"God", is an Anglo-Germanic corruption of the Old High German word 'gott', which simply means 'good', and is used [incorrectly] generically to represent a deity or deities.
The word, 'good', is an adjective.
Full Definition of ADJECTIVE
: a word belonging to one of the major form classes in any of numerous languages and typically serving as a modifier of a noun to denote a quality of the thing named, to indicate its quantity or extent, or to specify a thing as distinct from something else
Full Definition of NOUN
: any member of a class of words that typically can be combined with determiners to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept
A 'deity', is a noun; a 'good' is not.
Therefore: A deity or deities might exist, but a good or goods could never exist.
Anyone who professes that a good is perfect, is a fool.
'God' is a noun used to refer to a supreme being or deity.
Language evolves and changes.
The meaning of words can differ from that of their etymological ancestors.
The words 'god' and 'good' differ in spelling, pronunciation and meaning.
You're a noun.
Goods exist in warehouses and depots.
These were built by God for the storage of himself, his family and his belongings, which are insured for acts of good.
It doesn't matter when the blunder occurred, what matters is that whoever coined this term, for this usage, was in error.
They were probably referring to a 'good deity', or 'good deities'.
The problem is, that this has led to a situation where many people do not understand who / what this good deity was (these good deities were), and / or are reluctant or unwilling to discuss or elaborate on the specifics, character, traits, etc. of this.
There is no such thing a a 'good' or 'goods'. There is 'merchandise', are 'commodities' and 'wares', etc.
It's not a blunder. God the good deity organised the evolution of language just like that of plants, animals and dance.
The words 'god' and 'good' are unrelated.
I thought that Archaic Divided People didn't believe in 'evolution'. If they do, then this would mean that their so-called good book (which is, in reality, very, very corrupt)is incorrect. This would then mean that this so-called good deity is fallible. How good is a fallible deity?
Please back up your statement that,"The words 'god' and 'good' are unrelated" with proof that they actually are unrelated, instead of stating this as a simple conclusion (in your own mind).
Please back up your argument with proof that the words 'god' and 'good' actually are related, instead of stating this as an incorrect etymological fact.
The following pages claim the words have unrelated origins:
A fallible deity makes a no good god. Some interpret the good book allegorically, which leaves room for an understanding of the evolution of language, animals and dance. The rest limit their rejection of evolution to the biological only. They do believe in cultural and linguistic evolution. They prefer to call it 'change'.
Not to be at all argumentative, but how old a language is Old High German?
I'd have my doubts that was an extant language before the middle ages, but I do not know for sure.
Obviously, man has had a word for god in whatever language, before Old High German, so your discussion is slightly flawed, not that I disagree with the idea that god does not exist.
However goods is indeed a noun, in English. As in "goods" and services, and trade "goods", baked goods, etc.
A question for creationists
← View full post
None of the above.
"God", is not a person, place or thing.
"God", is an Anglo-Germanic corruption of the Old High German word 'gott', which simply means 'good', and is used [incorrectly] generically to represent a deity or deities.
The word, 'good', is an adjective.
Full Definition of ADJECTIVE
: a word belonging to one of the major form classes in any of numerous languages and typically serving as a modifier of a noun to denote a quality of the thing named, to indicate its quantity or extent, or to specify a thing as distinct from something else
Full Definition of NOUN
: any member of a class of words that typically can be combined with determiners to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept
A 'deity', is a noun; a 'good' is not.
Therefore: A deity or deities might exist, but a good or goods could never exist.
Anyone who professes that a good is perfect, is a fool.
--
jeebley
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
4
4
-
thegypsysailor
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You're an infinite regression.
'God' is a noun used to refer to a supreme being or deity.
Language evolves and changes.
The meaning of words can differ from that of their etymological ancestors.
The words 'god' and 'good' differ in spelling, pronunciation and meaning.
You're a noun.
Goods exist in warehouses and depots.
These were built by God for the storage of himself, his family and his belongings, which are insured for acts of good.
You're a warehouse.
--
suckonthis9
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It doesn't matter when the blunder occurred, what matters is that whoever coined this term, for this usage, was in error.
They were probably referring to a 'good deity', or 'good deities'.
The problem is, that this has led to a situation where many people do not understand who / what this good deity was (these good deities were), and / or are reluctant or unwilling to discuss or elaborate on the specifics, character, traits, etc. of this.
There is no such thing a a 'good' or 'goods'. There is 'merchandise', are 'commodities' and 'wares', etc.
--
suckonthis9
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Incorrect. I am not a 'warehouse'. A warehouse is a structure or room. I am a person.
--
jeebley
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
4
4
It's not a blunder. God the good deity organised the evolution of language just like that of plants, animals and dance.
The words 'god' and 'good' are unrelated.
Johnny B.
You are a blunder.
--
suckonthis9
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I thought that Archaic Divided People didn't believe in 'evolution'. If they do, then this would mean that their so-called good book (which is, in reality, very, very corrupt)is incorrect. This would then mean that this so-called good deity is fallible. How good is a fallible deity?
Please back up your statement that,"The words 'god' and 'good' are unrelated" with proof that they actually are unrelated, instead of stating this as a simple conclusion (in your own mind).
--
jeebley
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Please back up your argument with proof that the words 'god' and 'good' actually are related, instead of stating this as an incorrect etymological fact.
The following pages claim the words have unrelated origins:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/god
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=god
And this article:
http://blog.oup.com/2009/11/good-god-and-etymology/
Please provide proof to the contrary.
A fallible deity makes a no good god. Some interpret the good book allegorically, which leaves room for an understanding of the evolution of language, animals and dance. The rest limit their rejection of evolution to the biological only. They do believe in cultural and linguistic evolution. They prefer to call it 'change'.
You're an archaic divided people.
Not to be at all argumentative, but how old a language is Old High German?
I'd have my doubts that was an extant language before the middle ages, but I do not know for sure.
Obviously, man has had a word for god in whatever language, before Old High German, so your discussion is slightly flawed, not that I disagree with the idea that god does not exist.
However goods is indeed a noun, in English. As in "goods" and services, and trade "goods", baked goods, etc.