Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What was the first language?

page: 10
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   
naah
Whales don't live in east africa




posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
naah
Whales don't live in east africa


What?????? who????????????????? Who brought up this thread again?

We are talking language of animal or human?

The first human language is Arabic, because the first human was Adam.

English men could be from Africa though.




posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 10:38 PM
link   
according to the Bible Adam wasn't an arab
as you may know if you read the Koran properly Cinlung Arabs are descended from Shem son of Noah
so they didn't exist in the beginning
this of course means that Allah can't be an arab either
because technically Arabs are people from the arabian peninsula
and as you may know if you read the Koran properly Cinlung
Allah didn't come from the Arabian peninsula
he just created it
so can't but help think you don't know as much about the Koran as you think you do
are you sure you're not a Hebrew misinformationist

so what nationality was Adam ?
he had no job no money no clothes and he thought he was in paradise
sounds English to me



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 02:56 AM
link   
That bible was certainly pseudo-book full of pseudo-science written by con pseudo-scientist.

Arab are descended by Adam, they all were speaking Arab, then moved to a place which today called Arab peninsula.
There was no nationality during Adam's era ( no I.D. or passport needed ), it was one world, one nation and one language. And indeed he lived in heaven on earth which is now Arab, science has proven that Eden was in Iraq ( sorry, I mean IraN ) today.
Some people at that time felt into sins, and Allah split them into many tribes and languages, and one of them was Hebrew. And of course many years after one of the most sin tribe went to today called England and become English men.
Living 2 legged walking upright red hair monkey on earth, sounds English to me.

You don't read Qoran, and never read Qoran.




[edit on 30-1-2007 by CinLung]

[edit on 30-1-2007 by CinLung]

[edit on 30-1-2007 by CinLung]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 03:45 AM
link   


science has proven that Eden was in Iraq today.

then you will be able to prove it with a link
won't you

because as far as I know Eden hasn't been found
there has been a claim that it was found but it was erroneous
and was in Turkey anyway
www.thefirstpost.co.uk...
or possibly Iran
www.biblicalheritage.org...
or possibly England
en.wikipedia.org...



You don't read Qoran, and never read Qoran.

actually you're wrong there (again)
my favourite line is


Your women are your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like




posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   



Originally posted by Marduk
because as far as I know Eden hasn't been found
there has been a claim that it was found but it was erroneous
and was in Turkey anyway
www.thefirstpost.co.uk...
or possibly Iran
www.biblicalheritage.org...
or possibly England
en.wikipedia.org...



You don't read Qoran, and never read Qoran.

actually you're wrong there (again)
my favourite line is


Your women are your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like



Well, I made a correction about Iraq and IraN. Anyway it was somewhere near Arab today, and certainly England Eden was their own joke, created for their own sin leisures and monkey business.

Yes, of course you can enjoy the beauty of your wife, explore her in whichever way suit you both as long as there is no force against her as you can go to your field whichever way you like, but you don't want to spoil your field right?
That's called creative husband-wife relationship.

Look at that British monotone missionary style, no wonder many of them become gay. Even the prince and princess were so bored to each other and had affair with others.
The lack of knowledge lead to affair, a sin.



By the way how many English men has got nothing better to do instead of punching keyboard on internet and football?



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 04:36 AM
link   
if Allah is so all powerful
how comes none of his followers have nuclear weapons



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Marduk
if Allah is so all powerful
how comes none of his followers have nuclear weapons


Weapon? You talking about western war maniac who is so proud of nuclear weapons? It is mass destruction.
It is worried that Iran has fallen into trap and start building one, but it could be American false information.
I don't know though if English men has one.


Human are supposed to live in peace and enjoy all His creations. Only sinners are proud of nuclear race.


It is not about powerful or strength, it is about the truth.
Anyway, let's back to topic before each of us get another WARN from moderator again.


Again, it is the truth that the 1st man was Adam, hence 1st language was Arab.



[edit on 30-1-2007 by CinLung]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 06:43 AM
link   
you are the only one throwing insults here Cinlung so likely to be the only one who gets a warning for anything

lets face it Arabic was not the first language because Arabs weren't the first men
theyre too weak to handle nuclear weapons then theyre too weak to be the race from which all the others have descended
this is a fact

theres this other book you may have heard of called the Bible
its like the Koran but its at least 1000 years older and far more popular
the Koran is a newer version of it with not as much detail or credibility or followers
it says that at one point the whole world had one language and it wasn't Arabic because when the words that detail these details were written Arabic was still a semitic dialect an hadn't evolved into a fully fledged language
this is also a fact

you can use google to verify these facts for yourself
if you're brave enough
but seeing as you have picked one of the youngest languages on earth as the answer to this thread question I hardly see you coming up with the correct answer to anything anytime soon
hehe





The earliest Proto-Arabic, or Ancient North Arabian, texts are the Hasaean inscriptions of eastern Saudi Arabia, from the 8th century BC, written not in the modern Arabic alphabet, nor in its Nabataean ancestor, but in variants of the epigraphic South Arabian musnad. These are followed by 6th-century BC Lihyanite texts from southeastern Saudi Arabia and the Thamudic texts found throughout Arabia and the Sinai, and not in reality connected with Thamud. Later come the Safaitic inscriptions beginning in the 1st century BC, and the many Arabic personal names attested in Nabataean inscriptions (which are, however, written in Aramaic). From about the 2nd century BC, a few inscriptions from Qaryat al-Faw (near Sulayyil) reveal a dialect which is no longer considered "Proto-Arabic", but Pre-Classical Arabic. Modern Standard Arabic derives from Classical Arabic, the only surviving member of the Old North Arabian dialect group, attested epigraphically since the 6th century, which has been a literary language and the liturgical language of Islam since the 7th century.

en.wikipedia.org...
so unless you're claiming Adam lived in the 7th century
Arabic was not the first language

wow bet you're glad i just proved that you make a lot of claims but don't deliver the goods aren't you
ever


[edit on 30-1-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:58 AM
link   
Wow............ those links could all be wrong.
Don't live a life just google-ing. Anyway www.yahoo.com is better.

Truth is not about searching internet. Read Qoran!
Truth is not about reading books written by someone who read or heard from somewhere.
1.5 billions can't be wrong.

He talked, she wrote. She talked they listened. One of them wrote using his/her own taste and the other read and talked. Another person wrote and people listened and talked. Carry on for thousand years....
And a guy re-write it using his/her own imagination and posted in on internet.
Then, YOU get the internet address from search engine. And you call that prove?

Holy #, that's so English and it is so true............................

Reading is secondary sources, reading those from internet could be number 1001th resources.
You never give any reliable 1st hand source.

Qoran is direct from Allah.
It is ABOVE 1st source.







posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Please keep the discussions civil, folks.


Originally posted by CinLung
The first human language is Arabic, because the first human was Adam.


Actually, no. Arabic is a fairly modern language, derived from several much older Semetic languages of the area.

Languages belong to language families, and there's no indication that Semetic is the root language of all other languages.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung


Qoran is direct from Allah.
It is ABOVE 1st source.



See there goes your whole argument outa the window IMO. How can u claim that the Quran i directly from Allah. Did the Prophet say so? Is that it? I bet there are many many texts out there that claim to be devined directly from God. Does that make their claim correct?

I guess you have your beliefs, but for some of us just 'blind belief' is not enough....



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by CinLung

Qoran is direct from Allah.
It is ABOVE 1st source.


EXCEPT for Surah 53, verses 19 and 20. Al Najm has been a point of contention as to whether those verse came from God, or whether Muhammad was confused by satan.

The teaching on THOSE verses, the so-called "satanic" verses, in which permission is given to pray to goddesses and gods, calls for special interpretation, does it not?

Or say, 5:72, which says Christians go to hell, with 5:69, (a mere 3 verses before) which says they will be in paradise and have nothing to fear?

All of those require some "interpretation" to make sense out of the Qoran, don't they?

But then, if it is "direct," why is it not instantly understood.


Maybe it is enough for your conscience to believe. But not for mine, or some others, who remain unconvinced that the Qoran "proves" arabic as the first language.

If you say it cannot be argued or tested, then we are no longer talking about reason and rational inquiry, and this conversation is over. No offense to you or your beliefs, but they do not convince me, and I would be lying if I said they did, or pretended that you had "proven" anything. I'm glad you have found satisfactory answers in the Qoran. I have not.



Look, I realize that this is beyond the topic of the first language. But if a poster inserts an authority as a source, then people can show why they reject that authority, which is what I have done. Claiming an authority is "immune from debate" is antithetical to the process of free inquiry, which is the PURPOSE of ATS.

.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Dr Strangecraft my understanding of the green language is not the same as yours. You might be interested in this.

Reading the Green Language of Light
by Vincent Bridges


Part One
Divination is one of man's oldest spiritual technologies, its origins lost in the shift from neolithic hunter-gatherers to settled agriculturalists. As the shaman developed into the priest, divination, along with all forms of spiritism, became codified into mythology. From a framework of mythic events and divination - literally readings of the divine - came language, which evolved over time into written forms based on the original symbolic elements. In turn, these symbolic elements became the focus of divinatory practices of their own, creating sub-sets of meaning within common words and phrases. From this intentional ambiguity arose the possibility of an initiate's language, a language of the birds, or, as it was expressed by the medieval initiates, the Green Language.

Although we can point to the Green Language in works as diverse as Midsummer Night's Dream and The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosencruz, Nostradamus' quatrains, 18th century alchemical texts and surrealist manifestos, few authors have bothered to explain it. One who did was Fulcanelli, the enigmatic 20th century alchemist and philosopher, in his masterpiece The Mystery of the Cathedrals, published in Paris in 1926.[1] Here we have an authentic, although mysterious, voice of authority; one that was both master of the Green Language itself, and a master of the subjects usually hidden within it.

Fulcanelli's main point, the key to unraveling the larger mystery of alchemy and the cathedrals, lies in an understanding of what he calls the "phonetic law" of the "spoken cabala," or the "Language of the Birds." This punning, multi-lingual word play can be used to reveal unusual and, according to Fulcanelli, meaningful associations between ideas. "What unsuspected marvels we should find, if we knew how to dissect words, to strip them of their barks and liberate the spirit, the divine light, which is within," Fulcanelli writes. He claims that in our day this is the natural language of the outsiders, the outlaws and heretics at the fringes of society.

Read more here www.jwmt.org...

[edit on 31-1-2007 by Rotator]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator
Reading the Green Language of Light
by Vincent Bridges

From a framework of mythic events and divination - literally readings of the divine - came language, which evolved over time into written forms based on the original symbolic elements.

I'm pretty sure he's making that all up. How can you have divination (interpretation of the will of the gods) if you don't have gods in the first place (the first people worshipped nature spirits) and if you don't have the language to say "Og knows deity of wind is displeased."

Language is more likely to have evolved by pointing and making specific noises that meant "leopard! run away" or "dead animal! meat is mine!" We see that kind of language in animals today, where they have calls that are meaningful.

And none of them seem to use divination.



Fulcanelli's main point, the key to unraveling the larger mystery of alchemy and the cathedrals, lies in an understanding of what he calls the "phonetic law" of the "spoken cabala," or the "Language of the Birds."

And Fulcanelli was making it up, too. It only works with the very few and very specific examples he gives. It doesn't work with anything else.


"What unsuspected marvels we should find, if we knew how to dissect words, to strip them of their barks and liberate the spirit, the divine light, which is within," Fulcanelli writes. He claims that in our day this is the natural language of the outsiders, the outlaws and heretics at the fringes of society.

He was interesting, but his ideas were really not workable on anything but his small sample of words and phrases (and really are unworkable in languages other than the ones he tried. For example, they don't work at all in the African languages or older Baltic languages or the Native American languages, etc, etc.) He could have gotten a lot more out of them if he'd studied etymology.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:35 PM
link   
It was a few grunts from a couple of primates!


They probably just found out you can mix yeast, barley and hops for a tasty treat.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator

. . . Fulcanelli, the enigmatic 20th century alchemist and philosopher, in his masterpiece The Mystery of the Cathedrals, published in Paris in 1926.[1] Here we have an authentic, although mysterious, voice of authority; one that was both master of the Green Language itself, and a master of the subjects usually hidden within it.



I disagree that Fulcanelli is any sort of "voice of authority." or master of any subjects, beyond name-dropping various occult terms, and then twisting those terms until they have been contorted far beyond the true meanings.




Fulcanelli's main point, the key to unraveling the larger mystery of alchemy and the cathedrals, lies in an understanding of what he calls the "phonetic law" of the "spoken cabala," or the "Language of the Birds."


I've posted elsewhere on ATS about Fulcanelli's strip-mining esoteric terms like "spoken cabala," which had a specific meaning to the originators of those terms, and then he mis-uses those phrases, as if he were completely ignorant, or purposefully obfuscating.

"spoken cabala" means something specific within the world of jewish mysticism. There are four levels of learning. First is the "written cabala," the material suitable for books and literary discussion and criticism. Beyond that, is the "spoken cabala," which is discussed, but never written down. Beyond that oral tradition comes the "whispered cabala," which is only passed from the master to a single disciple, in a hushed voice, which not even the other students could understand. Finally there is an inner, personal "silent cabala," which is never shared with another mortal---a level of understanding that exists solely between the master and God.

Now, compare that, a teaching that Fulcanelli undoubtedly read in Gershom Scholem's Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism, but which he denuded of it's original meaning, so that he could invent his own concept, and propogate as "hidden wisdom."

But for the millions of casual dilettantes who read his works (or nowadays, commentaries on fulcanelli), who will never see an actual cabalistic text, much less begin to penetrate it, Fulcanelli is the only authority, since he's the only one they've heard of. They greatly prefer his writings to those of, say, Moses Cordovero, of whom they are completely ignorant. Not to mention the fact that they could never be bothered to learn a foreign language in their search for truth.


All the best.
.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
But then, if it is "direct," why is it not instantly understood.


Because you do not understand the first language, Arab the language of God.





posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Spewing dogma over and over does not make something a fact. The worst sort of ignorence is that which religion/religious dogma perpetuates.

We all appreciate everyones input and world views, but please do not attempted to stiffle reason. If you can not add something new to the discussion other than the parroting of the same old dogma, then please spare us all.

For those who wish to prattle on about "my religion is better then yours" or whatever such nonsense feel free to move on over to www.abovetopsecret.com... and you can tell us all how great your God is and why the PtB have conspired to hide the truth.

Infidel forever,
Casual One



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   


You have voted CasualOne for the Way Above Top Secret award







top topics



 
5
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join