Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pucc-h Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!CS-Mordred!Pucc-H:aeq From: aeq@pucc-h (Jeff Sargent) Newsgroups: net.religion,net.flame Subject: Re: Kulawiec on Sargent on speaking in tongues Message-ID: <1525@pucc-h> Date: Thu, 29-Nov-84 11:47:17 EST Article-I.D.: pucc-h.1525 Posted: Thu Nov 29 11:47:17 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Dec-84 05:50:50 EST References: <231@pyuxd.UUCP> <1469@pucc-h>, <184@stat-l> <1489@pucc-h>, <191@stat-l> <1503@pucc-h>, <198@stat-l> Organization: Purdue University Computing Crypt Lines: 45 >>> = Rich Kulawiec >> = Jeff Sargent > = Rich Kulawiec > 1. You *believe* you can repeat it [speaking in tongues]. > 2. You *believe* you've seen it before. > 3. You *believe* it's not attributable to the laws of physics. 1. Yes, I do believe. Belief surpasses knowledge. Of course, for that matter you could say I know I can repeat it, because I know God, and I know He doesn't fail. 2. People who, from my general personal knowledge of them, had trustworthy characters, have said they experienced this phenomenon, sometimes in my presence. I have no good reason to doubt that I've seen it before or that it has happened before. 3. I find it hard to believe that the mere act of a man's laying his hands on my shoulders and saying a few words could possibly physically change me so that now, over 12 years later, I can still speak in tongues! Your (apparent) assumption that this phenomenon is physically caused is more absurd than my belief that it is caused by God. > You also have a vested interest in *believing* 1-3 because it goes > along with your world view; this is just fine by me, but don't expect to > convince the rest of us (i.e. anyone who does not share your view of the > way things work around here) by merely pointing out that "speaking in > tongues" works in your world view. As I thought I pointed out, the standard > of proof is relative. Speaking in tongues happens. That's a fact, regardless of the world view with which you interpret it. Your world view states that those who believe as I do are lying, as far as I can tell. (It could be claiming that we don't know we're lying; but then how do you know you're not? No double standards here.) The last sentence is the real key. Your standard of proof is limited, being relative *only* to the physically perceptible world. When we start talking about God, things don't always work according to humanity's standards of proof or logic. (Both Testaments are full of examples.) The lunch crew is about to leave; I'll finish this response later. -- -- Jeff Sargent {decvax|harpo|ihnp4|inuxc|ucbvax}!pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq Clearing /tmp