Raf

Se7en ?

Yes. Life Goes On was about a Down Syndrome teen and his family. Good show.

Obladiblada

Throughout history, whenever man has answered the call to persecute the Jews, identifying them was never a problem.

A kid with Down Syndrome gets through high school and, years later, laments about how close he came to being a contender.

Some Like It Hot Dog: The Movie

I think I had breakfast at that ski lodge. I had, how you say, Sunny side up...

Correct.

Lol. I got the wrong Peter.

Being There

Dr. Strangelove ?

What's an escalope? And I think I'll take the tunnel on the way back from the store. The bridge looks like a bad idea.

No apology needed, Socks. I neglected in all this discussion to include on this thread a link to Samarin's article and Poythress' article, which have dominated the other discussion. Here's Poythress: http://www.frame-poythress.org/linguistic-and-sociological-analyses-of-modern-tongues-speaking-their-contributions-and-limitations/ Here's Samarin: http://philosophy-religion.info/handouts/pdfs/Samarin-Pages_48-75.pdf

Dogma Jason Mewes Scream 3 (Mewes and his frequent on-screen ally had a cameo in Scream 3, apparently in character as Jay and that other guy).

Yeah, we're not on new ground here. A little more detail on old ground. But not on new ground.

It will be interesting to see how you tie that into this discussion.

Tower Heist Alan Alda The Aviator

So if God does what you describe, WordWolf, could that explain why SIT is not deciphered by linguists? (I don't buy it, myself. It's not what the Bible describes. I consider that an ad hoc argument designed to explain why modern SIT doesn't produce what the Bible clearly describes, Chockfull's caveats considered).

Arthur Fonzarelli becomes a racecar driver and charms the pants off Nicole Kidman

No intent to recycle the same arguments. Thanks for clarifying, chockfull.

The Taking of Pelham One, Two, Three Musketeers

Not baiting. Trying to articulate what Allen might have meant, synthesizing some of the other aspects of our discussion. But I don't think I was trying to suggest this was Chockfull's position. Chockfull's position appears to be that I am mistaken in insisting that SIT produces a real human language. It may, on occasion, if God wills it, but it may also produce a linguistic code that no one but God can break. Thus, no surprise that a linguist cannot find a language in it. May not even be able to decipher a code. But God knows it's there.

Let me play Angel's advocate: If I'm free vocalizing and I know I'm faking it, it's just free vocalizing. If Chockfull is free vocalizing out of sincere love for God and desire to do His will, then God intervenes and what Chockfull produces is consistent with what the Bible says he will produce. If Chockfull does the SAME THING in an effort to have the product of SIT tested, that is not acting in agape, and he will be free vocalizing. A linguist would not pick up a language because none is there. It feels the same to Chockfull, but it's different because God's not energizing it. So no objective test will ever work, because anyone who submits to an objective test has stepped out of agape and is, instead, tempting God.

This kind of feeds into what I was thinking about the Bible calling it "speaking in tongues" rather than "speaking in code." To accept the latter possibility, you have to adopt a view of SIT that, in my view, far exceeds its description in scripture. The Bible simply does not define glossa in such a wide way as to incorporate this kind of utterance that does its best to defy human comprehension. If anyone wants to interpret I Cor. 14:2 to allow for such a definition, I can't stop them. I can only point out that it exceeds the clear meaning of the text. But we disagree on that.

I haven't seen Wind Talkers, so I am at the mercy of your summary. You noted in an earlier message that linguists could not break the code that was contained in the messages. Again, having not seen the movie and being unfamiliar with the true story behind it, I would be curious to know whether the linguists who tried to break the code concluded that there was none.