Re: A true description of Gene Scott. was Re: Thompson decides

Ray Martinez wrote:
On Jan 6, 4:02 pm, Devils Advocaat <mankyg...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 6 Jan, 22:38, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Jan 6, 2:07 pm, Devils Advocaat <mankyg...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 6 Jan, 19:51, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 6, 10:01 am, Devils Advocaat <mankyg...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 4, 12:29 am, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snipped for focus]

Utterly false.

I have related numerous times what Dr. Scott said. Paste the
link and the quote where it was said *first use of the English
word.* Dr. Scott provided the origin of the two-fold breakdown
and the concept. Again, refusing to acknowledge shows bad faith
and another agenda.

[snipped for focus]

No one is disputing what you have said that Dr Scott has said.

But what you seem to be missing is evidence that supports what he
said.

So how about you bring that evidence to the table?

This comment *assumes* my source (Dr. Scott) to not have produced
evidence and fact but merely a claim; unlike the O.E.D. which is
assumed to be the exact opposite: evidence and fact. Why is this
inconsistent assumption employed? Answer: because Devil's Advocate
sides with the latter. There is no basis for the assumption except
bias. I, on the other hand, accept both sources to have produced
evidence and facts. And I have shown numerous times in this thread
that neither source contradicts, that the evolutionists have
misunderstood their dictionary source while refusing to
acknowledge, and while refusing to acknowledge all facts and
points which have refuted their groundless position.

All that I have asked you to do is present supporting evidence for
Dr Scott's etymology of the word cannibal.

Adman has posted much supporting evidence. The Hislop material also
corroborates.

A few days ago I posted what I had found out, you seem to have missed
it so I will repost it:

I have done a little digging of my own after reading that Alexander
Hislop could be the source of this alleged etymology and here is what
I found:

http://www.thechurchesofgod.com/good%20old%20time%20part%20two.htm

?By the way, do you know where the word cannibal comes from? The word
Cahna means ?the priest of? and bal means ?Baal.? According to
Hislop, in ?The Two Babylons,? the priests of Baal were ?required to
eat of the human sacrifices, and thus it has come to pass that Cahna-
bal, the priest of baal is the established word in our own tongue
for a devourer of human flesh.? Babylon is the source of
cannibalism, sun worship and Satan worship.?


The above link commentary seems to have made some unwarranted
*conclusions.* What is your point in posting this link material?

However:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GooEAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&d...

From ?The Two Babylons? page 435:

? ... titles evidently equivalent to that of Bol-kahn, or " Priest of
Baal ... ?

Strange how Alexander Hislop the alleged source of this etymology of
the word cannibal, doesn't put the kahn before the bol.


Because that is how it probably appears in some ancient text or bas-
relief. The order is inconsequential. "Baal-priest" or "priest of
Baal" doesn't change the point of fact. Modern English changes the
order. Both are accurate.

For example: the Bible will say "Christ Jesus" and "Jesus Christ."

"Christ" is a title and not a surname.

Consequently the claim that Hislop was the first to identify this as
the etymology of the word cannibal is totally wrong.


Why is it wrong? What evidence do you base your opinion on?

Who made this "first to identify" claim?

Where is the evidence that the "first to identify" claim is wrong?

What relevance does "first to identify" have here?

Who was the first and what is the evidence for the first being the
first?

And if this is where Dr Scott got his etymology from then it is
reasonable to conclude that he is also totally wrong.


Why is that?

Doubtless you will refuse to accept this, and ignore the links I
provide.


Refuse to accept exactly what?

And what was your point in posting the links?

I think you actually forgot to make one?

Perhaps you will also fail as usual to provide supporting evidence
for this increasingly dubious etymology.


Second time: the Hislop material and the Adman material supports Dr.
Scott. Vice versa is also true.

Now, what is your evidence against these three sources? And what is
your position for the origin of "cana" and "bal" and the concept?

The O.E.D simply provides *first use of the English word.*


Please explain for me: Is 'Cannibal' an English word, or are there older
versions of the WORD?
What I want to know about is, is there an older word, singular, with the
same meaning, not about any old words that may be connected in order to
construct a new word That's cheating.







Ray

Why is that so difficult for you to do?

Ray- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Ray


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A true description of Gene Scott. was Re: Thompson decides
    ... the quote where it was said *first use of the English word.* Dr.. ... refusing to acknowledge shows bad faith and another agenda. ... assumed to be the exact opposite: evidence and fact. ... Scott's etymology of the word cannibal. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Cannibal revisited; invitation to Ray Martinez
    ... is why we hold him to be the greatest scholar of all time. ... Baal and you apparently do not remember what his evidence for this ... if his source for the earlier etymology of the word is ... other dictionaries disagree with Scott. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Cannibal revisited; invitation to Ray Martinez
    ... After he posts his etymology, ... Middle English ethimologie, from Anglo- ... occurrence in the language where it is found, ... assert or suggest that the practice or concept of cannibalism to not ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Share the road - IoAM
    ... You can have compulsory education and training - but there does not ... cycling on paths not to be an issue. ... Sorry - forgot English was not your strong point. ... When it comes to "usual" use of English, past evidence shows that you ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Some quotes for RH
    ... Is there any evidence that might cause you to reconsider your theory ... For instance an England team containing equivocal Englishmen dominating ... Englishmen have led to a decline in the standard of English cricket. ...
    (uk.sport.cricket)
Loading