06-11-2011, 02:25 AM
Akhan Jerry. Those are not the roots. BR is not the root of son, it's the construct. MY is not the root of water, thats MYA. You apparently don't want to have this discussion, that's fine just say so in the beginning instead of wasting my time.
You can hold to whatever theology or argument you'd like but I'm not going to allow you to bend grammatical rules to suit your theory.
You refuse to give me another example of a noun root that is modified with a Yodh to form the emphatic. Instead you keep bringing up that MRA is somehow unique when it's no different from any other noun.
Until you come up with another example where a Yodh is used to form the Emphatic from a noun please don't waste my time.
MRYA is not the Emphatic of lord. If it were, you would notice it used frequently outside of scripture and in secular usage. Even in pagan usage, but you don't.
+Shamasha
You can hold to whatever theology or argument you'd like but I'm not going to allow you to bend grammatical rules to suit your theory.
You refuse to give me another example of a noun root that is modified with a Yodh to form the emphatic. Instead you keep bringing up that MRA is somehow unique when it's no different from any other noun.
Until you come up with another example where a Yodh is used to form the Emphatic from a noun please don't waste my time.
MRYA is not the Emphatic of lord. If it were, you would notice it used frequently outside of scripture and in secular usage. Even in pagan usage, but you don't.
+Shamasha