responses - Fasaga's words in this color, my responses in blue
quote: Why is it so hard to accept that "speaking in tongues" is no less legitimate or a genuine paranormal event than mediumship, channelling, the afterlife or any other psyphenomena?" Mediumship creates a dialogue during which information is provided from a source specifically for the intended recipient. Information is given by the discarnate source to establish their identity often as a means of showing the continued existence of the communicator. That's the 'evidential mediumship' demonstrated by Modern Spiritualism's mediums. Does 'speaking in tongues' provide anything remotely similar? [I suggest this is not the right place for discussing channelling and the other points which, incidentally, I've dealt with elsewhere in the past.]
quote: I guess that's our judgemental, selfrightuous egos stepping up to the plate, can someone please show me the fundamental difference between speaking in tongues and channelling a spirit and why one is OK and the other must be the product of mental illness, and did someone reference drug induced jibberish? I think a channeller can better answer your question about channelling etc Might I have mentioned the drugs? Did I write what you claim or was it "Perhaps similar to the jibberish heard from those who take certain modern drugs (like mephedrone) when the abuser becomes almost incoherent." Never mind - why quote what someone says when you're rubbishing it - just make it up as nobody bothers to check. Politicians do it all the time - why not forum members too?
quote: I've witnessed this many times from many people and none of them were nuts (You had assessed all of them and are qualified to judge then?), some appeared in a trace like state, accepted some were fully aware, accepted none were in need of any attention and had no other motive for putting it on assumed.
None knew what the heck they were saying, all said it felt like the Holy Spirit speaking through them, interesting point - Perhaps you could explain, on their behalf, how they knew it was quote "Holy Spirit" speaking through them as opposed to something else, something else they had not experienced before?
none of them knew each other as this has spanned over my lifetime. showing what? Each individual would recite the same sequence of "words" each time they spoke in tongues and if you've heard that "jibberish" yourself, you will know that it is extremely unlikely to come out the exact same way twice if it was in fact just mindless babble. Interesting point but I doubt I'd have the ability to conclude that it was, quote "....the same sequence of "words" each time they spoke in tongues" when the alleged words and phrases couldn't be identified in the first instance. Rather like listening to a foreign language you know nothing about, spoken very quickly by various people at different points in time and then declaring they'd all said the same thing. really? You can be that certain? I don't believe I could and communications are my particular interest. I'd suggest that only an accomplished linguist might just stand a chance of doing it if anyone could....
quote: .....but let's not make judgement calls from a position of ignorance. hear, hear to that - I assume you'll be doing that yourself now you've read my responses?