Good is the name of God, minus one letter, and Evil is the name of the devil, minus one letter

This gives me the perfect excuse to post this awesome song:



But aside from that: NOPE, don't think it's weird or interesting at all.

reply to post by catwhoknows


Has it perhaps occurred to you that both words "good" and "evil" may have developed from their predecessors?

Further, anything taken from the hodge-podge gaggle f*ck that is the English language should be circumspect at the least. English is little more than a dirty snowball with bits and fibres from all kinds of verbiage.

When the English scholar can read Beowulf in its original form, then they've got some excellent credibility IMHO. (No, I certainly cannot)

Further, I would hope you're equally perplexed that the 10th month in our calendar has "Oct" (that is 8- like Octagon, Octopus, Octa-mom) in it... (btw, October would mean- 8th moon when it is our 10th moon...). Perplexed yet?

reply to post by sakokrap


Another putdown.

Of course English is derived from French and German.

I studied Beowolf at university.

Next question?

reply to post by catwhoknows


Forgive me if I was unable to successfully communicate my quandary without sounding like it was a put down.

There are a kajilion chain letter emails playing with words in English. As a student yourself, you're well aware that English is that hodge-podge, and as such, hold less significant value than a language divergent from others for longer periods.

As such, we can play at great length to these intricacies with English. Here you go- have you noticed that Satan and Santa have the same letters? There are a plethora of examples in any word scramble, no?

Therefore, I think perhaps you could agree that any "gems" found within common English are 1. abundant, and 2- derived from (or as I like to put it: bastardized) foreign sources.

For me personally, these feats of intellect are nearly mental masturbation; although, I do understand that others may get great pleasure from word games (as evidenced by word jumbles, cross words, etc).

Nothing personal mate- just adding my single bit into the convo (a single bit is 1/8th of a Whole coin heralding back from the not-so-distant past... a half of a quarter of a "dollar" or "franc" or "deb-lune" ;-)

Ok , here we go ...

evil
O.E. yfel (Kentish evel) "bad, vicious," from P.Gmc. *ubilaz (cf. O.Saxon ubil, Goth. ubils), from PIE *upelo-, giving the word an original sense of "uppity, overreaching bounds" which slowly worsened. "In OE., as in all the other early Teut. langs., exc. Scandinavian, this word is the most comprehensive adjectival expression of disapproval, dislike or disparagement" [OED]. Evil was the word the Anglo-Saxons used where we would use bad, cruel, unskillful, defective (adj.), or harm, crime, misfortune, disease. The meaning "extreme moral wickedness" was in O.E., but did not become the main sense until 18c. Related: Evilly. Evil eye (L. oculus malus) was O.E. eage yfel.

Source

good (adj.)
O.E. god (with a long "o") "having the right or desirable quality," from P.Gmc. *gothaz (cf. O.N. goðr, Du. goed, Ger. gut, Goth. goþs), originally "fit, adequate, belonging together," from PIE base *ghedh- "to unite, be associated, suitable" (cf. O.C.S. godu "pleasing time," Rus. godnyi "fit, suitable," O.E. gædrian "to gather, to take up together"). Irregular comparatives (better, best) reflect a widespread pattern, cf. L. bonus, melior, optimus. The good neighbours is Scot. euphemism for "the fairies" (1580s). Good-for-nothing is from 1711. Good looking is attested from 1780 (good looks by c.1800). Good sport is from 1917; good to go is attested from 1989.

Source

reply to post by sakokrap


It is clear you do not like what I am doing with the English language.

So get off this thread, please.

As far as I'm concerned English or any other language is garbage. We have lost our ability to speak in mind. We have chosen to try to elaborate words we never knew from a being that till this day we can never understand.

We are lost as a people and ourselves, what do you feel? Is it right to you? What do you want to learn from this? We have questions, yet no right answers.

Peace to you...

Originally posted by sakokrap

As such, we can play at great length to these intricacies with English. Here you go- have you noticed that Satan and Santa have the same letters? There are a plethora of examples in any word scramble, no?

I have already, (in another thread) pointed out the obvious, which is of course that Santa IS Satan. So no trying to steal my theory here! He is the anti-christ! He comes on the supposed but probably not birthday of Christ which is actually a pagan holiday, he spreads materialism, people all trust him, and he has nasty little pointy eared minions disguised as cute lil' elves and cloven hoofed animals pulling his hellish sled.

But thats another story.

Hey has anyone else noticed that the word "Holy" is only one letter off from "Holly?" Could it mean that holly is sacred? Or do you think that is another one of SATAN CLAUS' dirty tricks designed to have us flung into an ever burning pit of despair??? Which is what I sorta think.









Heehee.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Yes, Santa equals satan and he equals love of material goods instead of each other.

What about the camel and the needle?

While I don't believe a lot of the bible, I do believe that - if you are so rich and you do not help the poor, the end for you.

Hey , good find, but just thought i'd say you're on track with somebody else that thought the same thing about 14 years ago. Watch this

Skip to 1:33


He believed in the energy of 'God' but thought religion was about control, the same way a lot of us do. Again though good find


[edit on 13-7-2010 by ReturnOfTheOutlaw]

[edit on 13-7-2010 by ReturnOfTheOutlaw]

Originally posted by spacekc929
reply to post by Wertdagf

 

Kinda rude... yeah, it may only occur in English, but it's still something weird to think about. So please, don't be so rude. I think it is a very cool observation, even if only in English.

Here is a thought , and yes this happens with English all the time .It is a common belief that English is a modern language only a few hundred years old and was formed from a combination of Latin , French and old Norse . Within certain circles English is regaurded as the oldest langauge in the world . Yes the oldest and first in the world and is held as the one global language used by all before the fall of the Tower of Babel .This implies that this language was forbiden , hidden or lost and when rediscovered or rereleased along with the modern mathmatical system technology and science leaped forward at a unnatural pace . Hence the many encryptions .The above remarks that English came from many other languages is possible/likely , however it is just as likely to be the other way around if you consider the Babel aspect .

Another example for you OP would be Solomon - SOL O MON =SOLAR / MOON . Month - Moonth - Moon .

[edit on 13-7-2010 by 13th Zodiac]

[edit on 13-7-2010 by 13th Zodiac]

These are just all anagrams, you can do that with all words in every language.

I don't see the connections in this thread.

Satan is also the same letters as Santa, and they are both beings with reportedly supernatural powers. Coincidence?

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by sakokrap

As such, we can play at great length to these intricacies with English. Here you go- have you noticed that Satan and Santa have the same letters? There are a plethora of examples in any word scramble, no?

I have already, (in another thread) pointed out the obvious, which is of course that Santa IS Satan. So no trying to steal my theory here! He is the anti-christ! He comes on the supposed but probably not birthday of Christ which is actually a pagan holiday, he spreads materialism, people all trust him, and he has nasty little pointy eared minions disguised as cute lil' elves and cloven hoofed animals pulling his hellish sled.

But thats another story.

Hey has anyone else noticed that the word "Holy" is only one letter off from "Holly?" Could it mean that holly is sacred? Or do you think that is another one of SATAN CLAUS' dirty tricks designed to have us flung into an ever burning pit of despair??? Which is what I sorta think.









Heehee.

I got your back bro !
Manditory second line and yeah I noticed .

No your not the only one.

Here's a video of a presentation in Dutch.
He has a screen so you dont need to understand, cause you already do.

Watch from 15min30 point

www.star-people.nl...

So God = Dog, Dog = God?

Is that the real reason why God took a Rib out of Adam......... he was hungry

Here's another one: Democracy = Demon Crazy = Crazy Demon

Originally posted by ajmusicmedia
As others have mentioned, this happens in English only and English is a "new" language derived from a mix of German, Norse and tons of French. When William the Conquerer conquered England in 1066, there was no such thing as English and no written language in England. (Normand) French became the official language and was taught around the country. English is essentially a very simplified version of this French. It was derived by the way people spoke it and contains no codes whatsoever.

New Language? "Do you speak English" is an older question then you think.

The Anglo-Saxons never imported English

The currently prevailing interpretation of events in the 5th century creates more problems than it solves. Where is the proof that:

Celtic culture is linked with Celtic language?
There was such a thing as 'a Celtic language' ?
Anglo-Saxons changed the language?

In reality, none of those statements have been ever proved. They are all assumptions. Continental sources confirmed that 'Angles' took power in Britain around the early 440's AD. But there is a major difference between obtaining power and a full scale conquest. The conquest or takeover of eastern Britain by Anglo-Saxons is a modern assumption, which sounds logical, but the reality was different. Remarkably, even early British sources (Gildas, Bede), although condemning the Anglo-Saxons (especially Gildas), never spoke of a classic conquest. Something else happened. The linked assumption (that the whole of Britain spoke a 'Celtic' language before, and that the population in the east was forced to learn English) is even worse: it is completely false.

This website explains that Britain always had two languages: proto-Welsh in the west and proto-English in the east.

After the last Ice Age ended (about 8000 BC) , there were two language families in Britain: primordial Germanic east of the Pennines and primordial Brythonic in the west [1]. When agriculture arrived (about 4500 BC) both languages were developed into the ancestors of proto-English and proto-Welsh respectively . The proto-English zone was split into two regions: the Midlands and the Northeast were one zone, the South and Southeast were another. Both initially spoke a different variant of the Germanic idiom. The proto-Welsh language family zone gradually became divided into Cornwall (up to Wiltshire), Wales (including the valley of the Severn) and Scotland (+ Cumbria). The Germanic speaking population was genetically slightly different from the proto-Welsh speaking people. The reason is the relative isolation of both populations in their refuges on the Continent (Ice Age refuges) during the Ice Age, before they separately migrated into Britain.

Source

reply to post by catwhoknows


Good catch friend amazing that no one has ever brought it to the attention of many, keep that deep thinking up!

[edit on 7/16/10 by Ophiuchus 13]

there use to be a thread on the english language and how crazy it all is....and how complex....ill try and find it and link it.....

BIBLE = BUY BULL



here ya go...this is or was one of my favorite threads....

Language. Subliminal Influence. Caution: This may alter the way you think.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 16-7-2010 by Funkydung]

reply to post by catwhoknows


I guess this works with their English language titles only. I always wondered why so many people called God God back when I was a Christian and why they thought saying O My God was taking his name in vain when it isn't (his name is Yahweh, not GOD).

This could be intentional or it could just be coincidentally how those words evolved, either way I wouldn't read too much into it.