Tuesday, November 17, 2009

James White Refutes Zakir Naik

Perhaps Zakir Naik will one day agree to debate an experienced Christian debater like James White. Unfortunately, Dr. Naik refuses to face experienced debaters at the podium, which forces men like James to refute his claims in YouTube videos.

PART ONE


PART TWO


PART THREE

42 comments:

Ari said...

At least something changed! He no longer repeats the VCR analogy but upgraded to a DVD. Who says he isn't on the cutting edge of anti-Christian propaganda?

leviMichael said...

pitty dr james had to spend so much time refuting stupid claims...

oh well...the work of a Christian is never done; we r called to give an answer to all questions/objections: the good the bad and the ugly!

naik and others always say: if the Deity of Jesus is so important, why is there no outright statement from Jesus.

suppose we accept that as a good argument. let's turn this argument around...

If the mentioning of muhammad in the Bible is so important, why is there not a single outright statement in the Bible (not that there r any)?

i wish i could listen to the full debate between shabir and james.

VJ said...

joker naik refuted once again by DR white...pity he had to waste a lot of time on that ignorant fool,

i am pretty sure Dr joker naik will never take up the debate challenge since hes a coward for the last many years.,,
like said by Ali sina hes just a showman..
and all his excellent memory is waste cause it doesn't have logic in scholarly perspective..
anyways its still destined for one place and that HELL....lol

at least osama being the worst of all has the courage to face his opponents..unlike Dr naik...maybe he should learn something from osama..........:)

Fernando said...

VJ saide: «at least osama being the worst of all has the courage to face his opponents...unlike Dr naik»...

yes... I totally agree withe you... and that's whie people likke the Muslim Photon saies Osama is the #1 muslim apologist in the entire World...

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

James White makes a point that is interesting, but doesn't do Islam justice. His favourite statement 'Islamic Apologetics is Bankrupt'.

You know what we have James White (possibly among the top 5 best representative for Protestant apologetics) debating Sami Zatari a 20 year old college entry student!

Awesome James that must have been some mighty challenge indeed.


The times I did see James try to defend the integrity of the scriptures against Shabir Ally and Bart Ehrman epic fail!

1) Of course he was playing devils advocate using a slick line of well the Qur'an does actually not say that the Bible is corrupted. Which is true; however he never gave any positive arguments on why to accept the Bible. Infact maybe some one can show me any book, publication or blog entry where James White gives his 'evidence that demands a verdict' so to speak.
Again epic failure on behalf of James. Great at debating poor on invitation.

Round 2) With Shabir Ally again James just looked tired and like he just strung some arguments together. When Shabir corners him during question and answered James does seem rattled and this is very uncharachteristic of James during cross examination.

The proof that James doesn't really want honest dialouge with Muslims is the very telling fact that Shabir Ally's rejoinders to James are still awaiting replies.

Also don't people as Christians as truth seekers wonder why James would want to debate Zakir Naik? Think about. Zakir Naik is amazing at rattling off verses from the Qur'an and the Bible that's just about it.

So since Zakir Naik doesn't have depth in apologetics that Shabir has why would James want to debate him?

James is a calvanist and he believes that the gospel message is only for the elect although I was impressed by his recent debate in Australlia where I said to myself 'omg' is James actually evangelizing?

Maybe the goal of James White would be to show the Muslim side or those listening attentively just how lacking Zakir Naik is in depth. I think that would be a noble goal and if that is what he sets out to achieve that Zakir Naik is not the juggernaught Indian Muslims think he is than have it mate.

But if James or any Christians/Muslims want meaningful exchange it would be nice to see more written debates, more thought out more time to respond and reflect. I think they have more substance. Though in the entertainment religiously charged atmosphere of today where emotions run high who doesn't want to grab some pop corn and see a Christian and Muslim dawn their egotistical alter egos and clash on a podium of heated exchanges to the thrill and amusement of the dumb downed audience.
I mean another thing too maybe some people simply don't have the skill to debate others.
Case in point Sam Shamoun doesn't debate Ergun Caner.
James White has been running away from Bobb Ross (google him) for a very long time on the issue of regeneration before faith. Why?


James White Refutes Zakir Naik , yawn..
James White debated Nadir Ahmed and a Sami Zatari a 20 year old child.
NUFF SAID!!!

David Wood said...

GrandTaqiyyaMaster,

We know you're a Muslim pretending to be a Christian. If you want to practice Taqiyya, do it somewhere else (or at least make it more difficult to investigate your claims about your beliefs).

mkvine said...

thegrandverbalizer19,

Dr. White debates Sami Zaatari, so what? If a 20 year old Muslim kid is the best that Islam has to offer, then what does that say about Islamic apologetics?.... Nadir Ahmed, the self proclaimed "best Muslim apologist in the world" got owned by Dr. White. Again, if that's the best Islam has to offer, then what does that say about Islam?

Let's see what you have to say about Zakir Naik, "So since Zakir Naik doesn't have depth in apologetics that Shabir has why would James want to debate him?" hmm... so much for the "Doctor of Dawah." So the problem is not Dr. White, the problem is your OWN Muslim apologists. Maybe they should step up their game? You mentioned NON muslim "apologists" such as "Ergum Caner" and "Bob Ross" but what do they have to do with Islam? Also, I did follow your advice and googled "Bob Ross" and all that came up was some white guy with an Afro who paints for a career... Maybe I missed it, give me a link.

Shabir Ally is one of the only Muslim Apologists that I have respect for. He does try to have an engaging dialogue, unlike most of the other Muslim apologists. However, I have to disagree with you on his debate with Dr. White because if Shabir Ally would apply the same standards that he uses to judge the bible, then those same standards can be used to turn around and refute the Qur'an. Oh, I almost forgot, don't even mention Osama Abdullah LOL.

ben malik said...

Is grand-verbal-diarrhea high or something? Dr. White ate up Shabir and Shabir didn't know what hit him. You need to stop smoking that black rock that Muhammad loved to lick.

leviMichael said...

deedat and naik claimed that if we could show them where Jesus said: "I am God; worship Me", they will become Christians. LOL.

i thought that there's no historical evidence for the death and resurection of Jesus (according to islam)

naik, r u telling us that u r willing to believe sumthing that has not evidence for it? but then again, u r a muslim. lol

r u also telling us that the Bible will no longer be corrupted because these words appear in it?

r u also telling us that muhammad is not in the Bible if these words appear in it?

etc, etc, etc...

so, here's ur postition:
1. there's no historical evidence for the death and resurection of Jesus
2. if Jesus said: "I am God; worship Me" i will believe in the death and resurection of Jesus

here's the christian position:
1. there's very good historical evidence to believe in the death and resurection of Jesus
2. the death and resurection of Jesus is the ultimate proof of Jesus' Deity because actions (the resurrection) speak louder than words

although there's plenty of statements in the Gospels to prove that Jesus claimed Diety, they mean nothing without the resurrection!

Ilena said...

james is great. i liked the part when he explained the prophesy abt shabir ally in the old testament. LOL

Nakdimon said...

Zakir Naik makes a bunch of claims about Mo being in the Bible. I wish that Muslims would give Deuteronomy 18:18 up for goodness’ sake. Zakir Naik mentions:

Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.

Dr Naik points us to verse 18 but the entire thing begins at verse 14:

14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD your God has not permitted you to do so. 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die." 17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.


Moses tells the people that those whom live in the land that God has given them listen to people who practice sorcery and divination and God forbids the Israelites to practice those things. Instead of doing that, God will raise among them prophets who will tell them the councils of God. In short: Don’t listen to sorcerers, listen to the prophets that God will raise up. Where will those prophets come from? That we find in verse 15:

נָבִיא מִקִּרְבְּךָ מֵאַחֶיךָ כָּמֹנִי, יָקִים לְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ:
אֵלָיו, תִּשְׁמָעוּן

A prophet FROM YOUR MIDST, from your brothers, like me, will YHWH your God raise for you, to him you will listen. (Literal word-for-word translation)

According to this verse the prophet would come from the midst of the children of Israel. Not from outside of the nation of Israel. Deuteronomy 18 verse 18 is simply a repetition of verse 15. So if verse 15 speaks of an Israeli prophet then verse 18 speaks of the same Israeli prophet. Therefore to apply this prophecy to an Arab “prophet” is completely incorrect and contrary to the prophecy.

I will publish an article dismantling the so-called prophecies from the original Hebrew text that Zakir Naik claimed are about Mo in the Bible.

Nakdimon

Fernando said...

thegrandverbalizer19 said: «The times I did see James try to defend the integrity of the scriptures against Shabir Ally and Bart Ehrman epic fail!»...

Really? eben Shabir Allie recognized thate James White presented a better case than him... And whate aboutte Ehrman? He eben had to writte an apology to his editor explaining why he did not had placed some off the information doctor White presented to him...

how aboutt being mentally intoxicated?

I'm sure Doctor White woulde be more than whilling to debate Zakir Futil Naik everytime everywhere... can you say the same about this latte? YOU KNOW YOU CAN?T: he runs away from true Christian debates as Satan runs away from the Cross...

dear thegrandverbalizer19... be a man and show us all your courage in leaving islam, thate false religioin thate saide thate «I heard the Apostle say: ‘Whoever wants to see Satan should look at Nabtal!'» (Ishaq 243)

OumAmir said...

thegrandverbalizer19 said:

"James is a calvanist and he believes that the gospel message is only for the elect although I was impressed by his recent debate in Australlia where I said to myself 'omg' is James actually evangelizing? "

Good grief, how on earth do you expect anyone to take you seriously if you give no evidence of even understanding of the beliefs of the person you are criticizing?

IslamSINS said...

grandverbalizer (what a misnomer!) - Might you carry your own pompous self to a podium for a debate? It might be great fun, worthy of popcorn and Coke, to hear you try using your multi-sylable gobbledygook to show your ummah how it should be done. Oh wait! Naik fancies himself a bit of a grand verbalizer, also, so you'll need to look elsewhere to distinguish yourself.

Give a Muslim a computer, and they all think they're grand speakers. Of course, they also think "allah" is the same as the God of the Bible, ignoring - or completely ignorant about - the ocean of discrepancies. Allah can't even agree with himself, so 4.82 is a challenge that should never have been issued. We've "pondered" the Koran and found it not only filled with many discrepancies, but saturated with lunacy.

Muhammad was schizophrenic so his "god" is schizophrenic. This imposes schizophrenia on every Muslim, without exception.

YHWH calls His children to be holy because he is holy. Allah calls his slaves to be imbeciles because, . . . well, he is an imbecile.

GV, terminally consigned to the pit for eternity, carried away by his Islamic Tourette's Syndrome.

Repent, GV, and find the brain given you by your creator, Christ, the God who will also judge you in His great and terrible day.

mkvine said...

I forgot to mention, it's beyond me why Muslims like to quote Deuteronomy 18:18 as support for Muhammad. This is the same chapter, which a few verses later says "But if a prophet presumes to speak in my name an oracle that I have not commanded him to speak, or speaks in the name of OTHER gods, he shall die" (v.20). Didn't Muhammad speak in the name of OTHER gods (i.e Allat, Al'Uzza and Manat)? Isn't this the same Muhammad which spoke an oracle (surah) from SATAN and NOT from God? It seems to me that the same verse that Muslims like to quote for Muhammad, only turns around to refute them! According to v.20 Muhammad would be a false prophet, as is evident from the "Satanic Verses." I'm sure Dr. Wood would agree that the Satanic verses is a historical fact.

Semper Paratus said...

It looks to me like the Grandverbalizer may be a grand waste of time - a one-hitter-quitter (just like the one-time Muslim apologist Yahya Snow). I don't think he came in here to interact with anyone on anything; he likely just wanted to say something, anything, so that he could be heard.

Now that he got to see his picture next to his first "published" comments here at Answering Muslims, he will quite probably slink back to the Muslim underground. I highly doubt that he wants to crawl around in the light for very long. That's my prediction, but I'll happily be proved wrong if he wants to actually try and engage the issues that are brought up here.

leviMichael said...

thegrandverbalizer19, u r very smart and intelligent! allah has blessed u with incredible insight and wisdom...

Christianity is no-good compared to islam; can u believe that Christians actually follow the evidence? i mean, whatever happened to blind faith? what a bunch of fools Christians are!

how about taking over osama's prestigious position?

i'm sure u will do a good job; perhaps even better; it will be like osama is still here with us!

All the Christians on this board r so relieved bcos they do not have to engage with osama anymore; he really pulverised our arguments using humour, witt and charm; well...mostly humour...

So will u take the job?
please say yes. please!

Ed said...

James White says interesting things about statements in the Bible where Jesus seems to distinguish himself from God and speak of God as greater. James also points out statements where Jesus identifies himself with God in some sense: "I and the Father are one."

To my mind, that is the paradox of transcendence and immanence. On the one hand, God is absolutely Other. On the other hand, God is absolutely within. One thing that distinguishes Christianity is that it maintains that intense polarity or opposition between transcendance and immanence, accepts both poles as real, and finds the middle term or unity of the poles in the Holy Spirit. The result is a perception of the Trinity. No other religion, so far as I'm aware, maintains that polar unity to the same degree. All other religions favor one or the other pole. Most have favored immanence.

Prior to Judaism, had God ever been perceived as so totally Other to humanity and the cosmos? Prior to Judaism, the distinction could be lost between human and divine, as in the phenomenon of God-kings, and Gurus who claim to be God, but in no way distinguish themselves from God.

Jesus did both: he distinguished himself from God and did so with the consciousness of God's utter transcendence, a consciousness that apparently only the ancient Jews, among the peoples of the earth, had so fully achieved. And after that having been to some extent achieved, to again become one with God would from then on have a completely new meaning, a meaning that incorporates the free individual in a consciousness of a unique and unrepeatable history. No more eternal returns (cf. Eliade).

In this light, perhaps Jesus was the linchpin, the pivot, of all earthly and cosmic evolution.

The further back one goes in history, the closer human beings seem to have felt to the gods and to God, the more human beings felt and perceived spirits and non-physical powers in everything, in every spring, in every animal, in every bush. Those spirits were not projected as a kind of childish scientific explanation of nature. Those spirits were experienced.

But over time, that awareness was gradually lost. Consciousness evolved and changed. Human beings, who had once had little sense of individual self, and were somewhat like babies in the womb of the gods and a more spiritual natural world, more and more were ejected from or fell, with nature, out of that divine presence, by stages, and more and more were thrown back upon themselves, each toward the discovery of his own individuality.

During the historical stage prior to that of the ancient Greeks, most peoples had lived in images, rather than in thought. But with the Greeks, image faded into thought. It was thought still imbued with spiritual life, but it became progressively dryer and emptier as the centuries passed.

The Greeks and Romans in effect carved a sort of hole, with their thinking, into the plenum of existence. They created an empty space within the human being, where once the voices of gods had impelled men and left them unfree. But the emptiness that was coming, with all its darkness and difficulties, was something that could not compel. Nothingness, unlike the voice of a god, does not compel one. That is the nature of thought, at least of ordinary thought.

And Jesus Christ, the divine being, who had been approaching the earthly realm from out of the spirit, perhaps for eons, by many stages, then incarnated, at the low point of human evolution, when human beings would have descended into an abyss through their increasingly complete detachment from the spiritual worlds. Jesus Christ brought the divine ego into humanity, into the hole that had been carved out by thinking. From that point, it has been the task of humanity to incorporate that divine ego, that divine individuality or higher self, as the guide to all future evolution.

I find all that a plausible paradigm. I don't know if it's all entirely true, but it seems to me the best paradigm, when one looks into it enough.

Alcaff said...

Hi

I'm an Indonesian Christian. I know that some of my christian brothers here meant the god of Islam when speaking of "Allah". However, I must confess that I cringe a little whenever someone that "Allah" is not the true God, or is the devil, etc.

We Indonesians always have used the word "Allah" as referring to God and all our Indonesian bibles use the word "Allah" as well since the very beginning

Nakdimon said...

We Indonesians always have used the word "Allah" as referring to God and all our Indonesian bibles use the word "Allah" as well since the very beginning.

Selamat Alcaff, I can imagine that you are uncomfortable about us making that link with Allah of the Quran. My father-in-law is Indonesian (Surabaya - in fact he is there right now). I also know that the Indonesian Bibles are called “al-Kitab”, my father-in-law has one. Indonesia obviously has had Arabic influences in the transmission of the Indonesian translation process. But I understand that when Arabic and Indonesian Christians speak about “Allah” they do not refer to the god of the Quran. And that is too bad, because it gives Muslims the impression that we believe in the same god as they do, which is NOT the case. Allah of the Quran has virtually all the traits of Satan and therefore we can’t help but to make that link. He is Satanic. Maybe we can be more specific so not to create confusion on what we mean.

Would it help if we said "Allah of the Quran is not God" or "Allah of the Quran is Satan"?

Btw I dont understand where the Arabic influence comes from. Why was there chosen to follow the Arabic (obviously Islamic) naming for God?

God Bless,
Nakdimon

Fernando said...

Hi Brother Alcaff...

Saya harap Anda baik...

As you see I still remember your (my antient) language...

I understand clearly your point... Just somme points I reallized during mie path back to Christianity...

1) the arabic word for the generic "God" is, without any doubte, "ilah", as we can reallize from pre-islamic texts...

2) "allah" is the name off the (false) muslim "god" or "ilah"...

3) the reason Christians began to use the noumn "allah" to reffear to "God" in islamic countries was an inculturation (adopting other one culture) by aculturation (denying oneself culture)... somtehing likke when in Rome behabe likke romans... thats the reason the Bibles in muslims countries call "God" bie "allah"...

Semoga Tuhan memberkati Anda dan membantu keluarga Anda...

Fernando said...

Hi Ed...

are you a Christian? or someone in the search off the truth?

in any case I dearly liked your comment... profound and beautifull..

yes... I also believe thate everything is created in Jesus (Col 1:17)... He's not, in his absolute transcendency, exoghenous to the creation...

the biggest transcendency is, as a matter of fact, the inmanece...

a god like allah thate, for the sake off the (mearly human concept) transcendency, cannot intercat withe his creation is not transcendent whatesoever...

The Word off God was always present to His creation and interacting to it since the beggining off the Universe... humanity begann to be more and more transparent to His presence and in the "final days" (Hb 1:2), when that transparence reached its spiritual peak, He incarnated...

Glad to see you thinking aboute this... may God bless you and your familie...

Fernando

Simon said...

alcaff

y do muslims then say THERES NO GOD BUT ALLAH.
if allah is God then whos God is it? the muslims or the worlds?
Whos is Allah?
which bible do u use to describe this Allah? r u sure ur not reading the quran?
my friend if u read and write english then i suggest u read the NT bible the true gospel of Jesus.

Alcaff said...

Hello Nakdimon

"Would it help if we said "Allah of the Quran is not God" or "Allah of the Quran is Satan"?"

Yes that would certainly help. I too don't believe that we worship the same god as the muslims (alhough many christians in Indonesia do believe so). It's just that, personally, I feel very uncomfortable joining in a discussion with another christian brother when he use the word "Allah" as a false god (even though I do understand that he refers the word to the muslim god)

"Btw I dont understand where the Arabic influence comes from. Why was there chosen to follow the Arabic (obviously Islamic) naming for God?"

We have a lot of words in our vocabulary that originated from other languanges such as sanskrit, dutch, english and arabic. It just so happened that we use the arabic languange of "Allah" for God, like many other religious terms that we use. We do have another term that we use in the bible which is TUHAN (which means LORD).

Alcaff said...

Hello Nakdimon

"Would it help if we said "Allah of the Quran is not God" or "Allah of the Quran is Satan"?"

Yes that would certainly help. I too don't believe that we worship the same god as the muslims (alhough many christians in Indonesia do believe so). It's just that, personally, I feel very uncomfortable joining in a discussion with another christian brother when he use the word "Allah" as a false god (even though I do understand that he refers the word to the muslim god)

"Btw I dont understand where the Arabic influence comes from. Why was there chosen to follow the Arabic (obviously Islamic) naming for God?"

We have a lot of words in our vocabulary that originated from other languanges such as sanskrit, dutch, english and arabic. It just so happened that we use the arabic languange of "Allah" for God, like many other religious terms that we use. We do have another term that we use in the bible which is TUHAN (which means LORD).

Alcaff said...

"Hi Brother Alcaff...

Saya harap Anda baik.."

Hi Fernando

Terima kasih dan salam kenal


"I understand clearly your point... Just somme points I reallized during mie path back to Christianity...

1) the arabic word for the generic "God" is, without any doubte, "ilah", as we can reallize from pre-islamic texts...

2) "allah" is the name off the (false) muslim "god" or "ilah"...

3) the reason Christians began to use the noumn "allah" to reffear to "God" in islamic countries was an inculturation (adopting other one culture) by aculturation (denying oneself culture)... somtehing likke when in Rome behabe likke romans... thats the reason the Bibles in muslims countries call "God" bie "allah"..."

Yes that might be true Fernando. However, we just don't have any other word to replace "Allah" with in Indonesian. For me, Allah is the triune God. And when I pray and worship Him, I use that word just like millions of christians in Indonesian do.

"Semoga Tuhan memberkati Anda dan membantu keluarga Anda..."

Thank you for your kind words, may God bless you and your family too

Alcaff said...

"alcaff

y do muslims then say THERES NO GOD BUT ALLAH.
if allah is God then whos God is it? the muslims or the worlds?
Whos is Allah?"

Hi Simon

For us Indonesians, Allah is the generic term for God. We don't have any other substitute for the term "God" in our language. Of course some muslims want to claim that Allah is exclusively their term, but we Indonesians (the majority anyway) usually see the phrase "THERES NO GOD BUT ALLAH" as to mean that there are no other god(s) but GOD. So we would agree with the muslims when they say that, because the way we see it, there is only one true God (monotheism)

"which bible do u use to describe this Allah? r u sure ur not reading the quran??

Of course I'm sure. You can google any Indonesian bible on the web or buy any Indonesian bible and see for yourself.

Alcaff said...

Here is the article from the Indonesian Bible Society regarding the use of Allah in our bible:

Why are the terms “Allah” and “TUHAN” used in our Bible?

Introduction
The use of the term “Allah” is still being called into question by some users of the Bible published by The Indonesian Bible Society (Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia--LAI). This problem has surfaced because there are some groups who refuse to use the term “Allah” and want to revive the use of the name Yahweh or Yahwe. As a matter of fact, in the Hebrew text the name Yahweh or Yahwe is writen with just four consonants (YOD-HE-WAW-HE, “YHWH”) without any vowels. But there are those who insist that these four letters must be pronounced/expressed. They believe that the Indonesian Bible Society translation is deviant and even leads the Christian public astray here in Indonesia. Is it possible that the Indonesian Bible Society, which has been entrusted by the churches with the task of translating the Bible, has made such a basic mistake? Where in fact does the problem lie? The following explanation is meant to set forth briefly the considerations that underlie the Indonesian Bible Society’s policy with regard to this issue.

Why does the Indonesian Bible Society use the term “Allah”?
In the TB version (so-called “New Translation”) of the Bible (1974), which is being used widely throughout the archepelago by both Catholics and Protestants, the term “Allah” is being used as the equivalent of ’ELOHIM, ’ELOAH and ’EL in the Hebrew Bible.

* Gen 1:1 “Pada mulanya Allah (’ELOHIM) menciptakan langit dan bumi.”
* Deut. 32:17 “Mereka mempersembahkan kurban kepada roh-roh jahat yang bukan Allah (’ELOAH).
* Ps 22:1 (v.2 in TB) “Allahku (EL), Allahku, mengapa Engkau meninggalkan aku?”

From the linguistic perspective, one cannot deny that the terms ’ELOHIM, ’ELOAH dan ’EL are connected with the root ’L, the god who was worshipped in the ancient Semitic world. EL, ILU or ILAH are related general forms that were used to refer to the highest god. The ancient Israelites apparently used the term that was used by the nations around them. Does this mean that they were followers of polytheism? Of course not! The ancient Israelite people had a new understanding of these words. The one they worshipped was the one and only Creator of heaven and earth. This very same process is still going on whenever the Word of the Lord reaches various tribes and cultures all over the world.

Some groups who reject the term “Allah”, in fact, are of the opinion that the term “Allah” should not be found at all in the Bible used by Christians. Some give the reason that “Allah” is the name of the Lord worshipped by Muslims. There are also those who connect the term with the gods of the Arab people. If this position were correct, then certainly ’EL, ’ELOAH and also ’ELOHIM would have to be removed from the Hebrew Bible! In addition, some inscriptions that were found in the sixth century show that the word “Allah” was used by Orthodox Christians before the birth of Islam. Up to the present time, Christians in countries such as Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, Jordan and Lebanon still use the term “Allah” in their Bibles. So the word “Allah” cannot be claimed to be the property of only one religion.

Alcaff said...

The Indonesian Bible Society’s policy for translating ’ELOHIM, ’ELOAH dan ’EL is not a new policy at all. The first translation of the Bible, which was done into Greek around the 3rd Century B.C. is the oldest example that we have. The translation which is known by the name of “Septuagint” was done in Alexandria, Egypt and intended for Jewish people who spoke Greek. In Genesis 1:1, for example, the Septuagint uses the term THEOS which normally was used for Greek gods. Evidently, the New Testament also uses the same word as in the following example: ”Terpujilah Allah (THEOS), Bapa Tuhan kita Yesus Kristus” (2 Cor 1:3). Certainly THEOS in this quote was not understood as involving polytheistic worship.

The term “Allah” in the history of Bible translation in the archipelago
Before the “TB”(New Translation) was published by the Indonesian Bible Society in 1974, there had already been several Bibles in the Malay language which was the precursor of the Indonesian language. The Gospel of Matthew translated by A. C. Ruyl (1629) was the first attempt at Bible translation in the archipelago. Interestingly, in this very first Malay translation, the term “Allah” was already being used as in the following example: “maka angkou memerin’ja nama Emanuel artin’ja Allahu (THEOS) ſerta ſegala kita.” (Mat 1:23) The translations that followed also retained the term “Allah”, among these were:

* Translation of Genesis by D. Brouwerius (1662): “Lagi trang itou Alla ſouda bernamma ſeang” (Gen 1:5)
* M. Leijdecker’s translation (1733): “Pada mulanja dedjadikanlah Allah akan ſwarga dan dunja” (Gen 1:1)
* H.C. Klinkert’s translation (1879): “Bahwa-sanja Allah djoega salamatkoe” (Isaiah 12:2).
* W.A. Bode’s translation (1938): “Maka pada awal pertama adalah Firman, dan Firman itu bersama-sama dengan Allah” (John 1:1).

As is evident from the examples above, the term “Allah”, which only recently has been called into question by a portion of the Christian community, has already been in use for hundreds of years in translations of the Bible which have been circulating throughout the archipelago. In short, when they continued to use the term “Allah”, the team of translators from the Indonesian Bible Society (LAI) considered the weight of history as well as the process of translating cross-culturally which has already been evident in the Bible itself.

What is the basis for the Indonesian Bible’s Society’s policy with regard to the problem of “YHWH”?

Admittedly, the orgin of the name YHWH is not an easy one to trace. From a linguistic point of view, YHWH is often linked with the word HAYAH ‘be, become’, as is expressed in Exodus 3:14: “Firman Allah (’ELOHIM) kepada Musa: ‘AKU ADALAH AKU.’ (’EHYEH ’ASHER ’EHYEH). Lagi firman-Nya: ‘Beginilah kaukatakan kepada orang Israel itu: AKULAH AKU (’EHYEH) telah mengutus aku kepadamu.’” The exact meaning of this expression is not known anymore, but some understand it to refer to the Lord’s presence who always exist in the middle of His people.

Alcaff said...

On what basis does the Indonesian Bible Society use “TUHAN” (LORD) (all in capital letters) as an equivalent for YHWH? To answer this question, we need to pay attention to the history of the Jewish community after the period of captivity when they were very wary of expressing the holy name YHWH directly because out of a feeling of deep reverence. In addition, the exact pronunciation of YHWH is/was no longer known. Each time that the word YHWH was encountered in the Hebrew Bible, they would say, ’ADONAY which means ‘Tuhan’ (‘Lord’). This pronunciation tradition was also clearly evident in the Septuagint which uses the word KYRIOS (‘Tuhan’ “Lord”) for YHWH, as in the following example: ”KYRIOS menggembala¬kan aku, dan aku tidak kekurangan apa pun” (Ps. 23:1).

Apparently, Jesus and the apostles followed the same tradition! For example, in the temptation in the wilderness, Yesus answers the temptations of the Devil by quoting from Deuteronomy 6:16: “Ada pula tertulis: Janganlah engkau mencobai Tuhan (KYRIOS), Allahmu” (Mat 4:7) In this quote the name YHWH is not used but rather KYRIOS (LORD). If the name YHWH has to be written as in the Hebrew text why didn’t the writer of the Gospel of Matthew retain the original name? Similarly, in the letters of the apostle Paul, the name YHWH is never used. For example in Romans 10:13, Paul quotes Joel 2:32: “Barangsiapa yang berseru kepada nama Tuhan (KYRIOS) akan diselamatkan”. It is evident that the word that is used here is KYRIOS (LORD) not YHWH.

Is it possible that Jesus and the apostles are following a tradition that is wrong? Of course not! On the contrary, the writers of the New Testament were following the tradition of the Jewish people who said ’ADONAY (‘TUHAN’) each time they encountered the name YHWH. Because the New Testament was written in Greek, the word KYRIOS was used as the equivalent of ’ADONAY which reflected the tradition for the pronunciation of YHWH.

In short, the Indonesian Bible Society is following the example of Jesus and the earliest Christians with regard to the pronunciation of YHWH. In the TB (‘New Translation’) version of the Bible, the Indonesian Bible Society’s term “TUHAN” is written with all capital letters as an equivalent of ’ADONAY which reminds us of that pronunciation tradition. This spelling, in fact, intentionally differentiates between “Tuhan” (“Lord”) (with only the first letter being capitalized) which is the equivalent of the word ’ADONAY when it does not represent YHWH. Note the following example: “Sion berkata: ‘TUHAN (YHWH) telah mening¬gal¬kan aku dan Tuhanku (’ADONAY) telah melupakan aku.’” (Yes 49:14). This distinction, of course, is not relevant for the New Testament, which does not retain the spelling YHWH.
Various modern translations follow the same tradition, for example in English: “the LORD” (New Jewish Publication Society Version; New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, New King James Version, Today’s English Version); German: “der HERR” (Einheits¬übersetzung; the Bible according to the translation of Martin Luther); Dutch: “de HEER” (Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling); French: “le SEIGNEUR” (Traduction Oecumé¬ni¬que de la Bible).

Alcaff said...

Conclusion
The policy of the Indonesian Bible Society with regard to the divine names has not been made lightly or simplistically. Various aspects have been thoroughly considered, among others:

* The original texts (Hebrew and Aramaic for the Old Testament; Greek for the New Testament) and their interpretations
* The traditions of the Lord’s people in the Old and New Testaments.
* The history of the use of the divine names in the translation of the Bible in a variety of languages and cultures from age to age.
* The policy that teams of Bible translators have used around the world, especially those associated with the United Bible Societies.

There has been agreement among churches, both Catholic and Protestant who have been using the Bible published by the Indonesian Bible Society up until the present time. For example, as the translation of the TB version of the Bible by the Indonesian Bible Society was being finalized in 1968, a consultation was held in Cipayung with leaders and representatives of churches from a variety of denominations. At this consultation, among other things, it was agreed that “Allah” would continue to be used as in the previous translations.
The Indonesian Bible Society has never operated under the pretense that their translations were perfect and would never need to be improved. However, considering the lengthy and painstaking process which was followed in order to publish the Alkitab (Indonesian Bible), the demands of some groups who would like to remove or restore certain names, cannot be met without deliberation. In every decision-making process related to the translation of the Bible, various factors have to be carefully considered with regard to the original texts, interpretations, translation traditions as well as their impact on the fellowship and witness of the Lord’s people as a whole, especially in our own country.
Finally, fully conscious of our human limitations in God’s presence, we offer to Him our praise and thanksgiving who has expressed his revealed Word to train people in righteousness and equip His people for every good work. (2 Tim 3:16-17). He is the one who has prepared people to incarnate the Word of His truth in a variety of languages and cultures from age to age. Everything is from Him and through Him and to Him. To Him be the glory forever and ever.

Jakarta, May 2009
Indonesian Bible Society

http://www.alkitab.or.id/content/view/100/2/lang,en/

Gem said...

Hi Alcaff,

Saya dari Indonesia dan sekarang tinggal di luar negeri. (I am from Indonesia and now am living overseas).

When I was back in Indonesia I kept talking to people that the attributes of Christian God (Christian Allah) are totally opposite to the one of Muslims'.

Since it is a total opposite to name it 180 degree opposite direction indicates Islamic God (Allah) is no more than satan.

Thus, we may use the same word "Allah" however we refer to different Being. One with its Supreme Quality in Trinity and the other the satanic quality.

I guess the intrinsic meaning in a context defines the word not the other way round.

Subsequently, the confusion should be resolved easily by its vast distinction.

Again, as Dr James White reiterated many many many many times in his debates that "CONTEXT" matters.

Semoga Allah Tritunggal Kristen memberkati anda.

May Christian Triune God bless you.

Adam said...

Peace of Lord Jesus Christ be with you Gem and Alcaff.

Regarding the name of God.

In my mother tongue We call God as Dev(Dave) or Deva. For Jesus we call Jezu and in other Indian Languages Yeshu, Yeshua, Yesu

In Hindi or Sanskrit and many North Indian Languages (Indo-European) We Call God as

Dev (DIO in Latin)
Bhagwan
Ishwar
Param Ishwar

In Tamil and other South Indian Language they call God

Kadaval
Devvam
Devaru

In Urdu and in Kashmiri We call God

Khuda
Khudawal

Many Muslim or almost all Muslim of the Indian Subcontinent (Indo-Pak) Called Khuda.

But these days Saudi funded Wahabbi scums are forcing people to use ALLAH instead of Khuda. As They claim ALLAH is a right term to call their God.

As I know Just like Afghanistan and Hindia
(India, Bharat, Hindustan, Huda, Hind) Hindunesia (Indonesia) was also a Hindu country. Why dont you search for the ancient name or generic name for God.

Its better Not to use ALLAH as the Kaaba worshippers are alredy forcing their people to use ALLAH.

Our Rural Indian pronounce Indonesia as Hindunesia.


Dear Gem,

Regrding debating Kaaba Worshippers

I think its our duty to Expose the Kaaba and the false prophet. But keeping in mind to make apologetics as a tool to heal and win than a sword

About this man Zakir Naik

He is running away to debate Christian Apologists and Hindu scholors from Arya Samaj (Arya Samaj a Hindu sect which against statue worships just like Bible christians)

Zakir fool his worshipers

using Protestant literature against Catholics

Jehovah Witness Literature against Christians

Arya Samaj literature against All Hindus.

Arya Samaj has challenged Zakir regrding Zakir claims of muhamMAD in the vedas the Kalki Avatar.

The Shivaism sect of Hinduism claims Kaaba was one a Hindu place of worship. They are proving proof and logic.

Many India muslim (poorly educated) are even aware of islam. Hence men like zakir rule their mind.

Brianman said...

Is this the best James White can do? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Oh my God, please.

James white always says "could any other prophet say this? and How can Jesus not be a diety?" this is just as bad as Zakir Naik speed reading.

I actually wanted to hear stronger arguments from James White that I can work on.

Any Trinitarian Christians, please respond to this:
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=172

AND

http://www.robertroberg.com/writings/scam.html

And please affirm if they are correct or not.


Thanks a lot guys.

Fernando said...

Brianman...

1) you asked: «Is this the best James White can do?»... no it's not... butt to bee hable to speak to those who are on the same level off Zakir Naik one must nott be over technical... it woulde be like someone speaking about Trignometry to a 6 years old... have you read any off James White books? perhaps itt coulde you good... butt I doubt: you could nott eben present an argumentation on why Whites job was not good: you just played the old clown tactic...

2) about your links...

a) trinitarian Christians is a tautology... just like Christian monotheíst...

b) no, they are wrong... clearly wrong... they don't eben know the basic greek gramatic tahte explains teh difference between "noun" and "predicate noun"...

Christian aPaulogist said...

It's amazing how almost all muslims who ask about Christianity ask the very same format of questions such as: Where did Jesus say He's God, worship me!

Well, first of all, even if Jesus claimed to be God with no ambiguity, do you still need to hear him add: "Worship me"? of course, no, because if he really would say it in that format people would just fall on their knees in worship (IF they believed him for merely saying it). So, what really remains of the question is: Did Jesus claim to be God? Yes he did, and specifically he said it to "Muslims":

First, A question to the muslim: If Jesus used one of God's 99 names that you have wouldn't that make him saying he IS God?
One of God's 99 names in Islam is:
Al-Haqq (الحق), which means the Truth .. well check this out:
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Did any one notice that?

Today, many of the arab speaking muslim scholars would say: "Al-Haqq said" when they want to quote the Quran. And here we have Jesus saying: I am the WAY, the TRUTH (Al-Haqq), and "the Life" ..

Won't you worship him then?

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Brian:

I would be happy to discuss John 1 with you but right now I'm not sure what good it would do.

You have already said you reject the Gospels along with the rest of the NT because they were written after Paul.

You also have admitted that in the past you have lied here about you believe.

As it is you seem to be not really interested in the truth but instead only interested in confirming your own opinions.This sort of thing is not new. Jesus often delt with people who pretended to be seekers but were not.

It is possible I am wrong but you have given no evidence to that effect yet.

So before we can proceed you need answer a few questions

1) By what standard do you judge the truth of a proposition

2) If it were shown that the Bible taught something contrary to what you believe would you reject your belief or reject the Bible?

3)If the Bible taught something about the nature of God that was difficult to understand or except would you trust the Bible or would you instead assume an error?

4)If there is a question to which you are unqualified to judge (Greek grammar or syntax for example) will you commit to educating yourself from scholarly sources with no ax to grind before you decide.
How you answer these questions will go a long way in determining the kind of response you get from me.

I don't mean to be harsh but untill you are realy willing to be serious you will only be wasteing your and my time.

Peace

eagle said...

zakir naik is such a liar and deciever because his Allah is the best deciever according to Quran and his prophet Muhammad allowed Muslims to lie in three cases on of them is in the war ind this is kind of war and the war is deception . Islam is from Satan and Muhammad was driven by Satan and the best proof to that as whan Muhammad spoke the Satanic Verses

pure said...

Difference between Muslims and Christians and their faiths is this:
1)Christians believe and respect all the prophets from the beginning and the books they wrote with the inspiration of God and we protected them and we included all of them in our bible and answer any allegations towards them.

-> Muslims speak about all the previous prophets as though they have respect and they believe God sent books to them,but they undoubtely believe that All the books are corrupted except Quran and attack all the books of the previous prophets.

2)Christians have to defend all the previous prophets books (40+ prophets),believing that God is trustworthy and he is allpowerfull and he is just and not partial as he looks towards all the prophets equally and believe that he has guarded all.So we are defending a book written 4000yrs before i.e; Torah.

->Muslims have to defend only the book of 1 prophet Muhammad for any allegations,because according to them all the previous prophets are fools as Allah thought it not to preserve all of them.Only Muhammad is the Rocker.

So more burden on christians rather than muslims as we doesnt agree that God's word is corrupted and we answer any allegations against all the prophets which God previously sent,which includes 66 books.
===================================
is this the Character of God that he didnt Guard any of the previously sent books,(1024 prophets and 343 messangers).
Defntly i believe God's character is not of this Type,and yahweh is trustWorthy.

So with the above criteria Sura Al-ikhlas suits yahweh but Not Allah.isnt not?

Iwona said...

I Like your way of USELESS Attack on Islam and on DR ZAKIR NAIK.

James White and David Wood if you people thinks we muslim and Dr Zakir Naik are wrong then Please come and Debat..

Come and prove your point..

ISLAM DOES NOT DEMAND BLIND BELIEF.

“INVITE (ALL) TO THE WAY OF THY LORD, WITH WISDOM AND BEAUTIFUL PREACHING, AND ARGUE WITH THEM IN WAYS THAT ARE BEST AND MOST GRACIOUS!” [AL-QUR’AN 16:125]

Your work on this website is Rubbish , so come and prove your point not like one way traffic..

http://www.irf.net

Iwona said...

No need of lectures...

Think that if Jesus is God , then for God is it very difficult to say that " Jesus " i am God worship me, where he did so many mircle to prove about himself that he is true Phrophet of God, so for Jesus that was very difficult that i am God..
Please stop saying useless talk and come and have a dabeat and prove all the muslim that Jesus is god and all the muslim are worng.Quran is not words book..



Dr. Zakir Naik
President Islamic Research Foundation
Tel: +91 2223736875
Fax : +91 2223730689

http://www.irf.net/index.php?option=com_contact&view=category&catid=12&Itemid=28

Hardik Modi said...

I think Zakir Naik has used this "There is not a single unequivocal statement, not a single unambiguous statement in the complete Bible, where Jesus Christ Himself says that, 'I am God. Worship Me,'" tactic a thousand times! I've seen many Christians ask him a question regarding Jesus Christ's divinity and this is answer that he always gives! Ask about Jesus from John, he will give you this answer. There was another Christian who asked about Jesus being the Alpha and the Omega from Revelation, and again he launched this boring and unconvincing argument. Ask him about Jesus being divine from Isaiah, and again this is what he will tell you. Ask him about Jesus' divinity and he will give you this same answer again and again. Ask him about Jesus' existence since all eternity and you'll get this answer. Go to YouTube and see how many have asked him and he repeats this statement over and over again. That's the only answer he has! Foolish guy!