THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.

Submitted by IamJoseph (Australia), May 5, 2010 at 20:55

For the readers read and laugh. To remind you this thread is about Egyptian Arabic (EA) and is it a language or an Arabic dialect. I happen to believe that it is a language and the starting point of it was 642CE when the Arabs invaded Egypt and this is what I wrote

# The 642 date was never argued, but you have been denying that Arabic emerged around 400 CE, and that the Arab race is from time immorial, which I maintain is only from 500 BCE. This has been the basis of debate. Every one knows when Islamic arabs invaded Egypt - and that Egypt was not Arab before 642. The same applies with the land of Israel - this was invaded and a mosque dumped there - and today they claim immorial ownership, denying the historicity of Judea and Jerusalem as a Hebrew capital. Like Egypt, Judea was also robbed. These are not opinions but historical facts.

--------------------------------------

>No this is not a debate this is "I dhimmi no more telling you so" ... and it is about EA or did you forget?

Now our dear iam has no clue what is really EA and why is it a language and not a dialect . He does not know any Arabic or EA and his Egyptian history book is the Bible! He cannot tell the difference between the Egyptian language and EA. Then he is preoccupied with the "Arab race" and in the process he has no clue about what the history of the Arabs and their language are all about

# You can shout EA till the camels come home. It has no impact of the date the Arabic writings emerged. I explained to you, Arabic is an admix of ancient languages, including Hebrew, Aramaic, Assyrian, Latin, etc. This means the reverse of what you claim - it means this is not an original language. I explained to you that the Hebrew and Aramaic lived adjacent to the Egyptian - not so any Arabic. The Coptic language - different from Arabic - is closer to the Egyptian. I also explained to you - Egypt was not Arab. So you see, far from my history knowledge being limited to the Hebrew bible - I also know general history.

And BTW, your statements the Hebrew bible is myth is also a proof you are afflicted with what you accuse me of: the Hebrew bible happens to be the most credible writings in all recorded history, with over 70% of its texts being scientifically proven. You base your ignorance on such things like FX Miracles, then using this to disregard the historicity contained in the same passages of the Hebrew bible. Thus you claim, on the basis that we cannot prove the sea split - as proof the Israelites were not in Egypt and they never return to Canaan and remained there till 70 CE. You cannot accuse others of not knowing history!

-------------------------------------

Then he tells us that there was no "Arabs or is it Arabic and only allahu a3lam before 400CE and notice that he is mixing Arabs, Arabic, alphabet, extant evidence all in one. Then when he was reminded of the Arabs of Herodotus and the Arabs of the periplus he changed his mind and told us that the "Arab race" existed from 500BCE in other words they just dropped from the sky and he our dear iam did agree with Herodotus. Sohanallah

# Those names you quote have no connection with Arabs, which I respnded to numerously. The term Arab does not appear there, nor any Arabic writings, nor any follow-up Arab or Arabic imprints between 900 BCE and 500 BCE. Compare this to the Hebrew imprints in that same period - factor in also that the fictional pre-500 BCE Arabs had no Arab kings, queens, cities, monument, wars or any marks whatsoever - exactly the reverse of the Jewish history. Most importantly, factor also that the fictional pre-500 BCE Arabs, unlike the Jews, were not exiled, dispersed or their nation destroyed. What's your excuse for such a blatant, striking vaccum? Your problem is that I am applying real, factual and historical questions - not biblical ones, and your own history is dismal and in denial.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Oh the Periplus? He had no clue what is really the Periplus and then when he checked in wikipedia he came back with the little gem that I some how told him that the authors of the Periplus were belonging to the "Arab race". Then when he was provided with literary sources by Assyrians and from his Bible to the existence of the Arabs as early as 900BCE. He refused (as if anyone cares) such sources but notice that he has no difficulty accepting the Arabs of Herodotus go figure. I told him to go and write a book and tell the world that Resto and Hoyland and Versteegh are all wrong and that there was no "Arab race" before 500BCE and I promised him that he will be making a fool of himself. I even suggested that on his next visit to Israel that he should stop at the Dept of Arabic and islamic studies to tell them about his little gems and I assured him that they will laugh at him

# Again, and more links for you. Periplus is 1st Century and nothing to do with Arabs::

The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea: [http://wysinger.homestead.com/periplus.html]

Travel and Trade in the Indian Ocean by a Merchant of the First Century

Again - 1st Century; nothing to do with Arabs:

A Sailing Manual: [http://wysinger.homestead.com/periplus.html]

The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (Periplus Maris Erythraei) is a Greek periplus, describing navigation and trading opportunities from Roman Egyptian ports like Berenice along the coast of the Red Sea, and others along East Africa and India. Sometime in the middle of the first century AD, an anonymous merchant or sailor compiled a guidebook to the ports and sailing conditions of the Erythraean Sea. The Periplus Maris Erythraei ("Guidebook of the Erythraean Sea") is the only document of its kind known to have survived. The author is unknown, it is clearly a firsthand description by someone familiar with the area, and is nearly unique in providing accurate insights into what the ancient world knew about the lands around the region. Erythraean Sea is the term applied by Greek and Roman geographers to the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. [map]

The 'Periplus of the Red Sea' was written around the year 70 CE by an anonymous Alexandrian Egyptian merchant and captain, who certainly had personal experience in vast parts of that navigation and trade network area, and wished to compile a kind of guide for sailors and traders.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Oh the Arabic language: This is where it gets bizarre. Now here is our dear iam who cannot read speak or write Arabic

# How do you know that!?

---------------------------------------------------------

and has no clue about how to read historical literary sources but that does not stop him from pontificating about such topic. Then he tells us that there really is no Arabic language or is it texts or is it race before 400CE. And when he was reminded that texts can be oral or they can be in written form

# I agreed there can be oral forms - the debate was about 'WRITTEN' Arabic. Oral cannot be proven - that is why you cling to it. Can you prove English was not orally spoen 2 million years ago?

------------------------------------------------------------------

and that we indeed have evidence from the Qur'anic text that some of such texts can pre-date the Qur'an by hundrerds of years,

# No, this is not plausable. Better, if a Quranic text predates the Quran, and we see that text in other books, such as the Hebrew - it means the Quran copied it. Rocket science. Otherwise you can write a book and copy the Quran and claim the same thing today also.

--------------------------------------------------------

and that the Arabs used other alphabtes for their texts as in using Syriac or Garshouni Arabic

# This means they copied from an earlier writings. Where else can they get it from? The English language is an admix of many older languages too.

---------------------------------------

and that written literary sources can be lost or destroyed or they can be stored some place waiting to be discovered

# Agreed. So come back when they are discovered, and deal with the present status quo. Nor is there any plausable reason it can exist and not found. We found the dead sea scrolls - where is yours? Were the Arabs exiled and barred from returning - all their cities plowed and looted - as with the Jews? - so what's your basis of making a claim your proof may be discovered in the future? And you call my arguements as gooblecook?

------------------------------------------------

as in the case of the Nag Hammadi library and the Qumran library and good historians are very aware of the so called "argument from silence" in other words if he would have said there is no EXTANT literary sources prior to a certain date he would be correct.

# No, there is no comparison here with the Qumran's dead sea scrolls. This writings has a thread of books for a 1000 years, and only its 'AFFIRMATION' was discovered at Qumram. This is not the case with the Quran having as yet undiscovered writings which predate it. It only logically affirms that there is no Arabic writings pre-400 CE.

------------------------------------------------------

And indeed the earliest Arabic language inscription (notice that epigraphy and coins as literary sources survive more than papyri) is from Qaryat al-Faw and is dated to 100-300BCE

# LOL. You have twisted CE with BCE:

• archaeological excavation (in history of Arabia: Prehistory and archaeology; [http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/485528/Qaryat-al-Faw ]

  ...and Taymāʾ to the northeast of the other two, have long been known but not fully explored. In south central Arabia, near Al-Sulayyil, a town site at Qaryat Dhāt Kāhil (now Qaryat al-Fāw) has yielded rich results from excavation. In northeastern Arabia, inland from modern Al-Qaṭīf, a Danish expedition has revealed a hitherto unsuspected pre-Islamic...

  in history of Arabia: Kindah )

  ...authority. Its area of influence was south central Arabia, from the Yemeni border nearly up to Mecca. The discovery of the tomb of a king of Kindah (datable to perhaps the 3rd century ad) at Qaryat Dhāt Kāhil, on the trade route linking Najrān with the east coast, suggests that this site was in all likelihood the royal headquarters. Sabaean texts of the 2nd and 3rd...

# Do you see - even the 3rd Centure CE is debatable - and no Arab word or Arabic writings is seen attached there.

----------------------------------------------------------

and there is a two lines in Arabic language inscription from 3ayn Abdot in Israel and dated between 87-150CE he went back and told me that "there is no Arabic before 400CE" and when he was reminded about an Arabic language epigraphy from 328CE he changed his mind and told me that there was no Arabic before 300CE and when I reminded him why did he change his mind? He told me 300 is close to 400 and what a hypocrite and he reminds me of Muslims that tell us ya3ni bel taqreeb or it is close enough

# I did not change my mind. The Avdot reference has already been responded to. The 328 date is not impacting, it is just 70 years older, but has no verifiable connection with Arabic. Alphabets, or bits of alphabets, can easily be mistaken to look like whatever one chooses. The impacting factor is that we have no Arabic writings from 328 to 400 CE.

--------------------------------------------------

Now yes the Arabic language became a fully fledged language by the 3rd century of Islam through the works of the Muslim masorites and the great grammarian Sibawayhe and the great Ishaq ibn Hunein and the final step was Ibn Manzur great dictionary of the Arabic language Lisan al-3Arab

# This is not what you say, but what I said - and you denied it. Arabic writings is an admix of various older, well established writings of Arabia and Europe, and this occured around 400 CE - aka the 3rd Century.

---------------------------------------------

># Yes, it was about EA,

So what does this have to do with your bogus claims so far?

>and I responded that the EA is bogus

Only fools would utter this nonsense

# Only fools cannot show us any Arabic alongside the Egyptian, but we see that there is Aramaic, Hebrew & Greek alongside the Egyptian. Where is the Arabic here?!

------------------------------------------------------------

>and has no relation to Arabic writings.

Hello: EA is written in Arabic alphabet! What an ignorant man

# No - the Arabic alphabets came much later, when Arabic writings emerged. No such thing as alphabets dangling in space with no writings of it. Egypt is not Arab, its language not Arabic, and we have no Arabic writings pre-400 CE.

------------------------------------------------------

>How can you claim EA when Arabic writings emerged only in 400 CE?

Hello: I never said that as the Arabs invaded Egypt in 642CE. ...

# This only shows why Egypt was not Arab before this date. The Arabs invaded Egypt and are persecuting the Coptics, who should have a state of their own. Egypt is not sacred Islamic soil - it is one got in robbery, while the Jews have never stolen anyone's land in all their 4000 year history. Facts on the table.

-----------------------------------------------------

> We have no Arabic writings which tell us about Arabs or anything connected to Arabs.

It is OK if you dislike Islam but to hate people is evil do you get it?

# How can I dislike Islam, when it is Muslims who are negating all Jewish rights, and openly declaring to wipe Israel off the map - with grotesque silence from all Muslims? Does this say that I hate Islam:

"THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO THE UTTER DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL - WE WILL DRIVE ALL THE JEWS INTO THE SEA" - Nasser.

Your charges are confusing - what is it based on - my expose of falsified history?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now do me a favor and go and read a real book of history

# Thank you. But stealing another peoples' land - dumping a Mosque on the known sacred site of another people - then denying it - is not history, and cannot be justified because some Muslims say it is written in their scriptures or this is their belief. Better:

THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.

THOU SHALT NOT COVET,

THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS.

THIU SHALT NO FOLLOW A CORRUPT MULTITIDE.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".