• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Dumbass pastor believes ChatGPT can interpret speaking in tongues

GenesisNemesis

I am a proud hedonist.
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
5,714
Location
California
Basic Beliefs
In addition to hedonism, I am also an extremist- extremely against bullshit.
Another wild and unhinged mixing of AI and religion.

 
Sorry title should be dumbass (conservative) pastor.
 
Way back in the spring of '73, Rolling Stone ran a piece on the then-trendy Jesus freaks. I'll never forget the transcription of tongues the reporter heard in one freak group: "Ah sha la da, ah sha la da DAH." Gives you goose pimples, doesn't it?
I'm surprised that any minister anywhere would be talking about ChatGPT, because most evangelicals who believe in the gift of tongues also believe that interpreting tongues is also a gift of the holy spirit.
Tongues have got to be a cringe subject for mainstream church-goers. How exactly do you criticize the practice? But it's something they probably don't want to see, and definitely don't want to see in their church. To a veteran heathen like me, the tongues are like an ice cream cone with candy sprinkles -- it's so close to seeing Christians masturbating in public (let alone indulging in a practice which does no tangible good to any person in need, anywhere.)
Just watched a video clip of Bishop T.D. Jakes of Dallas stirring the congregation at his megachurch by performing glossolalia. He went on at some length. This is the portion I transcribed:
Ay kada
Ba-ho-sha
Da ba hi.
Ay day bay
Hey, sha daya.
Ee da ba kaysha
Da ba hosa.
Ee day kay
Sha da ba
kee sha
da ba.


I'll attempt a translation.
Ay kada
Ba-ho-sha

(Hope this sounds real.)
Da ba hi.
(Coins, keep clinking.)
Ay day bay
Hey, sha daya.

(Don't say fuck!!
Bills, keep rustling.)
Ee da ba kaysha
Da ba hosa.

(I'm on to somethin' with 'hosa'.)
Ee day kay
Sha da ba
Kee sha
Da ba.

(I got a beat here. What's for lunch?
Oh, yeah. Mexican.)
 
Last edited:
YouTube: Pastor Speaking in Tongues Can't Stop Checking His Phone
This video has some obscure pastor doing just what the title says. Also notice how a hand appears with a paper towel and wipes down his table while he performs. Also notice the loonnnggg moment while he checks his phone and, instead of making up syllables of gibberish, he emits a long moan, like someone who ate too many burritos.
 
My dog was barking up a storm so I put it through ChatGPT. Turns out she was saying "That stupid squirrel is taunting me from up in that tree. Come on down coward and I'll make a nice squirrel stew!"

That turns out to be what she says over and over again when she's out in the back yard.
 
I've witnessed plenty of speaking in tongues and it follows a general pattern. Individuals develop their particular Voynichese, referring to the Voyniche Manuscript, which linguists have finally decided doesn't have enough variation in words and characters to be a workable language.

Sooner or later, the tongue talker lapses into repetition of the same syllables. I've never doubted their sincerity. They genuinely believe their babbling is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but it's all nonsense.

The origin of "Speaking in tongues" is an event where certain Apostles were overcome by the Holy Spirit and were suddenly able to preach in foreign languages to a crowd of mixed nationalities, each person hearing their own language.

As far as is recorded, this has never happened again.
 
The origin of "Speaking in tongues" is an event where certain Apostles were overcome by the Holy Spirit and were suddenly able to preach in foreign languages to a crowd of mixed nationalities, each person hearing their own language.

As far as is recorded, this has never happened again.
That's because Babel fish are no longer readily available on this planet.

So long, and thanks...
 
The origin of "Speaking in tongues" is an event where certain Apostles were overcome by the Holy Spirit and were suddenly able to preach in foreign languages to a crowd of mixed nationalities, each person hearing their own language.

As far as is recorded, this has never happened again.
That's because Babel fish are no longer readily available on this planet.

So long, and thanks...
If I had a Babel fish, the first thing I would do is ask my cat what the fuck he wants.
 
The origin of "Speaking in tongues" is an event where certain Apostles were overcome by the Holy Spirit and were suddenly able to preach in foreign languages to a crowd of mixed nationalities, each person hearing their own language.

As far as is recorded, this has never happened again.
That's because Babel fish are no longer readily available on this planet.

So long, and thanks...
If I had a Babel fish, the first thing I would do is ask my cat what the fuck he wants.
I do that already. Very frequently.

The answer is "NOW!".

We are expected to be paying sufficient attention to require no further information.
 
Owa tanas Siam.
(All donations go into my offshore account in Siam.)
Oooops! In hindsight I now understand that he was using MY account (for tax evasion?).
I misunderstood and thought the funds were earmarked as donations for the exotic temples on Floating Fortune Road.
The money's all gone now. :thumbup: :whisper:
 
Did someone mention Jaynes' famous theory?

Julian Jaynes said:
Glossolalia

A final phenomenon that is weakly similar to induced possession is glossolalia, or what the apostle Paul called “speaking in tongues.” ... Acts 2 describes what is probably its first instance in history as a great rushing wind roaring with cloven tongues of fire, in which all the apostles begin to speak as if drunk in languages they had never learned.
...
Soon early Christians were doing it everywhere. Paul even put it on a level with prophecy (I Corinthians 14:27, 29). From time to time in the centuries since Paul, glossolalia as a search for authorization after the breakdown of the bicameral mind has had its periods of fashion.
... Glossolalia first happens always in groups and always in the context of religious services. I am stressing the group factor, since I think this strengthening of the collective cognitive imperative is necessary for a particularly deep type of trance. ... The worshiper, through repeated attendance at such meetings, watching others in glossolalia, first learns to enter into a deep-trance state of diminished or absent consciousness in which he is not responsive to exteroceptive stimuli. The trance in this case is almost an autonomic one: shakes, shivers, sweat, twitches, and tears. Then he or she may somehow learn to "let it happen." And it does, loud and clear, each phrase ending in a groan: aria ariari isa, vena amiria as aria!20 The rhythm pounds, the way epic dactyls probably did to the hearers of the aoidoi. And this quality of regular alternation of accented and unaccented syllables, so similar to that of the Homeric epics, as well as the rising and then downward intonation at the end of each phrase, does not — and this is astonishing — does not vary with the native language of the speaker. ... God has chosen to enter the lowly subject and has articulated his speech with the subject's own tongue. The individual has become a god — briefly. The cruel daylight of it all is less inspiring. While the phenomenon is not simply gibberish, nor can the average person duplicate the fluency and structure of what is spoken, it has no semantic meaning whatever. Tapes of glossolalia played before others in the same religious group are given utterly inconsistent interpretations.22 That the metered vocalizations are similar across the cultures and language of the speakers, probably indicates that rhythmical discharges from subcortical structures are coming into play, released by the trance state of lesser cortical control.23
The ability does not last. It attenuates. The more it is practiced, the more it becomes conscious, which destroys the trance. An essential ingredient of the phenomenon, at least in more educated groups where the cognitive imperative would be weaker, is the presence of a charismatic leader who first teaches the phenomenon. And if tongue speaking is to be continued at all, and the resulting euphoria makes it a devoutly wished state of mind, the relationship with the authoritative leader must be continued. It is really this ability to abandon the conscious direction of one's speech controls in the presence of an authority figure regarded as benevolent that is the essential thing. As we might expect, glossolalists by the Thematic Apperception Test reveal themselves as more submissive, suggestible, and dependent in the presence of authority figures than those who cannot exhibit the phenomenon.24 It is, then, this pattern of essential ingredients, the strong cognitive imperative of religious belief in a cohesive group, the induction procedures of prayer and ritual, the narrowing of consciousness into a trance state, and the archaic authorization in the divine spirit and in the charismatic leader, which denotes this phenomenon as another instance of the general bicameral paradigm and therefore a vestige of the bicameral mind.
 
Dumb ass a lot of people who believe ChatGPT.

The psychological term I heard recently is ChatGPT psychosis. People who can't tell the difference between ChatGPT and reality.

A teen asked ChatGPT for advice on a romantic relationship and commuted suicide after the response.
 
Did someone mention Jaynes' famous theory?

Julian Jaynes said:
Glossolalia

... Paul even put it on a level with prophecy (I Corinthians 14:27, 29).
Nah. In that same chapter, Paul says: "Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified. ... if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? ... in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue."
 
Did someone mention Jaynes' famous theory?

Julian Jaynes said:
Glossolalia

... Paul even put it on a level with prophecy (I Corinthians 14:27, 29).
Nah. In that same chapter, Paul says: "Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified. ... if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? ... in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue."
Agreed, plus, the Christian success ratio for prophesying the end times is......................................................oops.
 
Did someone mention Jaynes' famous theory?

Julian Jaynes said:
Glossolalia

... Paul even put it on a level with prophecy (I Corinthians 14:27, 29).
Nah. In that same chapter, Paul says: "Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified. ... if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? ... in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue."
Agreed, plus, the Christian success ratio for prophesying the end times is......................................................oops.
Yeah, all that end times stuff really misses the point. Jesus saying the kingdom of God is within you should have quashed that end times obsession.

Be that as it may, prophecy as used by Paul is not identical to foretelling. It likely indicates an inspired arrived-at understanding, something like a eureka moment which occurs seemingly out of nowhere but actually only after a person has been mulling over some problem for some time. Some are inclined to regard such an experience as inspired by God and, consequently characterize it as wisdom received from God since the inspired person cannot explain why the understanding came to (or upon) the person when it did rather than sooner, for instance. A problem arises when the inspired person publically attributes the inspired understanding to an act of God in order to lend greater authority to what the person thinks. Such is taking God's name in vain and is in error at the very least because such a proclamation detracts or distracts from the fact that it is human questioning and effort which is necessary in order for understanding to ever come to fruition - even if God inspires.

But Paul's main point with regard to such inspired understanding is that its importance regards (derives from) the communicability that may be of benefit to others: hence, the emphasis on intelligibility by which "the church may be edified."
 
The idea that Paul represents a coherent thought out philosophy or theology is a strtech.

In our modern era of mass education and knowledge of history and science we have many Christian modern prophets-evangelists preaching their interpretation of Jesus. Modern day Pauls.

People are as gullible and superstitious as ever.

The idea that one can know the intent of someone named Paul or Jesus for that matter 2000 years ago based on a small set of wrings attributed to Paul is a stretch.

Inspired insight? Ridiculous assertion. Pure Christian interpenetration.

It is Paul that took the Jewish out of the Jewish Jesus. The gospel Jesus never renounced his own Jewish traditions and reinforced Mosaic law and Jewish prophets.

Modern Christianity is more aptly called Paulism. Misogynistic.
 
Owa tanas Siam.
(All donations go into my offshore account in Siam.)
Oooops! In hindsight I now understand that he was using MY account (for tax evasion?).
I misunderstood ...
I may have mis-translated. (remembered from my childhood) Repete "Owa tanas Siam" five times fast. See what it sounds like to you.
 
Back
Top Bottom