Is Origin of Language proof for a Creator/God?

juvenissun said:

Something like your native language suddenly changed when you are, say, age 22. From then on, you use the new language as your native language. However, that does not erase your memory about the world you once lived in when you were younger than 22. You still can tell your children about your childhood, using your new native language.

Interesting, isn't it?

Click to expand...

It's certainly interesting.

Interesting that an adult can believe that such a fantastical scenario actually occurred.

Jimmy D said:

It's certainly interesting.

Interesting that an adult can believe that such a fantastical scenario actually occurred.

Click to expand...

You need to evaluate it scientifically.
This so-called scenario is the best choice left when screened through all scientific possibilities. You will hit somekind of deadend when you go any other way.

juvenissun said:

You need to evaluate it scientifically.

Click to expand...

This so-called scenario is the best choice left when screened through all scientific possibilities.

Click to expand...

Your religious tales, aren't scientific possibilities to begin with.
The point.

Scientific possibilities need to be demonstrated, not just asserted and/or believed.

You will hit somekind of deadend when you go any other way.

Click to expand...

Pretending to not hit a dead end, is not the way to solve a dead end.

juvenissun said:

You need to evaluate it scientifically.
This so-called scenario is the best choice left when screened through all scientific possibilities. You will hit somekind of deadend when you go any other way.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry Juvenssun, I don't mean to belittle your beliefs, but surely the best choice scenario would be to accept that it never actually happened, and that it is more of a morality tale.

What you are suggesting defies all logic and reason.

juvenissun said:

You need to evaluate it scientifically.
This so-called scenario is the best choice left when screened through all scientific possibilities. You will hit somekind of deadend when you go any other way.

Click to expand...

Fine. let's evaluate it scientifically. Where is the data showing that ANYONE'S native language has ever "suddenly changed?"

Jimmy D said:

I'm sorry Juvenssun, I don't mean to belittle your beliefs, but surely the best choice scenario would be to accept that it never actually happened, and that it is more of a morality tale.

Click to expand...

You can certainly do so. But the consequence is, as I said, a dead end.
You try it. (I bet you won't)
You do have chance to turn back.

46AND2 said:

Fine. let's evaluate it scientifically. Where is the data showing that ANYONE'S native language has ever "suddenly changed?"

Click to expand...

The discovery should be like this: The tracing ends at no where.
Ask a linguist about it.

juvenissun said:

The discovery should be like this: The tracing ends at no where.
Ask a linguist about it.

Click to expand...

And you think "sudden changes" in native language is a better explanation than simply a lack of appropriate ancient documentation? Despite the fact that we have never observed such a phenomenon as you suggest, and DO observe a gradient with age in the amount of preserved historical data in, well, pretty much all fields of study?

ewq1938 said:

We still wouldn't know what language that was or if it even changed over time to become other languages as is the case with most languages that evolve.

Click to expand...

One remnant of that language is the word YHWH, which identifies Jesus in the OT.

ewq1938 said:

No he wasn't made with an intelligence which can be compared to God's.

Click to expand...

Gen 3:22 ¶ And the LORD God (YHWH/Jesus) said, Behold, the man (Adam) is become as One of Us, (Trinity) to know good and evil:

Knowing good and evil gives mankind the ability of the Supreme Intelligence of Creation, to Judge. Humans are destined to have dominion or rule over everything God has made. Genesis 1:28 No other living creature in the entire Cosmos has this ability to Judge, except Humans, who are the descendants of Adam.

ewq1938 said:

The first humans were created on the 6th day not before the 3rd day.

Click to expand...

Not so, since Adam was made BEFORE plants, herbs and trees, which grew on the THIRD Day. Genesis 2:4-9 Eve was formed from Adam's rib on the present 6th Day. Genesis 2:22 Both Adam and Eve were "created in God's Image" or born again Spiritually in Christ on the present 6th Day. Genesis 1:27 Genesis 5:1-2 John 14:16 Adam was first made before any other living thing.

ewq1938 said:

No. Heaven was not destroyed in the flood.

Click to expand...

God told Noah that He was going to destroy the violent people of Adam's world "with the Earth". Gen 6:13 God told Noah that never again will a flood "destroy the Earth." Gen 9:11 God spared NOT the old world according to 2Pe 2:5. God tells us of the world that "THEN WAS" perished, which in Greek means destroyed utterly and totally. 2Pe 3:6 Only the Scoffers of the last days will not believe.

There are more references to the Fact that our world is NOT the same as the first Earth, the world that THEN WAS. Amen?

46AND2 said:

And you think "sudden changes" in native language is a better explanation than simply a lack of appropriate ancient documentation? Despite the fact that we have never observed such a phenomenon as you suggest, and DO observe a gradient with age in the amount of preserved historical data in, well, pretty much all fields of study?

Click to expand...

When science hit its end, what you do?
You can do nothing. Or
You can follow some kind of guide in faith.
What I do is not any worse than you do, and is likely to be better.

juvenissun said:

The discovery should be like this: The tracing ends at no where.
Ask a linguist about it.

Click to expand...

I'm a linguist. And I'm telling you you're wrong.

Now, I know you'll pretend to know more about he subject than i do, but you don't.

juvenissun said:

When science hit its end, what you do?
You can do nothing. Or
You can follow some kind of guide in faith.
What I do is not any worse than you do, and is likely to be better.

Click to expand...

No. It is not better. It is much better to say "I don't know."

Name one time that religious faith had the answer to an unknown topic, which was later confirmed by science.

46AND2 said:

Name one time that religious faith had the answer to an unknown topic, which was later confirmed by science.

Click to expand...

The Abrahamic religions said, in contrast to accepted science, that the universe had a beginning at a point in time, and had not existed forever. They were right.

Aman777 said:

One remnant of that language is the word YHWH, which identifies Jesus in the OT.

Click to expand...

Nothing in the Bible suggests that that's "Adamic language."

It's the name God chose to reveal to the Israelites.

juvenissun said:

When science hit its end, what you do?

Click to expand...

Be honest about it. Meaning: acknowledging ignorance and not just invent something.

You can do nothing. Or
You can follow some kind of guide in faith.

Click to expand...

That will only result in false beliefs.

What I do is not any worse than you do, and is likely to be better.

Click to expand...

No, it's not.
Pretending to know while you really don't know, isn't better then just saying you don't know.

The exact opposite is true.

Radagast said:

The Abrahamic religions said, in contrast to accepted science, that the universe had a beginning at a point in time, and had not existed forever. They were right.

Click to expand...

Every single religion says that. To single out abrahamic religions as if they were special in that respect, is not honest.

List of creation myths - Wikipedia

FYI: every single one of these creation myths, including the one in the bible, was brutally wrong.

TagliatelliMonster said:

Every single religion says that.

Click to expand...

Not every religion.

Bungle_Bear said:

I'm a linguist. And I'm telling you you're wrong.

Click to expand...

OK, since you said you are a linguist, then I like to treat you seriously.

WHY is my suggestion wrong? For example, where did Latin language, or Chinese language come from? Are the two related in any way?

46AND2 said:

No. It is not better. It is much better to say "I don't know."

Name one time that religious faith had the answer to an unknown topic, which was later confirmed by science.

Click to expand...

You don't want to go there. You will lose miserably. Such examples are LOADED in the Bible. Do you think I will have faith in the story of the Babel without having a strong base of faith from other sources in the Bible?

Give you an easy one: the Bible describes many many times, the mountains will "move". Do you think this is just a fantasy used in poetry? Since when do scientists know that mountains DO MOVE? Do you know the modern science know that mountains can move in several different ways?

Run, before you embarrass yourself.

46AND2 said:

No. It is not better. It is much better to say "I don't know."

Click to expand...

Absolutely not.
You will say that miserably in all your life.
I like to say, I DO know.

My way is much much better than yours.