KUALA LUMPUR, May 28 — The Catholic Church failed in its bid to get permission to use the word “Allah” while its suit to overturn the government ban is still being heard in the High Court.
The High Court here said the Catholic Church must wait until it decides conclusively on whether it is allowed to use “Allah” to refer to the Christian God.
“This means don’t use ‘Allah’ until the court decides,” said church lawyer S. Selvarajah.
Reverend Father Lawrence Andrew who edits the Catholic newspaper, The Herald, visibly drooped when he heard the news.
The editor-priest had seemed in high spirits earlier and was confident the High Court would allow the church to use the word “Allah” for the time being. He had smiled frequently while speaking with reporters earlier.
Judge Lau Bee Lan set July 7 for the next hearing after dismissing the church’s request to stay the government ban, lawyers for both the church and the state told reporters this afternoon.
The arguments were carried out in the judge’s chambers instead of in open court.
If the High Court allowed the church to use “Allah” in a non-Muslim context, it would be helping the church commit an offence under state laws, a lawyer for the government explained to The Malaysian Insider.
According to a lawyer representing several state Islamic religious councils, it is an offence for non-Muslims to use the word “Allah” to refer to any God other than the Muslim God.
Abdul Rahim Sinwan referred to the Control and Restriction of the Propagation of non-Islamic Religious Enactment that was passed into law by 10 states in 1988.
The states are: Selangor, Malacca, Perak, Terengganu, Kelantan, Kedah, Pahang, Negri Sembilan, Johor and Perlis.
The Catholic Church is suing the Home minister to overturn the Home minister’s ban.
The lawsuit stems from the government’s assertion that “Allah” should strictly refer to the Muslim God in Malaysia. This is a view that the Catholic Church has been challenging.
The word “Allah”, the church argues, does not belong only to the Muslims.
The Herald is published in four languages, including the national language Bahasa Malaysia (BM), which caters to the indigenous Malaysians from Sabah and Sarawak, who are mostly Christians.
Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur Reverend Tan Sri Murphy Pakiam filed the suit on February 16 to get a declaration from the courts that the church has the right to use the word in print and in church services.
The Home ministry, which issues the annual printing permit for all publications, had warned the church to stop using the word.
Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar, who headed the ministry then, claimed the church’s use of the word “Allah” in any literature published in BM would confuse Muslims, who make up the biggest religious group in the country.
This is the second consecutive year in which Archbishop Murphy Pakiam is suing the Home minister to settle the dispute over the use of the word “Allah”.
Bookmark
Email This
Comments (32)
Show/Hide comments
...
written by rocky, May 28, 2009
written by rocky, May 28, 2009
anything passed even in 1988 or 2009 and is against the constitution is not valid. Just read the constitution
-
- +4
-
-
...
written by Paul Ong, May 28, 2009
written by Paul Ong, May 28, 2009
This is expected as UMNO Gomen is trying to score political points to show to the Malays that they are the protector of Islam and Muslims, many Muslims somehow perceive that ISLAM is under siege and needs to be defended strongly.
The Catholic Church should just cool down and play along with the court decision until such time when the Malays population at large catch up with the rest of the world in terms of knowledge and skills.
Its no point for the Church arguing that the word "ALLAH" is used by the Indonesian Muslims or the Arab Muslims, its like arguing with DONKEYS, they knew that too but they need to please the UMNO Warlords and the grass roots.
The Catholic Church should just cool down and play along with the court decision until such time when the Malays population at large catch up with the rest of the world in terms of knowledge and skills.
Its no point for the Church arguing that the word "ALLAH" is used by the Indonesian Muslims or the Arab Muslims, its like arguing with DONKEYS, they knew that too but they need to please the UMNO Warlords and the grass roots.
-
- +10
-
-
...
written by Amin GmbH, May 28, 2009
written by Amin GmbH, May 28, 2009
So why is now since last years but not in 10 or 20 yrs back I heard such a dispute? This matter should not have risen at the first place as mean to shake the already shaken Muslims-non Muslims relationship. What's going on behind all of this?
Apostasy is not Muslims' virtue because they have got to maintain the faith no matter what, it is not even a choice. It is not something everybody can live for, and that's why some "un-practicing" live in refuge or sth like that. It is Muslims' concern here to note how far have they gone missing. When the word conversion comes, it is assumed as a mean to be publicized but should be nobody pursue for any information or leads.
A non muslim can be converted at their own rights to Islam without tumult, repercussion and polemic. But as Islam laws concern (I don't know about any other religion), apostasy is unacceptable and punishable by Hudud. Here, M'sian laws do not assume someone has committed apostasy but acknowledged silently only conversion.
Apostasy is not Muslims' virtue because they have got to maintain the faith no matter what, it is not even a choice. It is not something everybody can live for, and that's why some "un-practicing" live in refuge or sth like that. It is Muslims' concern here to note how far have they gone missing. When the word conversion comes, it is assumed as a mean to be publicized but should be nobody pursue for any information or leads.
A non muslim can be converted at their own rights to Islam without tumult, repercussion and polemic. But as Islam laws concern (I don't know about any other religion), apostasy is unacceptable and punishable by Hudud. Here, M'sian laws do not assume someone has committed apostasy but acknowledged silently only conversion.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by tuanguru, May 28, 2009
written by tuanguru, May 28, 2009
to nawawimohamed...
its better to keep your silence and go find out your facts more. its not the Father Lawrence looking for glamour, you are!! you are asking the church, why only now want to use the word "Allah"? is this question planted in your brain by some other ignorant ones? the church has came up with volumes of proofs to say that the word has been in use since when? 15th or 16th century's bible (malay version) . its not only been coined or borrowed from the other religion in this 21st century and its been used by the christians namely in the middle east as well. why didn't it create any confusion among the different religions over there? why confusion can happen here in malaysia? So Your question should be... why only now after 50 years of merdeka, the govt wants to curb the use??
Maybe as u have mentioned, we are only simple minded, naive ppl and do not have deep knowledge of our own religions... So this is the answer. Yes, i agree with you.
another thing, you mentioned that the other religions are acting silently and peacefully. Well, is there anything wrong with that, anything illegal or subversive, detrimental to national security? yes, i prefer they keep acting like that, they keep to their boundaries. they do not need to publish to the whole world, how many new members they ve recruited last year, last month or last week. we also dont wish to know that!
religious freedom is guaranteed in our constitution, lets keep it that way. okay? Live and Let Live is my motto.
its better to keep your silence and go find out your facts more. its not the Father Lawrence looking for glamour, you are!! you are asking the church, why only now want to use the word "Allah"? is this question planted in your brain by some other ignorant ones? the church has came up with volumes of proofs to say that the word has been in use since when? 15th or 16th century's bible (malay version) . its not only been coined or borrowed from the other religion in this 21st century and its been used by the christians namely in the middle east as well. why didn't it create any confusion among the different religions over there? why confusion can happen here in malaysia? So Your question should be... why only now after 50 years of merdeka, the govt wants to curb the use??
Maybe as u have mentioned, we are only simple minded, naive ppl and do not have deep knowledge of our own religions... So this is the answer. Yes, i agree with you.
another thing, you mentioned that the other religions are acting silently and peacefully. Well, is there anything wrong with that, anything illegal or subversive, detrimental to national security? yes, i prefer they keep acting like that, they keep to their boundaries. they do not need to publish to the whole world, how many new members they ve recruited last year, last month or last week. we also dont wish to know that!
religious freedom is guaranteed in our constitution, lets keep it that way. okay? Live and Let Live is my motto.
-
- +10
-
-
...
written by incensation, May 28, 2009
written by incensation, May 28, 2009
he Herald used "Allah" without any problems until the Government (in late 2007) threatened to ban the section of the newspaper published in BM (it publishes in four languages) unless it stopped using the word.
So the "Herald" isn't "only now asking to use the word" as nawawimohamad thought.
The "Herald" wants the right to CONTINUE using the word as it had been doing all along until the Government made its move to ban the newspaper - which many have construed as politically motivated.
Please, nawawimohamad, do not try to personalise the issue, suggesting it is all a plan by Fr. Lawrence to get some "glamour" - that is really a cheap and quite uncalled-for comment which does you no credit.
So the "Herald" isn't "only now asking to use the word" as nawawimohamad thought.
The "Herald" wants the right to CONTINUE using the word as it had been doing all along until the Government made its move to ban the newspaper - which many have construed as politically motivated.
Please, nawawimohamad, do not try to personalise the issue, suggesting it is all a plan by Fr. Lawrence to get some "glamour" - that is really a cheap and quite uncalled-for comment which does you no credit.
-
- +4
-
-
...
written by Jordan Williams, May 28, 2009
written by Jordan Williams, May 28, 2009
To address nawawi mohammad's comments. What does he mean by the Christian god and the Muslim god? Is he saying that he believes there are different gods ? Both Christianity and Islam professes believing in one god. As both religions believe in one god then obviously they both must be praying to the same god. It is the spiritual tenets between the two religions that differ. he world Allah is not a Malay word to start with. it has been universally used as a term of reference to god for centuries by different religions and it was adopted into the Malay language only because those who first converted the Malays to islam used it. So on what premsie does the Malaysian authority claim excusivity to the use of the word by Muslims. The word is generic. It is not a patent. So what legitimate basis does the govrnment have to bar other religions from using it . This is a blatant abuse of executive power under the Printing Press & Publication Act and is tantamont to religious dicrimination.
nawawi mohammad seems to have got his facts mixed up by asking why the Catholic Church is only asking now. The Cathlic Church is not asking for it just now. In fact the Church doesn't have to ask permission from anyone to use the word Allah and has been using the word in it's publication for years. It was the government that turned it into an issue by pohibiting the Church from using the word in their publications. So the correct question should be why is the government stopping them from using the word now. The reason given that it may cause confusion is quite pathetic since the Church's publications are aimed at the Catholic community. Why would any self respecting Muslim even read such publications.
I also don't get what nawawi mohamad is going on about publishing statistics. The Church is not a government funded organisation like Perkim. It is a spiritual organisation and as such does not, and is under no obligation to publish conversion statistics. That's hardly reason to alude sinister motives to the Church. The Church does not compel people to convert to Christianity do so of their own volition and they get no material benefit from doing so. So why the suggestion of a sinister motive by the Church? Why so paranoid?
What does the fact that Christmas is celebrated has anthing to do with anything? What does it prove? I find that a really silly statement by nawawi mohamad, which is further aggavated by him asking if they are trying to create the impression of opprssion. Hello!!!!! the fact that they are being banned from the use of a generic word like Allah in their publication is oppression. Whatmore proof o you need.
it is intersting to note that nawawi mohammad says the Buddhist are quiet about their grievances. Does he concde then that non muslims have cause for grievances in Malaysia? Is he suggesting then that as the Buddhist keep quit about it so should the Christians. Hello again! the constitution guarantees religious rights. So why should anyone keep quiet if those rights are being infringed.
The non Muslims do not try to impose their will on Muslims. All they ask is to be left alone to practise their faith within their own communities. Why is the government intefering with this right of practice.
i really find nawawi mohammads comments nonsensical.
nawawi mohammad seems to have got his facts mixed up by asking why the Catholic Church is only asking now. The Cathlic Church is not asking for it just now. In fact the Church doesn't have to ask permission from anyone to use the word Allah and has been using the word in it's publication for years. It was the government that turned it into an issue by pohibiting the Church from using the word in their publications. So the correct question should be why is the government stopping them from using the word now. The reason given that it may cause confusion is quite pathetic since the Church's publications are aimed at the Catholic community. Why would any self respecting Muslim even read such publications.
I also don't get what nawawi mohamad is going on about publishing statistics. The Church is not a government funded organisation like Perkim. It is a spiritual organisation and as such does not, and is under no obligation to publish conversion statistics. That's hardly reason to alude sinister motives to the Church. The Church does not compel people to convert to Christianity do so of their own volition and they get no material benefit from doing so. So why the suggestion of a sinister motive by the Church? Why so paranoid?
What does the fact that Christmas is celebrated has anthing to do with anything? What does it prove? I find that a really silly statement by nawawi mohamad, which is further aggavated by him asking if they are trying to create the impression of opprssion. Hello!!!!! the fact that they are being banned from the use of a generic word like Allah in their publication is oppression. Whatmore proof o you need.
it is intersting to note that nawawi mohammad says the Buddhist are quiet about their grievances. Does he concde then that non muslims have cause for grievances in Malaysia? Is he suggesting then that as the Buddhist keep quit about it so should the Christians. Hello again! the constitution guarantees religious rights. So why should anyone keep quiet if those rights are being infringed.
The non Muslims do not try to impose their will on Muslims. All they ask is to be left alone to practise their faith within their own communities. Why is the government intefering with this right of practice.
i really find nawawi mohammads comments nonsensical.
-
- +11
-
-
...
written by david, May 28, 2009
written by david, May 28, 2009
perak court result not out yet, but zombie can still act like MB....another double standard.
-
- +6
-
-
...
written by longkanghead, May 28, 2009
written by longkanghead, May 28, 2009
Msia is a laughing stock. People all over the world are seeing like Saudi Arabia. Shame on us. Pakiam should not back down. He should let himself be arrested under ISA -- then the world will see another Mandela and speak out against this stupid gomen. Sacrifice yourself Pakiam for your faith. Jesus would do the same thing for you.
-
- +6
-
-
...
written by miss ling, May 28, 2009
written by miss ling, May 28, 2009
@nawawimohamad Please check your facts before commenting. The Catholic Church has been using "Allah" for many years. It's not as you say "Why only now they are asking to use the word but not long before?". It's not 'asking to use the word' now.
Plus, what's so glamourous about going to court? You must be really shallow to think that the priest is doing this for glamour. Only politicians do things for fame.
And I think it is insulting for you to claim that "both of the followers are simple minded people, naive and do not have deep knowledge of their religion, more so in the isolated rural areas."
If the Home Ministry stops the Church from using the word Allah now, what will it stop the church from using next? The national language? This is absurd. Doesn't the Home Ministry have better things to do than to make life difficult for its citizens?
Plus, what's so glamourous about going to court? You must be really shallow to think that the priest is doing this for glamour. Only politicians do things for fame.
And I think it is insulting for you to claim that "both of the followers are simple minded people, naive and do not have deep knowledge of their religion, more so in the isolated rural areas."
If the Home Ministry stops the Church from using the word Allah now, what will it stop the church from using next? The national language? This is absurd. Doesn't the Home Ministry have better things to do than to make life difficult for its citizens?
-
- +5
-
-
...
written by steven ong, May 28, 2009
written by steven ong, May 28, 2009
Christian God?, Muslim God? Please leave God alone. Allah is the Almighty God in Arabic. Allah is God and God is Allah. Has the Muslim fall so far behind the other faith in Malaysia? The Almighty God or Allah is the God of all creation. He belongs to no one. He loves all, no matter what you believe.
So if you Muslim believe in and love Allah, you should be glad that even others honour the Lord God Allah as you do. Can you see that and understand, my dear Muslim brothers and sisters?
May God Allah reveal to you all Muslim, that He is God of all creation and he loves you all.
So if you Muslim believe in and love Allah, you should be glad that even others honour the Lord God Allah as you do. Can you see that and understand, my dear Muslim brothers and sisters?
May God Allah reveal to you all Muslim, that He is God of all creation and he loves you all.
-
- +13
-
-
...
written by Voon Yuen Woh, May 28, 2009
written by Voon Yuen Woh, May 28, 2009
"If the High Court allowed the church to use “Allah” in a non-Muslim context, it would be helping the church commit an offence under state laws, a lawyer for the government explained to The Malaysian Insider."
The High Court should apply the Constitution without being fearful of "helping the church to commit an offense." The Constitution overrides State Laws that say that Allah cannot be used. If the Constitution gives freedom of religion to all citizens, State laws cannot take it away. Any finding of the Court for the church will not be "helping the church commit an offence" but declarative that the State law contravenes the Federal Constitution and is a bad law. The church does not commit an offence because the law is bad and needs to sync with the liberties enshrined in our Federal Constitution.
State laws cannot take away liberties provided for in the Federal Constitution. Religious groups have the liberty to profess, practice and subject to State laws, which may restrict, (not prohibit) the propagatation of non-Islamic religions.
According to the Federal Constitution, the church can call God by any name they wish (It comes under the practice of their religion). That is their liberty under our Contitution. Whether God is happy to be called Allah by the Christians, it's between God and them. If my wife is happy with what I call her, what business is that of anyone else? If my wife is not happy, it is also our own business and not one else's. (My wife can of course tell me off!) My wife is my wife and not your wife - how can anyone be confused with how I address my wife?
The High Court should apply the Constitution without being fearful of "helping the church to commit an offense." The Constitution overrides State Laws that say that Allah cannot be used. If the Constitution gives freedom of religion to all citizens, State laws cannot take it away. Any finding of the Court for the church will not be "helping the church commit an offence" but declarative that the State law contravenes the Federal Constitution and is a bad law. The church does not commit an offence because the law is bad and needs to sync with the liberties enshrined in our Federal Constitution.
State laws cannot take away liberties provided for in the Federal Constitution. Religious groups have the liberty to profess, practice and subject to State laws, which may restrict, (not prohibit) the propagatation of non-Islamic religions.
According to the Federal Constitution, the church can call God by any name they wish (It comes under the practice of their religion). That is their liberty under our Contitution. Whether God is happy to be called Allah by the Christians, it's between God and them. If my wife is happy with what I call her, what business is that of anyone else? If my wife is not happy, it is also our own business and not one else's. (My wife can of course tell me off!) My wife is my wife and not your wife - how can anyone be confused with how I address my wife?
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by saddam, May 29, 2009
written by saddam, May 29, 2009
I do wonder what is happening to Lau Bee Lan. She used to be regarded in quite esteem. But her conduct for the Perak case and this is a bit more bewildering...
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by lucia, May 29, 2009
written by lucia, May 29, 2009
quote: "According to a lawyer representing several state Islamic religious councils, it is an offence for non-Muslims to use the word “Allah” to refer to any God other than the Muslim God.
Abdul Rahim Sinwan referred to the Control and Restriction of the Propagation of non-Islamic Religious Enactment that was passed into law by 10 states in 1988."
who said it is an offence? the control and restriction of the propagation of non islamic religious enactment said so! so the high court is subversive to them?
anyway, don't the muslim feel ashamed that there has to be such a thing as the control and restriction of the propagation of non islamic religious enactment? it's like telling the whole world their faith is not strong so there is a need for this enactment.
Abdul Rahim Sinwan referred to the Control and Restriction of the Propagation of non-Islamic Religious Enactment that was passed into law by 10 states in 1988."
who said it is an offence? the control and restriction of the propagation of non islamic religious enactment said so! so the high court is subversive to them?
anyway, don't the muslim feel ashamed that there has to be such a thing as the control and restriction of the propagation of non islamic religious enactment? it's like telling the whole world their faith is not strong so there is a need for this enactment.
-
- +2
-
-
...
written by Johan SSM @ Khun Pana, May 29, 2009
written by Johan SSM @ Khun Pana, May 29, 2009
The case of McDonald (the fast food chain) vs. McCurry (the roti canai shop)
McCurry is and was allow to use the name and logo until the court comes out with a verdict.
McCurry won their case !
McCurry is and was allow to use the name and logo until the court comes out with a verdict.
McCurry won their case !
-
- +2
-
-
...
written by layman, May 29, 2009
written by layman, May 29, 2009
In East Malaysia, you may see car with sticker "JESUS IS GOD" on. Perhaps, soon, it will be changed to "ALLAH IS GOD".
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by The Words, May 29, 2009
written by The Words, May 29, 2009
The Church had been used that "word" for more than 100 hundred years. The have proves by their Malay bible printed back on 18 centuries, almost 60 or 70 years before the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu Independent in 1957. The Church IS NOT asking to use that word just now, they just asking TO CONTINUE what their had been practicing in more than 100 years before (using the word).
I see that this banning is politically motivated. The christian community suddenly allowed to use this word before the Batang Ai by-election in Sarawak but now, after the by-election the government court tell us that the word STILL cannot be used!
It had been claimed that the word will make Muslim confused but it's the HOME MINISTER who claimed that. The HOME MINISTER create anger among the Muslim community supposedly to unite Malay to support UMNO once again. But as I knew before, there was no confusion like this because the Herald magazine was only distributed among the Roman Catholic Church members. I'm not Catholic so I never read that magazine. Will Muslim keen to read that magazine when they know It's Christian publication?
I'm glad because PAS do not banning other religion to use that word. They believe (PAS), it's better for other religion TO KNOW who is ALLAH after all and that's why UMNO look so ugly compared to PAS in this matter.
I see that this banning is politically motivated. The christian community suddenly allowed to use this word before the Batang Ai by-election in Sarawak but now, after the by-election the government court tell us that the word STILL cannot be used!
It had been claimed that the word will make Muslim confused but it's the HOME MINISTER who claimed that. The HOME MINISTER create anger among the Muslim community supposedly to unite Malay to support UMNO once again. But as I knew before, there was no confusion like this because the Herald magazine was only distributed among the Roman Catholic Church members. I'm not Catholic so I never read that magazine. Will Muslim keen to read that magazine when they know It's Christian publication?
I'm glad because PAS do not banning other religion to use that word. They believe (PAS), it's better for other religion TO KNOW who is ALLAH after all and that's why UMNO look so ugly compared to PAS in this matter.
-
- +2
-
-
...
written by pogadai, May 29, 2009
written by pogadai, May 29, 2009
Hello everybody...It final !! Only muslim can use the word ALLAH. The rest can just say the word God ..enough la. Don't talk too much.....
The christian say Jesus is the son of God but in Islam Isa is just a prophet.
Only Christian God have children. What a funny joker you all....
The christian say Jesus is the son of God but in Islam Isa is just a prophet.
Only Christian God have children. What a funny joker you all....
-
- -3
-
-
...
written by Voon Yuen Woh, May 29, 2009
written by Voon Yuen Woh, May 29, 2009
"The christian say Jesus is the son of God but in Islam Isa is just a prophet.
Only Christian God have children. What a funny joker you all.... "
Christians believe the Bible which states that Jesus is the Son of God. The "Son of God" is a title and does not mean that God has children in the natural sense of giving birth. Even in Malay, "anak bulan" is used figuratively. It does not mean that the Moon has children.
In another aspect, the Bible also say that God is the Heavenly Father of all who choose to believe. In this way, God has plenty of children. To say Christians are children of God means that when people put their faith in Christ, God gave them the right to become His children. (John 1:12) There are many ways one can be a father, including ways open to God. One is adoption, a process where a stranger, is accepted in a family by choice. You are right to say that the Christian God has children ... He has plenty. Blessings.
Only Christian God have children. What a funny joker you all.... "
Christians believe the Bible which states that Jesus is the Son of God. The "Son of God" is a title and does not mean that God has children in the natural sense of giving birth. Even in Malay, "anak bulan" is used figuratively. It does not mean that the Moon has children.
In another aspect, the Bible also say that God is the Heavenly Father of all who choose to believe. In this way, God has plenty of children. To say Christians are children of God means that when people put their faith in Christ, God gave them the right to become His children. (John 1:12) There are many ways one can be a father, including ways open to God. One is adoption, a process where a stranger, is accepted in a family by choice. You are right to say that the Christian God has children ... He has plenty. Blessings.
-
- +4
-
-
...
written by Rampage, May 29, 2009
written by Rampage, May 29, 2009
To my learned Christians friend, maybe it is unappropriate for me to ask this, probably due to the shallow knowledge that I have towards christianity. But, based on my observation, there is not a single phrase in any of the bible neither was in the the King James version in either New testament or old testament that the word "Allah" was used reffering to god. neither can you find it in the Roman Khatolic Bible And based again on my limited understanding the word God in Hebrew is "Eloihim" and the word god in Greek is "Hotious". So, why is that suddenly we are arguing the issue?
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by one_man, May 29, 2009
written by one_man, May 29, 2009
to pogadai: r u a Malaysian or what???don't u know the freedom of religion practice in Malaysia????
1st of all, I need to clarify myself, I'm a proud Muslim and Malaysian but I'm not proud 2 be a Malay..why???simply coz UMNO goons has used this ban juz "to protect Islam as official religion in Malaysia"..they think all they said they can get votes from urban Malay???hell no..they juz dreaming in fantasy world..YES, probably in rural area 4 old folks coz they juz read local newspapers especially Utusan n Berita Harian..1st all, Allah is God for mankind and He is the One who create all the creatures in this universe including JINs, ANGELs, DEMONs and all supernatural things that can't be seen with naked eye..religions in this world has its originality, from ADAM & HAWA (ADAM & EVE)..the prophets got the revelations from God (Allah) in several ways..enough of that..but the point is, why HOME MINISTER think by using word Allah which referred as God by Christian is an offence since it had been used several hundred years ago???for me, it is not about the language 4 Muslim entirely but it based on own faith..Muslim can't convert to another religions as it is consider as a big sin (not sure about another religion)..Muslim who has lost faith should have seek counselor to repent from being deviate..by referring the word Allah which has been used by Christian can't simply convert Muslims to Christian IF they have a strong faith..it's all about political ploy..even Tuan Guru Nik Aziz had mentioned it's not wrong to use Allah in Herald publication as long it's not distribute to Muslims..even Christian believed that there is only one God..same as Muslim in Islam..
1st of all, I need to clarify myself, I'm a proud Muslim and Malaysian but I'm not proud 2 be a Malay..why???simply coz UMNO goons has used this ban juz "to protect Islam as official religion in Malaysia"..they think all they said they can get votes from urban Malay???hell no..they juz dreaming in fantasy world..YES, probably in rural area 4 old folks coz they juz read local newspapers especially Utusan n Berita Harian..1st all, Allah is God for mankind and He is the One who create all the creatures in this universe including JINs, ANGELs, DEMONs and all supernatural things that can't be seen with naked eye..religions in this world has its originality, from ADAM & HAWA (ADAM & EVE)..the prophets got the revelations from God (Allah) in several ways..enough of that..but the point is, why HOME MINISTER think by using word Allah which referred as God by Christian is an offence since it had been used several hundred years ago???for me, it is not about the language 4 Muslim entirely but it based on own faith..Muslim can't convert to another religions as it is consider as a big sin (not sure about another religion)..Muslim who has lost faith should have seek counselor to repent from being deviate..by referring the word Allah which has been used by Christian can't simply convert Muslims to Christian IF they have a strong faith..it's all about political ploy..even Tuan Guru Nik Aziz had mentioned it's not wrong to use Allah in Herald publication as long it's not distribute to Muslims..even Christian believed that there is only one God..same as Muslim in Islam..
-
- +4
-
-
...
written by incensation, May 29, 2009
written by incensation, May 29, 2009
Dear Rampage,
The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew (a Semitic language, just as Arabic is). All of the New Testament was originally written in Greek. The entire Bible (Old and New Testaments) has been translated into hundreds of languages - including English and BM.
One of the English translations of the Bible is known as the "King James Version" (which you mention); but why would ANY English translation of the Old Testament or New Testament use the Malay/ Indonesian/ Arabic/ BM word "Allah"? No surprise here, the English translations of the Hebrew Old Testament use the English word "God" (where appropriate - in many places the Hebrew uses other terms to refer to God, such as "Adonai" which is translated by the English word "Lord").
In the BM translation and in the Indonesian translation and in the Arabic translation of the Bible, the word "Allah" is used, because that is the relevant term in those languages for the word which in English is translated as "God".
Finally, I do not know what you mean by the "Roman Catholic Bible". The Bible as authorised for use by the Roman Catholic Church comprises the Old Testament (in Hebrew) and the New Testament (in Greek). Every translation of these authentic original texts into another language (such as English or BM, or Indonesian) has to be officially approved by the Roman Catholic Church before it is acceptable for use by Roman Catholics either in church or privately. The translations of the Bible into BM and Indonesian which have been authorised by the Roman Catholic Church DO use the term "Allah".
The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew (a Semitic language, just as Arabic is). All of the New Testament was originally written in Greek. The entire Bible (Old and New Testaments) has been translated into hundreds of languages - including English and BM.
One of the English translations of the Bible is known as the "King James Version" (which you mention); but why would ANY English translation of the Old Testament or New Testament use the Malay/ Indonesian/ Arabic/ BM word "Allah"? No surprise here, the English translations of the Hebrew Old Testament use the English word "God" (where appropriate - in many places the Hebrew uses other terms to refer to God, such as "Adonai" which is translated by the English word "Lord").
In the BM translation and in the Indonesian translation and in the Arabic translation of the Bible, the word "Allah" is used, because that is the relevant term in those languages for the word which in English is translated as "God".
Finally, I do not know what you mean by the "Roman Catholic Bible". The Bible as authorised for use by the Roman Catholic Church comprises the Old Testament (in Hebrew) and the New Testament (in Greek). Every translation of these authentic original texts into another language (such as English or BM, or Indonesian) has to be officially approved by the Roman Catholic Church before it is acceptable for use by Roman Catholics either in church or privately. The translations of the Bible into BM and Indonesian which have been authorised by the Roman Catholic Church DO use the term "Allah".
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by Rampage, May 29, 2009
written by Rampage, May 29, 2009
Dear incensation,
I appreciate the explanation you have provided, however, I believe that I am putting it correctly by saying that the word Allah was never being used by any of the christian scholar before. Based on your explanation I personally feels that the usage of the word Allah is actually meant for your BM translation purposes. If you look into the scripture, we have to agree that the word Allah was never being used and nowhere to be found. It has been approved by the Roman Chatolic Chuch however the question remains whether or not the word Allah was used in the scripture before.
Translation and versions are to different thing all together. In christianity, you the King James bible with 66 books inside. When I mentioned the Roman Chatolik Bible, I am referring duoay or rheim bible with 73 books inside, 6 more then the Protestant bible. As you can see, it is no longer an issue of translation.
I appreciate the explanation you have provided, however, I believe that I am putting it correctly by saying that the word Allah was never being used by any of the christian scholar before. Based on your explanation I personally feels that the usage of the word Allah is actually meant for your BM translation purposes. If you look into the scripture, we have to agree that the word Allah was never being used and nowhere to be found. It has been approved by the Roman Chatolic Chuch however the question remains whether or not the word Allah was used in the scripture before.
Translation and versions are to different thing all together. In christianity, you the King James bible with 66 books inside. When I mentioned the Roman Chatolik Bible, I am referring duoay or rheim bible with 73 books inside, 6 more then the Protestant bible. As you can see, it is no longer an issue of translation.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by incensation, May 31, 2009
written by incensation, May 31, 2009
Dear Rampage,
You are correct, when you say in your first paragraph that the use of "Allah" is a translation issue (I think that is what you mean by "usage of the word Allah is actually meant for your BM translation purposes").
It is not helpful for you to add, however, that "If you look into the scripture, we have to agree that the word Allah was never being used and nowhere to be found." What "scripture" are you referring to? Not the Hebrew and Greek original texts, of course, and not any of the English translations for obvious reasons. I have told you that "Allah" is used in the BM, Indonesian and Arabic translations of the Bible - and it is these translations that are the only ones relevant to the appearance or non-appearance of the term "Allah".
But we aren't discussing the use of "Allah" in an English (or Hebrew or Greek) context . . the argument is whether the Herald can use it in its BM section. Simple, really . is "Allah" the normal BM word for "God" - that's the beginning and end of the issue.
You are correct, when you say in your first paragraph that the use of "Allah" is a translation issue (I think that is what you mean by "usage of the word Allah is actually meant for your BM translation purposes").
It is not helpful for you to add, however, that "If you look into the scripture, we have to agree that the word Allah was never being used and nowhere to be found." What "scripture" are you referring to? Not the Hebrew and Greek original texts, of course, and not any of the English translations for obvious reasons. I have told you that "Allah" is used in the BM, Indonesian and Arabic translations of the Bible - and it is these translations that are the only ones relevant to the appearance or non-appearance of the term "Allah".
But we aren't discussing the use of "Allah" in an English (or Hebrew or Greek) context . . the argument is whether the Herald can use it in its BM section. Simple, really . is "Allah" the normal BM word for "God" - that's the beginning and end of the issue.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by Rampage, June 01, 2009
written by Rampage, June 01, 2009
If the Herald intends to translate it into BM, the direct translation of the English word "God" in BM is Tuhan rather then using the word Allah. In our Malaysian context, when you use the word Tuhan in BM, as a general perception any ordinary person of any religion would understand that you are reffering to a "God" unless you intend to market the bible towards the Malay Muslim community.
Since the Heralds is so particular with the choice of word with regards to the "direct" translation of god in any particular language, am I correct to say that if you were to translate the bible in Chinese, would the direct translation of the word "god" in chinese would therefore be reffered to as 'Buddha'? Would that be acceptable?
Since the Heralds is so particular with the choice of word with regards to the "direct" translation of god in any particular language, am I correct to say that if you were to translate the bible in Chinese, would the direct translation of the word "god" in chinese would therefore be reffered to as 'Buddha'? Would that be acceptable?
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by FedUPwithAlltheCrap, June 03, 2009
written by FedUPwithAlltheCrap, June 03, 2009
See how silly this issue is and creates unnecessary tension?
Malaysia Boleh!
Malaysia Boleh!
-
- -1
-
-
...
written by incensation, June 06, 2009
written by incensation, June 06, 2009
Dear Rampage,
At least you have now grasped that the issue is the BM word for "God", and not why "Allah" does not appear in any English translation of the Bible (a bizarre topic you introduced many days ago).
The editor of the Herald has given a full and cogent explanation as to why (contrary to your opinion) "Allah" is - and for centuries has been - the correct word for rendering "God" into Malay (now BM), and that Tuhan is used by the Catholic Church in Malaysia (and in Indonesia) to translate "Lord". I do not propose to repeat the evidence here. If you have been following the subject at all closely, you should be aware of the evidence.
Your remarks on "Buddha" are unhelpful in the extreme.
In the first place, Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama) is not considered - even by his devotees - to be God or god, so it is an irrelevance how this term is reproduced in Chinese.
Secondly, "Buddha" is not a Chinese word but is the English form of a Sanskrit word meaning "the awakened one" or "the illumined one" (compare "Christ" which means "the anointed one"). There are more than 20 forms of the term in Chinese, including "Fu-tou" and "Fo".
Among Chinese Catholics, "tianzhu" ("Lord of Heaven") translates what English Catholics call "God" and what BM, Indonesian and Arabic-speaking Catholics call "Allah". Protestants use the term "shen". I leave it to you to discover why there is this divergence.
Neither I nor (I imagine) you are able to discuss the Chinese practice further than what we can read in wikipedia, for example - so I suggest you cease appealing to languages and cultures with which you are not familiar.
I hope that answers your question.
At least you have now grasped that the issue is the BM word for "God", and not why "Allah" does not appear in any English translation of the Bible (a bizarre topic you introduced many days ago).
The editor of the Herald has given a full and cogent explanation as to why (contrary to your opinion) "Allah" is - and for centuries has been - the correct word for rendering "God" into Malay (now BM), and that Tuhan is used by the Catholic Church in Malaysia (and in Indonesia) to translate "Lord". I do not propose to repeat the evidence here. If you have been following the subject at all closely, you should be aware of the evidence.
Your remarks on "Buddha" are unhelpful in the extreme.
In the first place, Buddha (Siddhārtha Gautama) is not considered - even by his devotees - to be God or god, so it is an irrelevance how this term is reproduced in Chinese.
Secondly, "Buddha" is not a Chinese word but is the English form of a Sanskrit word meaning "the awakened one" or "the illumined one" (compare "Christ" which means "the anointed one"). There are more than 20 forms of the term in Chinese, including "Fu-tou" and "Fo".
Among Chinese Catholics, "tianzhu" ("Lord of Heaven") translates what English Catholics call "God" and what BM, Indonesian and Arabic-speaking Catholics call "Allah". Protestants use the term "shen". I leave it to you to discover why there is this divergence.
Neither I nor (I imagine) you are able to discuss the Chinese practice further than what we can read in wikipedia, for example - so I suggest you cease appealing to languages and cultures with which you are not familiar.
I hope that answers your question.
-
- +1
-
-
...
written by incensation, June 08, 2009
written by incensation, June 08, 2009
Dear Rampage,
So much for the linguistic argument, which we can now, I think, consider closed.
There remains your insinuation as to the motive for Catholic usage. The very idea of the Catholic Church "market(ing) the Bible to the Malay Muslim community" just because it uses "Allah" in the BM version is even more paranoid than the Government's own claim that the use of the term by "The Herald" might "confuse" Malay Muslims.
It is not for you, the Government, or anyone, to dictate to Catholics in Malaysia how they are to express their religious concepts in BM, because to do so would infringe upon the rights of freedom of speech and religion contained in the Malaysian Constitution. These are the precise issues raised by "The Herald" in its pending application before the High Court.
The Editor and the publisher of "The Herald" are just as entitled as you to exercise those rights and to initiate a legal challenge to any infringement of them. In "the Malaysian context" it is distinctly subversive of national harmony and of the rule of law to deny anyone rights which have been guaranteed to them under the Constitution.
So much for the linguistic argument, which we can now, I think, consider closed.
There remains your insinuation as to the motive for Catholic usage. The very idea of the Catholic Church "market(ing) the Bible to the Malay Muslim community" just because it uses "Allah" in the BM version is even more paranoid than the Government's own claim that the use of the term by "The Herald" might "confuse" Malay Muslims.
It is not for you, the Government, or anyone, to dictate to Catholics in Malaysia how they are to express their religious concepts in BM, because to do so would infringe upon the rights of freedom of speech and religion contained in the Malaysian Constitution. These are the precise issues raised by "The Herald" in its pending application before the High Court.
The Editor and the publisher of "The Herald" are just as entitled as you to exercise those rights and to initiate a legal challenge to any infringement of them. In "the Malaysian context" it is distinctly subversive of national harmony and of the rule of law to deny anyone rights which have been guaranteed to them under the Constitution.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by PAUL YONG, June 25, 2009
written by PAUL YONG, June 25, 2009
It seems that the word "Allah" is a registered trade mark of some kind, that a (TM) or (R) has to be added.
The government is killing its own language.
The government is killing its own language.
-
- +0
-
-
...
written by jijot ni, June 28, 2009
written by jijot ni, June 28, 2009
ok fine Allah cannot be used but what about Alah with only one L in it? that can surely do the trick.
this so called Hamid Labar was in the wilderness so when he comes back becomes home minister only then he started to learn the work Allah or maybe since the home ministers post is like a demotion to him so he just wants to be famous and start eye catching issues such as this and also the arrest of innocent people when he was the then home ministers being the reason why najib take him out of there or else he is still there now.
what kristian call Allah as God is kristian business. why islam want to control kristian? for what?
it is not being sold to public but to kristian buyers only. even the seller also will make sure they dont sell it to non kristian. why worry?
worry about your own muslim lah. dont go to friday prayers catch them and punish them. caught not puasa catch sue them in syariah court. catch thise who dont pray 5 times a day. those who dont pay zakat sue them and punish. those who gamble. steal. kill. cheat. divorce.
why bother to know how kristian do with thier religion? u want to become kristian meh. then dont be shy lah the church door is open wider for u to joint mah.
this so called Hamid Labar was in the wilderness so when he comes back becomes home minister only then he started to learn the work Allah or maybe since the home ministers post is like a demotion to him so he just wants to be famous and start eye catching issues such as this and also the arrest of innocent people when he was the then home ministers being the reason why najib take him out of there or else he is still there now.
what kristian call Allah as God is kristian business. why islam want to control kristian? for what?
it is not being sold to public but to kristian buyers only. even the seller also will make sure they dont sell it to non kristian. why worry?
worry about your own muslim lah. dont go to friday prayers catch them and punish them. caught not puasa catch sue them in syariah court. catch thise who dont pray 5 times a day. those who dont pay zakat sue them and punish. those who gamble. steal. kill. cheat. divorce.
why bother to know how kristian do with thier religion? u want to become kristian meh. then dont be shy lah the church door is open wider for u to joint mah.
-
- -1
-
-
Write comment
Show/Hide comment form
