Raf

However, if you'd like to discuss the Christ Myth theory (which I'm familiar with but don't subscribe to), I'm game. I'll start a thread in Questioning Faith. You're welcome to join it.

People don't realize that evolution says nothing at all about the origin of life. Only its development. They are separate issues. Science has no solid explanation for how life actually began. "God did it" is not an answer. It's a decision to stop seeking an answer.

Yes

Comparing me to Wierwille is rude, so don't expect politeness in return. I will tell you what I told everyone else: identify the language, or you have given no reason for ANYONE to believe you are doing anything supernatural. You want presumptuous? "It's genuine because I say so" is presumptuous. Wierwille was right about one thing: sincerity IS no guarantee for truth. I do not challenge anyone's sincerity. But when it looks like a counterfeit, sounds like a counterfeit, is produced in the same way as a counterfeit, and produces the same result as a counterfeit, it is not presumptuous to conclude it IS a counterfeit. It is presumptuous to insist on any other explanation without evidence to support it. So you're the one being presumptuous here. Want me to change my mind? Identify the language and knock off the but, but, but excuses that Allan couldn't resist for a single post.

Excuses excuses. They understood the languages in Acts. All sorts of anecdotes about people from China or the Middle East visiting and understanding the SIT and then disappearing, but suddenly, conveniently, scripture demands no one will be able to understand it. How convenient. Listen, pick a position and stick with it. Either the Word of God says it's an unknown language (it doesn't, by the way, but you knew that) or Allan is uniquely qualified to recognize an amalgamation of a single language that contains elements of "a Pacific Island" language (name it. I thought not) German and Italian. All rolled into one. Yeah right. If you can't prove it's a language, you can't blame me for believing it's nothing more than free vocalizations. If you want me to believe it's more than that, it's your burden to prove it.

The main character of the parent series was male. The main character of the spinoff was female. The male did not need eyeglasses. The female did not need a hearing aid.

Oh, give it to him.

My personal opinion, if a thread hasn't received a new post in over a year, it's pretty much done for. Nothing against resurrecting it, if you guys want to discuss it again. And obviously there are aspects I can no longer discuss because I no longer share a frame of reference with most of us involved in this discussion. Oh well.

Steve, I can take the insult that I'm as presumptuous as Wierwille ever was, seeing as it is ad hominem and completely without basis, so it rolls off my back. But I trust that if you cannot rebut my argument and demonstration without burying your message in a sea of equivocation and definition shifting, I must be onto something. Challenge to everyone who claims not to be faking it: Identify the language. No excuses. No "but look at this scripture that says blah blah." You claim to speak in a language you've never learned. Identify the language. Pass go. Collect $1 million. You can't do it, and it's not for any reason more complicated than what I have laid out in this thread. You can compare me to Wierwille, Satan or Hitler: pick your method of demonizing me. By all means. Go for it. It does not affect me in the slightest. Identify the language. Prove your claim, or stop criticizing me for declining to believe it.

You are in the majority. Nice to see you.

It is.

Nope. Think more sci fi

You know, if you added the words following "wise man," everyone would get this.

Okaaaay.... The spinoff series was recently rebooted on TV with a series of the same name. It did not succeed.

This popular movie spawned three sequels, which is a neat trick when you consider that the main character was an anti-hero who died at the end of the novel on which the first movie in the series was based. Interestingly, the main character kills no one in the first movie (and plenty of people in the sequels).

I am? Oh. I am. Ok...

Allan, I'm really sorry you won't admit that you faked it and continue to do so. But if you'd like to prove your claim by identifying the language and demonstrating that you never learned it, I am certainly open to actual evidence. You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath... Folks, this thread was dead, pretty much. What's say unless someone actually has something new to add, we let it rest? Can I get an amen?

Starring Noah Hathaway, Bruce Willis and Michelle Pfeiffer.

If you check out the SIT, TIP confession thread, you'll probably see a "how convenient is that" type of argument weaving through my posts. Why can't linguists detect an actual language when a person is speaking in tongues in an observable setting? List the reasons. They're hilarious. 1. The linguist's knowledge is limited. 2. God won't subject himself to a test. It's genuine when the speaker is speaking under conditions that are not being observed, but take the same speaker performing the same action in the same way while someone is watching and taking notes, and suddenly God's not energizing it anymore. The speaker can't tell the difference. But trust me, God energizes it in church, but won't energize it in a lab. How convenient is that? 3. God promised NO ONE would understand when a person speaks in tongues. Acts 2 was an anomaly. Other anomalies include stories about people visiting fellowships from West Bubbagump, astonished to hear someone who's never been to West Bubbagump suddenly speaking in fluent West Bubbagumpian! At last, a confirmed case of SIT producing a language, violating the ironclad rule that NO ONE would understand (a rule that suddenly becomes as ironclad as a colander)! So where are these West Bubbagumpians? Gone. No one has seen or heard from them since. How convenient is that? Etc.

Yes

16 people won't admit they faked it. 22 people admit it. Not a representative sample. Proves nothing. But definitely not "neck and neck."

No Easy Way Out The Burning Heart Living in America

A little boy fleeing a bunch of bullies steals a book and escapes into a the tale of two jilted lovers who spend fifteen years of marriage together, only to find that they might no longer love each other. As he reads, the boy learns that the events of the book are really happening, and he has a role to play in the outcome.

I'm offended!

Cool. Because we're not going to resolve creation v. evolution on an Internet message board. Back to topic, then...