The suicide killer's father

[smaneck]

This statement is patently false. The tongue, in Hebrew, can also mean the "speech" if understood in a literal sense.

Not in this context. If you read the surrounding verses it is clear they are referring to bodies of water.

warmest, Susan

[mastralvarado]

Not in this context. If you read the surrounding verses it is clear they are referring to bodies of water.

warmest, Susan

Susan,

Instead of reducing yourself to petty one-liners you should have provided some evidence. This is the evidence I found for YOUR argument. Even with this evidence, which is consistently 2nd century BCE (~0 H.C.) apocryphal fairy-tales by an unknown hebrew author [17] does not help your position.

And his portion extendeth along the great sea, and it extendeth in a straight line till it reacheth the west of the tongue which looketh towards the south; 1 for this sea is named the tongue of the Egyptian Sea. 2 15. And it turneth from here towards the south towards the mouth of the great sea 3 on the shore of (its) waters, and it extendeth to the west to ‘Afrâ 4 and it extendeth till it reacheth the waters of the river Gihon, and to the south of the waters of Gihon, 5 to the banks of this river. 16. And it extendeth towards the east, till it reacheth the Garden of Eden, to the south thereof, [to the south] and from the east of the whole land of Eden and of the whole cast, it turneth to the †east,† 6 and proceedeth till it reacheth the east of the mountain named Râfâ, and it descendeth to the bank of the mouth of the river Tînâ. 17. This portion came forth by lot for Shem and his sons, that they should possess it for ever unto his generations for evermore. 18. And Noah rejoiced that this portion came forth for Shem and for his sons, and he remembered all that he had spoken with his mouth in prophecy; for he had said:

Since you really have no genuine interest in helping me (2-3 days is perhaps enough to do a little search?), I can assume you won't reply my previous post in a sensitive manner. Did you see the similarities between the Parable of the Prodigal and Isaiah Chapter 10-12. It is very clear that Jesus (PBUH) was quoting Isaiah when he mentioned the parable of the prodigal son. The parables are like so because he himself was quoting Isaiah[18].

Reason for parables
And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?"
He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him.

Prophecy fulfilled
Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says:

Hearing you will hear and shall not understand,
And seeing you will see and not perceive;
For the hearts of this people have grown dull.
Their ears are hard of hearing,
And their eyes they have closed,
Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.

So now, please do concern yourself (with seriousness) as to the obscure origins of the Tongue of the Mediterranean / Tongue of the Sea of Egypt.

regards,

m
[17] http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/jub/jub02.htm
[18] http://www.lifeofchrist.com/teaching...ide/reason.asp

[smaneck]

Susan,

Instead of reducing yourself to petty one-liners you should have provided some evidence.

That was unnecessary, as you had already posted the passage in question which in itself contained the evidence I referred to. But I'm glad you found some additional evidence.

Since you really have no genuine interest in helping me (2-3 days is perhaps enough to do a little search?),

What exactly am I suppose to be helping you with?

Did you see the similarities between the Parable of the Prodigal and Isaiah Chapter 10-12

.

I didn't see how it was relevant to what we were discussing.

So now, please do concern yourself (with seriousness) as to the obscure origins of the Tongue of the Mediterranean / Tongue of the Sea of Egypt.

Sorry, I see no reason to accept your these that these verses are talking about a language, but even if they were it would not be evidence that the Romance languages were derived from Maltese instead of Latin as every linquist would say.

warmest, Susan

[mastralvarado]

Not in this context. If you read the surrounding verses it is clear they are referring to bodies of water.

warmest, Susan

I got another one for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tongue_of_the_Ocean

"Tongue" in the ( Isaiah 11:15 ) verse is clearly not part of a proper name.

Maybe, just maybe, Isaiah (PBUH) got the wrong location and hurricane Paloma was the cause of the destruction. (No, offense intended)

[Lili]

That would not make sense to an Irish, Dutch, German or English reader. The "ie", "ai". and "ae" sounds are the immediate conceptions of such.

That is because the Maltese language is where most of the words the romance languages have borrowed from. Maltese language is evil. It has no historical background prior to the advent of Islam that I'm aware of.

No, the Romance languages are derived from Latin.

[mastralvarado]

No, the Romance languages are derived from Latin.

Could you perhaps like to provide evidence to back up your assertion?

[smaneck]

Could you perhaps like to provide evidence to back up your assertion?

Uh, the word Romance means they are derived from Rome, and Latin was the language of Rome.

It is easy enough for anyone who speaks one of these languages and knows a little Latin to see the derivation for themselves, just as an Arab speaker can spot which dialects are Arabic.

[mastralvarado]

Uh, the word Romance means they are derived from Rome, and Latin was the language of Rome.

It is easy enough for anyone who speaks one of these languages and knows a little Latin to see the derivation for themselves, just as an Arab speaker can spot which dialects are Arabic.

Maltese is claimed to have been derived from Arabic. Arabic is a more complex language than maltese. Classical Latin was of about the same complexity of Maltese. How did maltese become arabicized? The Arabs did take Malta for a time of course. The Normans took back the island but realized that the people that remained spoke a mix between sicilian and arabic. Therefore, Rome adopted the language as a (perfective) dialect of the latin language hiding the (imperfective) siculo-berber-arabic, nativized pidgin language origin for historians.

Many have hypothesized the origin of the Maltese language. None has for sure pin pointed it out to my knowledge.

In a nut shell, until this is resolved, Spanish, Dutch, French, and English all came from the berberic/barberic non-sensical word that the Roman clergy created to place both muslims and pagans .


Allah knows best.

[penguinfan]

I wish I had that poster that hung in Mulder's office right about now.

Oh, heck. Here it is guys!

[smaneck]

Maltese is claimed to have been derived from Arabic. Arabic is a more complex language than maltese.
Classical Latin was of about the same complexity of Maltese. How did maltese become arabicized?

There is a difference between a language being Arabicized and derived from Arabic. A language is Arabicized if like Spanish, Swahili or Persian it has a lot of Arabic vocabulary. For a language to be *derived* from Arabic its grammar would have to be Arabic based. This is not true of Spanish, Swahili or Persian, but it is true of Maltese.

The Arabs did take Malta for a time of course. The Normans took back the island but realized that the people that remained spoke a mix between sicilian and arabic. Therefore, Rome adopted the language as a (perfective) dialect of the latin language hiding the (imperfective) siculo-berber-arabic, nativized pidgin language origin for historians.

Romans adopted Maltese because Vikings invaded it? I hate to break it to you but Latin is much older than that. And what does Rome have to do with the Normans?

In a nut shell, until this is resolved, Spanish, Dutch, French, and English all came from the berberic/barberic non-sensical word that the Roman clergy created to place both muslims and pagans

.

LOL. That makes about as much sense as saying that because the Aryans invaded India that means that French is derived from Chinese. There is no relationship between these things!
And by the way, Dutch and English are not Romance languages, they are Germanic languages.

[mastralvarado]

Maltese is claimed to have been derived from Arabic. Arabic is a more complex language than maltese.
Classical Latin was of about the same complexity of Maltese. How did maltese become arabicized?

There is a difference between a language being Arabicized and derived from Arabic. A language is Arabicized if like Spanish, Swahili or Persian it has a lot of Arabic vocabulary. For a language to be *derived* from Arabic its grammar would have to be Arabic based. This is not true of Spanish, Swahili or Persian, but it is true of Maltese.

Maltese was arabicized and since its the first non semitic language to become arabicized and latinized at the same time, it's therefore an unnatural language. Either way, if maltese was derived from arabic and latinized later, then it was not fully derived from Arabic and the cause was?

The Arabs did take Malta for a time of course. The Normans took back the island but realized that the people that remained spoke a mix between sicilian and arabic. Therefore, Rome adopted the language as a (perfective) dialect of the latin language hiding the (imperfective) siculo-berber-arabic, nativized pidgin language origin for historians.

Romans adopted Maltese because Vikings invaded it? I hate to break it to you but Latin is much older than that. And what does Rome have to do with the Normans?

Romans would never have anything to do with Maltese unless they did business with the Maltese later on. However the Maltese were not prone to mixing their language while affecting its own and instead added borrowed words from all languages that try to mingle with it. More importantly, why did major languages borrow from Maltese?

Don't take my word for it?

Prof. M. Brincat:
Switching between languages is condemned by everyone but at least one third of the population practise it regularly. Will it ruin the language? Will Maltese be abandoned? At present this danger seems remote because most speakers do not consider mixing as a permanent structure. It is a compromise one resorts to in informal speech between people who know both languages, when one does not bother to search for the right word but speaks the one which comes up first, whether Maltese or English. In fact nobody switches between languages when speaking to Maltese monolinguals or to English people or foreigners.[19]

The imperfective tense was an innovation in languages in the way it was used by the Romance-Germanic marriage languages. The imperfective aspect is mingled with tense and you don't see this in arabic since it distinguishes between three modes whose use depends on semantic-syntactic connotations. Maltese, on the other hand, does not have an imperfective aspect nor tense in the way that Arabic does. There is good reason to believe this because the natives learned to communicate with the Arabs but since the Normans repelled the invasion to the south of Italy the Papacy became worried about the how to prevent any future invasion to the Holy See and therefore assimilated the Arabic with the haplological Basque and some Maltese to renovate all Norman, Germanic and Romanesque languages while the rest of the population was aware or not.

In a nut shell, until this is resolved, Spanish, Dutch, French, and English all came from the berberic/barberic non-sensical word that the Roman clergy created to place both muslims and pagans.

LOL. That makes about as much sense as saying that because the Aryans invaded India that means that French is derived from Chinese. There is no relationship between these things!
And by the way, Dutch and English are not Romance languages, they are Germanic languages.

You do not understand. At one point old English became English and old french became french, old German - German. There was a mutual agreement between all the persons that engaged in war with the Muslim Ummah to integrate some Arabic into the language taking for example Maltese some little of this and some little of that in order to water down the Qur'an for the rest of the population. If Maltese was Arabicized it makes no sense to call the language natural since it had both influence from Latin in the grammar and Arabic in the speech. Does not matter which came first. Make a list of the number of languages whose grammar is different than its speech and whose historical origins cannot be verified.

The power to create entire languages by force was available to the Roman empire at the time. There are many words which are non sensical and yet people use them everyday. Take for example: Gaza = invasion in Arabic. Cristianos = Cristo+janus

Hence that's were one gets all the italicized, anglicized, capitalized grammatical gibberish that is necessary to circumvent true Christianity (i.e. followers of the way) using Pauline® theology.

[19]http://www.macmillandictionary.com/M...LI-Maltese.htm

[smaneck]

Maltese was arabicized and since its the first non semitic language to become arabicized and latinized at the same time, it's therefore an unnatural language.

Uh Maltese is not a non-semtic language. And it is *derived* from Arabic, not Arabicized.

Either way, if maltese was derived from arabic and latinized later, then it was not fully derived from Arabic and the cause was?

It would still be derived from Arabic.

More importantly, why did major languages borrow from Maltese?

What evidence do you have that they did?

There is good reason to believe this because the natives learned to communicate with the Arabs but since the Normans repelled the invasion to the south of Italy the Papacy became worried about the how to prevent any future invasion to the Holy See and therefore assimilated the Arabic with the haplological Basque and some Maltese to renovate all Norman, Germanic and Romanesque languages while the rest of the population was aware or not.

If there was any mixture of Arabic and Basque we can thank the Moors, not the Pope for that. The Papacy was in no position to renovate Norse, Germanic and Romantic languages. How could he? These languages were not written down.

You do not understand. At one point old English became English and old french became french, old German - German.

And before that English and German were even more Germnanic.

There was a mutual agreement between all the persons that engaged in war with the Muslim Ummah to integrate some Arabic into the language taking for example Maltese some little of this and some little of that in order to water down the Qur'an for the rest of the population.

Oh, please! If a few Arabic words entered into the Germanic and Romance languages it is likely the result of their two centuries of residence in the Levant during the Crusades. You don't need a conspiracy to explain this. Languages change and evolve naturally.

The power to create entire languages by force was available to the Roman empire at the time.

Wrong. You can't invent languages unless you write them down, and these languages were not written.

There are many words which are non sensical and yet people use them everyday. Take for example: Gaza = invasion in Arabic. Cristianos = Cristo+janus

LOL. Christianity does not contain the word 'janus.' But in any case, we are not talking about the intrusion of a few foreign vocabulary terms.

[mastralvarado]

Uh Maltese is not a non-semtic language. And it is *derived* from Arabic, not Arabicized.

Therefore the Son is derived from the Father. Like father unlike Son. The cause was? On the other hand if Maltese was Arabicized as would be a pidgin Latinicized script there would be legitimacy and yet be suicidal (i.e. syncretic) because it does not recognize its Arabic origin. God does not promote multiple languages in the same person in nature (vox populi). The confusion of tongues in the tower of babel was not caused by God but by the temptation sent from him and the bible is wrong to point out that God confuses people on purpose.

It would still be derived from Arabic.

Heretic!

What evidence do you have that they did?

[20] Comments in brackets. []There are also minor modifications for enphasis:

PRONOUNS
PERSONAL PRONOUNS
Hi (or Hija) = She; She is


DEMONSTRATIVE ADJECTIVES / PRONOUNS

singular plural

masculine dan (this) dawn (these)

feminine din (this) dawn (these)


RELATIVE PRONOUN

The relative pronouns who, whom, that, which are rendered in Maltese by the particle "li".

L-ittra li bghattli. (The letter you sent me).


GENDER OF NOUNS AND ADJECTIVES

ilma (water), papa (pope), alla (god).


DOUBLED VERBS

Root Verb: MESS (he touched)

Imperative: miss (touch) (sing) ["hello miss daisy"]
missu (touch) (plur)

THE QUADRILITERAL VERB

Root Verb: FIXKEL (he obstructed)

Imperative: fixkel (obstruct) (sing) [reminiscent of book of Daniel's Greek: obstruct - παρεμποδίσει]
fixklu (obstruct) (plur)

VERBS AS PROPER NAMES

ghandi = I have [reminiscent of the false nationalist Mahatma Gandhi (he was probably a Manchurian candidate as were the Mumbai attackers of last year) THE NAME. Gandhi has no etymology in Hindu that I'm aware of]


WORDS IN SPANISH

Danger. Periklu. periklu = peligro [again, reminiscent of the Bible's Greek corruption of Periklutos to perikletos (Parakletos = Comforter-advocate) Periklutos = Renowned-praised Ahmed = praised)]

Poison. Velenu. velenu = veneno

Police. Pulizija. pulitsiya = Policia

nurse Infermier (m) infermi:r = enfermero/a
infermiera (f) infermi:ra

Remember that these words are fundamental words in each language. I could understand that Maltese influenced some of the less used words but the influence of Maltese on the more commonly used words can only be explained by a hypothesis.

If there was any mixture of Arabic and Basque we can thank the Moors, not the Pope for that. The Papacy was in no position to renovate Norse, Germanic and Romantic languages. How could he? These languages were not written down.

At what point(s) in history do you think they were written down?

And before that English and German were even more Germnanic.

Germanic even before being German was Iberian

Oh, please! If a few Arabic words entered into the Germanic and Romance languages it is likely the result of their two centuries of residence in the Levant during the Crusades. You don't need a conspiracy to explain this. Languages change and evolve naturally.

Take a look at the examples I provided above. Do they match with any of the Arabic borrowed English words? [21]
They don't. And it is neither coincidence. You do realize that I believe that Napoleon invaded Malta and coincidentally the British figured it was important enough to convert into a commonwealth. Centuries later the Nazis bombarded it. Looks like someone wants Malta destroyed from the historical map. As for the tongue itself it is already self defeated with all the bilingual switching going around. It appears that bilingualism became popular here first for some reason. There could be many reasons for this.

1. Someone thought that Arabic was too hard too learn.
2. Muhammad (AS) was named in the Gospel but the papacy was too obstructive to allow it to destroy the Church®.
3. The papacy realized that the vulgars would never admit to accept the religion of Muhammad and so sided with them
4. The Babylonian monarchy, who have secretly controlled the world since even before written history decided to destroy the Qur'an's influence on people and the best way was making written conscripts similar to their native tongues with Semitic elements in them available to the population as they did in Babel and in the Carolingian "renaissance".

...

LOL. Christianity does not contain the word 'janus.' But in any case, we are not talking about the intrusion of a few foreign vocabulary terms.

Yes it does: -ianus = english, -ianos = spanish... The Papacy had much influence in how the grammar in each language became written down.

[20] http://aboutmalta.com/grazio/maltesegrammar.html#alp
[21] http://www.zompist.com/arabic.html

[smaneck]

Therefore the Son is derived from the Father. Like father unlike Son. The cause was? On the other hand if Maltese was Arabicized as would be a pidgin Latinicized script there would be legitimacy and yet be suicidal (i.e. syncretic) because it does not recognize its Arabic origin. God does not promote multiple languages in the same person in nature (vox populi). The confusion of tongues in the tower of babel was not caused by God but by the temptation sent from him and the bible is wrong to point out that God confuses people on purpose.

Sorry, the above makes absolutely no sense to me. \

[20] Comments in brackets. []There are also minor modifications for enphasis:

Since you don't identify which word is Maltese and how it appears in the various European languages I fail to see how this constitutes proof.

ilma (water), papa (pope), alla (god).

Aside from Maltese the only place where alla appears in European languages that I know of is in expressions like Ojala which in Spanish is used to mean "I hope" though its obvious connection with inshallah has been lost. As for "papa" that word has long standing Indo-European roots. It is not Arabic.

Root Verb: MESS (he touched)

Imperative: miss (touch) (sing) ["hello miss daisy"]
missu (touch) (plur)

Sorry, that doesn't make any sense.

ghandi = I have [reminiscent of the false nationalist Mahatma Gandhi (he was probably a Manchurian candidate as were the Mumbai attackers of last year) THE NAME. Gandhi has no etymology in Hindu that I'm aware of]

I thought we were talking about European languages? Why did you suddenly jump to India?

The word Gandhi is derived from an area in Gujarat. Indira Gandhi got that name because she married a Parsi from the same region. (I will not comment on your nonsensical conspiracy theories.)

WORDS IN SPANISH

At what point(s) in history do you think they were written down?

Most European vernacular languages began to be written down during the Renaissance. There were a few works written in Old English much earlier. The first work in Italian was by Dante in the early part of the 14th century. The use of vernacular languages became more widespread during the Reformation as Reformers like Luther translated the Bible into the vernacular German. Ultimately it was probably the invention of the movable-type printing press that led to writing these languages down.

Germanic even before being German was Iberian

Doesn't make any sense.

Take a look at the examples I provided above. Do they match with any of the Arabic borrowed English words? [21]

For the most part, no. The English words borrowed from Arabic are practically all the nouns which begin with "al" such as algebra, alchemy, and alcohol. Most of the other loan words are nouns as well such as hazard, hashish, giraffe, elixir, etc.

[mastralvarado]

Sorry, the above makes absolutely no sense to me. \
Since you don't identify which word is Maltese and how it appears in the various European languages I fail to see how this constitutes proof.

Here's the proof you asked for. How did the Maltese word for danger (peryclutos)

get into Latin and Spanish???

periclitar. (From lat. periclitāri). intr. Peligrar, estar en peligro. || 2. Decaer, declinar.

Microsoft® Encarta® 2007. © 1993-2009 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

This is the wrong usage of the Latin clearly borrowed from the Maltese language's "Peryklutos" which borrowed from the Greek Peryklutos.

periclitar From latin periclitāri Periclitar is an infinitive only found in Spanish. "Periclitari" means:

periclitar (del lat. "periclitari")
1 (cult.) intr. Peligrar.
2 (cult.) *Decaer, después de haber llegado al apogeo. Declinar.

Take a look at the example of the correct usage of Greek loan words in english of *pery* (all-around, isotropic) and *Klin'l* (descent, lean from the Greek klīnein).

per·i·cli·nal [pèrrə klīn'l]
adjective
1. dome-shaped: used to describe a fold in sedimentary rocks that appears as a regular dome on the surface of the Earth
2. parallel to outside wall: describes cell walls that are parallel to the outer surface of a plant part

[Late 19th century. < Greek periklinēs "sloping all around" < peri "all around" + klinein "to slope"]

Microsoft® Encarta® 2007. © 1993-2009 Microsoft Corporation. Reservados todos los derechos.

Consider that klines and clin'l both mean to slope or to become dangerous. Both of these words do not share the same roots therefore one interpretation is false.

The closest, similar sounding word in the English vocabulary is the noun "persecutor(s)". This word, in all honesty, comes from the Latin language's aberration of the Maltese term peryclutos. This is what answers.com says about the this term whom it compares with the french word persécuteur.

n.

[L.: cf. F. persécuteur.]
One who persecutes, or harasses. Shak.

Did you notice that in the end of this definition Shak is mysteriously thrown in [22]?

What in the world does shak mean???

Shak may refer to:

* Shak, a film about an Afghanistani man living in Pakistan
* The Shak, a television series

This ^^^^ doesn't make any sense...seems almost like racism, on second thought.


What about harass (taken from the definition of Persecutor)??? You mentioned Hazard in your response to me. Both words seem to have similar roots.

For the most part, no. The English words borrowed from Arabic are practically all the nouns which begin with "al" such as algebra, alchemy, and alcohol. Most of the other loan words are nouns as well such as hazard, hashish, giraffe, elixir, etc.

Harass possibly comes from the Arabic ha-zhar (if you transpose the root).

harass Look up harass at Dictionary.com
1618, from Fr. harasser "tire out, vex," possibly from O.Fr. harer "set a dog on," and perhaps blended with O.Fr. harier "to harry, draw, drag." Originally "to lay waste, devastate," sense of "distress" is from 1656.

See the underlined words in this definition? Distress is a synonym for danger. The roots may have been transposed as well by comparison.

hazard Look up hazard at Dictionary.com
1167, from O.Fr. hasard "game of chance played with dice," possibly from Sp. azar "an unfortunate card or throw at dice," which is said to be from Arabic az-zahr (for al-zahr) "the die." But this is doubtful because of the absence of zahr in classical Arabic dictionaries. Klein suggests Arabic yasara "he played at dice;" Arabic -s- regularly becomes Sp. -z-. The -d was added in Fr. in confusion with the native suffix -ard. Sense of "chance of loss or harm, risk," first recorded 1548; the verb sense of "put something at stake in a game of chance" is from 1530. Hazardous in the sense of "perilous" is from 1618.

Noticed the dates on all these terminologies??

Classical Arabic dictionaries miss the word zahr on purpose? Then how does one reconcile the arabic origins of hazard and harass (<<transposed root)??

There's something fishy going on; the transposing of words may have been done on purpose...

perilous Look up perilous at Dictionary.com
c.1290, from O.Fr. perillous (Fr. périlleux) "dangerous, hazardous," from L. periculosus, from periculum "dangerous"

If I lived in 1167-1290,The Pope would have objected by now saying "you risk blaspheming the (`parakletos') Holy Ghost, heretic!". There's no way that looking up a specific words' etymology results in eternal damnation/blaspheming by any standard.

The most likely scenario is that 1167 is really 967 and 1290 is really 1090 using the H.C. hypothesis.

The mystery is why zhar is missing from the classical Arabic dictionary.

Peryclutos means All-round praised not Periklines nor Parakletos (advocate, intercessor). This is pure etymology there's no basis for calling it blasphemy. Maybe there's a reason why words in latin are inflected and in english: they are periphrastic. Sure, words in modern romance languages are the Sons of Latin and Germanic tongues are not; except for one word in each of these languages (to my knowledge). Periklutos (e.g. Persecutor, hazard, harasser, danger, distress) which clearly is borrowed from the conflation of the term into the Maltese language: a misinterpretation of the Muslim's "Ahmad!" call for backup.

Fixkel gives us a clue as to the intention of the original authors of the Maltese language as to the reason why the Greek was so intentionally misused.

In maltese this word means obstruct.

More to come, Insha'allah...

[22] Persecutor. (n.d.). Webster 1913 Dictionary. Retrieved January 19, 2009, from Answers.com Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/persecutor-2