Rejection of the Charasmatics and Biblical Literalism

randman If you did not know the language ,please explain how you could consider the unknown language to be "fluent-sounding". Just how do you consider it to be seperate from mere gibberish?

randman How do you know it had definite meaning if you did not understand the language being spoken? You have heard ancient aramaic being spoken where that would allow you to state this claim?Edited by sidelined, : No reason given.

Faith And directly below that quote we have this one. Why would she need reference materials and models when she is divinely inspired and has been to heaven? And imagination is not a unusual quality of four year olds.I agree her talent is extraordinary, {The art not the poetry} but if we base the divine on that which is rare why is that so?

nemesis_juggernaut I really would like you to explain this because,unless your wife is God's secretary, one must wonder how such a conclusion is arrived at.

nemesis_juggernaut An excellent quote and absolutely of no value to me since it does not explain how your wife is capable of knowing that God is pipelined to this person.What exactly do you use to determine the fruits to be correct unless you have, a priori, established a standard by which to differentiate good from bad fruit?

nemesis-juggernaut I have been fooled before and I am sure that you and anyone you care to introduce me to can also be fooled. That is not a difficult thing to perform at all. Really? Just how discerning do you think you are? Does your discernment come from God? If yes then can we safely assume that your discernment would be 100%? How could we test this in open forum? I have to disregard your assesment here since, I am sure you will agree, it is heavily biased. However, is your wife's high level of discernment testable and ,if no, why not?

nemesis_juggernaut I do not say that people cannot hear God just that they cannot show this to be so in unambiguous demonstration.The people making the claim of such extraordinary ability are the ones who must satisfy their critics if they wish to be taken seriously. Of course, if you wish to believe that such is the case and are not willing to demonstrate it I have no problem whatsoever with that stance.How can it be unfair to me? I do not demand that you prove your claims unless you are trying to convince me in discussion that this really occured. I simply state that speaking in tongues is more likely a delusion on the part of the participant than an actual event. I assume you have no problem with my awaiting evidence before conceding to your argument. If you do have a problem then all that is needed is a demonstration of your claim.I would ask the same of psychics or astologers and since they are completely off the mark I see no reason to assume, based on your stance, that you are any different.Since a world in which God requires that you believe before you see cannot be differentiated from a universe in which there is none nor can be differentiated from one in which we have deluded ourselves I simply choose one of these 3 possibilities.

nemesis_juggernaut You did state that your wife met this person, and ,no, you mentioned nothing about its frequency. We still have not established how your wife is capable of discernment that makes her authoritarian on whether a man is legitimate or not. You did reference scripture concerning fruits and I suppose you have an explanation for this reference.Also, could you explain the "special circumstances" that were required? Since when is a legitimate question about a claim considered an attack? You make a statement that caught my interest and I ask you to explain things that are unclear to me. The topic was your wife and her "discernment" of speaking in tongues and I am asking for a clarification of what makes her more or less discerning.This is directly related to the topic of speaking in tongues since it relates to the criteria people will use to assess its validity. This is the crux of the matter. How is legitimacy objectively determined in the case of speaking in tongues?

nemesis_juggernaut You did state that your wife met this person, and ,no, you mentioned nothing about its frequency. We still have not established how your wife is capable of discernment that makes her authoritarian on whether a man is legitimate or not. You did reference scripture concerning fruits and I suppose you have an explanation for this reference.Also, could you explain the "special circumstances" that were required? Since when is a legitimate question about a claim considered an attack? You make a statement that caught my interest and I ask you to explain things that are unclear to me. The topic was your wife and her "discernment" of speaking in tongues and I am asking for a clarification of what makes her more or less discerning.This is directly related to the topic of speaking in tongues since it relates to the criteria people will use to assess its validity. This is the crux of the matter. How is legitimacy objectively determined in the case of speaking in tongues?

double post