In the Name of God

1. In today's religious context, the word 'Allah' is a word loaded with Islamic theology. The God of the Christian Bible Yahweh-Elohim from Genesis to Revelation is a trinitarian mono God. IT is not a creation of the Church but it is a inspired revelation. Its maths is hard to understand but it is the heart of John 3: 16 and Jesus' life will be nonsensical as much as His sacrifice for sinful and doomed humanity if the second person of the Trinity did not incarnate in the human flesh. The Christian Gospel is based on this redemptive revelation of the triune Godhead. The Quranic concept of 'Allah' is in total opposition to this. There is NO similarity between them whatsoever.

2. The early 'Christian missionaries', mostly Roman Catholics erred when they started to Christianize pagan words (jargon/terminology), concepts, icons, statues (Mother and child), festivals and celebrations (like Christmas/Easter) and included them as Christian so the 'converts' from the Christianized societies are not brought into a cultural vacuum. Therefore the word `Allah' that pre-dates Islam, a word that was and is a non Hebrew word for a pagan deity was Christianized and retained among the middle Eastern converts and used in the Bible translation. This syncretism was followed in Asia with the use of the word, Allah among minority ethnic 'converts'. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

3. The word 'Allah' is a transliteration of the Arabic word. Why would a Christian missionary/translator use an Arabic word to represent a Hebrew God of the Bible? It is due to the syncretistic attitude as mentioned above. To be true, the translators and 'Christian missionaries' at that time ought to have transliterated the Hebrew word, 'Jehovah' for `Lord' and 'Elohim' for 'God' in the available script of each ethnic group of converts and not the word 'Allah'. Why use the pre-Islamic Arabic word 'Allah' for the Biblical God written in Hebrew the language of the Old Testament? After all 'the people of the Book', the Jews were worshipping Jehovah-Elohim 500 years before Mohammed. No matter how it is insisted, it is a betrayal of the the God of the Bible. Words do not exist in a vacuum and they are loaded with implications. When we import from the Quran a word that is alien to the Hebrew Bible, we also import its foreign teachings.

4. Bible translations are the efforts of humans and in this digital age correction can be made easily to remove the word 'Allah' and replace it with `Jehovah' and `Elohim' or close to its sound in any ethnic laguage. Christians who have used the Islamic word, 'Allah' must be told of its implications and the error made earlier and enlighten them as to why we need to change. Education is the enlightening of people from ignorance to knowledge as new information avails as it is realized or discovered. Most who claim to be Christians are untaught of the Biblical truths. Most are adherents to the rites and form without a clue to its theological basis to their faith. So, like any other education, evangelical teacher/pastors need to educate the dill and the bright. New Bible translation with 'Allah' removed ought to be phased in with education. The use of any word depicting/portraying the God of the Bible should be in keeping with the Hebrew jargon and etymology. Words may have common roots in a locality but they are not to be thought as one and the same. Hebrew script and language is vastly different from the Arabic.

5. The present controversy over the use of the word in the Christian context has a political agenda both sides are guilty of. The so called fear of the erosion of Christian rights and its domino effect if unchallenged is to the detriment of the Christian faith. The rights of minorities must be challenged in Courts as a political matter. Christian theology should not have been used as a means to that. The Roman Catholic Church in my opinion made an unwise move plunging the country to this sad polarisation of people.

6. If I were a Muslim I would welcome the Christians to use the word 'Allah' for it plays into the Islamic faith. Well, if the Christian God is also Allah, then the Christian is none other than a wayward Muslim for that is the God of the Quran. In time when the lines are blurred and ignorance of the biblical doctrines blooms to bliss, Islam will be a tempting option for a nominal 'Christian'. The use of the word 'Allah' then is the Islamization of the Christian. (Note - on this part definitely Muslims have their own reasons on why they are against it)

7. Finally, I speak as an evangelical Christian, believing the Bible as THE Word of God, uncorrupted and the final word to humanity. It is Jesus who said that 'He is the way and the truth and the Life. No man comes unto the Father (God) but by me' (John 14: 6). Jesus affirmed and confirmed the Hebrew Bible and never once used the Arabic word, 'Allah', referring to His Father (Jehovah-Elohim). So Christians who take the Bible as God's Word should not use the word 'Allah' to refer to the Hebrew God of the Bible.

Pastor Brutus Balan
Baptist Church, Australia.

Baca lagi:
* Translating God: Specialness and insecurity
* Kalau dieja ‘Alaha’, bagaimana?

----------------------------------------
Nota: Saya tidak pasti jika nama penulis yang tertulis di bawah artikel ini adalah seperti yang didakwa, tetapi bacalah hujah-hujahya. Saya kira, inilah juga pendirian banyak orang yang melihat dengan dua mata tentang kontroversi penggunaan kalimah Allah oleh gereja Katolik Malaysia. Ia merupakan komen terhadap artikel berjudul “Allah” is a Colonial Scheming’ di sini.