Why does Catholic Bishop Muskens call God, Allah?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kaycee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To my understanding - the Jews had an imperfect understanding of the god they worshiped and with whom they had made a covenant. That god revealed himself - and they didn’t accept his revelation. So in my opinion while they technically worship the same god, that is their prayers go to the God of Abraham, their understanding is so different that in truth they can be seen as two separate gods.

I hope that makes sense.
No, it doesn’t. I think it’s too close to Marcionism, and I think the problematic assumption behind your argument is that if people have an imperfect understanding of God they are not worshiping the true God. That is the main problem with the “Muslims don’t worship our God” claim, as I see it.

Edwin
 
If a Christian is speaking Arabic then they should use “Allah” with no problem.

If speaking French, “Deu” and not “allah”

If they are conversing or praying aloud in Spanish, “Dios” is just fine (Though sometimes “Senior” is used for “Lord”) and “allah” is not.

In English, “God” is suitable, or “Lord”. “allah” should never be used.

What the good bishop suggested is silly, pandering and probably insulting to Moslems.
And you’ll note that English speaking and writing Muslims never say or write “God,” but always refer to him as “Allah.” That’s because “Allah” does not simply mean “God” to the Islamic religion.

What the Bishop suggests is not just “silly” but is one big step toward total apostasy.
 
So in every other language in the world all people must use the English word “God” to satisfy your belief system? :rolleyes:
No. But do English speaking Muslims use the English word “God?”
This reminds me a great deal of the system that the Jews live under to this day in that they won’t even write anything but “G-d” or say it for fear of blasphemy.
Non sequitur. This is practiced out of reverence.
Did you convert to Judaism perhaps?
No.
I don’t agree with the bishop in question, but I think you go too far in your criticism.
I would pray that you too would go so far in criticizing the “bishop in question.” His suggestion should outrage you.
 
God’s name is YHWH.

He is called by a variety of euphemisms — God, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost, Jesus Christ, etc.

Politics aside, I’m not aware of any injunction against calling Him Allah.
 
It asserts it. I was not dealing with the empty rhetoric which you cite, but with the alleged evidence, which I have characterized accurately. Please deal with that evidence, which shows clearly (assuming it to be correct) that “Allah” was not a name proper to the moon god but a name meaning “the god” which worshippers of the moon god (again, if the article has its facts straight) sometimes appropriated.

The argument from the pagan Arabs’ acceptance of the word is false, because it rests on the assumption that they were familiar with the name as the name of a moon god, rather than (as the earlier “evidence” actually indicates) as a generic word for the supreme God.

Finally, as I have said several times, Christians and Jews were already using “Allah” to mean the one true God. No one is disputing this, and it blows the “moon god” argument right out of the water.

Edwin
Edwin, the archeological facts are there:Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the “greatest” except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This “Allah” was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence.To the Muslim mindset, “Allah” doesn’t just mean “God” as presented say in Isaiah 45:5:"I am the Lord there is no other; besides Me there is no God."But the name of the god Muhammad presented to his people, and literally forced to worship by the edge of the sword, was in reality the Moon god with whom they were already familiar and he extolled as the “greatest” of all their gods. A corrupt form of monotheism.

You cannot divorce the name “Allah” today from its Islamic etymology. And even before its Islamic association it was linguistically bound to a polytheistic mentality. It was never framed in the linguistic innocence of which you’re trying to convince us.

Bishop Tiny wants to appease Islam and its religious brutality by asking Christendom to play a subordinate role to it, even calling the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, “Allah.” May God have mercy on this man and any of you who would even think to take that initial step toward such apostasy of no return.

How do you think the Muslims who live in the west would respond if the RC Bishop asked them (in the name of peace) to stop using the “word” “Allah” and exchange it for the generic word “God,” whether it be in English, Dutch, French or whatever?
 
Politics aside, I’m not aware of any injunction against calling Him Allah.
That’s the problem, it’s not simply a political issue as the Bishop tries to frame it.

I do find it curious, however, that the Bishop asks western Christianity to change and not the Muslims who are now living in the west.
 
That’s the problem, it’s not simply a political issue as the Bishop tries to frame it.

I do find it curious, however, that the Bishop asks western Christianity to change and not the Muslims who are now living in the west.
I don’t like the bishop’s call here anymore than you do.

However, it is one thing to do something woefully naive and potentially harmful in a time of war and another to go against the teachings of the Church. I don’t think the bishop’s abused his office here.
 
No. But do English speaking Muslims use the English word "God.
Absolutely. I’ve been around many muslims who were born in Morocco and immigrated to the US. When speaking in English to me they always use the word God and have never used the word allah.
 
Edwin, the archeological facts are there:Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the “greatest” except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This “Allah” was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence.
What archeological evidence? You haven’t presented any. I mentioned the evidence that the fundamentalist site describes, and I pointed out that this evidence does not, on their own admission, point to “Allah” meaning “the moon god,” but rather “God” in general, which allegedly was sometimes applied by worshippers of the moon god to their favorite deity.

For instance, an ancient Greek might call Zeus “o theos.” That doesn’t mean that when the New Testament calls God “o theos” it is referring to the thunder-bolt-throwing womanizer who hung out on Olympus.

There’s simply no case here. The fundamentalists are snatching desperately at one with their usual bad logic, and you are accepting their argument because it suits your prejudices.

As for the “greatest,” this is no different from the language used about God in the OT. “You shall not have other gods before me” implying that there are other gods who must not be preferred to Yahweh. “Give judgment, O Yahweh, among the gods.” There are many passages like this.
To the Muslim mindset, “Allah” doesn’t just mean “God” as presented say in Isaiah 45:5:"I am the Lord there is no other; besides Me there is no God."But the name of the god Muhammad presented to his people, and literally forced to worship by the edge of the sword, was in reality the Moon god with whom they were already familiar and he extolled as the “greatest” of all their gods.
You do not make the “moon god” argument valid by repeating it over and over.

I will leave it to the Muslims on this forum to say whether “Allah” means “God” in the sense of Isaiah 45:5 or not.
You cannot divorce the name “Allah” today from its Islamic etymology. And even before its Islamic association it was linguistically bound to a polytheistic mentality. It was never framed in the linguistic innocence of which you’re trying to convince us.
I’m doing nothing of the sort. You are the one who seems to believe in a “linguistic innocence” which the word “Allah” lacks, while presumably words such as “Elohim,” “Yahweh,” or “theos” possess such an innocence. All language has prehistory. This is simply a non-issue. All the evidence points to “Allah” being the best word in Arabic to describe the one true God, since it seems to have described some sort of supreme “high God” who was less associated with idolatry than other deities. Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians made this decision. Who are you to disagree with it?
How do you think the Muslims who live in the west would respond if the RC Bishop asked them (in the name of peace) to stop using the “word” “Allah” and exchange it for the generic word “God,” whether it be in English, Dutch, French or whatever?
In my experience, English-speaking Muslims use “God” on a regular basis, although obviously in worship and study of the Qur’an they use “Allah.” I’m sure that the more fundamentalist Muslims are less likely to use the English word.

Edwin
 
No. But do English speaking Muslims use the English word “God?”
Indeed they do and quite often.
This reminds me a great deal of the system that the Jews live under to this day in that they won’t even write anything but “G-d” or say it for fear of blasphemy.
Non sequitur. This is practiced out of reverence.
The practice is Pharisaical and not at all in line with Christian belief and practice for 2,000 years. My point is that this contention of yours is very similar.
No.I would pray that you too would go so far in criticizing the “bishop in question.” His suggestion should outrage you.
Frankly, I’d appreciate it a lot if you and people like you would have the courtesy of not telling me what I should think and what should outrage me.

The fact is that the whole position that you have taken is excessively extreme and typical of a great many people who have sought to demonize all things Muslim due to the war and all the other craziness that is rampant in the world. It doesn’t help at all and only inflames emotional rhetoric on all sides instead of promoting rational and charitable efforts to dialog and resolve differences between Moslems and others so that progress towards peace can be made.

I frankly don’t give a rip what some Dutch bishop says unless he occupies the seat of Peter and since this one does not, it makes very little difference to me. I’ll leave him to whatever authority is over him and remain faithful to the Pope and those who teach sensibly. This bishop has no authority beyond his diocese, and I doubt very much if his own people will take him very seriously.
I certainly don’t…

If you want to be outraged… knock yourself out. I’m closer to outraged that guys like you presume to tell me and other Catholics how to think and base it all on the flimsy rhetoric that Contarini (of whom I am fast becoming a fan!) has so ably debunked.
 
Wrong–Allah is the normal word used for God by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians and was used in this way long before Muhammad.

However, it’s more reasonable for European Muslims to call Allah God than for European Christians to call God Allah.

More broadly, I know it is tempting to say that the Islamic God is radically different from our God, but this won’t hold up. You then have to say that Jews also worship a different God than we do. This results in one of two conclusions.
  1. People in the Old Testament did not worship the same God we do. This is the heresy of Marcionism. Or
  2. When Jews rejected Jesus, they stopped worshiping the God they had been worshiping up to that time and started worshiping a different God. I find that completely unbelievable.
I would make the further argument that all monotheists by definition worship the same God. But that is a somewhat more difficult point to prove–the historical argument outlined above is sufficient, I think.

Edwin
 
The fact is that the whole position that you have taken is excessively extreme and typical of a great many people who have sought to demonize all things Muslim due to the war and all the other craziness that is rampant in the world. It doesn’t help at all and only inflames emotional rhetoric on all sides instead of promoting rational and charitable efforts to dialog and resolve differences between Moslems and others so that progress towards peace can be made.

I.
Why don’t you start a thread how you “dialog” with a religion that is a replacement theology of both biblical Christianity and Judasim.

So you know the truth is 1+1=2, so lets “dialog” with them to agree somewhere so the answer is 3 or 4. Thats not too extreme. The only peace dialoging will bring is a short lived worldly peace, the real peace is found in Christ.
 
I love Father Jonathon Morris’ commen from the link in the OPt-
"I’m sure his intentions are good but his theology needs a little fine-tuning,…"

Well spoken
 
Why don’t you start a thread how you “dialog” with a religion that is a replacement theology of both biblical Christianity and Judasim.

So you know the truth is 1+1=2, so lets “dialog” with them to agree somewhere so the answer is 3 or 4. Thats not too extreme. The only peace dialoging will bring is a short lived worldly peace, the real peace is found in Christ.
When they, like so many n-Cs and a-Cs, can produce verifiable facts instead of rhetorical propaganda, then I might get involved.

Frankly, I see the same sort of “replacement theology” from a great many n-Cs/a-Cs all the time with respect to my Catholic faith. Either way… fiction is still fiction.

I have no problems with the fact that peace is found in Christ and peace is His domain…my responsibility is to follow him, not create fictional rhetoric to combat a non-Christian religion.

I have a suggestion for you.

Why don’t you go to Moslem forums and tell them the kind of stuff you have told us here? Especially if you perceive them as such a great threat to the faith? Or is it easier to come here and take cheap pot shots at the Catholic faith because some Dutch bishop says something that all of us find weird.
Is this your idea of Christian witnessing?🤷
 
Allah is Not the Judeo/Christian God.

foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293394,00.html
And you are correct, IMV.

I had a Catholic aquaintance tell me that Allah, “the same god” Muslims worship, is present in the Catholic Eucharist.

This is very disconcerting to say the least and very confusing for the world which requires spiritual leadership from those who follow Christ.

Telling someone that they are worshipping the one true God when they clearly are not only sets them up for destruction.

We must all stand firm in exactly what you stated with ALL semantic wrangling aside: Allah is Not the Judeo/Christian God.

…
 
When they, like so many n-Cs and a-Cs, can produce verifiable facts instead of rhetorical propaganda, then I might get involved.

Frankly, I see the same sort of “replacement theology” from a great many n-Cs/a-Cs all the time with respect to my Catholic faith. Either way… fiction is still fiction.

I have no problems with the fact that peace is found in Christ and peace is His domain…my responsibility is to follow him, not create fictional rhetoric to combat a non-Christian religion.

I have a suggestion for you.

Why don’t you go to Moslem forums and tell them the kind of stuff you have told us here? Especially if you perceive them as such a great threat to the faith? Or is it easier to come here and take cheap pot shots at the Catholic faith because some Dutch bishop says something that all of us find weird.
Is this your idea of Christian witnessing?🤷
The 'ol “Is this your idea of witnessing” line.

Islam is a replacement theology religion of Judeo/Christianity. Again, it attempts to replace everything Jewish, the scriptures, the land, all archeaological proof of their existence in the land. Once the Judaic roots are gone, Christianity in Islams eyes is just another religion that is acheiving temporal worldy peace and then it can make vanilla out of it’s gospel. Jesus is a Palestinean, Mary is venerated by both, Allah is the same God, some stories in the OT are just fables, why quibble over those details?

How would you “witness” to a replacement theology?

I’m all ears, well in this case eyes.
 
In my experience, English-speaking Muslims use “God” on a regular basis, although obviously in worship and study of the Qur’an they use “Allah.”
Obviously! And why do you think that is? Could it be that “Allah” is the NAME of their God?
I’m sure that the more fundamentalist Muslims are less likely to use the English word.
You’ve got that right!!! But “fundamentalist” Christians should be required to use the word “Allah” when referring to their God, right?"Our Allah who art in heaven, hallowed by thy name: (Allah)."I know two true believing converts from Islam and they do not call the God who saved them through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ “Allah.” They clearly know the difference and express it. How tragic it is that you and the Bishop do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top