Announcement

Collapse

Comparative Religions 101 Guidelines

Welcome to Comp Religions, this is where the sights and sounds of the many world religions come together in a big World's Fair type atmosphere, without those delicious funnel cakes.

World Religions is a theist only type place, but that does not exclude certain religionists who practice non-theistic faiths ala Buddhism. If you are not sure, ask a moderator.

This is not a place where we argue the existence / non-existence of God.

And as usual, the forum rules apply.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Malaysian Christians permitted to call God "Allah"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post

    "Allah" sounds like you are talking about the Muslim God. Which is confusing. Since they are using a foreign word for God instead of their own native word, then why not use a word that is not confusing? Like "God" or even "Yahweh" or "the LORD?"
    ...that is a good question....

    Before "Western" Christianity expanded Eastwards..."Eastern" Christianity (and Judaism) had used the trade routes to expand eastwards...but this expansion was limited. When these Christian scholars attempted to translate the Bible, they tried to find the most appropriate concept-word for God in that language---for example in Chinese this was "Tao" (initially)....
    ...By the time Islam came on the scene--- 2 important factors---trade winds and mass production of paper/books....made its expansion very rapid......so it spread to China, the Subcontinent , South East Asia and Australia. ---In some cases, before Christianity appeared.
    It came to Malaysia early through trade and was established by the 12th Century with the conversion of one of the Kings (Pra Ong Mahawangsa).. so "Allah" as a concept-word for God in Malay was likely well in use before Christianity came on the scene. That is probably why the Arabic "Allah" was used in translations as the most appropriate word.....

    Comment


    • #17
      Allah is the Arabic cognate of 'El and simply means " [The] God."
      "Obama is not a brown-skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You are thinking of Jesus." Episcopal Bishop of Arizona

      I remember WinAce. Gone but not forgotten.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by siam View Post

        ...that is a good question....

        Before "Western" Christianity expanded Eastwards..."Eastern" Christianity (and Judaism) had used the trade routes to expand eastwards...but this expansion was limited. When these Christian scholars attempted to translate the Bible, they tried to find the most appropriate concept-word for God in that language---for example in Chinese this was "Tao" (initially)....
        ...By the time Islam came on the scene--- 2 important factors---trade winds and mass production of paper/books....made its expansion very rapid......so it spread to China, the Subcontinent , South East Asia and Australia. ---In some cases, before Christianity appeared.
        It came to Malaysia early through trade and was established by the 12th Century with the conversion of one of the Kings (Pra Ong Mahawangsa).. so "Allah" as a concept-word for God in Malay was likely well in use before Christianity came on the scene. That is probably why the Arabic "Allah" was used in translations as the most appropriate word.....
        OK, that makes sense. Basically you are saying Islam was already there when Christianity came on the scene, so they just adopted the current word for God when they preached the gospel and converted people to Christianity. Kinda like Paul used the statue to the "unknown God" to preach to the Greeks.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by kiwimac View Post
          Allah is the Arabic cognate of 'El and simply means " [The] God."
          Yeah we all get that. I was just curious why they would be using Arabic when their native language is Malay, Siam explained it well.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
            Yeah we all get that. I was just curious why they would be using Arabic when their native language is Malay, Siam explained it well.
            Appears to be largely confirmed by a report from the BBC

            Source: Malaysia court rules non-Muslims cannot use 'Allah'


            A Malaysian court has ruled that non-Muslims cannot use the word Allah to refer to God, even in their own faiths, overturning a 2009 lower court ruling.

            The appeals court said the term Allah must be exclusive to Islam or it could cause public disorder.

            People of all faiths use the word Allah in Malay to refer to their Gods.

            Christians argue they have used the word, which entered Malay from Arabic, to refer to their God for centuries and that the ruling violates their rights.

            One Malaysian Christian woman said the ruling would affect the community greatly.

            "If we are prohibited from using the word Allah then we have to re-translate the whole Bible, if it comes to that," Ester Moiji from Sabah state told the BBC.

            ...

            The newspaper's supporters have argued that Malay-language Bibles have used Allah to refer to the Christian God since before Malaysia was formed as a federal state in 1963.

            "Allah is a term in the Middle East and in Indonesia it is a term both for Christians and Muslims. You cannot say that in all of the sudden it is not an integral part. Malay language is a language that has many borrowed words, Allah also is a borrowed word."

            However, some Muslim groups have said that the Christian use of the word Allah could be used to encourage Muslims to convert to Christianity.

            "Allah is not a Malay word. If they [non-Muslims] say they want to use a Malay word they should use Tuhan instead of Allah," Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, a lawyer representing the government, told the BBC.




            Source

            © Copyright Original Source



            [*The rest of the article can be seen at the link provided above*]

            In virtually every article I've read that is more than just a few short paragraphs long, every one brings up Muslims worrying that it cause Muslims to convert to Christianity. Since it has been used universally for "god" including "God" for centuries now, if this were an issue we should have a long record of it.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post

              OK, that makes sense. Basically you are saying Islam was already there when Christianity came on the scene, so they just adopted the current word for God when they preached the gospel and converted people to Christianity. Kinda like Paul used the statue to the "unknown God" to preach to the Greeks.
              yes...."Western" Christianity (Catholic and Protestant) expanded eastwards during the (European) colonizing period (age of exploration) which made their historical timeline later.

              Comment


              • #22


                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                In virtually every article I've read that is more than just a few short paragraphs long, every one brings up Muslims worrying that it cause Muslims to convert to Christianity. Since it has been used universally for "god" including "God" for centuries now, if this were an issue we should have a long record of it.
                Yes....what should have been a no-brainer---Christians using Allah---instead suddenly turned into a controversy....why?

                IMO....
                there are 3 background factors that may have contributed....
                1) Wahabism/Salafism
                Islam can be broadly categorized into 3 types...a) Sufi, b) mainstream, c) Purists....
                ---Sufi are generally more predisposed to degrees of perennialism which makes it particularly adaptable form of religio-philosophy...and these were the type of Muslim scholars that initially came to the East.
                ---Purists are generally more disposed towards parochialism/identity-formation and the 2 building blocks for this are a) in-group vs out-group (Muslim vs Non-Muslim) and Good vs Bad (Good Muslim (us) vs Bad Muslim (the rest))
                The Afghan wars were a particularly good environment for this type of strong group-based ideas to flourish. Since Muslims have to go to the Hajj pilgrimage at least once in their lifetime-- ideas inevitably traveled out...
                coupled with "petro-dollars" the Saudis spread their influence through scholarship programs and Salafism/Wahabism began to rise in the East....

                2) Economics/politics
                The largest group of Muslims are what one would classify/type as mainstream---and generally are too busy with their own lives to bother about the affairs of other groups....so "Purists" ideas would not have had much traction except for the unfortunate circumstance of economics.....To put this in context---"Malaysia" (Federation of Malaya) was formed in 1963. Previously, it had been colonized and as with all colonial structures, its economy was based on exploitation. Therefore new policies of "social re-engineering" were adopted to help balance the economic situation The goal of this policy was laudable in that it wanted to "redistribute" wealth without reducing existing wealth. But this meant it needed to identify the various target peoples/citizens---and the term "Bumiputra" became a convenient identity-marker. It also played into the structures of (political) democracy since a democracy requires a "majority". A clearly defined (artificially conceived) "majority" is politically convenient in multiethnic/multi-religious, multi-historical geographical areas of the East.
                however, strong identity-markers inevitably lead to social tensions.....

                3) Unethical Christian proselytizing practices
                Perhaps as Western Churches/Missions became wealthier---they became more aggressive in their mission activities prioritizing numbers at the expense of religio-philosophy. (The respective mission organizations have since addressed such problems)
                In any case, there were reports of missionaries misusing Christian publications (such as newsletters) pretending these were "Islamic" to gain attention and attendance....which became a convenient flashpoint to exacerbate existing social tensions by the "Purists" ---this is all happening in an environment of the "global war on terror" and Islamophobia......
                Last edited by siam; 03-19-2021, 12:30 AM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by siam View Post




                  In any case, there were reports of missionaries misusing Christian publications (such as newsletters) pretending these were "Islamic" to gain attention and attendance....which became a convenient flashpoint to exacerbate existing social tensions by the "Purists" ---this is all happening in an environment of the "global war on terror" and Islamophobia......
                  Has anyone ever produced any of these publications or are they merely at the level of rumor?

                  And I'll just note that studies consistently show that Christianity is the most persecuted religion, with much of it coming from those whining about Islamophobia.

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I looked into this some years ago...which is why I have not provided links....I could look up the specific incident again...if I find it, I will give links.....It is possible that the Herald ---which is a Christian newsletter---got embroiled in this...but as I recall---Catholics were not the mission group involved....(?)
                    Around this time---unethical Christian missions were a problem all over the East, not just Malaysia---and many different unethical practices were used---Christians of the regions were also concerned as such practices undermined Christianity itself as well as the reputation and trust of existing Christian communities.....
                    I don't recall the details...but some conference was held by Christian mission organizations to tackle these problems and some announcement/statement issued.....

                    In countries where both Christianity and Islam are minorities...both can be harassed and/or discriminated...such issues are not black/white. Even in Muslim-majority countries---non-wahabi Muslims can be harassed by the louder, more vocal wahabi/salafi groups.
                    There is a choice---one way is to live in communities isolated by intolerance and prejudice, the other is to live in communities that interreact and share in tolerance and respect.

                    Comment


                    • #25

                      Just WHAT "unethical practice" or use of the generic word "Allah" were used by Christians - missions or otherwise, in Malaysia?

                      I reside in this region of southeast Asia and am more familiar of this situation than you are, siam.

                      Since WHEN did Christian missions here become "unethical" - is it only ethical when you do da'awa / dakwah or islamic missions outreach and convert the non-muslims, right??

                      The use of Allah as the general and generic word for God in the Bahasa (ie. Malay) Bible, the Al-Kitab is for use BY CHRISTIANS of the states Sabah of Sarawak. The Malaysian Constitution provides for all religionists in the country the freedom to practice and propogate their religions. It also forbids the interference in the affairs by the government and other religionists in the religious affairs of other religions.

                      So, just WHAT right do the muslims of malaysia or anywhere else have to forbid & prohibit the use of the word "Allah" by the Christians in Malaysia? Now, THAT WOULD BE THE REAL UNETHICAL action -unwarranted interference by muslims into the religious and administrative affairs of the Malaysian Christians. East Malaysian Christians have ALWAYS used the Bahasa language Bible with "ALLAH" in it for over 200 years - even before independence and confederation with peninsula Malaya. Their native languages in Iban, Bidayuh, Lun Bawang, Dusun etcetera ALL use the word ALLAH in their services, worship and Christian Scriptures.

                      I disagree that Christian and muslims are equally persecuted and discriminated against. It is always the Christians that are inordinately oppressed, persecuted, attacked and bullied by muslims, regardless if they were the minority or majority, Christians in muslim majority societies always tend to get the unjust short end of the stick, invariably.

                      In Sarawak state of east Malaysia, the Christians OUTNUMBER muslims in that state and these christians have the right to read ALLAH for God in their Bahasa Alkitab or Bible, that was what the Jill Ireland court case was all about, THIRTEEN years ago. It is the muslim dominated peninsula government across the sea, that wants to harrass, opress these Christians of their rights in a muslim minority state.

                      Who is unethical and unjust here? Clearly the muslims who seek to exert their dominance, as usual and obviously!







                      Originally posted by siam View Post
                      I looked into this some years ago...which is why I have not provided links....I could look up the specific incident again...if I find it, I will give links.....It is possible that the Herald ---which is a Christian newsletter---got embroiled in this...but as I recall---Catholics were not the mission group involved....(?)
                      Around this time---unethical Christian missions were a problem all over the East, not just Malaysia---and many different unethical practices were used---Christians of the regions were also concerned as such practices undermined Christianity itself as well as the reputation and trust of existing Christian communities.....
                      I don't recall the details...but some conference was held by Christian mission organizations to tackle these problems and some announcement/statement issued.....

                      In countries where both Christianity and Islam are minorities...both can be harassed and/or discriminated...such issues are not black/white. Even in Muslim-majority countries---non-wahabi Muslims can be harassed by the louder, more vocal wahabi/salafi groups.
                      There is a choice---one way is to live in communities isolated by intolerance and prejudice, the other is to live in communities that interreact and share in tolerance and respect.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                        Just WHAT "unethical practice" or use of the generic word "Allah" were used by Christians - missions or otherwise, in Malaysia?

                        I reside in this region of southeast Asia and am more familiar of this situation than you are, siam.

                        Since WHEN did Christian missions here become "unethical" - is it only ethical when you do da'awa / dakwah or islamic missions outreach and convert the non-muslims, right??

                        The use of Allah as the general and generic word for God in the Bahasa (ie. Malay) Bible, the Al-Kitab is for use BY CHRISTIANS of the states Sabah of Sarawak. The Malaysian Constitution provides for all religionists in the country the freedom to practice and propogate their religions. It also forbids the interference in the affairs by the government and other religionists in the religious affairs of other religions.

                        So, just WHAT right do the muslims of malaysia or anywhere else have to forbid & prohibit the use of the word "Allah" by the Christians in Malaysia? Now, THAT WOULD BE THE REAL UNETHICAL action -unwarranted interference by muslims into the religious and administrative affairs of the Malaysian Christians. East Malaysian Christians have ALWAYS used the Bahasa language Bible with "ALLAH" in it for over 200 years - even before independence and confederation with peninsula Malaya. Their native languages in Iban, Bidayuh, Lun Bawang, Dusun etcetera ALL use the word ALLAH in their services, worship and Christian Scriptures.

                        I disagree that Christian and muslims are equally persecuted and discriminated against. It is always the Christians that are inordinately oppressed, persecuted, attacked and bullied by muslims, regardless if they were the minority or majority, Christians in muslim majority societies always tend to get the unjust short end of the stick, invariably.

                        In Sarawak state of east Malaysia, the Christians OUTNUMBER muslims in that state and these christians have the right to read ALLAH for God in their Bahasa Alkitab or Bible, that was what the Jill Ireland court case was all about, THIRTEEN years ago. It is the muslim dominated peninsula government across the sea, that wants to harrass, opress these Christians of their rights in a muslim minority state.

                        Who is unethical and unjust here? Clearly the muslims who seek to exert their dominance, as usual and obviously!
                        It seems odd that when Muslims seek to convert Christians that's all fine and well, but when the shoe is on the other foot it is "unethical." FWICT, this was never a problem for hundreds of years right up until the Wahhabis started to gain influence in the area and began stirring up trouble.

                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          It seems odd that when Muslims seek to convert Christians that's all fine and well, but when the shoe is on the other foot it is "unethical." FWICT, this was never a problem for hundreds of years right up until the Wahhabis started to gain influence in the area and began stirring up trouble.
                          Deception is wrong and conversion by deception is not a great way to introduce Christianity....I would hope even Christians can agree to that?.....

                          Deception is also wrong when done by Muslims to other Muslims and there was a case when a Christian governor of Indonesia used a Quran phrase (correctly) but the Purists claimed it was incorrect and the governor was put on trial ....
                          https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...atives/8412596

                          These "Purists" may be equivalent to what in the west might be called "right-wing" populists----that is, because they are loud and vocal---it is easier to win elections---but their paradigm is not compatible with multivariant societies found in the East.....
                          ...also, ---extreme social tensions are bad for commerce/capitalism---for this region to prosper---and for its citizens to prosper---social tensions need to be managed. This mean it is necessary and pragmatic to get back to the more pluralistic vision/paradigm of the traditional Islam of the region......

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            It seems odd that when Muslims seek to convert Christians that's all fine and well, but when the shoe is on the other foot it is "unethical." FWICT, this was never a problem for hundreds of years right up until the Wahhabis started to gain influence in the area and began stirring up trouble.
                            And like there are Mosques in Israel - even Jerusalem - but many Islamic territories don't allow Christian Churches.

                            Why do they not allow churches to be built in Muslim countries when we allow mosques to built in the West?

                            There are many Churches in present day Muslim countries e.g. Egypt, Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia. This is in line with the freedom of religion given in Islam.

                            However it is right to note that some countries have gone against this Islamic injunction and prohibited collective worship by non-Muslims. This is wrong and completely unacceptable. Never did the Prophet Muhammad(sa) forbid the building of a church, nor did he order the demolition of a church. In fact the Holy Qur’an mentions that we Muslims are to defend Churches, and synagogues if they are attacked,
                            Those who have been driven out from their homes unjustly only because they said, ‘Our Lord is Allah’ – And if Allah did not repel some men by means of others, there would surely have been pulled down cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques, wherein the name of Allah is oft-commemorated. And Allah will surely help one who helps Him. Allah is indeed Powerful, Mighty. (Holy Qur’an, Ch.22:V.41)


                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
                              ....

                              I disagree that Christian and muslims are equally persecuted and discriminated against. It is always the Christians that are inordinately oppressed, persecuted, attacked and bullied by muslims, regardless if they were the minority or majority, Christians in muslim majority societies always tend to get the unjust short end of the stick, invariably.

                              ....

                              ...Clearly the muslims who seek to exert their dominance, as usual and obviously!
                              A minority experience of prejudice/discrimination should be taken seriously in any society. It is unfortunate that such calls to a more just society are ignored/dismissed....this also includes hate-crimes/islamophobia occurring in the West.....

                              ideas of "Supremacy" of any kind is toxic---Islamic supremacy, Christian supremacy, Secular supremacy or White supremacy...they are all harmful for humanity and society.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by siam View Post

                                Deception is wrong and conversion by deception is not a great way to introduce Christianity....I would hope even Christians can agree to that?.....

                                Deception is also wrong when done by Muslims to other Muslims and there was a case when a Christian governor of Indonesia used a Quran phrase (correctly) but the Purists claimed it was incorrect and the governor was put on trial ....
                                https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-...atives/8412596

                                These "Purists" may be equivalent to what in the west might be called "right-wing" populists----that is, because they are loud and vocal---it is easier to win elections---but their paradigm is not compatible with multivariant societies found in the East.....
                                ...also, ---extreme social tensions are bad for commerce/capitalism---for this region to prosper---and for its citizens to prosper---social tensions need to be managed. This mean it is necessary and pragmatic to get back to the more pluralistic vision/paradigm of the traditional Islam of the region......
                                Kind of ironic coming from someone who follows a faith that thinks holding a sword up to someone else's throat and forcing conversion is not only fine and dandy but a requirement.

                                From what I've seen there has been no "deception." It was only until after the Wahhabis infiltrated the region that they declared it was now deceitful for Christians to refer to God as "Allah" -- something they had been doing for several centuries without any problems.

                                IOW, the deception claim is nothing but a ruse and an excuse.

                                I'm always still in trouble again

                                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X