V
Vonier
Guest
Perception is everything. I would think some Muslims would think it was silly and would feel pandered to, and some would like the appearance, at least, of submission and ask for more.
- Status
P
PoliSciProf
Guest
It is being reported that Bishop Muskens of the Breda diocese in the Netherlands has said we should call God Allah since God doesn’t care what He is called and that it would foster understanding with the Muslim community. Furthermore, he states that priests in the Netherlands have been using Allah in the Mass for quite a while.
This strikes me as foolish and naive and theologically suspect. It is foolish and naive since it will have no impact on Islamic radicals and probably not even on moderates. Should we then call churches mosquesin the same spirit? And, I am not sure Allah is the same as the Christian God especially since they deny the divinity of Christ. All monotheisms are not necessarily the same.
Comments on this from CA?
This strikes me as foolish and naive and theologically suspect. It is foolish and naive since it will have no impact on Islamic radicals and probably not even on moderates. Should we then call churches mosquesin the same spirit? And, I am not sure Allah is the same as the Christian God especially since they deny the divinity of Christ. All monotheisms are not necessarily the same.
Comments on this from CA?
A
AJV
Guest
P
Pax
Guest
It sounds like the idea being put forward is a bit goofy. Allah is simply the Arabic word for God. Deus is the word for God in Latin. We could go from language to language to get the translation and notice that the word for God is different from one to another.
Why be concerned about using Allah if you are speaking Dutch or English? When speaking Arabic a person should definitely use Allah. If we are having a conversation with a Muslim and it makes that person more comfortable when we use the Arabic then that is fine.
This kind of thing does not apply, however, within the liturgy. The idea simply seems misplaced.
Why be concerned about using Allah if you are speaking Dutch or English? When speaking Arabic a person should definitely use Allah. If we are having a conversation with a Muslim and it makes that person more comfortable when we use the Arabic then that is fine.
This kind of thing does not apply, however, within the liturgy. The idea simply seems misplaced.
I
ilmor
Guest
Allah is what Muslims call their god. We call ours God. Their god, allah, apparently has no problem with killing. God say “thou shalt not kill”. There is no way I will ever call our God allah.
K
Kevin42
Guest
Arab Christians have been calling God “Allah” for centuries. The only problem is too many people today do not realize this, so for a Western Christian to call God “Allah” may provide scandal to others.
E
Ecoclimber
Guest
But the name of God is rather more significant, and in that revelation it is manifest that God does care what he is called.
And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD (Heb. ‘YHWH’) thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me (Ex 20: 1-3).
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you… this is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations (Ex3:14f).
The Bishop is right to point out that Christians throughout Arabia would use the name ‘Allah’, not least because it has come to be simply the Arabic term for God. But this was not revealed to Mohammed: the term predates his era and that of the Qur’an. Allah was in fact a Babylonian moon god, one of a pantheon of gods. Over the centuries he came to be the chief god and then the only god. Of course, most Muslims refute this, but they are largely ignorant of etymology, the evolution of language, cultural history, and textual criticism. And those who dare to delve into such areas as the ‘satanic verses’ either lose their heads or end up with a fatwa on their heads.
The use of ‘Alla’ for Arab Christians has always been as natural as ‘Dieu’ is for the French or ‘Gott’ is for the Germans. But ‘God’ is a job description, not a name. For Jews and Christians the name of God is revealed and he has made himself known; for Muslims he is unknown and unknowable. For Jews and Christians God is immanent and is their Father; for Muslims he is transcendent and not intimately related. For Christians God is revealed in Jesus, the Son of God; for Muslims God is one and has no partners.
Unfortunately, this Roman Catholic bishop who would have spent three years studying philosophy and a further four being steeped in theology completely misunderstands or chooses to entirely ignore the missio dei expounded so clearly in the New Testament. The entire story of the Early Church is dominated by the profound difficulties inherent in communicating a Hebrew messiah to a Greek audience. The modern Western world lives with the consequences of fusing Greek philosophy with Christian theology, which is why Jewish Christians tend to have a very different christology from Christians in the West. Christianity adapts to culture, but its central truths are immutable.
For Christians in the West to call God ‘Allah’ is nothing but dhimmitude. And what of reciprocity? Might we ask the Muslims to call Jesus the Son of God? No, of course not: the compromise is one way. And the problem is that ‘Allah’ does not now simply mean ‘God’: it has come to symbolise a distinct theology, and a particular doctrine of God. The connotations are salvation through works by adherence to law, absolute and unquestioning submission, and a complete absence of grace. Islam is intolerant of other faiths, and insensitive to cultural diversity. For many in the West, Allah is vindictive, oppressive, and his name has become the battle cry of terrorists and murderers. For Christians to use the term in a Western context would therefore be what St Paul termed ‘foolishness to the Greeks’. If the gospel is already foolishness to those who are being lost, the use of ‘Allah’ to reveal the saving grace of Jesus would be a further hurdle to overcome, an offence, a stumbling block. Here, where nomenclature is so important, it clearly matters what one calls God, and to get the term wrong is to risk the salvation of souls.
Our Father in Heaven, the one who asked that we call him Abba, Father, is manifestly not of the same ontology as the Allah of the Qur’an. One might just as well propose that churches be called mosques, Christians be called Muslims, and pretend in a pluralist Hickian kind of way that it doesn’t really matter because God is really an elephant and no-one sees the whole creature - Muslims have a leg and Christians have a tusk and Jews have got the trunk, but the greater truth is in the whole, which no-one sees.
And God spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD (Heb. ‘YHWH’) thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me (Ex 20: 1-3).
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you… this is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations (Ex3:14f).
The Bishop is right to point out that Christians throughout Arabia would use the name ‘Allah’, not least because it has come to be simply the Arabic term for God. But this was not revealed to Mohammed: the term predates his era and that of the Qur’an. Allah was in fact a Babylonian moon god, one of a pantheon of gods. Over the centuries he came to be the chief god and then the only god. Of course, most Muslims refute this, but they are largely ignorant of etymology, the evolution of language, cultural history, and textual criticism. And those who dare to delve into such areas as the ‘satanic verses’ either lose their heads or end up with a fatwa on their heads.
The use of ‘Alla’ for Arab Christians has always been as natural as ‘Dieu’ is for the French or ‘Gott’ is for the Germans. But ‘God’ is a job description, not a name. For Jews and Christians the name of God is revealed and he has made himself known; for Muslims he is unknown and unknowable. For Jews and Christians God is immanent and is their Father; for Muslims he is transcendent and not intimately related. For Christians God is revealed in Jesus, the Son of God; for Muslims God is one and has no partners.
Unfortunately, this Roman Catholic bishop who would have spent three years studying philosophy and a further four being steeped in theology completely misunderstands or chooses to entirely ignore the missio dei expounded so clearly in the New Testament. The entire story of the Early Church is dominated by the profound difficulties inherent in communicating a Hebrew messiah to a Greek audience. The modern Western world lives with the consequences of fusing Greek philosophy with Christian theology, which is why Jewish Christians tend to have a very different christology from Christians in the West. Christianity adapts to culture, but its central truths are immutable.
For Christians in the West to call God ‘Allah’ is nothing but dhimmitude. And what of reciprocity? Might we ask the Muslims to call Jesus the Son of God? No, of course not: the compromise is one way. And the problem is that ‘Allah’ does not now simply mean ‘God’: it has come to symbolise a distinct theology, and a particular doctrine of God. The connotations are salvation through works by adherence to law, absolute and unquestioning submission, and a complete absence of grace. Islam is intolerant of other faiths, and insensitive to cultural diversity. For many in the West, Allah is vindictive, oppressive, and his name has become the battle cry of terrorists and murderers. For Christians to use the term in a Western context would therefore be what St Paul termed ‘foolishness to the Greeks’. If the gospel is already foolishness to those who are being lost, the use of ‘Allah’ to reveal the saving grace of Jesus would be a further hurdle to overcome, an offence, a stumbling block. Here, where nomenclature is so important, it clearly matters what one calls God, and to get the term wrong is to risk the salvation of souls.
Our Father in Heaven, the one who asked that we call him Abba, Father, is manifestly not of the same ontology as the Allah of the Qur’an. One might just as well propose that churches be called mosques, Christians be called Muslims, and pretend in a pluralist Hickian kind of way that it doesn’t really matter because God is really an elephant and no-one sees the whole creature - Muslims have a leg and Christians have a tusk and Jews have got the trunk, but the greater truth is in the whole, which no-one sees.
P
Petergee
Guest
Vatican II declared that Moslems worship the one true God. And this was nothing new - popes, bishops and saints had been saying it for at least a millennium.
C
chevalier
Guest
I don’t think it’s a great idea, although as someone said, there might be something in it. The most opposition probably comes from not understanding that Allah is not a proper name, but it means God (Eloh in Hebrew, a related language), and that it’s the same God. Neither Christians nor Muslims should be regarded as pagans from each other’s point of view.
The only confusion may be as to the intent. We can’t go on and introduce muezzins instead of church bells, make Friday replace Sunday etc etc. Understanding the common root and the concepts we share is one thing, islamicising is another. Theoretically, we shouldn’t fuss about saying “Allah akbar!” but it’s the cultural difference which makes us doubt in the propriety of that.
The only confusion may be as to the intent. We can’t go on and introduce muezzins instead of church bells, make Friday replace Sunday etc etc. Understanding the common root and the concepts we share is one thing, islamicising is another. Theoretically, we shouldn’t fuss about saying “Allah akbar!” but it’s the cultural difference which makes us doubt in the propriety of that.
M
Mag_Uidhir
Guest
Well if it has to do with us accepting the Allah of Islam then no I want no part of it, they don’t even see God as being Trinune.
If Allah is Arabic for God then fine, I don’t speak it, God works fine for me, let those who do speak it call God Allah.
Sadly I think many Muslims worship the messenger more than Allah, yes I do think Mohamed is worshipped.
If we are to accept the term Allah will the Muslims then defend Christ like they do Mohamed ?
Yes if Christianity is insulted will they hold rallies calling for blood if Jesus Christ is insulted, I don’t think so.
I’m afraid I won’t be following the crowd with the term Allah, what next, a statment from the Vatican that they got it wrong, God is not Trinune ?
I’m afraid I won’t be following the crowd, if it’s rejecting the Trinune God then forget about me, because that would be heresy and I want no part of it.
If Allah is Arabic for God then fine, I don’t speak it, God works fine for me, let those who do speak it call God Allah.
Sadly I think many Muslims worship the messenger more than Allah, yes I do think Mohamed is worshipped.
If we are to accept the term Allah will the Muslims then defend Christ like they do Mohamed ?
Yes if Christianity is insulted will they hold rallies calling for blood if Jesus Christ is insulted, I don’t think so.
I’m afraid I won’t be following the crowd with the term Allah, what next, a statment from the Vatican that they got it wrong, God is not Trinune ?
I’m afraid I won’t be following the crowd, if it’s rejecting the Trinune God then forget about me, because that would be heresy and I want no part of it.
D
DaveBj
Guest
Ilmor brings up a good point, and I’m going to take it to its logical conclusion, as stated by an anti-Muslim Christian apologist that I once read.
Muslims declare that Allah is the same deity that was the God of Abraham, the same deity that Jews and Christians worship.
If it were true that Allah is the same deity that Jews and Christians and Jews worship, then the characteristics of Allah, as “revealed” in the Qur’an, would be the same as the characteristics of the Judeo-Christian God, as revealed in the Old and New Testaments.
In fact, the characteristics of Allah are different from those of the Judeo-Christian God in a number of areas.
Therefore, Allah is not the same as the Judeo-Christian God. I can accept that Muslims believe that they are worshiping the same God, but it cannot be true.
As to who Allah really is, if I spoke my opinion on that subject, I would probably be disciplined by the mods, so I will keep my keyboard quiet.
M
Mjae
Guest
Not in my worst nightmares.
It is true that Christians and Muslims have the same God, since there is only One God.
What, exactly, the Muslims worship, is open to question.
The more I learn about Allah, the less I am able to tell him apart from God’s greatest antagonist.
I will respectfully refer to I AM as my Father and my God.
It is true that Christians and Muslims have the same God, since there is only One God.
What, exactly, the Muslims worship, is open to question.
The more I learn about Allah, the less I am able to tell him apart from God’s greatest antagonist.
I will respectfully refer to I AM as my Father and my God.
D
dwc
Guest
Some have made very good points as to why the bishop may have done this. I understand them, and I appreciate the insight. For me, though, as a non-arabic Christian, Allah doesn’t mean the same as God. Allah is the deity in whose name jihad is committed. God sent His son to save us. I can’t reconcile the two.
A
Athanasiy
Guest
Very possible that in the countries like Belgium and Netherlands
in the next generation the word Allah will be used instead of God.
If the Churches are transformed into the clubs, museums and mosques it is very possible.
But I think that to call God Allah is too early , because the Christianity is not died out in Europe yet.
in the next generation the word Allah will be used instead of God.
If the Churches are transformed into the clubs, museums and mosques it is very possible.
But I think that to call God Allah is too early , because the Christianity is not died out in Europe yet.
B
Brendan
Guest
Actually, the Melkite Catholic Church uses that name, as does the Chaldean Catholic Church in it’s Arabic Divine Liturgy ( they also celebrate the Divine Liturgy in Aramaic)
And even the native Maltsese (Roman Catholics) name for God is “alla”, so if you go to Mass in the Cathedral in Mdina, you’ll hear the name ‘Alla’ mentioned a lot
So there is nothing technically wrong with using that name, if understood as we are addressing the same God worshiped by the Melkites, Chaldeans and Maltese Catholics. but I don’t have much confidence in the Bishop’s intentions on this matter.
B
Brendan
Guest
That is true, that is why the Muslims are Infidels, not Heathens.
Infidels worship the True God in a False way, hence the term “Infide;”- unfaithful.Heathens do not worship the True God at all.
The Church has always classified the Muslims as Infidels, so it acknowledges that they have an understanding (abiet a False one) about the God of Abraham.
P
Petergee
Guest
Actually in theory there is no reason why the Church could not do both of these, for some places or for the whole church. Not that I’m suggesting it should. But they are both disciplinary, not doctrinal matters.
Be wary of marrying the Church to a culture. The Church is big enough to embrace cultures as different as South Indian, Ukrainian and Egyptian in its liturgies and practices. people in non-Western european cultures should not be made to feel that they must embrace everything about W European culture in order to become a Catholic. Culture is not the central element of the Church. Again, I’m not suggesting the Church should imitate these islamic/arabic cultural practices, but it’s wrong to reject them in principle.
B
Brendan
Guest
The replacement of church bells would be disciplinary, but the Celebration of Sunday as the Lord’s Day IS doctrinal.
Easter Sunday was a Sunday, and the Church does not have the authority to change that. And it’s celebration is a Aposolic Tradition ( with a Captial ‘T’), so the Church cannot change that either.
P
Petergee
Guest
Yeah that’s what I used to think, but I was informed that for Catholics in some Moslem-ruled countries where Sunday is a normal working day, the Church has authorised the weekly “Sunday” Mass to be celebrated on Fridays and has ruled that those who attend it on a Friday satisfy their obligation under the Third Commandment to attend weekly Mass. After all Friday was the day of the Lord’s saving death.
Also consider what will be the situation when/if Catholics will be living on other planets with totally different “day” and “year” cycles, which will have no Sunday. The Church would have to make some other arrangement for them.
- Status