waysider

Absolutely. I would love to see a study that compares the two activities, along with a similar study of TIP and prophesy. Along with that, if someone did some mathematical mapping of the above, it would make for some fascinating reading, as well.

"The musical improviser first has to think of what sound could come next, make a lightning-quick decision as to whether that sound follows harmoniously or melodically, rule it in or out on that basis, and then hurry up and play it." This is very true when you are in your early stages of learning to improvise. After you get a few miles behind you, though, you start to just let it flow, disregarding the potential for mistakes. I think this is sort of what happened for many people in session 12. Somewhere deep inside the brain, there is still information being processed (in both musical improv. and SIT) but it becomes more of what people call second nature. That's where I can see these brain scan type studies helping us better understand how we think and process information.

I couldn't agree with you more. Before I became involved with The Way, I had worked (with mild success) as a musician and actor. They "broke" my creative spirit. I've tried many times to rekindle it, mostly through improvisational music, but, my success has been limited. It's no surprise to me now that speaking in tongues seemed so easy at the time.

Oh, there was a seemingly endless list of musicians we were to avoid for that very reason. They were either "possessed" or "born of the wrong seed". That was part of the driving force behind Uncle (he wasn't MY uncle) Harry Day.

People frequently perceive speaking in tongues to be originating from a source outside themselves. Seeing how the ability to think critically is diminished during the process gives me a deeper understanding of why it might be perceived that way. That's part of the value of this study....a more comprehensive appreciation of the mechanics involved. .......................................................... At one time, the general thinking in Way Theology was that the only way a person could improvise music with high levels of fluency was if a devil spirit was directing the process. It wouldn't surprise me to find this thinking persists in Way circles.

Newberg is not the only one to measure functions (indirectly via blood flow, using MRI), with a view toward understanding brain activity during creative processes

"...... unless the language is understood, there is no way an independent researcher COULD distinguish it from made-up sounds. Unless is was obvious gibberish, which WAS able to be detected." ............................................................................ This conflicts with Newberg's study of blood flow during glossolalia, in which it was demonstrated that finite changes take place during speaking in tongues.. (University of Pennsylvania, 2006) http://www.amebrasil.org.br/html/Newberg2006.pdf

There, now wasn't that easy? http://rlv.zcache.com/clean_sweep_mug-p168817061761312581enw9p_400.jpg

Here is an interesting, though somewhat lengthy, article on glossolalia. Page four offers some insightful information on free vocalization, while not actually using that specific terminology. (For some reason, I'm not able to cut and paste.) http://www.psihijatrija.com/bibliografija/radovi/Koic%20E%20GLOSSOLALIA%20COLLEGIUM.pdf

Your video will begin in 17 seconds.

I wouldn't even need for anyone to identify the language. I would be satisfied if someone could simply verify that it IS a language...any language. (Along with the usual qualifiers, such as no previous exposure to the language, etc.)

It might be a tumor.

We haven't discussed yet how Wierwille mangled dechomai and lambano to validate speaking in tongues. Do we want to go there?

Wierwille would have told you he taught Catechism to the Pope if he'd thought it would have furthered his agenda.

They're all more than I have in my pockets at the moment.

"Just one example. That shouldn't be so hard." Isn't that we've been saying all along?

I never felt like I was lying about speaking in tongues when I was in The Way. (TIP and prophesy are a whole other issue.) If I told you I believe it's currently available (in the Biblical sense), that would be lying. I don't believe it is. On the other hand, I don't think it can hurt you either, in and of itself. What can hurt you, though, is maintaining unrealistic expectations for its effectiveness. This is one disadvantage I have experienced personally. Too many times I took unreasonable risks with my personal health and safety, thinking the so-called law of believing and speaking in tongues would cover me. I had some bad experiences but, I'm still alive. Other people who tried this approach weren't as fortunate as me. Sometimes a seemingly harmless placebo can kill you if it's the genuine medication you really need.

Man! I feel like I'm trying to make myself believe in Santa Claus again. I guess when you're a kid, you hold out hope as long as you can that the jolly old man is real.

Chock said: "Socrates told Plato at the beginning of their philosophical discussion "if you are I are going to converse together, we must first define our terms". It's interesting that you should mention Plato because he, himself, experienced what we refer to as speaking in tongues, many years before the time of Christ. He, too, attributed it to spiritual intervention, not that it gives any credence to that particular aspect. http://brainblogger.com/2010/02/07/speaking-in-tongues-a-neural-snapshot/

"I think a conversation with a devil spirit is far different than SIT." Put the devil spirit thing on the back-burner for the moment and consider that a conversation requires...drum roll, please....language....and that's the crux of the matter...whatever SIT is, be it good spirits, bad spirits or no spirits, it simply lacks the components that qualify it as "language".

Devil spirits were a handy-dandy default explanation to almost anything that conflicted with Way Theology. Got cancer? Must be devil spirits. Suffering from clinical depression? Must be devil spirits. Unbelievers speaking in tongues? Must be devil spirits. Maybe that subject warrants a whole new thread. .................................................................. "To me, if I can pray to God and get born again, and pray further and simply SIT without any further instruction, then if I become "willing to accept" that somehow my prayers are BS, and God didn't answer them, then how is the prayer in which I became born again any different?" ............................................................. I haven't seen anyone saying your prayers are BS. This thread isn't about your prayers, it's about the validity of speaking in tongues, as a modern practice

It's really a twofold process. 1. The experience would need to be replicated/verified. 2. The possibility of "sleight of hand" would need to be eliminated.

Well, you got trouble, my friends... right here in Greaser City. Well,it starts with a G and that rhymes with Z. And, that stands for .....Gad Zooks!

Oh, I think they can be the same. It's just a matter of how things sound. Like how a garbage man is now called a sanitary engineer. Except, this is like an inverted example.

That's Marketing 101, Ham. Create a problem so you can solve it. Did you ever worry about how many were crucified with Christ before Wierwille told you that you needed to?