*************
M*W: I've asked this question before, but could not get any answer:

What language does god speak when he talks to A&E?

What language does the talking snake speak when he talks to Eve?

What language did A&E speak to each other?

What language was spoken BEFORE it was translated into ancient Hebrew?

God would not have spoken any language, he'd have directly thought the words into peoples minds.

One can presume, since religion is usually infinitely flexible when it comes to explaining away technicalities and mysteries, that God didn't have to talk. As for Adam, Eve, and the snake, I would've guessed something like ancient Hebrew, or maybe Arabic if we're talking the Koran. Or how about "Proto-Semitic" even? Never mind that it would be illogical as no evidence shows that all languages descend from the Semitic family!

We can go with the early Catholic church's belief on it and say God only speaks and understands Latin. :D

Now this is certainly an interesting topic!!!

What were the ancients trying to tell us when they referred to "The Word" or to "God speaking"? Personally, I like to consider that they may not have been trying to tell us that "God made sound". There is a perceptual shift that occurs when things are named, the mind changes from percieving things conceptualizing things.

Remember the Bible story where all the animals were brought to Adam and he named them? When this happens, when things are named, they become mental concepts. Instead of being real things that exist only a certain physical place and time they become concepts of things. It is possible that this type of perceptual shift is what the ancients were alluding to when they talked about the Word. It is also possible that a similar perceptual shift is what was meant when people said "God spoke".

Presumably he spoke the antedilluvian language pre-Babel.

It's hard to mix science with religion. The traditional biblical creation date is something like 4000BCE. (I'm not going to waste my time looking it up, I'm a scientist.) The Hebrew language had not yet developed from proto-Canaanite. Akkadian (an early Semitic language) was one of the most widespread languages of the Middle East. The location of the Garden of Eden and its pomegranate tree (there were no apples anywhere near that part of the globe that long ago) has been postulated at various points. The creation myth in the bible is not an invention of the Canaanites, who were nothing more than a Stone Age tribe in those days. It goes back to the civilizations that had already sprung up in that area, Babylon, Sumer, etc. It is usually referred to as the Babylonian creation myth and the Abrahamists just appropriated it as they did much of their bible.

My amateur opinion is that people who lived in the region of the Garden of Eden at the traditional time of Adam and Eve probably spoke Akkadian. If they heard voices in their heads, as Abraham did, they were probably speaking Akkadian.

It's hard to mix science with religion. The traditional biblical creation date is something like 4000BCE.(I'm not going to waste my time looking it up, I'm a scientist.) The Hebrew language had not yet developed from proto-Canaanite. Akkadian (an early Semitic language) was one of the most widespread languages of the Middle East. The location of the Garden of Eden and its pomegranate tree (there were no apples anywhere near that part of the globe that long ago) has been postulated at various points. The creation myth in the bible is not an invention of the Canaanites, who were nothing more than a Stone Age tribe in those days. It goes back to the civilizations that had already sprung up in that area, Babylon, Sumer, etc. It is usually referred to as the Babylonian creation myth and the Abrahamists just appropriated it as they did much of their bible.

My amateur opinion is that people who lived in the region of the Garden of Eden at the traditional time of Adam and Eve probably spoke Akkadian. If they heard voices in their heads, as Abraham did, they were probably speaking Akkadian.

*************
M*W: Assuming, of course, that these characters existed!

M*W: Assuming, of course, that these characters existed!

Well yeah. :p

If they heard voices in their heads, as Abraham did, they were probably speaking Akkadian.

If they heard voices in their heads?

Um . . . tounges?

Um . . . tounges?

*************
M*W: What is "tounges?"

It was hebrew the 22 alphabets are sybolized as harmonic rythms of sounds. Each letter as viewed would appear to have a distinct acoustic pattern respective of audibility.

Presumably he spoke the antedilluvian language pre-Babel. Hard to argue with that.

Assuming, of course, that these characters existed!Well sure, but we are making that assumption for the sake of the argument.If they heard voices in their heads?The question concerned the language spoken by the god of Abraham in Genesis, which postulates that someone heard this speech. Anyone who "hears" a fictional character talking to him is hearing a voice inside his head. Abraham is said to have heard god telling him to sacrifice his son. Today he would be diagnosed as psychotic and locked up for the safety of both his sons.Presumably he spoke the antedilluvian language pre-Babel. Well sure. I assumed the question was meant more seriously, "What language was in common use during the 3rd through 1st Millennia BCE when the conversations attributed to the god of Abraham are fabled to have occurred?"

The historical analog to "Babel" occurred in the Mesolithic Era, around 70,000BCE when Homo sapiens embarked on the diaspora out of Africa. Although many languages may have already been spoken across such a huge continent at that time, one might presume that the first successful expedition into Asia Minor was made by a group with a common language, and that this was therefore the ancestor of all languages outside Africa.

It was hebrew the 22 alphabets are sybolized as harmonic rythms of sounds. Each letter as viewed would appear to have a distinct acoustic pattern respective of audibility.

Interesting guess. But I wonder what you mean by "harmonic rhythm of sounds".

Anyone who "hears" a fictional character talking to him is hearing a voice inside his head. Abraham is said to have heard god telling him to sacrifice his son. Today he would be diagnosed as psychotic and locked up for the safety of both his sons.

Oh, I gotcha.

everyone who believes in religion are idiots. i agree with the person who asked the question about the languages. and what made god? i'm sure there are lots of questions about how the earth and the galaxies are here but do we need to make something up? its stupid really and i don't care what anyone has to say because this is my perspective and i have a right as a citizen to express my feelings. as for the who made god question, don't respond saying "god" made him because i do not want to hear that. anyone who can answer me this question with PROOF i will believe in god.
P.S---> THE BIBLE IS NOT PROOF TO ME. MEN WROTE THAT BOOK, NOT "GOD".

lalokakatracha,

If you want to discuss the truth of religious belief that is one thing. If you want to contend that religion shoulod not be believed. That does not give you free reign to call people who do believe in religion idiots. Such language amounts to an ad hominem attack and isn't worthy of an adult poster.

What makes your calling other people idiots even worse is the fact that you aren't even capable of using correct grammar when posting it.

I asked this question once to an orthodox rabbi. He was quite sure that the language of God was Hebrew, in Genesis, before Genesis, today and throughout the rest of time. According to him, Hebrew is the language of God handed down by God to communicate with Him.

I didn't pursue it any further than that as I wasn't looking to start a fight.

lalokakatracha, If you want to discuss the truth of religious belief that is one thing. If you want to contend that religion shoulod not be believed. That does not give you free reign to call people who do believe in religion idiots. Such language amounts to an ad hominem attack and isn't worthy of an adult poster. What makes your calling other people idiots even worse is the fact that you aren't even capable of using correct grammar when posting it.I have responded to your criticism in a PM. I urge members to avoid inflammatory language on this board (as well as obscene language) because it draws an international group and such things could be easily misinterpreted. Notwithstanding that, I have made my position clear as a Moderator that fundamentalist religion stands in opposition to science because of its flouting of empirical observation, rational deduction, and the concept of the natural universe as a closed system--basic components of the scientific method--as tools for understanding and predicting the behavior of the universe. Therefore to insult the class of people who believe in it is not a violation of the rules but rather an expression of camaraderie within the scientific community. Not to mention a signpost warning those people to go clutter up the other gazillion websites on the planet and let the scientists, future scientists, and people who want to learn or discuss science have this one to ourselves.

I would like people not to call each other idiots on this board, and if you had left it up to me I probably would have edited that post--grammar and all--just as I quietly edit posts with incorrect etymologies, poor punctuation, and other types of errors of style and substance.

However, since you chose to make an example of it, I'm perfectly happy to let it backfire on you.

The question, "What language did god speak?" can only be taken in a metaphorical or allegorical sense. Since the people who adapted the Sumerian legends into the scriptures of Judaism believed that the Earth is considerably older than the origin of the Hebrews and their language, a reasonable answer is that this imaginary creature spoke Akkadian, the language of the region in which the ancestors of the Jews lived. To believe that the question can be asked and answered literally is not merely unscientific but antiscientific, and I would have deleted the thread as a textbook case of trolling. The only places where science can be flouted on SciForums are the Religion and Crackpottery subforums.

Fraggle Rocker,

You may know science but you seem to have a bit of a problem with reading comprehension. Had the comment refered to believers in religion that would be one thing but this is what was actually said, "everyone who believes in religion are idiots." Notice, not everyone who believes in fundamentalist religion is an idiot but everyone who believes in religion is an idiot.

I believe in religion but I also believe in science. I do not believe in a fundamentalist religion but in a religion that accepts the existence of God and accepts the laws of the natural world. I don't believe the world was created in seven twenty four hour days, that Adam named every animal in the world, or that Eve fed Adam and apple. I believe that the world is not the result of random occurences but that there is/was a prime causer, a great architect of the universe. I also believe that God works through the science of the natural world The two beliefs are not mutually exclusive.

I have no idea what language God spoke and it really is not that important to me but if it was I would agree that it would most likely be Akkadian or some proto-Semitic language. The same with the language Adam and Eve spoke, if indeed Adam and Eve existed as two distinct individuals. If the Garden of Eden was an actual geographic place it probably existed in either southern Iraq, Kuwait or Dubai.

You'd have to talk to the Samaritans, whom have kept via oral tradition(and a few really bloody old texts) a great many ancient words, they think have power. Including...supposedly the real(original) pronunciation of YHWH.

Had the comment refered to believers in religion that would be one thing but this is what was actually said, "everyone who believes in religion are idiots." Notice, not everyone who believes in fundamentalist religion is an idiot but everyone who believes in religion is an idiot.I appreciate your respectful response. In context, I found the only reasonable interpretation of the statement was a reference to people who would ask the question, "What language did god speak?" seriously. Not a reference to all people who consider themselves religious. I understand that you interpreted it differently.

Nonetheless, the definition of "religion" includes belief in a supernatural universe. This is at best unscientific and at worst antiscientific, since science defines the natural universe as a closed system. I stand on the principle that since this is a place of science, we have a right and perhaps an obligation to be hostile to religion.

And I realize that this may appear to be going off topic, but it is about the definition of some important words.

* * * * MODERATOR'S NOTE * * * *

I continue to receive reports on this thread. This is how my policy applies to it:The OP could not help but open this to a discussion of religion, so such a discussion is not "off topic." "Religion" by any standard definition includes belief in supernatural creatures who exert control over our lives and the entire natural universe, which violates the principles of science. Religion is therefore unscientific, and posting unscientific remarks on a science website, except in a philosophical discussion of the validity of science, is trolling. Therefore we are under no obligation to treat religion with respect. Nonetheless I would prefer it if we did not call each other "idiots." I am not going to infract or ban anybody over this but I will continue to edit posts imperiously.

He probably talked baby talk.

Fraggle Rock,

You seem to think that scientists have to be antagonistic toward religion. I disagree. Throughout history there have been people who were scientists and religious. While technically not a scientist I do have a degree in biology and I am religious. I personally know two people rather well known in the scientific field, one deceased and the other still living who are/were religious, one Jewish and one Roman Catholic.

Science and religion are not mutually exclusive and there need not be the antagonism between the two that is exhibited by many people. Religious people have no need to fear or hate science and scientists have no need to fear or hate religion.

In my opinion only small minded people feel a need to attack beliefs they do not share. Those who are secure in their own beliefs feel no such need.

it's just like the question I like to ask people because it confuses them a bit. How do babies think? The language is so much more powerful then most people think. It not only allows communication of thoughts, feelings, and ideas between humans, but between oneself. If you have no language, you can't think, you can only react with primal instincts.

It is very difficult to comprehend what it would be like without language, but it is altogether not simply primal instinct. Babies think in terms of photographs; in other words, action + action = effect. Babies can learn very rapidly.

As far as the language of God? That is a rhetorical question, no one knows, no one ever will.

God would not have spoken any language, he'd have directly thought the words into peoples minds.

the bible said his voice boomed out...

well i guess most christians would say he spoke in tongues? y'know that random thing where they basically have an oral breakdown

well i guess most christians would say he spoke in tongues? y'know that random thing where they basically have an oral breakdown"Speaking in tongues" is called glossolalia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_in_tongues). It is only an important feature in the Pentecostal and Charismatic branches of Christianty.

"Speaking in tongues" is called glossolalia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_in_tongues). It is only an important feature in the Pentecostal and Charismatic branches of Christianty.

its bullshit is what it is.

When I was young (years ago) living in Southern, West Virgina the local paper printed a report of the discussion at an open school board meeting, which had been called to get the commuinty's view about hiring a foreign language teacher. (One for both French and Spanish, as I recall.) One old farmer was against that "needless expense." He, holding up his bible said: "If English was good enough for Jessus Christ, that's all our kids need."

its bullshit is what it is.Well fine, but the point is that it's not "bullshit" that "most Christians" believe in:well i guess most christians would say he spoke in tongues?Just Pentecostal and Charismatic congregations. Not Catholics, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc.

One old farmer was against that "needless expense." He, holding up his bible said: "If English was good enough for Jessus Christ, that's all our kids need."
:p Good one!

If they heard voices in their heads, as Abraham did, they were probably speaking Akkadian.

They were speaking "schizo". ;)

- N