Arabic inscriptions revisited and our dear iam' and more comedy

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), May 6, 2010 at 06:47

This is what our dear iam wrote

.> Please give this forum a direct proof of ARAB pre-500 BCE and Arabic writings pre-300 CE.

And this was my response

>I urge the readers to check all extant pre-Islamic Arabic langauge inscriptions athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Arabic_alphabetNow you will find the inscription from 3ayn abdot dated 88-150CE and your bonus for today is from Qaryat al-Faw dated BCE (100-300 BCE)How come you did not google this too?

># Your own Wiki refs prove you wrong:

We shall see and what we will be discussing here is History 101 and this is how basic this subject is

For the readers: Our dear iam is not aware that a language can have different alphabets over a very long period of time and it can also be written in a foreign alphabet and in the case of the Jews in Egypt in the late antique period they used Hebrew alphabet to write khotoba papyri that were written in Aramaic and in our dear iam bizarre world this could mean that there was really no Aramaic now do you get it our dear iam? Let me guess you did not right?

>Quote: "The Arabic alphabet evolved either from the Nabataean, or (less widely believed) from the Syriac.:

Very true so what?

>The abive says it is not an original writings,

So?

>and never existed before this date,

So?

>namely:Quote: In the 2nd century AD^{[citation needed]}, the first known records of the Nabataean alphabet

And?

>were written, in the Aramaic language (which was the language of communication and trade), but including some Arabic language features:

So?

>the Nabataeans did not write the language which they spoke.

And?

>They wrote in a form of the Aramaic alphabet, which continued to evolve; it separated into two forms: one intended for inscriptions (known as "monumental Nabataean") and the other, more cursive and hurriedly written and with joined letters, for writing on papyrus. This cursive form influenced the monumental form more and more and gradually changed into the Arabic alphabet.

Sure so what?

>The above says even the Nabetean was recent, itself derived from Aramaic.

And your point is?

>Quote: In the 6th and 5th centuries BC, north-Semitic tribes immigrated and founded a kingdom centered around Petra, in what is now Jordan. These people (now named Nabataeans from the name of one of the tribes, Naba?u), probably spoke a form of Arabic.

Then there was Arabic spoken that is before your bogus 500BCE right mr fake?so who was speaking that Arabic let me guess Martians right?

>The above aligns with my premise - the Arab race began around 500 BCE [read, not from Time Immorial'].

Mr ignorant you are mixing texts and languages and alphabets and your ugly "Arab race" all in one

> The people of Jordan were the Moabites before this time [Hebrew bible].

Oh not the Bible and Musa and Ibrahim again spare me this one

>Quote: The first recorded text in the Arabic alphabet was written in AD 512. It is a trilingual dedication in Greek, Syriac and Arabic found at Zabad in Syria. This version of the Arabic alphabet used includes only 22 letters, of which only 15 are different, being used to note 28 phonemes:-

You fell in the trap and it does not surpise me

And here is your lesson for today in the case of Egypt the Egyptians their language was

1. Egyptian

2. The alphabet used over a period of 3000 years was as follows

A. Hieroglyphics

B. Hieratic

C. Demotic

D. And then Coptic was introduced in the late 3rd century CE so this would mean in your bizarre world that the Copts did not exist in Egypt from time immemorial in Egypt and as a matter of fact a Copt would not be able to read his own language in one of the older alphabets now do you get it?

As a matter of fact some ignorant Muslims in Egypt claim that Copts must be the decendants of the Greek settlers in Egypt because Coptic used Greek letters! Did you get it?

Do you know what this means? It means that a language can be written in different alphabets but it is the same language and in the case of Arabic it also did not drop from the sky and it also has a history behind it now do you get it mr demagogue?

And here is History 101 so here is a one line text that is supposed to have been uttered by Jesus and here is the text in Syriac

Eli Eli lama sabachtani

And in Arabic it would be

Elahi Elahi lema sabaqtani

Suppose such text existed some 2000 years ago in the above forms we have. A poor historian will tell us that such text is an English language text and therefore there was neither Arabic no Syriac back then but a good historian will tell us

1. The first text is in Western Syriac and is written using Latin alphabet

2. The second text contains the same words as the first text but it is in Arabic language and it is written in Latin alphabet!

Now do you get it? Oh and do not foget to tell them at Hebrew Universtiy that 3Ayn Abdot inscription cannot be in Arabic because there was no Arabic language before your bogus 400CE and I can assure you they will laugh at you

And you are a careless reader as I told you not only once but several times that the Arabs used garshouni or Syriac when writing their texts and indeed garshouni was used in the early Islamic period because the Arabic alphabet was still not stable. The spoken Arabic language? It was there from time immemorial

>The above again affirms my position: the first alphabet in Arabic being post 500 CE

Your post only affirms your ignorance.

>CHECK MATE?

You are not even funny

---

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".