text:
This Article From Issue
September-October 2011
Volume 99, Number 5
Page 422
SUPERCOOPERATORS: Altruism, Evolution, and Why We Need Each Other To Succeed. Martin A. Nowak with Roger Highfield. xxii + 330 pp. Free Press, 2011. $27.
SuperCooperators is Martin A. Nowak's latest book reviewing his theoretical work on the evolution of cooperation. Written with Roger Highfield, the editor of New Scientist magazine, it is an ambitious attempt to present Nowak's highly mathematical research to a general audience without using equations. In fact, the authors bend over backward to allay the fears of the math-phobic, to the point of always writing out a key variable's name, sigma, rather than using the scary Greek letter σ. The result is a skillful courtroom brief that masterfully advocates a particular viewpoint on cooperation. However, like good lawyers, the authors don't mention the weaknesses in their arguments, leaving those for others to discern. Thus the picture they paint is far from comprehensive.
Nowak and Highfield argue that cooperation drives the evolution of many features of biological complexity, from the earliest replicating strands of RNA to everything that makes humans a unique species. Cooperation is defined in the broadest possible way, so that a reaction that is catalyzed by one RNA strand and promotes the assembly of another strand is considered to be a cooperative endeavor. Probably most scientists do not view chemical reactions as examples of cooperation, but I suppose a good central theme can be forgiven some exuberant exaggeration.
After an introductory chapter, the book puts forth the proposition that cooperation can only evolve and overcome selfishness through one of five mechanisms: direct reciprocity (I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine); indirect reciprocity (I'll scratch your back, you scratch someone else's, and eventually someone will scratch mine); spatial structure (back-scratching tends to bring back-scratchers together); group selection (groups that back-scratch do better than groups that don't); and kin selection (if you're a relative, I'll scratch your back even if you won't scratch mine). The authors argue quite persuasively that humans are the top "SuperCooperators," because all five mechanisms are evident in our behaviors and societies.
None of the individual mechanisms for the evolution of cooperation is particularly controversial as a theoretical concept (although it is not clear to me why spatial structure cannot be subsumed into the other four). What is controversial is the relative importance the authors attach to each of the five mechanisms for influencing the evolution of cooperation.
Nowak argues repeatedly that a particular format for direct reciprocity, the Prisoner's Dilemma, is the key to understanding the evolution of cooperation. A Prisoner's Dilemma is defined as a situation with a specific set of payoffs for cooperation and defection. Pairs of cooperating individuals do better (each getting a higher reward, R) than pairs of noncooperators (who each get a lower reward, P), but this does not automatically lead to cooperative behavior. The dilemma arises from the fact that the strategy that has the highest payoff of all (reward T) is for a player to defect (not cooperate) in the presence of a cooperator (who then gets the lowest reward of all, the sucker's payoff, S). A large portion of SuperCooperators focuses on how cheating to gain short-term advantages can be overcome to get to a stable state of cooperative, altruistic behavior yielding long-term benefits. Nowak tends to rank kin selection as a less important process than such reciprocity. Given that many evolutionary biologists believe the opposite—that kin selection is the far more important mechanism—this book will indeed ruffle some feathers.
I expect that the most ruffled will be those studying cooperation in nonhuman species. Nowak's background is chiefly mathematical, and his ventures into nature are strikingly anthropocentric. This book attempts to chart the entirety of the evolution of life from algal mats to humans. Yet the authors cite barely a dozen original studies on the actual behavior of nonhuman animals in natural settings, while citing several hundred that model cooperation mathematically! The implication is that if the math works, then that is how evolution must also work. Why bother testing the conclusions against reality?
Nowak's preference for math over biology is most evident in the fact that he considers Prisoner's Dilemma models to be more useful and to have greater merit than kin-selection models. The dynamics of the Prisoner's Dilemma game are a very interesting puzzle for mathematicians. It almost seems that every evolutionary game theorist, to prove his or her worth, is required to solve a variant of this game. This has resulted in innumerable mathematical solutions incorporating many scenarios and assumptions.
Solutions to the Prisoner's Dilemma often invoke variations of the tit-for-tat strategy ("what you just did to me, I'll do back to you"). However, as I routinely advise new behavioral ecology graduate students, "If you can find any natural system in which the payoff matrix of the Prisoner's Dilemma is unequivocally present, you will be famous forever, no matter what the animals do." There simply is no conclusive evidence that a Prisoner's Dilemma applies anywhere in nature apart from human interactions. Indeed, in support of this supposedly ubiquitous model of cooperation, Nowak cites only a handful of mostly anecdotal observations of situations in which animals might be doing tit-for-tat. Only one study (by Manfred Milinski) is experimental: A stickleback inspects a potential predator, and angled mirrors give the fish a reflection that appears to be a companion who is either cooperating (keeping pace) or defecting (retreating). In the presence of a "cooperative" reflection, the fish usually comes closer to the predator than when paired with a "defector" reflection. In his summation, however, Nowak fails to mention the numerous criticisms of the study by those who have questioned whether the Prisoner's Dilemma payoff matrix actually holds for the fish, or who have proposed that a "safety in numbers" explanation better explains the results. Nor is there any mention in the book of Kevin C. Clements and David W. Stephens's ingenious 1995 cooperation experiments with blue jays. When placed in an iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, these birds never exhibited stable cooperation. Overall, game theory might better predict nature by focusing less on the Prisoner's Dilemma and more on games with payoff matrices in which cooperation benefits players both immediately and in the future, such as Snowdrift or Mutualism (which are briefly mentioned in the book).
Kin selection is often represented by evolutionary biologist W. D. Hamilton's simple rule: Cooperate if the reproductive benefit (B) provided to an individual, prorated by its genetic relatedness (r), exceeds its reproductive cost (C) to the actor (rB–C>0). Because of all the hidden assumptions and complexity rolled into the seemingly simple variables B and C, the rule is a mathematical purist's nightmare. Nowak may well be correct that the full calculation of inclusive fitness required to make the rule mathematically rigorous comes at the cost of losing its elegant simplicity. He has presented an alternative approach in "The Evolution of Eusociality," an article he coauthored with Corina E. Tarnita and Edward O. Wilson, which was published in the August 26, 2010, issue of Nature. His suggested approach is a population-genetics model, which essentially predicts that cooperation can evolve when members of groups are reproductively more successful than solitary individuals. This must be true, of course, because cooperation could not evolve if it were not reproductively beneficial. But such a prediction is also profoundly trivial, because—unlike Hamilton's rule—it offers scant insight into what exactly makes cooperation the more reproductively advantageous choice.
Although Hamilton's rule occasionally fails to accurately predict behavior, it has yielded numerous major insights into the evolutionary dynamic between cooperation and conflict. Sometimes imperfect math leads to great biology. Nowak and Highfield acknowledge this, observing vaguely that "Hamilton's rule has been a valuable heuristic" and has "inspired many field studies." But they don't specifically describe any of the rule's successes in what must now be at least a thousand experiments and studies. Nor do they give a single example demonstrating that their alternative model produces a different, and more valid, prediction than do inclusive fitness calculations. In my view, they advocate replacing a model that has repeatedly illuminated how evolution works with one that often does no more than confirm the obvious.
Furthermore, kin selection lurks in the background in several of the book's chapters, apparently unnoticed by the authors. In "Society of Cells," cancer cells are proposed to be mutant cheaters in a cooperative game. Instead of restraining their reproduction for the common good of the body, cancerous cells defect and favor selfish growth. But a mutation for unrestrained growth also makes the cancer cell unrelated at that locus to the rest of the body. And selfish growth is exactly what Hamilton's rule would predict for an unrelated parasite exploiting its host.
In the penultimate chapter, "Game, Set, and Match," Nowak describes his "cosmic conclusion": Cooperation evolves in the iterated Prisoner's Dilemma game based on three variables: the average payoff for a cooperator (R+S); the average payoff for a defector (T+P); and the variable σ, which is the relative rate at which cooperators and defectors encounter one another. If σ is greater than one, then like individuals interact with one another more often than by chance—just as, in many species, kin are more likely to interact with one another than with random strangers. Therefore, cooperation is favored when (σR+S)>(T+σP). Rearranging gets σ(R–P)–(T–S)>0, or in other words, the equivalent of rB–C>0. Hamilton, like a phoenix, rises again.
Of the remaining chapters, some work better than others. "The Gift of Gab" is a fascinating account of how mathematical descriptions of language can reliably predict its cultural evolution. The authors put forth the interesting proposition that the evolution of human language and of the large brain required to handle its complexity were both driven by the advantages gained from being able to cooperate through indirect reciprocity. This chapter is marred only by a one-sided consideration of Noam Chomsky's "universal grammar" hypothesis. Critics have very vigorously challenged this hypothesis, but Nowak and Highfield present only the supportive mathematical results and not the full debate.
In "Punish and Perish," the authors argue that punishment rarely makes cooperation work more efficiently. They describe experiments with human subjects showing that groups meting out punishments do not succeed as well as ones that are supportive. However, humans appear to have a great need to punish social transgressions. Consider, for example, that subjects in psychology experiments have been easily induced to inflict harsh punishments with enthusiasm, and prisons in the United States are overflowing. Left unaddressed is the question of why models so poorly predict this distinctly human behavior.
Finally, I found the chapter on networks of human interactions that can transmit both information and disease ("How Many Friends Are Too Many?") to be disappointingly superficial—particularly in comparison with Malcolm Gladwell's incisive 2000 book, The Tipping Point, which is full of examples and practical suggestions. It is shocking that Gladwell's book rates no mention here.
In reading SuperCooperators, I was often annoyed by the authors' self-promoting tone, obliviousness to alternative views, ignorance of actual data and inability to distinguish a truism from an informative insight. Despite this, I still quite enjoyed the book, and I found it hard to put down once I started reading. Time and again I needed to really think through why I disagreed with the authors. And sometimes—with regard to the evolutionary uniqueness of humans, for instance—I came around to their point of view. A book that continually challenges you to think is more valuable than one that leaves you nodding absentmindedly in agreement. I am still an unrepentant kin selectionist, but now I have a much better idea of why. Whether you agree with Nowak or not, the book's subtitle makes a valid point: "We need each other to succeed." Anyone who wants to sharpen his or her thinking about why we cooperate ought to read this book.
Peter Nonacs is a professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles. He is an evolutionary behavioral ecologist who has done extensive theoretical and experimental work on the evolution of cooperation in social insects.


text:
Sabine Haase
Expert for Digital Transformation and Female Leadership
Sabine Haase is a true internet veteran looking back upon 20 years of management expertise in the internet sector. She has successfully developed internet businesses nationally and internationally. She was responsible for start-up activities of big corporates and SMEs covering a range of industry sectors such as retail, media, finance and IT. In her management roles at Otto Versand, Sainsburys, Lycos and affilinet as well as CEO within Scout24 Group she has gained an in-depth knowledge in the areas of marketing, product development and digital technology.
Being an online pro, she knows how online companies function, how quickly trends develop and what is vital when building an online business. Be it start-up or new business within a corporation if you want to survive in internet today, innovation, speed, products, processes, and last but not least personnel development need to be adapted to this fast changing environment.
Today, Sabine Haase works as interim manager building up businesses online. Based on her experience as female leader in a rather technical environment she has founded the Female Academy where she is training and accompanying female leaders during their careers.
Presentation Topics
- Start-ups in big corporates - Chances and Risks
- The Lean Start-up
- Trends and Challenges of Social - Local - Mobile
- Suddenly digital
- Start-up or Shut-down
- Never follow in the footsteps - create your own path
- Women be brave
- Fit for Diversity
Gern senden wir Ihnen weitere Informationen zu dieser Expertin.
Nutzen Sie dafür unsere Wunschliste.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
All our Collins & Hayes reupholstery work is undertaken in our own workshops by time-served professionals using traditional methods.
To get a free quote and advice ASAP, contact us via our new site's contact form.
Reupholstery of Collins & Hayes Furniture
Your Collins & Hayes furniture will be completely stripped down to the frame, all loose joints would be fixed all dangerous products removed ie materials that don't conform to fire regulations, and new padding and foam will be applied, Then your suite will be rebuilt back to its original splendour.
We are often asked: "What is the difference between reupholstery and a recover?"
A few unscrupulous upholsterers might try and sell Collins & Hayes Furniture recover as reupholstery. However, put simply a recover is exactly what it says, the furniture fabric is merely stripped off and then replaced.
A lot less work is involved in a recover. Therefore the price should be significantly less than full reupholstery.
Ask to see your Collins & Hayes Furniture suite when it has been stripped down if you are having reupholstered, or ask to have a photograph sent of your suite stripped. You can then be sure you're getting what you pay for.
Eeze Covers Company Pledge
We will always email photographs of the progression of your Collins & Hayes Furniture reupholstery project or supply you with a selection of photographs to confirm we have done the work expected from the Eeze Covers master craftsmen.


text:
This article will be permanently flagged as inappropriate and made unaccessible to everyone.
Are you certain this article is inappropriate?
Excessive Violence
Sexual Content
Political / Social
Email Address:
Article Id:
Reproduction Date:
New Radicals (stylized as Иew Radicals) was an American alternative rock band active from 1997 to 1999. The band centered on frontman Gregg Alexander, who wrote and produced all of their songs and was the sole constant member. They released one album, 1998's Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too, an alternative album heavily influenced by the rock and soul of the 1970s,[1] containing—among radio-friendly modern rock tracks and love songs—strong criticism of corporate America.[2][3]
The band is known for their debut single "You Get What You Give", which topped the charts in Canada and New Zealand, became a top 5 hit in the United Kingdom, was in the top 40 in the US, and whose lyrics, which insulted celebrities at the end of the song, provided a minor media spectacle.[4][5] Tired of touring and promotional interviews, Alexander disbanded the group in mid-1999 before the release of their second single, "Someday We'll Know", to focus on writing and producing songs for other artists. As a result, "Someday We'll Know" received little attention in most countries and the band is widely considered a one-hit wonder.
New Radicals had a "revolving door policy" and no permanent members other than Gregg Alexander, who produced, wrote, sang and played various instruments for the band. The only other person considered a relatively constant member was former child actress Danielle Brisebois (All in the Family, Archie Bunker's Place).[6] She acted as background singer and percussionist on the album, at live shows and in the band's music videos. She also co-wrote their second single "Someday We'll Know" with Alexander and Debra Holland. Brisebois had previously worked with Alexander on his 1992 album Intoxifornication and on her 1994 solo debut Arrive All Over You.
Most of the musicians who worked on Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too were friends of Gregg and Danielle, including piano player Paul Gordon, drummers Matt Laug and Josh Freese, Paul McCartney's guitarist Rusty Anderson, guitarist Michael James (who also mixed)[3], bassists Paul Bushnell, Dan Rothchild [4] and John Pierce, percussionist Lenny Castro, pianist Greg Phillinganes, and producer Rick Nowels, who played piano on two tracks on the album (and who had previously produced Alexander's debut album Michigan Rain). Other musicians who were at some point part of the live line-up include drummer Stuart Johnson, guitarist Bradley Fernquist, keyboardist Jim McGorman and bassist Sasha Krivtsov. The latter two were later also part of the house band in Rock Star: INXS.[7]
New Radicals was formed in Los Angeles, California in 1997 by Gregg Alexander, who had previously released two unsuccessful solo albums, 1989's Michigan Rain and 1992's Intoxifornication. Michael Rosenblatt, MCA Records' A&R Senior Vice President, signed the band to the label in 1998,[8] and Alexander received a $600,000 advance for their first (and only) album, Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too.[9] The album was released on October 20, 1998, and was well received by music critics, who praised the record for its wide range of atypical influences for a modern pop-rock album, such as Todd Rundgren, World Party and Hall & Oates, and compared its funk and soul-influenced upbeat pop rock to the early work of Prince and Mick Jagger.
Some critics, however, disliked the album's themes—Alexander's criticism of society and the frequent references to drugs and sex that run throughout the album—denoting them as "shallow posturing" and "empty social pronouncements"[10] while others found that Alexander's social criticism and observations "would sound clichéd if they werent [sic] so insightful and articulated with such uninhibited truth."[11] Also popular with the general audience, the album reached No. 10 on the UK Albums Chart and No. 41 on the Billboard 200 in the U.S., where it also achieved platinum status (1,000,000 copies sold). It was also certified gold in the United Kingdom (100,000 copies sold) and in Canada (50,000 copies sold).
To promote their album, the New Radicals embarked on a tour through the United States, starting in late 1998. Apart from many concerts and festivals the tour also included several live performances on the radio, appearances on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and Nickelodeon's All That and a performance at the House of Blues in Chicago on New Year's Eve 1998—which is probably the only New Radicals show of which bootlegs are circulating.[12] They also opened for the Goo Goo Dolls on their tour starting on March 30 in 1999.[13]
The album was followed on November 17, 1998 by the release of their first single, "You Get What You Give" (co-written with Rick Nowels), which reached No. 36 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100, No. 5 on the UK Singles Chart, and No. 1 on the RPM Canadian Singles Chart. The song received heavy radio airplay and rotation on MTV and much media attention. In large part this attention focused on the celebrity-slamming line "Fashion shoots with Beck and Hanson/ Courtney Love and Marilyn Manson/ You're all fakes run to your mansions/ Come around we'll kick your ass in."
When asked about it in an interview, Marilyn Manson replied he was "not mad that [Alexander] said he'd kick my ass, I just don't want to be used in the same sentence with Courtney Love" and would "crack his skull open if I see him."[4] Beck reported that "I was in a grocery store and he [Alexander] came running up to me, so apologetic, and saying, 'I hope you weren't offended. It wasn't supposed to be personal.' I was kind of pleased, because he's a big guy."[5] Hanson (the band, not to be confused with Beck's last name) said they weren't really bothered by the song, as they saw it as just a pop-culture reference. They also co-wrote the song "Lost Without Each Other" from their 2004 album Underneath with Alexander. Zac Hanson said that "It was cool working with Gregg... [he]'s definitely a character but he's a cool guy."[14]
Following the mass media's excitement about the celebrity insults, Alexander explained that the verse, along with the lines directly preceding it ("Health insurance rip off lying/ FDA big bankers buying/ Fake computer crashes dining/ Cloning while they're multiplying") were an experiment to see if the media would focus on the real issues, or on the celebrity ridicule.[2] Similar complaints and attacks on Christian religion, American society, politics and corporations can be found in other songs on the album as well, and Alexander would often use promotional interviews to talk about these topics, complaining about—among other things—corrupt, greedy politicians and corporate officers, credit card interest, the poor American social security system, and lack of education.[3]
When the band canceled their appearance at the Atlanta open-air music festival RockFest, as well as their UK tour (scheduled to start on May 17, 1999) rumors started they would break up, while MCA Records claimed an unspecified member of the band (although explicitly not Alexander) being ill was the cause for the canceled shows.[15] The New Radicals went on to shoot the video for their second single "Someday We'll Know"; however, less than two weeks before its release, Gregg Alexander issued a press release on July 12, announcing the breakup of the group. Alexander said that the New Radicals "will no longer be a recording, promoting, or performing entity" and that he would focus on producing and writing material for other artists. He went on to say that he "accomplished all of [his] goals with this record" and that "the fatigue of traveling & getting three hours sleep in a different hotel every night to do boring 'hanging and schmoozing' with radio and retail people, is definitely not for [him]", that he "lost interest in fronting a 'One Hit Wonder' to the point that [he] was wearing a hat while performing so that people wouldn't see [his] lack of enthusiasm" and that he would go on to form a production company to focus on producing and writing songs freelance for other artists.[16] His first production work after the New Radicals' breakup was the album Portable Life by fellow Radical Danielle Brisebois, originally set to be released in October 1999, but cancelled by RCA Records until eventually being released digitally almost a decade later in September 2008. Given the band's breakup and the resulting lack of promotion, "Someday We'll Know" failed to have a notable impact on the charts (it did not chart the Billboard Hot 100 and reached only No. 28 on the U.S. Adult Top 40 and No. 48 on the UK Singles Chart), and the band is therefore regarded as a one-hit wonder.
Although no third single was released, there are some (conflicting) clues as to what would have been the third single: Certain promotional copies of Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too come with a sticker reading "includes 'You Get What You Give' 'I Don't Wanna Die Anymore' 'Someday We'll Know'",[17] suggesting that "I Don't Wanna Die Anymore" would join the other two as a single release. Several websites selling the album also marked the track as "Album Version", indicating that there would be a single version at some point.[18] However, there also exist copies of "Mother We Just Can't Get Enough" as both a one-track promotional single[19] and as a four-track commercial single with a barcode.[20] These apparently never made it to retail and were probably test pressings.
In addition to the songs released on the United States version of Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too, two additional studio songs by the New Radicals were produced. The song "To Think I Thought" was included as the B Side to "You Get What You Give" and as an additional track on the Japanese version of the album, and "The Decency League" was a B-side to the single "Someday We'll Know."
In the years following New Radicals' breakup, Alexander worked with artists such as Ronan Keating, Sophie Ellis-Bextor, and Enrique Iglesias, often collaborating with producer/songwriter Rick Nowels. His most successful song as a producer/songwriter was the 2003 Grammy Award-winning "The Game of Love" by Santana and Michelle Branch. Rod Stewart also recorded Alexander and Nowels' "I Can't Deny It" for his 2001 album, Human.
In 2003, a new Gregg Alexander song entitled "A Love Like That" was released at PickTheHits.com, a website where users could rate new music. While it was uncredited, fans immediately recognized Alexander's voice and parts of the lyrics that had already appeared in the booklet for Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too. The song was (as official sites listing Alexander's song repertoire reveal) written by Alexander and Rick Nowels.[21]
Since their breakup, the New Radicals' songs have been used for several commercials and trailers (for example the trailer to 1999's Big Daddy with Adam Sandler, the 2001 film Bubble Boy, and the 2006 film Click), TV shows (like Scrubs, Community, JAG and Daria), on soundtracks (such as A Walk to Remember, Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed, Click and Surf's Up) and covered by artists such as Mandy Moore and Jon Foreman (lead singer of Switchfoot) and Hall & Oates (both covered "Someday We'll Know" – Moore and Foreman on the soundtrack to A Walk to Remember, Hall & Oates on their 2003 album Do It For Love). Ronan Keating also covered the song during his 2002 Destination Everywhere tour and included "You Get What You Give" in his celebrity playlist on iTunes, as did Joni Mitchell on her Artist's Choice CD, released by Starbucks' Hear Music. She also declared the New Radicals "the only thing I heard in many years that I thought had greatness in it... I loved that song 'You Get What You Give.' It was a big hit, and I said, 'Where did they go?' It turns out the guy [Gregg Alexander] quit. I thought, 'Good for him.' I knew he was my kind of guy."[22] In 2012, "You Get What You Give" was covered in the season three finale episode of Glee.
In 2005, LMC performed a remix of "You Get What You Give" under the title "Don't Let Go". A new version of the remix, with new vocals by Rachel MacFarlane replacing the samples from the original version, was released in January 2006 as a single under the song's original title. The remix with new vocals peaked at No. 30 on the UK Singles Chart. Shawnna's 2006 song "Chicago" from the album Block Music samples the opening line from Moore and Foreman's version of "Someday We'll Know". In 2013, Brooklyn-based pop-rock duo Savoir Adore covered "You Get What You Give" as part of season four of The A.V. Club's web series A.V. Undercover.[23]
Ontario, Quebec City, Quebec, Ottawa, Aboriginal peoples in Canada
United Kingdom, Australia, Cook Islands, Tokelau, Canada
Philippines, Universal Music Group, New York City, Decca Records, World War II
Moby, Sophie Ellis-Bextor, Cher, Pop music, Electronica


text:
Between turning down a $3 billion acquisition offer from Facebook and the ongoing legal battle between its co-founders, Snapchat is all over the news lately. The self-destructing photo messaging app has been pretty popular, but that doesn't mean you can't find a good alternative.
React Messenger is a new iPhone app that puts a unique spin on selfies. The startup's focus is on combining stickers and selfies for its own messaging service. It's like a hybrid between Snapchat and regular text messaging. We first heard of React Messenger from TechCrunch.
Friends can chat with each other as icons capturing real time emotions. The program is free to download from the App Store. It has potential to expand on its features since it still is in beta, but check out our walkthrough of the app below.


text:
The DLRO10HD low-resistance ohmmeter features an IP65 case design for ingress protection, line or battery operation (including operation while charging the battery), unique high or low power output selection, five measurement modes, and 0.1 mÙ resolution. The ohmmeter features an internal rechargeable battery and can operate from a mains supply, even if the battery is completely flat, according to the company.
For more information:
Hide comments


text:
Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists / Re: Avoid Tier 3/4, and 5 Law Schools- End of a Golden Era!« on: January 19, 2011, 11:52:09 AM »
This is the greatest time to open new firms, lots of people need attorneys and many are going to use local, low cost attorneys over big firms. I know SEVERAL people who have rented small buildings and started their own firms and all are doing very well for themselves. These people all went to tier 3 schools and made 75-80k net their first year out working for themselves. Now two of these same people are so busy from word of mouth and small amounts of advertising that they have actually hired another attorneys to work for them. Also, when you run your own business you are able to form a llc and pay yourself a very small salary which will allow you to pay the minimum amount on student loans. Eventually the debt will be forgiven and all will be good.


text:
Gingrich distorted Kerry's vote on Unborn Victims of Violence Act
Research ››› ››› JEREMY CLUCHEY
As a guest on the July 15 edition of Sean Hannity's radio program, FOX News Channel political contributor Newt Gingrich expanded on a misleading attack against Senator John Kerry (D-MA) made in a recent Bush-Cheney '04 campaign ad when he criticized Kerry for voting against the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (pdf). In so doing, Gingrich misrepresented both the law -- which defines an "unborn child" not simply as one that is "viable," as Gingrich claims, but much more broadly -- as well as Kerry's position on the issue.
The law -- nicknamed "Laci and Conner's Law," in reference to the murder of Laci Peterson -- actually "increase[s] penalties for violence against a 'child in utero' by making it a separate federal offense when the mother is the victim of certain federal crimes of violence," according to the Annenberg Political Fact Check.
From the July 15 edition of ABC Radio Network's The Sean Hannity Show:
GINGRICH: John Kerry voted against protecting babies who are killed by violent criminals if they're viable in the last months of pregnancy -- the Laci Peterson case. ... [I]t basically said if a violent criminal happens while attacking a pregnant woman to kill her child and the child was viable -- that is, it would've lived outside the womb, then the criminal could be charged with an additional crime.
Gingrich's suggestion that the new law would apply to "babies who are ... viable in the last months of pregnancy ... that is, it would've lived outside the womb" misrepresents the law (pdf), which actually defines an "unborn child" as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb." It was this controversial definition that prompted 35 Democrats, two Republicans and one Independent to vote against the law in the Senate, out of concern that "it may open the door to an erosion of reproductive rights by assigning a separate legal status to an 'unborn child,'" according to a July 8 Reuters article.
In fact, as The Washington Post reported on July 8, Kerry did vote for an amendment to the law offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) that would have "increased penalties for attacks on pregnant women -- including murder charges if the fetus is killed -- without defining an 'unborn child.'" This measure was defeated 50 to 49.
Related Links
- Posted In
- Health Care, Reproductive Rights
- Stories/Interests
- 2004 Elections
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.


text:
your bag
Your bag is empty.
Sorry, this product has sold out!
If you would like ARCHFASHION to try to and find it for you complete the form below.
There is no doubt you will be turning heads in this stunning lace dress.intuition dress features a classic high neckline,bodycon fit and racer back detail, lace detail all over with nude underlay exposed centre back zip closure with hook & eye, curved hemline. Style it simply with nude heels and some soft pink lippy. Polyester lined, non sheer length of size 6/xsmall (shoulder to hem):84cm model wears size 6/xsmall model height: 180cm without heels


text:
Texas Rangers Schedule
About Texas Rangers
Why Buy Texas Rangers Tickets from SeatSmart?
Same tickets. Lower prices. Guaranteed.
When you buy Texas Rangers tickets from SeatSmart, we guarantee that you are getting the lowest price available on the web. No other site can sell Texas Rangers tickets at a lower price than the one you see for our Preferred Inventory.
Authenticity Guaranteed
SeatSmart connects you directly to professional sellers. That means that not only are you getting the lowest available price, but you're buying Texas Rangers tickets that are 100% guaranteed to be authentic. Click here to learn more about our Authenticity Guarantee.
No Hidden Fees
You'll never be surprised by hidden fees when you buy Texas Rangers tickets from SeatSmart. You deserve to know the final price of your tickets right from the get-go.


text:
What about future generations?
To the Editor:
I read a quote this morning that has struck a nerve, when thinking about all that is going on in the world right now. If our leaders would just sit back and think about this for a moment. I am talking about world leaders, our nation"s leaders; our states"s leaders; and, especially, our county and civic leaders, who are dealing with zoning issues, asphalt plants, and the CalTran bypass. I implore you to search your soul and ponder this. It is a wisdom from the Hopi people.
"Before you make any decision, consider its effect on the next seven generations." I hope you will decide wisely.
Roni McFadden


text:
National Accounts Program
We understand that you are looking for efficiency and consistency. Working with a glass services company that has more than 260 locations in the U.S. and Canada can give you the efficiency you need. Benefits that Glass Doctor® National Account customers receive include:
- Discounted Volume Pricing: National Accounts customers receive 10% - 30% discount off regular pricing.
- Nationwide Standard Pricing: Same rates regardless of the area of the country.
- Centralized Dispatching and Billing: Dedicated toll-free 800 number and one billing address for all of our more than 250 locations. Option to call or e-mail work order requests.
- Real Time Management Reporting: Stay up to date on all work requests. See actual invoices and all pertinent information about your account.
- Dedicated Account Management: Single point of contact through our National Accounts Manager.
- Priority Response: We understand the importance and convenience of uninterrupted daily business transactions.
- After-Hours Emergency Services: Glass Doctor is ready 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Our mobile glass shops quickly secure broken glass storefronts and doors.


text:
Literary Arts: C S Lewis: Author of many good books, including the Narnia Trilogy for kids
Hat Tip to Steve Bishop of The reformational Daily and blogger-newspotter Greg Breazeale
Yearn for God, the list-author's blog for Nov28, 2012 (Jan22,2k13)
Hat Tip to Steve Bishop of The reformational Daily and blogger-newspotter Greg Breazeale
Posted by Unknown at 3:24 AM
Labels: C S Lewia, literary art, Narnia, novels, romances, science fiction
Professional trading signals sent to your cell phone every day.
Start following our signals right now & profit up to 270% daily.
refWrite page 2 * pisteutics * ethics * history * sciences * principial matters.
refWrite page 3 Special Features.
refWrite refBloggers Insert China, Iran and other states repressing freedom of info, blogging, online searching, bloggers, journalists, and free speech lawyers. North America info against blog abuse, blog impersonation, blog IDtheft, etc.
refWrite's Backpage
*technics * semiotics * aethetics & arts * writing & satire
Our Backpage consists of alternating and occasional feature- columns, including our present line-up: Technotes, Semiote Analytics, Vis a VizArts, ArtTalk, Moviedom, TV or Not TV, Ire & Satire and HumorFeed (in the Sidebar).
Owlie Scowlie
& other Geekery
Mcintosh afficionados can't do better!
Apple/Mac brand blog
New: Slugging turns to negotiating in Apple vs Creative counter-suits regarding iPod patents. Question of USA imports of iPod-made-in- Communist- China raised by Creative re unfair labour practices.
The Causes of the Deaths of Philosophers
The Meaning of Life
the sqwib
The Wittenberg Door
Erma's Werkshoppe 4 Humourwriters
Oddly Enuff News


text:
- Fabric Details
- Shopping Tips
- Custom Tips
Custom Printed Squish Fabric ( Double Side Minky ) NO MOQ
* Article : SQ300
* Name : Squish Fabric
* Content : 95% polyester 5%Sp
* Width : 150cm
* Weight : 300-350gsm
* Remarks :
Wholesale orders will be big discounted, welcome to email us for a pricing list !
NO MOQ Per Print, NO MOQ Per Order
Bulk Production time : 15 - 20 days ( depends on order quantity )
Designs to be sent by email or upload to website, we will recheck with you with order screenshot.
High Quality Printing Technic:
We specilize in digitial printing for 6 years with an excellent reputation.
The colors show brightness, rish, without heathering issue. we take the whole responsibility for our duty if flaws happen.
We are working with a lot of clients selling custom printed cotton lycra fabric on facebook and website.
We do full inspection before shipment.
Thousands designs for choice :
Your unique own desgisn are most welcome, your designs will be secretly protected.
Thousands available designs like famous cartoon for choice, check our Designs Gallery and order fabric directly.
Our own professional designs can be us to make designs for you according to your ideas.
We can print on all kinds of fabrics :
Medium Cotton Lycra Fabric CL200 Polyester Swim Fabric PYK200 Polyester PUL Fabric FA075S
Polyester Minky Fabric PMK200 Cotton Poplin Fabric CP4020 Cotton French Terry CFT280
PT1. --- Production Time
Your order will be shipped within 1-2 weeks for production upon receipt of payment.
PT2. --- Telephone No.
Pls make sure the delivery address is correct. If shipping by Express, TELEPHONE NO. is requrested.
PT3. --- Shipping Option
For China Post, usually it takes 3-5 weeks to reach most overseas countries. Some countries may take about 1 more week. It depends on postage.
For FedEx, usually it takes 2-4 days to most countries.
PT4. --- Tracking
The tracking will be offered as soon as the package sent out.
PT5. --- Urgent or Special needs
If you need something special or in a hurry, please let us know and I would be more than happy to accommodate you!
PT6. --- Tax and Duties
We always value it very low or mark " as sample or gift " to help you avoid tax.
However, customers are responsible for any fees, taxes, and duties associated with shipping & purchasing to their respective countries, when it happens.
Payment Policy:
Buyers can now make purchases with PayPal payment, Western Union, Credit Card or Debit Card
If you would like a printed receipt for your order, please let me know and I would be glad to include one in the shipment of your items.
Refund Policy:
It is our intention to display images and descriptions of designs as richly and accurately as possible, but we recognize that the online buyer is deprived of the tactile experience. If you don't adore your items, please contact me within 3 days of receipt. You will be refunded (minus shipping charges) via PayPal once the items in their original condition have been returned to me. All return shipping costs are the responsibility of the buyer.
In the event of any item being faulty, we will either refund or send a replacement.
Please note that cut lengths of fabrics and sewing trims cannot be returned or exchanged. Custom and bulk orders are not refundable unless faulty.
Feel free to convo us any time with questions, concerns, etc. we hope everyone to be as happy with designs as we !
Confidentiality Agreement : Never share or leak customer's designs, fabrics, even any related infos.
Custom Designs:
AI, TIF, PSD, JPG, PDF, etc are all accpetable for printing,
300 DPI is needed for best printing effect.
Make sure the file seamless and no flaws.
Make sure the file size is original and correct for printing.
Custom Fabrics :
Our fabrics are all available for printing with low MOQ.
We can supply and print according to your fabric sample, upon your approval
Various fabric ranges are sellable
Looking forward to hearing from you.


text:
Views: 69
Replies to This Discussion
I live by PSU and would love to hit the ball sometime. I just joined this site and am looking to play more tennis. I can be reached at 503 367 fifty six thirty one.
Any chance you would want to get together? I am a beginner and think I am a 2.0-2.5 rating. I took a tennis class in college over 10 years ago but have not court experience and need to really learn it all. I am very motivated and would just like to meet someone since I am new to the Portland area. Would you consider helping me learn?
Mike L.
© 2019 Created by Mark / The Mayor. Powered by


text:
I am reading Susan Freinkel's book, Plastic, A Toxic Love Story.
The book is comprehensive, and a fascinating read about the history of plastic and products familiar to all of us. It also got me feeling depressed, and then alarmed about the future and the environment my grandchildren will inhabit.
Ms. Freinkel chooses eight objects to help tell the story of plastic: The comb, the chair, the Frisbee, the IV bag, the disposable lighter, the grocery bag, the soda bottle and the credit card.
She examines how these objects are made, the history, the culture of plastics, and how synthetics affect our health and environment.
There is a comment from a speaker at a plastics manufacturer's conference in 1956, quoted as saying "Your future is in the garbage wagon". How true…and it turns out that today, the average American throws away 300 pounds of packaging a year — and this mountain of containers and wrappings accounts for about 1/3 of the municipal waste stream.
Initially, we had to be taught to throw away plastic items — especially after the depression era culture of "use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without".
But it did not take long for us to absorb the lessons — especially because everyone was becoming more prosperous — at the same time when many disposable products were entering the market. Life magazine dubbed this (then) new era "Throwaway Living" .
The thing is…in these modern times, the abundance of plastic waste is not exclusive to a wealthy country like the United States. Plastic waste is also an issue for the poor.
The difference between the Philippines and the US per capita income is huge. The Philippines is at $2,007 (US Department of State data – 2010) and the US is at $47,084 (World Bank, 2010 data).
So…you would think that when you don't have the money to spend on disposable utensils and other disposable conveniences, the issue of plastic trash is minimized.
Unfortunately, that is not the case in a country like the Philippines. Because the poor can afford to buy only the bare necessities…these items are packed in very small, plastic packages. Snack foods too, are packed in tiny packages, and remnants of these tiny packages are often seen at the beach, by the side of the road…well, all over really.
Can you imagine buying only a clove of garlic, as pictured below, from a local market…
or just enough spice, or salt for cooking the day's family meal?
or to buy detergent and laundry products to wash just a few items of clothing?
I am part of this plastics generation — and problem — and feel propelled into doing something, before it is too late.
The question is…what can I do…how do I get the word out? Well, here is a part of getting the word out…PLEASE READ THIS TIMELY BOOK.
~Lola Jane


text:
Jim Carrey Posing for PETA01 Apr 2012
By Lucas Allen (Web correspondent)
According to Hollywood Reporter, Jim Carrey has signed on to PETA (People Ethical Treatment of Animals) to do an upcoming ad. He will join other celebs like Hugh Jackman and Eva Longoria to pose naked for the organization's mission to stop the mistreatment of animals in America.
When being asked about doing the ad, he said to one interviewer, "I too love animals. Yes I was famous for playing "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective" and the character's humorous love for the animal kingdom. But when it comes to the serious reality, these animals deserve better than being slaughtered for both meat and clothing. It's time we take a stand and help the future of our animal friends."
He went on to say, "It's always fun working with animals like dogs and birds, but I want to take that fun and use it to help a cause. It would mean a lot to both the public and the animal world."
The ad featuring Jim Carrey is scheduled to be released later in April.
Source: April Fools' Day. Click to comment this article.
» Send to friend
« Newer article | Overview | Older article »


text:
After deliberating for almost two hours, a Georgia jury found 18-year-old De'Marquise Elkins guilty Friday of multiple charges, including felony murder, in the fatal shooting of 13-month-old boy during a robbery.
Elkins also was convicted of aggravated assault and other charges for shooting pastor Wilfredo Calix-Flores during a mugging 10 days before the baby, Antonio Santiago, was shot in the coastal city of Brunswick.
His mother, Karimah Elkins, was convicted of tampering with evidence for her alleged role in trying to cover up the March shooting.


text:
Glossolalia or (speaking in tongues) is the fluid vocalizing of speech-like syllables that lack any readily comprehended meaning, in some cases as part of religious practice.[1] Some consider it as a part of a sacred language. It is a common practice amongst Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity.
Glossolalia (and especially the idiom "speaking in tongues") also sometimes refers to xenoglossy, the putative speaking of a natural language previously unknown to the speaker.
"Glossolalia" is constructed from the Greek word γλωσσολαλία, itself a compound of the words γλῶσσα (glossa), meaning "tongue" or "language"[2] and λαλέω (laleō), "to speak, talk, chat, prattle, or to make a sound".[3] The Greek expression (in various forms) appears in the New Testament in the books of Acts and First Corinthians.
The exact phrase "speaking in tongues" has been used at least since the translation of the New Testament into Middle English in the Wycliffe Bible in the 14th century.[4] Frederic William Farrar first used the word "glossolalia" in 1879.[5]
In 1972, William J. Samarin, a linguist from the University of Toronto, published a thorough assessment of Pentecostal glossolalia that became a classic work on its linguistic characteristics.[6] His assessment was based on a large sample of glossolalia recorded in public and private Christian meetings in Italy, The Netherlands, Jamaica, Canada and the USA over the course of five years; his wide range included the Puerto Ricans of the Bronx, the Snake Handlers of the Appalachians and the Spiritual Christians from Russia in Los Angeles (Pryguny, Dukhizhizniki).
Samarin found that glossolalic speech does resemble human language in some respects. The speaker uses accent, rhythm, intonation and pauses to break up the speech into distinct units. Each unit is itself made up of syllables, the syllables being formed from consonants and vowels taken from a language known to the speaker:
It is verbal behaviour that consists of using a certain number of consonants and vowels[...]in a limited number of syllables that in turn are organized into larger units that are taken apart and rearranged pseudogrammatically[...]with variations in pitch, volume, speed and intensity.[7]
[Glossolalia] consists of strings of syllables, made up of sounds taken from all those that the speaker knows, put together more or less haphazardly but emerging nevertheless as word-like and sentence-like units because of realistic, language-like rhythm and melody.[8]
That the sounds are taken from the set of sounds already known to the speaker is confirmed by others. Felicitas Goodman, a psychological anthropologist and linguist, also found that the speech of glossolalists reflected the patterns of speech of the speaker's native language.[9]
Samarin found that the resemblance to human language was merely on the surface and so concluded that glossolalia is "only a facade of language".[10] He reached this conclusion because the syllable string did not form words, the stream of speech was not internally organized, and – most importantly of all – there was no systematic relationship between units of speech and concepts. Humans use language to communicate but glossolalia does not. Therefore, he concluded that glossolalia is not "a specimen of human language because it is neither internally organized nor systematically related to the world man perceives".[10] On the basis of his linguistic analysis, Samarin defined Pentecostal glossolalia as "meaningless but phonologically structured human utterance, believed by the speaker to be a real language but bearing no systematic resemblance to any natural language, living or dead".[11]
Practitioners of glossolalia may disagree with linguistic researchers and claim that they are speaking human languages (xenoglossia). Felicitas Goodman studied a number of Pentecostal communities in the United States, the Caribbean and Mexico; these included English-, Spanish- and Mayan-speaking groups. She compared what she found with recordings of non-Christian rituals from Africa, Borneo, Indonesia and Japan. She took into account both the segmental structure (such as sounds, syllables, phrases) and the supra-segmental elements (rhythm, accent, intonation) and concluded that there was no distinction between what was practised by the Pentecostal Protestants and the followers of other religions.[12]
In Christianity
Theological explanations
In Christianity, a supernatural explanation for glossolalia is advocated by some and rejected by others.
- Glossolalists could, apart from those practicing glossolalia, also mean all those Christians who believe that the Pentecostal/charismatic glossolalia practiced today is the "speaking in tongues" described in the New Testament. They believe that it is a miraculous charism or spiritual gift. Glossolalists claim that these tongues can be both real, unlearned languages (i.e., xenoglossia)[13][14] as well as a "language of the spirit", a "heavenly language", or perhaps the language of angels.[15]
- Cessationists believe that all the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased to occur early in Christian history, and therefore that the speaking in tongues practised today is simply the utterance of meaningless syllables. It is neither xenoglossia nor miraculous, but rather learned behavior, possibly self-induced. These believe that what the New Testament described as "speaking in tongues" was xenoglossia, a miraculous spiritual gift through which the speaker could communicate in natural languages not previously studied.
Proponents of each viewpoint use the biblical writings and historical arguments to support their positions.
Biblical practice
There are five places in the New Testament where speaking in tongues is referred to explicitly:
- Mark 16:17, which records the instructions of Christ to the apostles, including his description that "they will speak with new tongues" as a sign that would follow "them that believe" in him.
- Acts 2, which describes an occurrence of speaking in tongues in Jerusalem at Pentecost, though with various interpretations. Specifically, "every man heard them speak in his own language" and wondered "how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?"
- Acts 10:46, when the household of Cornelius in Caesarea spoke in tongues, and those present compared it to the speaking in tongues that occurred at Pentecost.
- Acts 19:6, when a group of approximately a dozen men spoke in tongues in Ephesus as they received the Holy Spirit while the apostle Paul laid his hands upon them.
- 1 Cor 12, 13, 14, where Paul discusses speaking in "various kinds of tongues" as part of his wider discussion of the gifts of the Spirit; his remarks shed some light on his own speaking in tongues as well as how the gift of speaking in tongues was to be used in the church.
Other verses by inference may be considered to refer to "speaking in tongues", such as Isaiah 28:11, Romans 8:26 and Jude 20.
The biblical account of Pentecost in the second chapter of the book of Acts describes the sound of a mighty rushing wind and "divided tongues like fire" coming to rest on the apostles. The text further describes that "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in other languages". It goes on to say in verses 5-11 that when the Apostles spoke, each person in attendance "heard their own language being spoken". Therefore, the gift of speaking in tongues refers to the Apostles' speaking languages that the people listening heard as "them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God". Glossolalists and cessationists both recognize this as xenoglossia, a miraculous ability that marked their baptism in the Holy Spirit. Something similar (although perhaps not xenoglossia) took place on at least two subsequent occasions, in Caesarea and Ephesus.
Glossolalists and cessationists generally agree that the primary purpose of the gift of speaking in tongues was to mark the Holy Spirit being poured out. At Pentecost the Apostle Peter declared that this gift, which was making some in the audience ridicule the disciples as drunks, was the fulfilment of the prophecy of Joel which described that God would pour out his Spirit on all flesh (Acts 2:17).[14]
Despite these commonalities, there are significant variations in interpretation.
- Universal. The traditional Pentecostal view is that every Christian should expect to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, the distinctive mark of which is glossolalia.[16] While most Protestants agree that baptism in the Holy Spirit is integral to being a Christian, others[17] believe that it is not separable from conversion and no longer marked by glossolalia. Pentecostals appeal to the declaration of the Apostle Peter at Pentecost, that "the gift of the Holy Spirit" was "for you and for your children and for all who are far off" (Acts 2:38-39). Cessationists reply that the gift of speaking in tongues was never for all (1 Cor 12:30). In response to those who say that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is not a separate experience from conversion, Pentecostals appeal to the question asked by the Apostle Paul to the Ephesian believers "Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?" (Acts 19:2).
- One gift. Different aspects of speaking in tongues appear in Acts and 1 Corinthians, such that the Assemblies of God declare that the gift in Acts "is the same in essence as the gift of tongues" in 1 Corinthians "but different in purpose and use".[16] They distinguish between (private) speech in tongues when receiving the gift of the Spirit, and (public) speech in tongues for the benefit of the church. Others assert that the gift in Acts was "not a different phenomenon" but the same gift being displayed under varying circumstances.[18] The same description – "speaking in tongues" – is used in both Acts and 1 Corinthians, and in both cases the speech is in an unlearned language.
- Direction. The New Testament describes tongues largely as speech addressed to God, but also as something that can potentially be interpreted into human language, thereby "edifying the hearers" (1 Cor 14:5,13). At Pentecost and Caesarea the speakers were praising God (Acts 2:11; 10:46). Paul referred to praying, singing praise, and giving thanks in tongues (1 Cor 14:14-17), as well as to the interpretation of tongues (1 Cor 14:5), and instructed those speaking in tongues to pray for the ability to interpret their tongues so others could understand them (1 Cor 14:13). While some limit speaking in tongues to speech addressed to God – "prayer or praise",[13] others claim that speech in tongues is revelation from God to the church, and when interpreted into human language by those embued with the gift of interpretation of tongues for the benefit of others present, may be considered equivalent to prophecy.[19]
- Music. Musical interludes of glossolalia are sometimes described as singing in the Spirit. Some hold that singing in the Spirit is identified with singing in tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:13-19,[20] which they hold to be "spiritual or spirited singing", as opposed to "communicative or impactive singing" which Paul refers to as "singing with the understanding".[21]
- Sign for unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22). Some assume that tongues are "a sign for unbelievers that they might believe",[22] and so advocate it as a means of evangelism. Others point out that Paul quotes Isaiah to show that "when God speaks to people in language they cannot understand, it is quite evidently a sign of God's judgment"; so if unbelievers are baffled by a church service they cannot understand because tongues are spoken without being interpreted, that is a "sign of God's attitude", "a sign of judgment".[23] Some identify the tongues in Acts 2 as the primary example of tongues as signs for unbelievers
- Comprehension. Some say that speech in tongues was "not understood by the speaker".[13] Others assert that "the tongues-speaker normally understood his own foreign-language message".[24] This last comment seems to have been made by someone confusing the "gift of tongues" with the "gift of the interpretation of tongues, which is specified as a different gift in the New Testament, but one that can be given to a person who also has the gift of tongues. In that case, a person understands a message in tongues that he has previously spoken in an unknown language."[this quote needs a citation]
Church practice
100 AD to 400 AD
20th century Pentecostalism was not the earliest instance of "speaking in tongues" in church history, but earlier examples are few; in church history and writing after the New Testament, it had rarely been recorded by 'formal church authority' as orthodox until the rise of 'Pentecostal Church.'
References to speaking in tongues by the Church fathers are rare. Except for Irenaeus' 2nd-century reference to many in the church speaking all kinds of languages "through the Spirit", and Tertullian's reference in 207 AD to the spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues being encountered in his day, there are no other known first-hand accounts of glossolalia, and very few second-hand accounts among their writings.[25]
What we do have are general remarks that Christ had given the gifts of the Spirit to the church, and that the gifts in general remained in the church.
For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to this present time. (Justin Martyr, c. 150)[26]
Now, it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God. (Justin Martyr, c. 150)[27]
The Fathers also recount the lists of gifts of the Spirit recorded in the New Testament.
This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and thus make the Lord's Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed. (Novatian, c. 200–c. 258)[28]
For God hath set same in the Church, first apostles…secondly prophets…thirdly teachers…next mighty works, among which are the healing of diseases… and gifts of either speaking or interpreting divers kinds of tongues. Clearly these are the Church's agents of ministry and work of whom the body of Christ consists; and God has ordained them. (Hilary of Poitiers, 360)[29]
There is one instance of a Father apparently recording that he had heard some in the church speaking all kinds of languages through the Spirit:
In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God. (Irenaeus, c. 180)[30]
Tertullian in an anti-heretical apologetic alludes to instances of the "interpretation of tongues" as one among several examples of "spiritual gifts" common enough in his day to be easily encountered and provide evidence that God was at work in the church:
Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart; let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer -- only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him; let him show to me also, that any woman of boastful tongue in his community has ever prophesied from amongst those specially holy sisters of his. Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty, and they agree, too, with the rules, and the dispensations, and the instructions of the Creator; therefore without doubt the Christ, and the Spirit, and the apostle, belong severally to my God. Here, then, is my frank avowal for any one who cares to require it. (Tertullian, c. 207)[31]
There were unorthodox movements that may have engaged in glossolalia. For example, Montanus was accused (by his opponents) of ecstatic speech that some have equated to glossolalia:
He became possessed of a spirit, and suddenly began to rave in a kind of ecstatic trance, and to babble in a jargon, prophesying in a manner contrary to the custom of the Church which had been handed down by tradition from the earliest times. (Eusebius, d.c. 339)[32]
Their hostility to such a practice demonstrates that the mainstream (the anti-Montanists) regarded it as false, and would never have practised it. Indeed, "after the first or perhaps the second century, there is not record of it in any Orthodox source, and it is not recorded as occurring even among the great Fathers of the Egyptian desert, who were so filled with the Spirit of God they performed numerous astonishing miracles, including raising the dead".[33]
However, Eusebius' words demonstrate that he still regards the gift of prophesying as being a normal part of church life, so he is clearly not a cessationist.[citation needed]
Chrysostom regarded the whole phenomenon of "speaking in tongues" as not only something that was not practised in his own day, but was even obscure.
This whole phenomenon [of speaking in tongues] is very obscure, but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such then as used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more? (Chrysostom, 344–407)[34]
Augustine of Hippo regarded speaking in tongues (that is, xenoglossia) as a gift for the apostolic church alone, and argued that this was evident from the fact that his contemporaries did not see people receiving that gift in their own day.
In the earliest times, "the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues", which they had not learned, "as the Spirit gave them utterance". These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away. In the laying on of hands now, that persons may receive the Holy Ghost, do we look that they should speak with tongues? Or when he laid the hand on infants, did each one of you look to see whether they would speak with tongues, and, when he saw that they did not speak with tongues, was any of you so wrong-minded as to say, These have not received the Holy Ghost; for, had they received, they would speak with tongues as was the case in those times? If then the witness of the presence of the Holy Ghost be not given through these miracles, by what is it given, by what does one get to know that he has received the Holy Ghost? Let him question his own heart. If he love his brother, the Spirit of God dwelleth in him. (Augustine of Hippo, 354–430)[35]
Augustine did, however, recognise a phenomenon he called jubilation[36] – sounds of exaltation without words; commentators such as Richard Hogue speculate that the practice of singing in the spirit persisted in Augustine's era, although xenoglossia was no longer extant among Christians:[37]
Behold, he giveth as it were the tune of thy song; seek not words as if thou couldest explain whereby God is pleased. Sing with jubilation: for this is to sing skilfully unto God, to sing with jubilation. What is it to sing with jubilation ? To be unable to understand, to express in words, what is sung in the heart. For singers, either in the harvest, or in the vineyard, or in any other busy work, after they have begun in the words of their hymns to exult and rejoice, being as it were filled with so great joy, that they cannot express it in words, then turn from actual words, and proceed to sounds of jubilation. The jubilee is a sound signifying that the heart laboureth with that which it cannot utter. And whom beseemeth that jubilation, but the Ineffable God? For He is Ineffable, Whom thou canst not speak; and if thou canst not speak Him, and oughtest not to keep Him silent, what remaineth to thee but jubilation ; that the heart may rejoice without words, and the boundless extent of joy may have no limits of syllables? Sing skilfully unto Him with jubilation.— Augustine of Hippo on the 33 Psalm[38]
400 to 1900
- 5th century St. Patrick of Ireland (c. 387–493), in The Confession of St. Patrick, records hearing a strange language being prayed by the Holy Spirit in a dream. St. Patrick says in his book:
And another night – God knows, I do not, whether within me or beside me – most words which I heard and could not understand, except at the end of the speech it was represented thus: 'He who gave his life for you, he it is who speaks within you.' And thus I awoke, joyful.[39]
And on a second occasion I saw Him praying within me, and I was as it were, inside my own body , and I heard Him above me—that is, above my inner self. He was praying powerfully with sighs. And in the course of this I was astonished and wondering, and I pondered who it could be who was praying within me. But at the end of the prayer it was revealed to me that it was the Spirit. And so I awoke and remembered the Apostle's words: "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we know not how to pray as we ought. But the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for utterance [Romans 8:26]." And again: "The Lord our advocate intercedes for us [Romans 8:27].[39]
- 12th century – Bernard of Clairvaux, commenting on Mark 16:17 ("they will speak in new tongues"), asked: "For who is there that seems to have these signs of the faith, without which no one, according to this Scripture, shall be saved?"[40] He explained that these signs were no longer present because there were greater miracles – the transformed lives of believers.[citation needed]
- 12th century – Hildegard of Bingen is reputed to have spoken and sung in tongues. Her spiritual songs were referred to by contemporaries as "concerts in the Spirit."[citation needed]
- 1265 – Thomas Aquinas wrote about the gift of tongues in the New Testament, which he understood to be an ability to speak every language, given for the purposes of missionary work. He explained that Christ did not have this gift because his mission was to the Jews, "nor does each one of the faithful now speak save in one tongue"; for "no one speaks in the tongues of all nations, because the Church herself already speaks the languages of all nations".[41]
- 15th century – The Moravians are referred to by detractors as having spoken in tongues. John Roche, a contemporary critic, claimed that the Moravians "commonly broke into some disconnected Jargon, which they often passed upon the vulgar, 'as the exuberant and resistless Evacuations of the Spirit'".[42]
- 17th century – The French Prophets: The Camisards also spoke sometimes in languages that were unknown: "Several persons of both Sexes," James Du Bois of Montpellier recalled, "I have heard in their Extasies pronounce certain words, which seem'd to the Standers-by, to be some Foreign Language." These utterances were sometimes accompanied by the gift of interpretation exercised, in Du Bois' experience, by the same person who had spoken in tongues.[43][44]
- 17th century – Early Quakers, such as Edward Burrough, make mention of tongues speaking in their meetings: "We spoke with new tongues, as the Lord gave us utterance, and His Spirit led us".[45]
- 1817 – In Germany, Gustav von Below, an aristocratic officer of the Prussian Guard, and his brothers, founded a charismatic movement based on their estates in Pomerania, which may have included speaking in tongues.[citation needed]
- 19th century – Edward Irving and the Catholic Apostolic Church. Edward Irving, a minister in the Church of Scotland, writes of a woman who would "speak at great length, and with superhuman strength, in an unknown tongue, to the great astonishment of all who heard, and to her own great edification and enjoyment in God".[46] Irving further stated that "tongues are a great instrument for personal edification, however mysterious it may seem to us."[this quote needs a citation]
- 19th century – The history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), contains extensive references to the phenomenon of speaking in tongues by Brigham Young, Joseph Smith and many others.[47][48] Sidney Rigdon had disagreements with Alexander Campbell regarding speaking in tongues, and later joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Speaking in tongues was recorded in contemporary sources, both hostile and sympathetic to Mormonism, by at least 1830.[49] The practice was soon widespread amongst Mormons, with many rank and file church members believing they were speaking the language of Adam; some of the hostility towards Mormons stemmed from those of other faiths regarding speaking in tongues unfavorably, especially when practiced by children.[49] At the 1836 dedication of the Kirtland Temple the dedicatory prayer asks that God grant them the gift of tongues and at the end of the service Brigham Young speaks in tongues, another elder interprets it and then gives his own exhortation in tongues. Many other worship experiences in the Kirtland Temple prior to and after the dedication included references to people speaking and interpreting tongues. In describing the beliefs of the church in the Wentworth letter (1842), Joseph Smith identified a belief of the "gift of tongues" and "interpretation of tongues". The practice of glossolalia by the Latter-day Saints was widespread but after an initial burst of enthusiastic growth circa 1830-34, seems to have been somewhat more restrained than in many other contemporary religious movements.[49] Young, Smith, and numerous other early leaders frequently cautioned against the public exercise of glossolalia unless there was someone who could exercise the corresponding spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues, so that listeners could be edified by what had been said. Although the Latter-day Saints believe that speaking in tongues and the interpretation of tongues are alive and well in the Church, modern Mormons are much more likely to point to the way in which LDS missionaries are trained and learn foreign languages quickly, and are able to communicate rapidly on their missions, as evidence of the manifestation of this gift. This interpretation stems from a 1900 General Conference sermon by Joseph F. Smith which discouraged glossolalia; subsequent leaders echoed this recommendation for about a decade afterwards and subsequently the practice had largely died out amongst Mormons by the 1930s and '40s.[49] The visitor to 21st Century LDS church services will never hear spontaneous, incomprehensible glossolalia as one might overhear at a Pentecostal service.
20th century to present
During the 20th century, glossolalia would primarily become associated with Pentecostalism and the later charismatic movement. The holiness preachers Charles Parham and William Seymour are credited as co-founders of the movement. It was Parham who formulated the doctrine of "initial evidence". After studying the Bible, Parham came to the conclusion that speaking in tongues was the Bible evidence that one had received the baptism with the Holy Spirit.
In 1900, Parham opened Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kansas, where he taught initial evidence. During a service on 1 January 1901, a student named Agnes Ozman asked for prayer and the laying on of hands to specifically ask God to fill her with the Holy Spirit. She became the first of many students to experience glossolalia, coincidentally in the first hours of the 20th century. Parham followed within the next few days. Parham called his new movement the Apostolic Faith. In 1905, he moved to Houston and opened a Bible school there. One of his students was William Seymour, an African-American preacher. In 1906, Seymour traveled to Los Angeles where his preaching ignited the Azusa Street Revival. This revival is considered the birth of the global Pentecostal movement. Witnesses at the Azusa Street Revival wrote of seeing fire resting on the heads of participants, miraculous healings in the meetings, and incidents of speaking in tongues being understood by native speakers of the language.[citation needed] According to the first issue of William Seymore's newsletter, "The Apostolic Faith", from 1906:
A Mohammedan, a Soudanese by birth, a [m]an who is an interpreter and speaks six[t]een languages, came into the meetings at Azusa Street and the Lord gave him messages which none but himself could understand. He identified, interpreted and wrote [a] number of the languages.[50]
Parham and his early followers believed that speaking in tongues was xenoglossia, and some followers traveled to foreign countries and tried to use the gift to share the Gospel with non-English-speaking people. These attempts consistently resulted in failure and many of Parham's followers rejected his teachings after being disillusioned with their attempts to speak unlearned foreign languages. Despite these setbacks, belief in xenoglossia persisted into the latter half of the 20th century among Pentecostal groups.[51]
The revival at Azusa Street lasted until around 1915. From it grew many new Pentecostal churches as people visited the services in Los Angeles and took their newfound beliefs to communities around the United States and abroad. During the 20th century, glossolalia became an important part of the identity of these religious groups. During the 1960s, the charismatic movement within the mainline Protestant churches and among charismatic Roman Catholics would adopt some Pentecostal beliefs, and the practice of glossolalia would spread to other Christian denominations. The discussion regarding tongues has permeated many branches of the Protestantism, particularly since the widespread Charismatic Movement in the 1960s. Many books have been published either defending[52] or attacking[53] the practice.
Because Pentecostal and charismatic beliefs are not monolithic, there is not complete theological agreement on speaking in tongues. Generally, however, it is agreed that speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift that can be manifested as either a human language or a heavenly supernatural language in three ways[citation needed]. The "sign of tongues" refers to xenoglossia, wherein one speaks an actual language he has never learned. The "gift of tongues" refers to a glossolalic utterance spoken by an individual and addressed to a congregation of, typically, other believers. Lastly, "praying in the spirit" is typically used to refer to glossolalia as part of personal prayer.[citation needed] Many Pentecostals and charismatics adhere to Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 14 which established guidelines on the public use of glossolalia in the church at Corinth.[citation needed]
The gift of tongues is often referred to as a "message in tongues".[citation needed] This use of glossolalia requires an interpretation so that the gathered congregation can understand the message. This is accomplished by the interpretation of tongues, another spiritual gift. There are two schools of thoughts concerning the nature of a message in tongues. One school of thought believes it is always directed to God as prayer, praise, or thanksgiving but is spoken in for the hearing and edification of the congregation. The other school of thought believes that a message in tongues can be a prophetic utterance inspired by the Holy Spirit.[citation needed] In this case, the speaker delivers a message to the congregation on behalf of God.
In addition to praying in the Spirit, many Pentecostal and charismatic churches practice what is known as singing in the Spirit.
Non-Christian practice
Other religious groups have been observed to practice some form of theopneustic glossolalia. It is perhaps most commonly in Paganism, Shamanism, and other mediumistic religious practices.[54] In Japan, the God Light Association believed that glossolalia could cause adherents to recall past lives.[55]
Glossolalia has even been postulated as an explanation for the Voynich manuscript.[56]
Certain Gnostic magical texts from the Roman period have written on them unintelligible syllables such as "t t t t n n n n d d d d d...". It is conjectured that these may be transliterations of the sorts of sounds made during glossolalia. The Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians also features a hymn of (mostly) unintelligible syllables which is thought to be an early example of Christian glossolalia.[citation needed]
In the 19th century, Spiritism was developed by the work of Allan Kardec, and the phenomenon was seen as one of the self-evident manifestations of spirits. Spiritists argued that some cases were actually cases of xenoglossia.
Glossolalia has also been observed in the Voodoo religion of Haiti,[57] as well as in the Hindu Gurus and Fakirs of India.[58][59]
Some Jewish groups sing or chant nigunim, which are often melodies not consisting of recognizable words, but of repetitive or other syllables. Sometimes, they are repetitive singing of recognizable words. [60][61]
See also
- Aphasia
- Asemic writing
- Biblical hermeneutics
- Charismatic Movement
- Covenant theology
- Direct revelation
- Dispensationalism
- Divine language
- Dream speech
- Gibberish
- Historical-grammatical method
- Holiness movement
- Lists of language disorders
- Logorrhoea
- Pentecostalism
- Scat singing
- The Revival Fellowship
- Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship
- Toronto Blessing
- Vonlenska
- Xenoglossia
- ↑ "Glossolalia n." A Dictionary of Psychology. Edited by Andrew M. Colman. Oxford University Press 2009. Oxford Reference Online. Retrieved 5 August 2011.
- ↑ γλῶσσα, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus
- ↑ λαλέω, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, on Perseus
- ↑ Mark 16:17 in Wycliffe's Bible
- ↑ Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed, 1989
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).[page needed]
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).[page needed]
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God (11 August 2000). "The Baptism in the Holy Spirit: The Initial Experience and Continuing Evidences of the Spirit-Filled Life" (PDF). General Council of the Assemblies of God of the United States. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 December 2008. Retrieved 9 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 Assemblies of God (1961). "Statement of Fundamental Truths" (PDF). General Council of the Assemblies of God of the United States. Retrieved 9 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ "Baptism with the Holy Spirit". christians.eu.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value). Cited by Riss, Richard M. (28 July 1995). "Singing in the Spirit in the Holiness, Pentecostal, Latter Rain, and Charismatic Movements". Retrieved 9 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value). Cited by Riss, Richard M. (28 July 1995). "Singing in the Spirit in the Holiness, Pentecostal, Latter Rain, and Charismatic Movements". Retrieved 9 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ "Questions about Tongues". General Council of the Assemblies of God of the United States. 2009. Retrieved 10 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 82.
- ↑ Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 88.
- ↑ Novatian, Treatise Concerning the Trinity, Chapter 29.
- ↑ Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, Vol 8 Chap 33
- ↑ Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter VI.
- ↑ Tertullian, Against Marcion, Book V, Chapter VIII, s:Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume III/Anti-Marcion/The Five Books Against Marcion/Book V/VIII.
- ↑ Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, V,17,3
- ↑ Fr. Seraphim Rose, Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future, p.125.
- ↑ Chrystostom, Homilies on First Corinthians, xxix, 1
- ↑ Augustine, Homilies on the Gospel of John 6:10, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [7:497-98]
- ↑ Augustine, Exposition on the Book of Psalms, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [8]
- ↑ Richard Hogue, Tongues: A Theological History of Christian Glossolalia, Tate Publishing, 2010, page 136.
- ↑ Augustine, Expositions on the Book of Psalms, vol. 1, (Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1847), p. 317.
- ↑ 39.0 39.1 Saint Patrick. Confessio, sections 24 and 25
- ↑ Bernard, Serm. i. de Ascens., 2
- ↑ Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Question 176.
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers at line 47: attempt to index field 'wikibase' (a nil value).
- ↑ Burrough, Edward (1831) [1659]. "Epistle to the Reader" in Fox, George. The great mystery of the great whore unfolded; and Antichrist's kingdom revealed unto destruction. The Works of George Fox. 3. p. 13. OCLC 12877488.
- ↑ Irving, Edward (January 1832). "Facts Connected With Recent Manifestations of Spiritual Gifts". Fraser's Magazine. 4 (24): 754–761. Retrieved 9 June 2009.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ http://www.frontiernet.net/~bcmmin/tongue1.htm[unreliable source?]
- ↑ http://www.mormonwiki.com/Speaking_in_Tongues[unreliable source?]
- ↑ 49.0 49.1 49.2 49.3 Copeland, Lee. "Speaking in Tongues in the Restoration Churches", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol 24, No. 1
- ↑ Square brackets indicate faded parts that are no longer readable.
- ↑ Faupel, D. William. GLOSSOLALIA AS FOREIGN LANGUAGE:AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EARLY TWENTIETH-CENTURY PENTECOSTAL CLAIM. [1]
- ↑ Example: Christenson, Laurence, Speaking in tongues : and its significance for the church, Minneapolis, MN : Dimension Books, 1968.
- ↑ Example: Gromacki, Robert Glenn, The modern tongues movement, Nutley, N.J. : Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1973, ISBN 0-87552-304-8 (Originally published 1967)
- ↑ Fr. Seraphim Rose: Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future, St Herman Press
- ↑ "Page Moved -- UC Press: Journals". ucpress.net.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Gerry Kennedy, Rob Churchill (2004). The Voynich Manuscript. London: Orion. ISBN 0-7528-5996-X.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ "Tongue Speaking". scionofzion.com.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ "Sri Sri Anandamayi Ma's Spiritual Heritage". anandamayi.org.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ "Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future". orthodoxphotos.com.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
- ↑ Haida Touchstone Sacred Dance Library, Accessed February 2014
- ↑ Music In Kaballah , The Nigun's Influence on the Soul From the book Shirat HaLev (The Song of the Heart) by Shmuel Stern - Translated by Gita Levi.Accessed February 2014
Further reading
- Cartledge, Mark J., ed. Speaking in Tongues: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives. Paternoster, 2006.
- Ensley, Eddie. Sounds of wonder : speaking in tongues in the Catholic tradition. New York: Paulist Press, 1977.
- Goodman, Felicitas D. Speaking in Tongues: A Cross-cultural Study of Glossolalia. Chicago, University of Chicago Press 1972.
- Gromacki, Robert G.: "The Modern Tongues Movement", Baker Books, 1976, ISBN 978-0-8010-3708-5.
- Harris, Ralph W. Spoken by the Spirit: Documented Accounts of 'Other Tongues' from Arabic to Zulu (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1973).
- Hoekema, Anthony A. What about tongue-speaking? Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans 1966.
- Johnson, Luke Timothy. Religious Experience in Earliest Christianity: A Missing Dimension in New Testament Studies. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998. ISBN 0800631293
- Keener, Craig. Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011.
- Kelsey, Morton T. Tongue-Speaking: An Experiment in Religious Experience. NYC: Doubleday, 1964.
- Kostelnik, Joseph, Prayer in the Spirit: The Missing Link. Prophetic Voice Publications, 1981.
- MacArthur, John F.: "Charismatic Chaos". Zondervan, 1993, 416 pages, ISBN 978-0-310-57572-6.
- Malony, H. Newton, and Lovekin, A. Adams, Glossolalia: Behavioral Science Perspectives on Speaking in Tongues, Oxford University Press, 1985, ISBN 0-19-503569-0
- May, Jordan D. Global Witness to Pentecost: The Testimony of 'Other Tongues,' (Cleveland, TN: CPT Press, 2013).
- Mills, Watson E. Speaking in Tongues: A Guide to Research on Glossolalia. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1986.
- Roberson, Dave, Vital Role of Praying in Tongues
- Roybal, Rory, Miracles or Magic?. Xulon Press, 2005.
- Ruthven, Jon. On the Cessation of the Charismata: The Protestant Polemic on Post-biblical Miracles. 2nd ed. Word & Spirit Press, 2012.
- Sadler, Paul M.: "The Supernatural Sign Gifts of the Acts Period" <http://www.dovhost.com/grace-books/SadleI05.pdf>. Berean Bible Society <http://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/>, 2001, 63 pages, ISBN 1-893874-28-1.
- Sherrill, John L. They Speak with Other Tongues. New York: McGraw Hill 1964.
- Stronstad, Roger. The charismatic theology of St. Luke. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1984.
- Tarr, Del. The Foolishness of God: A Linguist Looks at the Mystery of Tongues. Springfield, MO: Access Group Publishers, 2010.
External links
|Look up glossolalia in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Religious perspectives
- Gerlach, Joel C., "Glossolalia" (from a Confessional Lutheran perspective)
- "Gift of Tongues". T. Reilly. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. 1912.
- "Tongues". by John Salza, bible verses and the Catholic Church fathers on speaking in tongues
- "Glossolalia". bible411.com. (Cessationist perspective)
- "Glossolalia as Foreign Language". D. William Faupel. Wesleyan Theological Journal Vol. 31 No. 1 (Spring 1996): pp. 95–109. (Historical study of Pentecostal beliefs)
- "Questions about Tongues". Assemblies of God USA. (Pentecostal perspective)
- "The Function of Tongue-Speaking for the Individual: A Psycho-Theological Model. Daniel A. Tappeiner. Journal of American Scientific Affiliation. Vol. 26. March 1974. pp. 29–32.
- Understanding the Glossolalia of Hélène Smith, the Famous Spiritist Medium by Huub Engels
- Andrei Bely's Glossalolia {sic} with an English translation
- "Gift of Tongues". 1911encyclopedia.org.
- "Glossolalia". The Skeptic's Dictionary. 9 December 2010.
- Scene from Holy Ghost People, featuring glossolalia.
- (Italian) Esperimenti di Glossolalia. A case of glossolalia in theatre.
- "Lalia". Extreme episode of glossolalia captured in modern music.
- Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from August 2010
- Articles lacking reliable references from June 2009
- Articles with unsourced statements from April 2015
- Articles with unsourced statements from June 2009
- Articles with unsourced statements from May 2015
- Articles with unsourced statements from October 2015
- Articles with unsourced statements from August 2009
- Use dmy dates from July 2012
- Articles with Italian-language external links
- Constructed languages
- Language and mysticism
- Charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity
- Spiritual gifts
- Macaronic language
- Christian terminology
- Acts of the Apostles
- Pneumatology
- Christian behaviour and experience
- Christianity in Appalachia


text:
Write a News Story
Meet a Pioneer Pilot
Amelia Earhart Home
Back to
Story List
What I know about Amelia Earhart
By: Erica H.
Virginia, Age 11
Amelia Earhart was born in Kansas, Atchison on July 24,1897.When she was about ten years old she always wanted to fly an airplane.So when she got her plane she was not impressed it was rusty an ugly. When Amelia grew up she gota new beautful plane and she named it Dolly cause was beautful.When piolt Amelia and the navagatior Fred Noonan was flying for a thing.They disapperd and was never heard from again.Now is still people trying to seek out the lost great mstery.
Back to
Story List


text:
This report studies the PVDF Resin market status and outlook of global, from angles of players, regions, product types and end industries; this report analyzes the top players in global market, and splits the PVDF Resin market by product type and application/end industries.
The global PVDF Resin market was XX million US$ in 2017 and is expected to XX million US$ by the end of 2025, growing at a CAGR of XX% between 2017 and 2025.
To learn more about this report, Download a free Sample Copy
Geographically, this report is segmented into several key regions, with sales, revenue, market share and growth Rate of PVDF Resin in these regions, from 2013 to 2025 forecast, covering
North America United States, Canada and Mexico
Europe Germany, UK, France, Italy, Russia and Turkey etc.
AsiaPacific China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia and Southeast Asia Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam
South America Brazil etc.
Middle East and Africa North Africa and GCC Countries
The major companies in this report including
Sinochem Lantian
Zhejiang Juhua
Shandong Deyi
Zhejiang Fluorine
By the product type, the market is primarily split into
PVDF Granule
PVDF Powder
By the end users/application, this report covers the following segments
Agricultural Coating
Frequently Asked Questions ?
A license granted to one user. Rules or conditions might be applied for e.g. the use of electric files (PDFs) or printings, depending on product.
A license granted to multiple users.
A license granted to a single business site/establishment.
A license granted to all employees within organisation access to the product.
Upto Working 24 to 48 hrs
Upto 72 hrs max - Weekends and Public Holidays
Online Payments with PayPal and CCavenue
Wire Transfer/Bank Transfer
Hard Copy


text:
GENEVA – WGN-TV stopped by the All Chocolate Kitchen in Geneva today to film a segment with Chef Alain Roby that is scheduled to air during the 5 p.m. news hour tonight (Jan. 22).
WGN's Marcus LeShock interviewed Roby, and helped him create a blown sugar bird for a 20-foot chocolate tree Roby created for Valentines Day. The chocolate tree, situated in the middle of the store, was made with 1,200 lbs of chocolate.
All Chocolate Kitchen is located at 33 S. Third St. in Geneva, Illinois.
For more information, visit www.AllChocolateKitchen.com or call 630-232-2395.


text:
Microsoft has been using its TechEd 2012 developer and user conference this June to woo the Orlando crowds with news of Team Foundation Service, Windows LightSwitch, and Windows RT (Windows on ARM) for ARM-based tablet devices. Corporate developer division VP Jason Zander has detailed, as is his usual way, the "key takeaways" for the Redmond-centric programming faithful, who continue to flock to this event now in its twentieth year.
First out of the traps is the news that Team Foundation Service is out of preview, so any software engineers can now sign up to use it as a development solution. Microsoft's on-premise collaboration, code repository, and Agile development project management solution integrates with Visual Studio and aims to provide a "complete ALM solution" amongst an already overcrowded ALM market.
This Azure-hosted service is moving to public preview and we now have a full-depth description, sign-up, and log-in site at http://tfspreview.com. The proposition here is "build in the cloud, test in the cloud" and, wait for it… even automatically deploy the application directly to Azure (if it's an Azure-hosted application you're building, and it passes all test cases).
Also in the newsbag are updates on LightSwitch. Microsoft's tool for building "line-of-business" applications for the desktop and cloud can now scale as needed and will render HTML5 applications (in addition to Silverlight).
Once again there is a clear suggestion and proposition here to software developers; Microsoft is saying that LightSwitch can be used to build apps that run on any device that supports HTML5: tablets, mobile devices, web, etc.
LightSwitch also supports producing applications that consume and produce OData feeds, thus easing (in theory) integration of cross-application, cloud-supported data sharing with enterprise data sources (like SAP).
The last of the big fireworks was let off for the forthcoming Windows RT (also known as Windows for ARM), which Microsoft's Zander says will be as easy to build for as building Metro style apps for x86/x64 devices. In a blog post subsequent to his TechEd appearance, Zander walked through the process of developing for ARM and said a developer who has used Visual Studio to build a Metro style app targeting x86/x64 devices already knows what they need to know to target ARM.