OldSkool

That's scary.

He is both. He is happy because he is building another 501 c3 and "believing" for some bored billionaires to give him money. He is quite healthy, especially for his age.

And knowing about knowing should never be confused with "to know that you know that you know."

The bit of irony in that is Rosalie has continued to shoo people to the exits out of boredom.

ROFL! Justice had been served.

I just believed to interpret and I am very edifRied. Please do not make me report this post!!!!

Ewww.

I don't either, just giving unsolicited advice. Def. not trying to argue his point of view. Raf on the other hand...well...not trying to argue either...just a lame attempt at humor.

Really, that's an excuse. I've managed to sift through all the arguing to consider and learn what has been studied/said on the subject. Doing otherwise is shortchanging yourself, IMO. May I ask what that means in this context? To me it seems too many times people use that phrase to disengage from what confronts their beliefs. If the belief is true then it should stand to reasonable scrutiny. Just my 3 cents.

Well, I'm game and have the mic right next to my computer. Some of you that are reading along know me personally. I "learned" how to "manifest" speaking in tongues via the way international's teachings. I had never considered the possibility of their teachings being false when it came to SIT until now, though I remain unconvinced. Whatever, nothing I could ever produce will prove everyone wrong or right on the subject and would no doubt be subject to failing some research standard or another. Whatever. I'm still game. It's either a language or not.

I'm trying to prove myself wrong, or right.

I'm largely ignorant of all things Linguistics. I am willing to learn, especially in this case where my ignorance may have been taken advantage of. I am more than willing to SIT and send anyone interested a .mp3 to do with as you see fit.

Mind you, I am not convinced that modern day SIT is BS. However, I am starting to view it as highly suspect. So I am not in a position to be an advocate for either you or RAF, or step in to validate/refute the arguments between you two.

from Wikipedia. Linguistics It would seem you are taking language meaning (that nobody understands SIT) and ignoring the rest of what can be known from a very broad scientific field of study.

Hey, I'm ready to hit a revival!

To me, if what is taught regarding modern day SIT is true it should stand up to scrutiny. God not only tells us "to prove the spirits," but also to prove him. Therefore, since we are talking something tangible as followers producing a language, I think that whatever language it is should stand or fall as a language - whether or not it's in use or not. I am beginning to think that what I have been taught by Wierwille was nothing more than rehashed Pentecostalism. Since I know little of Pentecostals, I need some time to understand them a little better. I just hope their roots did not begin with another false prophet.

It seems Oral Roberts had his roots in the Pentecostal denomination as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Roberts

Well, it may not kill it beyond question, but it leads me to the position that we were not taught anything more by TWI than what was taught by Pentecostals at the time, with the difference that we receive by believing. Otherwise, it's the same - you move your mouth, your lips, your tongue and the spirit gives the utterance. My ramblings are on a more personal level and have little to do with the scope of the many arguments swirling around on this thread. Most of the arguments have been beaten to death and have become ridiculous at this point. But carry on.

Then to me that squelches my own argument that Wierwille taught us something that was not included in the study. What Wierwille taught us was the Pentecostal practice except we were to "receive it by believing" and not by tarrying or pleading with The Lord. That was Stiles position and why he struck out from the Pentecostal church.

Oops, forgot the link. Stiles Materials

The following site has an enlightening excerpt from JE Stiles book, The Gift of the Holy Spirit. Clearly, Stiles expected those who received to produce a language, even a "new," supernatural language, albeit one that was not understood by the speaker or those present. The following background on Stiles is enlightening to me to answer one of the questions I have had: Where did Wierwille, Stiles, and other contemporaries doctrine originate? So, and I am not going through 80 some odd pages looking for the answer but I assume Samarin included Pentecostals in his studies? On a side note, I really dislike this practice of not stopping to question, as if faith does not stop to question. Faith should be the result of answered questions.

Can someone remind me again where Wierwille stole...err...I mean got his material on SIT?....and where did they (VP's source) get it?

I dunno. By extension of logic, if speaking in tongues does not produce a real language --- then gifts of healings need not produce a real healing.

Nah. The trick is actually writing it. Getting it to market is the easy part these days since most anyone with a few dollars to invest can self publish.