Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Dakka Bingo! By Ouze "You are the best at flying things"-Kanluwen
"Further proof that Purple is a fething brilliant super villain " -KingCracker
"Purp.. Im pretty sure I have a gun than can reach you...."-Nicorex
"That's not really an apocalypse. That's just Europe."-Grakmar
"almost as good as winning free cake at the tea drinking contest for an Englishman." -Reds8n
Seal up your lips and give no words but mum.
Equip, Reload. Do violence.
Watch for Gerry.
I wonder if when "speaking in tongues" the speaker spouts a kind of nonsense language made of odd syllables derived from human basic phonemes, and the listeners feel as if they are going to understand because they also have the same phonemes.
I speak Japanese. If I listen to Koreans talking, it sounds like a rough version of Japanese that I am just about to understand, catching odd words here and there, but I can never break through to understanding.
However, Korean and Japanese are completely unrelated languages, and don't share any vocabulary, although their grammatical structures are similar. I don't speak a single word of Korean, anyway, so the words I think I am almost understanding must mean something completely different to what I think.
I don't to disrespect the religious inspiration of speaking in tongues, only to suggest there is a natural human capacity for producing such forms of speech. Which is not to say it isn't inspired by God.
This, however, was not my friend's experience. He knew what he was saying and the Malaysian he spoke with understood it since my friend was speaking in Malaysian.
Wolfblade wrote: Could be he just has a gift with languages, as in, naturally good with them, no mystic explanation needed.
That could be, but he said at the time his language skills were almost non existant to minimal at best since he only had a few weeks of training. After the conversation on the bus he didn't have skills of that level until months later of immersion.
How did the speaking in tongues work? Could the people speaking be understood by someone who spoke the language?
I ask because a close friend of mine was a missionary in Malasia who had a few weeks of learning and was not very fluent. He was on a bus with a fellow missionary and someone asked him who he was, since looks wise, he stood out from the regular population. He then spent several minutes talking with the man, telling him of Christ and gospel doctrine.
After they left the bus, his fellow missionary, who had been in the country for over a year and a half, told him he had spoken the language flawlessly.
I cannot fully explain it, because it just sounded like a bunch of BS when others explained it. There were the occasional missionary stories, our church sent a group to India to build a school (unlike many out there, the church I grew up in's focus was doing work for people, rather than handing out bibles) During this trip to India, during a worship service, one of the guys who was there to pour concrete began speaking in tongues. A local came up to him after the service and asked him if he spoke Hindu. Mr. Concrete said that he only spoke English. The local man replied, that that was odd, because he was not only speaking Hindu fluently, but he was speaking that specific dialect fluently.
There was a belief in the church that if someone had a "prophetic message" from god, delivered in tongues, that god would also deliver the "translation" and so during service you'd hear one person speaking louder than others in another language, there'd be a hush, and usually someone would then randomly start speaking in English with the response.
I've heard a number of these stories and always was intrigued by them. My friend's tale of his experience put it on a more personal level.
I believe in the gift being of a divine nature as long as what is being said may be understood, such as having people there that can understand the language being spoken and it is a skill given in a time of need.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/06 20:06:07
feeder wrote: I think that both theists and atheists are relying on zero evidence to form a firm belief. Both require faith.
I can never have understand people saying there is no evidence for God. For me the fact I'm alive, the world, the universe I'm part of scream to me that someone made it all and it all screams at me some me one saying 'I made this all and I'm awesome.' I just can't get the no evidence thing. Having problems with faith systems or belief sets is different but I cannot get my tiny head round no evidence.
Knockagh wrote: For me the fact I'm alive, the world, the universe I'm part of scream to me that someone made it all and it all screams at me some me one saying 'I made this all and I'm awesome.
Who would there need to be some kind of entity responsible for all that?
feeder wrote: I think that both theists and atheists are relying on zero evidence to form a firm belief. Both require faith.
I can never have understand people saying there is no evidence for God. For me the fact I'm alive, the world, the universe I'm part of scream to me that someone made it all and it all screams at me some me one saying 'I made this all and I'm awesome.' I just can't get the no evidence thing. Having problems with faith systems or belief sets is different but I cannot get my tiny head round no evidence.
That's because none of that is evidence unless you have proof any of that was made by some entity.
This, however, was not my friend's experience. He knew what he was saying and the Malaysian he spoke with understood it since my friend was speaking in Malaysian.
It doesnt correspond with the guy speaking in tongues in an airport, only to be approached by a person from a country he had never visited who recognised the language spoken. He has no training in that language or ever visited that country.
It doesnt correspond with what I witnesses either I speak an unknown language, and another person who I never met before (or since) and had never spoke in tongues in the presence of used exactly the same words.
This cannot be a coincidence because there is zero reference between the myself and he beyond laying on of hands.
I don't appreciate the trolling accusation that tongues users belong in 'the asylum'.
The link is filled with BS also. There are uses and examples of tonufges widely in excess of what the artcile claims, the article makes no reference to spontaneous and unrehearsed usage of the same words between different people with different native langguages, it also erroneuosly places the gift of tongues usage beginning in the early 20th century, when its use is biblical and has recorded usage throughout history.
" I’m not presenting you with an alternative opinion, but rather with hard solid scientific proof that it is not real."
No proof was actually given anywhere in the text,, some opinion was given that some people dismiss the claim, also the but they haven't seen identical patterns, or denied those they saw because it didn't fit their world view. I cant even begin to work out the probabilities of two people independently of each other speaking an unknown language using the exact same words, but it will likely be extremely slim.
There was a belief in the church that if someone had a "prophetic message" from god, delivered in tongues, that god would also deliver the "translation" and so during service you'd hear one person speaking louder than others in another language, there'd be a hush, and usually someone would then randomly start speaking in English with the response.
There still is a belief in this, not past tense by any account. The gift of interpretation of tongues is a separate gift entirely. This is standard New Testament teaching, here:
1 Corinthians 12 : 4-11
4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually has he wills.
Interpretation of tongues works more or less as you say it does, though interpretation is not from my experience random. Tongues desiring an interpretation are specific, the speaker knows if he has a tongue from God for interpretation and then asks to speak it publically. Those who can interpret listen to the tongues and wait to see if there is a translation given, or images are thought of that fit the interpreter things are a fit for the words.
Because of contamination from human imagination it is quite normal to dismiss an interpretation unless two or three persons with the gift of interpretation give the same interpretation. God doesn't see it as a lack of faith to dismiss and unverified prophesy or interpretation at any time. Multiple independently corroborated interpretations occur rather a lot, despite the consistently extreme odds of this happening randomly. I would witness this on a weekly basis, participate in it fully (though I personally lack the gift of interpretation) yet it only occurs in meetings of believers with the Holy Spirit present, but it happens a lot in those meetings. I am long past the point where it is any way feasible for me to have any excuse to doubt God, I consider myself exceptionally fortunate in having lived my faith to this point, and have sympathies for those here who are trying to work things out. My advice, don't even bother. Instead of trying to work out religion just ask the Holy Spirit to enter your life, through Jesus Christ once you know the Holy Spirit and have experienced the living God, you can then go looking for answers and God will instruct you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/06 20:34:30
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
I can never have understand people saying there is no evidence for God. For me the fact I'm alive, the world, the universe I'm part of scream to me that someone made it all and it all screams at me some me one saying 'I made this all and I'm awesome.' I just can't get the no evidence thing. Having problems with faith systems or belief sets is different but I cannot get my tiny head round no evidence.
But that's exactly the point of the 'no evidence' claim.
You're seeing all these awesome things and ascribing them to a God. But where is the actual link between 'The universe exists' and 'God did it'?
The fact that something is awesome doesn't mean God did it. It just means something is awesome.
Case in point: The infamous 'Bananas: The Atheist's Worst Nightmare' video that still circulates around the depths of the internet, where it was claimed that the banana was proof of a Creator, because it was just too perfectly designed for human consumption (shaped to fit the hand while 'pointing' towards the mouth, handy tab for opening, changes colour to show when it is good to eat, etc... Or, you know, all the things that banana growers specifically bred into early bananas, which started out as horrible, hard, green lumps of ick,.. nothing to do with God at all)
The Creationist says: 'Here's all this amazing stuff that I don't understand. Must have been God!'
The Atheist says: 'Here's all this amazing stuff that I don't understand. I wonder what caused it?'
God is only an answer if you presuppose the existence of God. Otherwise, there is literally no evidence linking God to the creation of the universe.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
I put "Babelfish is much better." into Babelfish and ran it through English - Spanish - Italian - French - Ukrainian - Japanes - Hindi - English and got the following;
The first lady speaking says "Chigee" ... ... "Hanashi" ... ... "Hachiru" ... which sounds to me like "Chigee" (Different/Mistake, informal) "Hanashi" (Speaking/Speech) and "Hachiru" (To run) in Japanese.
Maybe there are similar confusions between say Finnish and Dutch or German, though these languages I believe are distantlyrelated.
Wolfblade wrote: Could be he just has a gift with languages, as in, naturally good with them, no mystic explanation needed.
That could be, but he said at the time his language skills were almost non existant to minimal at best since he only had a few weeks of training. After the conversation on the bus he didn't have skills of that level until months later of immersion.
I've heard similar stories from the sailors living in japan. they've been trying to learn the language to start with, a good night of drinking gives them the clarity of the language. Of course it's usually another drunk sailor recounting the tale I find such claims dubious
The point here is that atheism isn't scientific either, including that evolutionary theory does not imply the non existence of a creator God. keeps the teaching fair, as it cannot thereby be hijacked by atheism.
atheism as absolutely nothing to do with evolution. That needs repeating,
atheism as absolutely nothing to do with evolution.
So I have to wonder how anyone can hijack it. I'd ask where such a notion would even come from, but I already know. Evolution is a scientific theory backed by a mountain of evidence and taken as fact by almost all biologists. Evolution is the only theory that explains all life on earth and compliments other scientific fields, along with, and this is the key part. Allows predictions to be made and tested. That's how many new species are being discovered, you find a gap between a species that evolved from another, pick a 1/2 way point, look back at the geological records to figure out where the middle species could have lived and where fossils were likely to occur and go dig in that spot and most of the time, find the species you were looking for.
Theories allow for predictions to be made from them, that's what makes them good theories.
ID allows for none of that, it's not even a theory, I don't think it even qualifies as a hypothesis as it's designed to be non refutable. Which is another key part of being a scientific theory, there must be a way to disprove the theory. The theory of evolution as presented by Darwin had quite a few mentioned. Creationists have been trying and failing at trying to provide that evidence.
so let's remember, the theory of evolution is a solid theory with mountains of evidence, just like the theory of gravity and the theory of electricity.
Atheist is just the label you are given if you answer "no" to one specific question.
Scientific method is awesome.
I don't believe it is complete; the task of studying a subject enough to make it sell, and forgoing extensive field research to determine real-life results is quite lacking today. Quite essential.
However, on note of evidence and proof, I have a couple things to say:
1) Instruments & Tools:
science uses instruments/tools to find results. What was once inconceivable and ridiculous, the earth being discovered as spherical rather than flat for example, was discovered through an instrument (hanging weight from ceiling, drawing on the floor). Germs and micro cellular life being discovered through lenses that allow us to see what the naked eye cannot.
Instruments/tools.
With things Spiritual, we do not have man made tools to determine much. We can see the electromagnetic fields around the body which is called the "aura". Little actual scientific effort has been given towards understanding this, instead the hippies and what not put their lives into this. Not a very fact-driven community, very much more -experience- driven.
What is used in lieu of direct instruments/tools is our own human body. One can feel the warmth of anothers hug within our "heart", which is amongst being a bio-electrical/chemical response is also a spiritual one.
However, it is difficult to set aside ones feelings and impressions, presumptions and preconceptions, to have that sterile "clean/null environment" from which to develop a theory from. It makes things more challenging. One must continue a walk of life continuing to develop on their experiences and conclusions to get more accurate results over time.
Similar to how one would receive data from stellar studies, not having a perfect picture yet but forming a greater picture over time. This is in its own way an accurate study.
2) of Gods silence
Taking from ancient Hebrew literature on God, its said that God withdrew from the world. That God gave free will, and although gave Law through Moses didn't pressure people into a life they didn't choose to live. God wants to "separate the wheat from the chaff", and to do this chooses to see what peoples lives produce, the "fruit" of their choices.
If taking from Hebrew context, life was pretty perfect at first. Man screwed things up. Over. And over. And over again... God hasn't murdered. Man has. God has raped. Man has. God hasn't withheld food from families. man has.
With the style of life its said God created, to up and clean up the world by literally using His own hands and feet would undermine His purpose/style in life. Instead, its said He uses people as His "hands and feet". Everywhere within the texts it speaks of people being how He works in others lives.
Christianity today does good on some things, and is also so very fail on others. Its a hard path for those who truly seek to make good "fruit", and really they cannot do this without letting go of self/I/wants/desires/personal-ambitions, in this very ego driven world.
He is said to have a kingdom established for those whom He finds are fruitful. This world is in a way a school for which one learns and is tested, to determine the direction they choose in life. He wants everyone to succeed, that is to have actions and "fruit" in their lives that 'echo into eternity' rather than what selfishness brings which is death (in concept, and in actuality).
Being that we weren't ever able to make it on our own efforts, always failing and falling short, He gave His most cherished thing, His Son, to lead the way and ultimately die the death of a criminal tho He broke no law. This act was to put an end to Law, and create a path of Faith and in this faith bring righteousness. Its said that a person who has Faith in His Son is like a single page inserted into a book, what God sees is not the person (the page) but His Son (the book).
This is all from Hebrew context, but it is an illustration as to how/why God chooses to be this way. He Himself surely could fix every little thing that's wrong in life... but wants us to play our part in it, so that we may participate in His will for reality.
3) Christian Example
There shouldn't be any form of condemnation, only love; in no way does any Christian gain by his own merit, any good thing is from Him - that we be saved from carrying any form of pride. Even faith is a gift, not out own making.
There should be complete generosity, giving all one is asked to give; to have faith He will supply what one needs. In fact, when one gives they receive many times over. Try it out, like a psuedo-experiment, it really does happen this way.
There should be faith, not fear; churches standing for/against gays, fighting politically... no no no. Nothing happens without faith, as it all comes from Him. A church should pray and find solace in His plan, not doubt or fear which manifests itself as the need to act out against... but instead be humble and meek.
Given that things have had such a falling away with the "organized" religion called Christianity, i do understand why people would look the other way.
Its only in my relationship with Him that i hold any hope, and joy, and trust in my daily walk in life. Like a son to His Father, that's me. In small thins and great, He loves to hear His children. He loves to give. He loves.
He works on a system of conditions. To have what we ask, we must meet the conditions. If we care not for the conditions, He won't give what we ask. Some things tho are without condition, like His love.
Would a father to "easy" on a druggie son, or would he reprimand him?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/08/07 09:06:43
MekLeN wrote: What was once inconceivable and ridiculous, the earth being discovered as spherical rather than flat for example, was discovered through an instrument (hanging weight from ceiling, drawing on the floor).
This is somewhat of a misconception, by the way. We've known that the earth is round for well over 2000 years, backed up by even basic observations like the changing of constellations with changes in latitude or ships disappearing over the horizon. I suppose at once point maybe it could have been considered "inconceivable and ridiculous", but it's been a very long time since then.
Little actual scientific effort has been given towards understanding this, instead the hippies and what not put their lives into this.
No, plenty of scientific effort has been put towards understanding "spiritual" things. It just happens to be the case that none of this effort has found any credible evidence that "spiritual" things are real.
Taking from ancient Hebrew literature on God, its said that God withdrew from the world. That God gave free will, and although gave Law through Moses didn't pressure people into a life they didn't choose to live. God wants to "separate the wheat from the chaff", and to do this chooses to see what peoples lives produce, the "fruit" of their choices.
And yet people, including people in this thread, still talk about prayer having results and god continuing to be active in the world. This non-interventionist god is not the one that most people believe in.
Being that we weren't ever able to make it on our own efforts, always failing and falling short, He gave His most cherished thing, His Son, to lead the way and ultimately die the death of a criminal tho He broke no law. This act was to put an end to Law, and create a path of Faith and in this faith bring righteousness. Its said that a person who has Faith in His Son is like a single page inserted into a book, what God sees is not the person (the page) but His Son (the book).
Sorry, but this just makes no sense at all. Why is the omnipotent creator of the universe always portrayed as some kind of TFG rules lawyer obsessing over RAW? Why does he need to send himself to earth and have himself brutally tortured to death before he can change his own rules? Why does brutally torturing an innocent person to death spare the lives of the guilty (we certainly wouldn't allow this concept in a criminal trial)? Why is it considered a meaningful sacrifice when god is eternal and just resurrected back up to heaven as soon as he "died"? God in this story is a bloodthirsty tyrant, and probably thoroughly insane. There is nothing at all morally appealing about the idea.
Its only in my relationship with Him that i hold any hope, and joy, and trust in my daily walk in life.
Honestly, this is really sad. I'm sorry that your life has no other hope or joy, and I sincerely wish that things get better for you.
Would a father to "easy" on a druggie son, or would he reprimand him?
When the "reprimand" consists of torturing his son for eternity I think the obvious morally correct choice is to go easy on him.
God hasn't murdered. Man has. God has raped. Man has. God hasn't withheld food from families. man has.
peregrine did a good response, but I wanted to touch on this part.
God has committed many genocides and murders. If you accept his existence. The flood, all the first born of egypt, etc. but think about the flood though, he committed genocide on a unthinkable scale. Murdering many men, women, children, and unborn children. Then just to be dic he tells people to murder their children just for the lols and to see if they'll do it.
yes man has raped, and you know what god see's as a fit punishment for it? 40 pieces of silver to the father and to marry the girl who was raped. How evil is that, telling a girl after she's been raped that she has to marry the guy who did it.
then if you think about being kicked out of the garden of eden, god has withheld food from families. Don't eat the apple or I'll take away your home, your livestock, and your way of life. then he killed all of the egyptians livestock, sent a plague to eat all the crops, etc.
all the things you think god hasn't done, he's done in such a horrific and truly evil manner.
The flat earth was mainly a european idea, based on the bible. most other people on the earth had a pretty good idea it was round. the aztecks, the egyptians, and maybe some others. the book of Enoch was all about how flat the earth was, that even when it came time for man to choose which books were canon they knew it didn't work that way and didn't add it as canon. Of course they didn't like the idea Enoch never died, he walked with god to heaven many times and just skipped the whole death part. It was thought that it cheapened the idea of jesus death.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat Earth darkness' among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology."[4] Historians of science David Lindberg and Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference"
This is a myth people get taught about Columbus by people who really shouldn't be teaching about Columbus. The idea that Christians in the middle ages thought the Earth was flat originates in the 19th century, when the debate over evolution was even more intense than it is now and a certain scholars invented the myth, either by design or by misconceptions present in their own time now lost to us.
Mario wrote: I think this is a succinct allegory regarding the idea of god and intelligent design:
I'm sorry but that's utter drivel, to compare sentiment beings with needs so complex to survive to something so base is pretty pathetic but that's what comedians do, it's a tired old routine. Donald Trump science. Make something ridiculous sound clever, well done clever man. If he can't see the difference between a puddle and a human he needs to do a little more study.
" -KingCracker
