I like Mckenna's assement of glossolalia, although I've never experienced the phenomena on DMT (or at least don't recollect it) and perhaps only briefly on mushrooms myself, I like that Mckenna demystifies the experience in a sense while at the same time suggesting meaning in the experience. Mckenna approaches the phenomena as basically an expansion of Wittgenstein's concept of language-games. Terrance McKenna Talks About Glossolalia: http://youtu.be/3iQLfCALknA
So glossolalia is an opening up of spontaneous expression going out everywhere that can alight anywhere there is a receiver. Now examining the source of these distinctions there are two distinct functions described in the coming down or coming into holy spirit. Tongues of fire lit on them and the other is glossolalia. Both converge on speaking in tongues or speaking in the tongue. The tongue of fire is the revealing tongue. It burns away distortion. In the form of glossolalia it burns away the sense of separation and in terms of the informative tongue it reorients the senses.
So now we have this term to deal with holy spirit. Remember the elements of quantification, same and different or not the same. Holy and spirit is the quantifying way of looking at the combined term. As above so below. Holy is not a condition separate from our own. It means without blemish or distortion. Spirit is breath. To become filled with the holy spirit is to become a being knowing no distortion or being able to penetrate the question of what is or what is different from that being. It is said i will send the comforter to you the holy spirit, that teaches all things. I am in it and it is in me. The truth sets us free, comforts.
I can't find a lot on the net about Glossolalia on the net but, I tend to value the opinions of those who hold valid degrees more than I do the common man, especially if the degree is in the area of contention. William J. Samarin, is listed as a linguist from the University of Toronto. He appears to have written several books on linguistics. So yeah, I value his options more than most. I am not concerned that he doesn't know all the languages that ever existed, who does? I don't know what you are saying here. Are you saying that this is proof that glossolalia is a language? Where is that quote from? So are you claiming that glossolalia is a language that no one can understand? Yeah, I saw that. It would seem to support the contention that it isn't a language. So what? What are you trying to say. While the research pointed to in the article is certainly interesting, I don't see how Molly Edmonds, the author of the article jumps to her conclusions about what the research has to do with God or religion. Actually I don't see many assumptions in the Samarin quote. As a linguist he sees no word formations in the strings of syllables that he studied, it was not internally organized, and there was no systematic relationship between units of speech and concepts. He therefor concluded that it is not a language in that it has no basis in any language, current or dead that he knows of, and he certainly is more familiar with living and dead languages than I am. Further I don't understand what point you are making. I agree that glossolalia occurs, and I agree that there are those who think it has some kind of import; what of it? If I spontaneously type: So what?
It is very common for people not to find a lot when they are looking for little. Can you you hear yourself say you are exceptional and every one else isn't worth your serious scrutiny? Got to have a shirt and tie to get in. Got to be a real man. You are real already. you just find yourself in a straight jacket.
hmmm, must not have looked very hard, a simple Google inquiry yields 335,000 results. surely there must be something out there. you need to develop better critical reading skills and learn to read what is on the page without filtering it according to what you think is being said. I imagine you don't see the assumptions as they are the same ones you are making possibly? but whatever, what do you say concerning the scientific research that suggests that it is coming from some place/way beyond the direct control of the speaker? I notice you completely skipped that portion of the research.
Touché. If that is how you view me, so be. I make no claims as to my exceptionality. I apologize to anyone I offend.
I'm using Duck Duck, so maybe that's the reason! I should have said I didn't find much separate, independent research. A lot of rehashing of the same ones though. I admit I didn't look at all 335,000 posts. Possible. I skipped that because it didn't really say much: So what would this something else be? The researcher assumes it's another part of the brain, but he couldn't see where. What do you think? Will you address my concerns? (BTW I'll be off line for a few days.)
My point in it is as the article stated, that it is a phenomena outside of the direct control of those experiencing it, as they claim, it is God speaking/praying through them via his spirit. Is that really so far fetched when/if we stop and consider. the research thus far does not give evidence that claim is in error, that is my point.
Speaking in tongues has been exposed as fake numerous times. Enough times to warrant that it is in no way genuinely real.
http://www.skeptical-science.com/religion/speaking-in-tongues-the-real-story/ http://bible-truth.org/TonguesWhatisGoingOn.html
baby talk for adults. its fun. the fun of pure ego indulgence. in a kind of trance state. and i guess its mostly harmless. many 'tribal' beliefs in africa and elsewhere have this kind thing. i wouldn't say there's anything wrong with it exactly. only that it really doesn't signify anything beyond the self indulgence and opportunity for doing so, that it is.