2 of 2
2
Valor
Posted: 06 September 2007 08:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1207
Joined  2007-04-28

I still don’t get the bit in Dr T’s ‘God in Arabic’ link above about Christians, Jews and Muslims all worshipping the same deity. The respective words for God might be related and have similar derivations but no Jew, Muslim or Christian would assert adherents of rival faiths are going to get into heaven. I was accused of religious bigotry here for pointing this out and I am still puzzled by the logic. Etymology aside, each and every religion claims all other religions are barking up the wrong spiritual tree and won’t deliver on the afterlife promise. What does it matter if Allah means God? Or that Christ is a prophet in Islam? It just points to these religions’ common linguistic, geographical, cultural and historical roots. I can’t work the relevance of this out except anthropologically.
So Allah means God in Arabic. All monotheistic deities are assigned different names but it doesn’t follow that they are the same deity and the worship of the one you fancy will guarantee eternal life. Christ, for example, was quite explicit that only He is the way and the path etc.
Sorry to bring this up again. The fact that a meaningful word or phrase exists obviously does not mean the referent exists eg unicorn, phlogiston, the present king of France etc. I simply cannot see the connection between etymology, divine truth, and exclusivity in religions.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2007 10:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  710
Joined  2007-02-07

Sorry to bring this up again

I think you’re being disingenuous. You’re not sorry to bring it up. You’re making a point of bringing it up and you’re making theological arguments that are not etymological in nature. You’ve made your point, now let it go.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 September 2007 10:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3421
Joined  2007-01-29

What happydog said. You’re utterly wrong about this, but to prove it would require a lot of citations that are irrelevant to Wordorigins.  Please drop it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2007 09:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1207
Joined  2007-04-28

OK, I’ll drop it, though a satisfactory answer would have been preferable :) I can’t help but wonder if only religious posters find this line of inquiry objectionable - eternal verities in etymological happenstance around the Middle East. Oh well
Subject closed

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2007 10:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2785
Joined  2007-01-31

I can’t help but wonder if only religious posters find this line of inquiry objectionable

JFTR, languagehat identified himself as an atheist the last time you wanted to argue about this.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2007 10:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1207
Joined  2007-04-28

Apologies to languagehat. It’s not an argument, more an area of mutual misapprehension lol, though I remain chastened. Yahweh/Christian God/Allah merely sharing etymologies works for me.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2
 
‹‹ words that waltz      Bronx cheer ››