His Name Will Be One
Bishop Muskens of the Netherlands urges Catholics to address G-d as "Allah" in their prayers.
Kathleen Parker in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, page 11A, Aug. 21, 2007
"And it is said that G-d will be king over all the world, and on that day G-d will be one, and his name will be one."
Zecharia, 14:9
Is Bishop Muskens taking a first step to fulfilling the prophecy of Zecharia by adopting the Muslim title of the Almighty? Ibrahim Cooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, We commented that " (using Allah for G-d) reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same G-d." But is he right?
We must begin by recognizing that differences in language can make differences in ideology seem greater than they really are. The original documents of the three religions cited by Mr Cooper were written in Arabic, Greek, and Hebrew, respectively.
The name "Allah" is the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew "Eloha", which means "god" in a generic sense. (For example, on Rosh Hashonoh we say in the Shmono Esray "ain eloha mibadolecha", which means "there is no god besides You". The passage makes no sense if "eloha" is meant as the proper name of G-d.) "Elohim", on the other hand, refers to the One True G-d, both in Torah and later liturgy.
So, does the Arabic word "Allah" mean the same thing as the Greek "Theos", the Latin "Deus", the Dutch "Gott" or the English "God"? If so, then Bishop Muskens and Mr Cooper have a valid point, in that devotees of all three religions are actually praying to the same Being, just using different names.
Clearly, one man may be known by two names, such Samuel Clemens and Mark Twain. The same city may be called both Istanbul and Constantinople. Since these are physical beings and places, their essences are not determined by their names. But, when we are speaking of a Being that has no form or physical substance, the name used may express a belief about the nature of this Being, so that two different names may signify two different concepts of the Being. Even the same name, as used by two people with sharply different ideologies, may also refer to two different Beings.
On this point, Judaism and Islam are the same: both believe in one Creator of the universe, without any shape or form, who has always existed and will always exist, without change. (Muslims label Jews as "infidels" only in the sense that they do not accept Muhammad as a prophet and the Quran as a divine revelation) Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet, but not as a divine being.
A small minority of Protestant Christians, called Unitarians, (1) share the Muslims' views on G-d and Jesus, but reject Muhammad. But the vast majority of the world's Christians, including the Catholics, are Trinitarians: believers in the tripartite nature of the Almighty---the Father, the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit (2). In the Trinitarian theology, the nature of G-d changed about two thousand years ago, when He transformed one aspect of Himself into human form .
Clearly, Trinitarian Christianity is basically incompatible with the common theology of Judaism and Islam. It is not coincidental that, of the three religions discussed here, only Christianity (3) is named after its founder! Although Christians consider themselves as "monotheists", the very concept of the Trinity is anathema to true monotheism.
Accordingly, when a Trinitarian Christian uses the term "God" (or its equivalent in another language) the speaker is referring to a different concept of the nature of divinity than when a Jew or Muslim or even a Christian Unitarian uses the same name, whatever the language. For this reason, Jews and Muslims (whatever their differences on the Middle East) should join hands to oppose Christian efforts to re-introduce common prayer into the public schools or other governmental activities.
Maybe Bishop Muskens will win some friends among Dutch Muslims for his dictum on using Allah in Catholic prayers, but it is intellectually dishonest to pretend that Catholics and Muslims are really praying to the same Deity. In a very important sense, they are not----and neither are we!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Noting the similarity in doctrine between the Unitarians and Reform Jews, the leaders of the latter group sought to merge the two religions in the 1920's. As part of the elite WASP establishment in the US, the Unitarians were not interested.
(2) Formerly known as the "Holy Ghost", which nowadays has inconvenient connotations.
(3) The name Christ is an Anglicized form of the Greek Christos, which means "anointed" in English and "moshiach" in Hebrew. Significantly, many groups seeking to convert Jews to Christianity call themselves "Messianic Jews" and use Hebrew terminology (such as "Yeshua Moshiach") to conceal the true "goyish" nature of their efforts.
Kathleen Parker in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, page 11A, Aug. 21, 2007
"And it is said that G-d will be king over all the world, and on that day G-d will be one, and his name will be one."
Zecharia, 14:9
Is Bishop Muskens taking a first step to fulfilling the prophecy of Zecharia by adopting the Muslim title of the Almighty? Ibrahim Cooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, We commented that " (using Allah for G-d) reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same G-d." But is he right?
We must begin by recognizing that differences in language can make differences in ideology seem greater than they really are. The original documents of the three religions cited by Mr Cooper were written in Arabic, Greek, and Hebrew, respectively.
The name "Allah" is the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew "Eloha", which means "god" in a generic sense. (For example, on Rosh Hashonoh we say in the Shmono Esray "ain eloha mibadolecha", which means "there is no god besides You". The passage makes no sense if "eloha" is meant as the proper name of G-d.) "Elohim", on the other hand, refers to the One True G-d, both in Torah and later liturgy.
So, does the Arabic word "Allah" mean the same thing as the Greek "Theos", the Latin "Deus", the Dutch "Gott" or the English "God"? If so, then Bishop Muskens and Mr Cooper have a valid point, in that devotees of all three religions are actually praying to the same Being, just using different names.
Clearly, one man may be known by two names, such Samuel Clemens and Mark Twain. The same city may be called both Istanbul and Constantinople. Since these are physical beings and places, their essences are not determined by their names. But, when we are speaking of a Being that has no form or physical substance, the name used may express a belief about the nature of this Being, so that two different names may signify two different concepts of the Being. Even the same name, as used by two people with sharply different ideologies, may also refer to two different Beings.
On this point, Judaism and Islam are the same: both believe in one Creator of the universe, without any shape or form, who has always existed and will always exist, without change. (Muslims label Jews as "infidels" only in the sense that they do not accept Muhammad as a prophet and the Quran as a divine revelation) Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet, but not as a divine being.
A small minority of Protestant Christians, called Unitarians, (1) share the Muslims' views on G-d and Jesus, but reject Muhammad. But the vast majority of the world's Christians, including the Catholics, are Trinitarians: believers in the tripartite nature of the Almighty---the Father, the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit (2). In the Trinitarian theology, the nature of G-d changed about two thousand years ago, when He transformed one aspect of Himself into human form .
Clearly, Trinitarian Christianity is basically incompatible with the common theology of Judaism and Islam. It is not coincidental that, of the three religions discussed here, only Christianity (3) is named after its founder! Although Christians consider themselves as "monotheists", the very concept of the Trinity is anathema to true monotheism.
Accordingly, when a Trinitarian Christian uses the term "God" (or its equivalent in another language) the speaker is referring to a different concept of the nature of divinity than when a Jew or Muslim or even a Christian Unitarian uses the same name, whatever the language. For this reason, Jews and Muslims (whatever their differences on the Middle East) should join hands to oppose Christian efforts to re-introduce common prayer into the public schools or other governmental activities.
Maybe Bishop Muskens will win some friends among Dutch Muslims for his dictum on using Allah in Catholic prayers, but it is intellectually dishonest to pretend that Catholics and Muslims are really praying to the same Deity. In a very important sense, they are not----and neither are we!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Noting the similarity in doctrine between the Unitarians and Reform Jews, the leaders of the latter group sought to merge the two religions in the 1920's. As part of the elite WASP establishment in the US, the Unitarians were not interested.
(2) Formerly known as the "Holy Ghost", which nowadays has inconvenient connotations.
(3) The name Christ is an Anglicized form of the Greek Christos, which means "anointed" in English and "moshiach" in Hebrew. Significantly, many groups seeking to convert Jews to Christianity call themselves "Messianic Jews" and use Hebrew terminology (such as "Yeshua Moshiach") to conceal the true "goyish" nature of their efforts.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 8:41 AM
1 comments
