What is Gods native tongue.

MooseJam

He created us and He loved us so much he sent his son etc

I would have thought given this a few words would have been passed to us, one or two even , perhaps His name as known to Him

I would have thought a few words would be known to us, but correct me if I am wrong not even one word is known.

Is there any particular reason for this ?

I suppose you could say his language would be incapable of being grasped by the human brain but our langauges are great at making approximations even so an approximation or two would have been nice.

People say the bible is the word of God, how much more powerful would it be if it was His word in His language or as approximate as would allow us to understand, if not the whole bible even a couple of passages - the more important passages in the true words of God and us to understand it by Him having revealed their meaning to use.

That would be something no ?

Seaneh

His name Is Jehova. He has many other names too.

Also... Why does an omnipotent being need any language to be honest?

Coriolanus

The subject has had a colourful history from a brief look around the interwebs. Personally I find this particular exercise in inductive reason to be pretty funny.

German philologist Jacob Grimm wrote in 1851 that if God spoke language, indeed any language that involves dental consonants, God must have teeth, and since teeth were created not for speech but for eating, it would follow that he also eats, which, as Frits Staal puts it, "leads to so many other undesirable assumptions that we better abandon the idea altogether"

PDN

Having watched Barcelona's passing game for the last 45 minutes, I'm tempted to say that God's native tongue might be Catalan.

wolfsbane

MooseJam wrote: »

He created us and He loved us so much he sent his son etc

I would have thought given this a few words would have been passed to us, one or two even , perhaps His name as known to Him

I would have thought a few words would be known to us, but correct me if I am wrong not even one word is known.

Is there any particular reason for this ?

I suppose you could say his language would be incapable of being grasped by the human brain but our langauges are great at making approximations even so an approximation or two would have been nice.

People say the bible is the word of God, how much more powerful would it be if it was His word in His language or as approximate as would allow us to understand, if not the whole bible even a couple of passages - the more important passages in the true words of God and us to understand it by Him having revealed their meaning to use.

That would be something no ?

This sounds a bit confused to me. If God had a special language used only in heaven, how would giving us a few minutes of it enlighten us? Are you enlightened to what a Chinese wants when he speaks to you in his native tongue? I have enough trouble understanding the Geordie or Glaswegian dialect of English.

As it is, He has caused us to receive His word in our native tongues. First He spoke to His servants the prophets and apostles, who then wrote it down in their language; then it was translated into ours. God has made sure we have His message in sufficient clarity that we can be saved and live lives pleasing to Him.

Coriolanus

PDN wrote: »

Having watched Barcelona's passing game for the last 45 minutes, I'm tempted to say that God's native tongue might be Catalan.

Don't let ETA hear you say that! :eek:

wolfsbane wrote: »

If God had a special language used only in heaven, how would giving us a few minutes of it enlighten us?

If one was so inclined it could be argued that as with human tongues, the possibility of unsatisfactory translations muddying the meaning of things could be an issue.

God has made sure we have His message in sufficient clarity that we can be saved and live lives pleasing to Him.

The differing interpretations would tend to dispense with that idea. If we were able to receive the message of god, in his own tongue and as speakers of that tongue, things might be quiet different.

wolfsbane

Nevore said:

Originally Posted by wolfsbane
If God had a special language used only in heaven, how would giving us a few minutes of it enlighten us?
If one was so inclined it could be argued that as with human tongues, the possibility of unsatisfactory translations muddying the meaning of things could be an issue.

Quote:
God has made sure we have His message in sufficient clarity that we can be saved and live lives pleasing to Him.
The differing interpretations would tend to dispense with that idea. If we were able to receive the message of god, in his own tongue and as speakers of that tongue, things might be quiet different.

OK, I get you now. Yes, if we spoke 'Godish' then having the Bible in Godish would be the ideal.

Since we don't, the present arrangements are best. Yes, there are difficulties with various words and phrases, but nothing to prevent us knowing the key issues of how to be saved and live a life pleasing to Him. The other details can be added to our knowledge as we get more light from linguistic studies.

Seaneh

Nevore wrote: »

Don't let ETA hear you say that! :eek:

ETA are Basque, not Catalaunian (Basque country being San Babastian/Pamplona/Bilbao and south-western france).

kiffer

This reminds me of the attempts to learn what or if there was a true, original or innate language of humans... (e.g. the language spoken before God shattered the Tower of Babel and muddled up all our languages. )

Several people over the years have thought that the way to do this was to take some babies and raise them in isolation with a deaf/mute nurse... When the children started to talk they would do so in the pre-Babel language...


Some King types have given it a try...
Is language innate and if so what language?
Results ...
Psammeticus, Pharaoh of Egypt 7th Century BC, innate language of humans is Phyrgian (Children spoke a few words ).
King James V, Scotland 15th Century AD, reported that the Children spoke 'good' Hebrew.
Emperor Akbar of India, 16th Century, Children developed no language, conclusion language is not innate...


anyway... sketchy on the details there (maybe not to accurate too) ... and maybe somewhat off topic.

marco_polo

Seaneh wrote: »

His name Is Jehova. He has many other names too.

Also... Why does an omnipotent being need any language to be honest?

Since an omnipotent being is completely free from the confines of logic and common sense, who can say?

Coriolanus

kiffer wrote: »

This reminds me of the attempts to learn what or if there was a true, original or innate language of humans... (e.g. the language spoken before God shattered the Tower of Babel and muddled up all our languages. )

Several people over the years have thought that the way to do this was to take some babies and raise them in isolation with a deaf/mute nurse... When the children started to talk they would do so in the pre-Babel language...


Some King types have given it a try...
Is language innate and if so what language?
Results ...
Psammeticus, Pharaoh of Egypt 7th Century BC, innate language of humans is Phyrgian (Children spoke a few words ).
King James V, Scotland 15th Century AD, reported that the Children spoke 'good' Hebrew.
Emperor Akbar of India, 16th Century, Children developed no language, conclusion language is not innate...


anyway... sketchy on the details there (maybe not to accurate too) ... and maybe somewhat off topic.

There was a play in the Gate or the Abbey or one of them recently on. A bunch of aristocrats kidnap a bunch of kids and raise them without human contact to see what happens. Chaos ensues afaik. :pac:

PDN

marco_polo wrote: »

Since an omnipotent being is completely free from the confines of logic and common sense, who can say?

I certainly don't see how an omnipotent being is completely free from the confines of logic - athough we do get a few posters visiting this forum who appear to be (free from the confines of logic, that is, not omnipotent).

marco_polo

PDN wrote: »

I certainly don't see how an omnipotent being is completely free from the confines of logic - athough we do get a few posters visiting this forum who appear to be (free from the confines of logic, that is, not omnipotent).

Make all the snide comments you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you cannot ignore the paradoxical can of worms that the concept of an omnipotent being opens up, at least not without resort to serious mental gymnastics.

PDN

marco_polo wrote: »

Make all the snide comments you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you cannot ignore the paradoxical can of worms that the concept of an omnipotent being opens up, at least not without resort to serious mental gymnastics.

Oh goodness gracious, can't you tell the difference between a little gentle humour and someone being snide? Get over yourself, please!

Most of us would understand that an omnipotent Being cannot create a square circle, cannot make black the same as white, cannot make 3+3=562 nor can He create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it.

Similarly an omniscient Being cannot 'know' something that isn't true. Nor can an omnipresent Being be in a place that doesn't exist.

MooseJam

Excuse my ignorance but where does it say that God is omnipotent anyway - could someone quote the passage with omnipotent in it or with words to those effect, it isn't just being assumed is it ?

PDN

MooseJam wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance but where does it say that God is omnipotent anyway - could someone quote the passage with omnipotent in it or with words to those effect, it isn't just being assumed is it ?

Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26)

I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted. (Job 42:2)

Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you. (Jeremiah 32:17)

For nothing is impossible with God. (Luke 1:37)

chopley

MooseJam wrote: »

He created us and He loved us so much he sent his son etc

I would have thought given this a few words would have been passed to us, one or two even , perhaps His name as known to Him
...
People say the bible is the word of God, how much more powerful would it be if it was His word in His language

Languages develop as a result of interaction and the need for communication between human beings. If we assume God is on his own (there is only one true God, after all), then he will have no need for human language. It would also be impossible for him to have a native language as that would imply he/she had at some point been born and brought up by other speakers of that language.

chopley

PDN wrote: »

Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26)

I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted. (Job 42:2)

Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you. (Jeremiah 32:17)

For nothing is impossible with God. (Luke 1:37)

That sounds fairly omnipotent to me :-)

MooseJam

chopley wrote: »

If we assume God is on his own

Angels, weren't they there all the time, is it possible to make complex plans without language ?

MooseJam

PDN wrote: »

Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26)

I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted. (Job 42:2)

Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you. (Jeremiah 32:17)

For nothing is impossible with God. (Luke 1:37)

Well Mathew was written a century after the event so any quote should be taken with a pinch or two at least.

The last three appear to be peoples opinion on the matter, I am correct in assuming that ? the quote from Jeremiah is plain old wrong as it assumes a biblical creation of a readymade complete earth which no one bar creationists believe and has been scientifically disproven.

So everybody believing in an omnipotent God on the strenght of the above is strange to say the least. I assume I am missing something here ?

ART6

wolfsbane wrote: »

As it is, He has caused us to receive His word in our native tongues. First He spoke to His servants the prophets and apostles, who then wrote it down in their language; then it was translated into ours. God has made sure we have His message in sufficient clarity that we can be saved and live lives pleasing to Him.

This post created a sudden revelation for me. Could it be that this was the reason that the word "celebrate" was translated as "celibate"?:p

PDN

MooseJam wrote: »

Well Mathew was written a century after the event so any quote should be taken with a pinch or two at least.

No it wasn't.

the quote from Jeremiah is plain old wrong as it assumes a biblical creation of a readymade complete earth which no one bar creationists believe and has been scientifically disproven.

No it doesn't. It simply states that God created the heavens and the earth, not how He did it.

So everybody believing in an omnipotent God on the strenght of the above is strange to say the least. I assume I am missing something here ?

I think you're missing quite a lot.

hivizman

God is frequently described in the Bible as "Almighty" - this is just an English translation of the Latin word "omnipotens" - "all powerful". For example, Revelation 19:6 (last part): "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns" - in the Vulgate, this is: "Alleluia quoniam regnavit Dominus Deus noster omnipotens".

In the Middle Ages, philosophers such as St Anselm derived omnipotence as a necessary characteristic of God. Anselm thought of God as "the being than whom no greater can be conceived". If God is thought of as having limited power, then it is possible to conceive of a being with greater power, so the first conception can't actually correspond to God. This implies that God must, necessarily, be the entity with the greatest conceivable degree of power, which we call omnipotence. What actually constitutes omnipotence is, of course, another matter.

One thing, though, I'm fairly confident that God has the power to communicate in any language. God's first recorded speech ("Let there be light" - Genesis 1:3) was first written down in Hebrew, but that doesn't mean that God spoke in Hebrew, or even "spoke" in any recognisable human form at all. A theme that Christianity has in common with Judaism and Islam is the creative power of God's speech or God's word, but I've just seen the time and it's too late tonight to explore this further. [Yawns :pac: and goes to bed.]

hokeypokey

God created languages to confuse us.

And i would say if we spoke to god it would be in understanding rather than speach.