Prohibition of ‘Allah’ and Other Words: Forcing Christians to Dishonor God

The government directive also emasculates Christian religious language and strips it of a sense of sacredness that helps to usher the worshipper into the presence of God and enables the worshipper to relate to God….It is prepared to invent/coin words just to deny Christians the right to identify and express what God has said/revealed to them: Wahyu should be substituted with ‘Revelasi’, ‘Nabi’ with ‘propet’ and ‘Al-Kitab’with ‘Baibel’ (note that these words are not even found in the Kamus Dewan)….n effect, the government is not respecting Christianity; and is asking Christians to commit sacrilege, that is, to dishonor their God.

Prohibition of ‘Allah’ and Other Words: Forcing Christians to Dishonor God

The Malaysian government’s recent decision to prohibit non-Muslims from using the word ‘Allah’ is not an ad-hoc decision made on the spur of the moment. It is only the tip of the ice-berg in a move to steadily enforce policies that restrict the freedom of Christians. This is evident if we look at the matter in a wider, historical perspective.

The beginning of the crisis occurred in the 1980s when Church leaders received a directive from the Ministry of Home Affairs (Bahagian Kawalan Penerbitan, Kementerian Dalam Negeri Malaysia) stating that the following words (listed in the first column) are not to be used in the Al Kitab (Bible). The authorities also suggested that the Church should use alternative words (second column) to replace the prohibited words. Continue reading “Prohibition of ‘Allah’ and Other Words: Forcing Christians to Dishonor God”

‘Allah’ and Linguistic Hegemony

The lofty term ‘language planning’ degenerates to a form of interest-bound modern social-political planning. Williams (1981:221) points out that it is high time that we recognize that language planning is undertaken by those who are in a position of power to undertake such policies and is therefore designed to serve and protect their interests…The recent policy to prohibit non-Muslims from using certain terms on the ground that there are Islamic is in reality a projection of power for the purpose of controlling minority groups – euphemistically described as cultural and language planning for social harmony when in reality it is cultural and religious cleansing.

‘Allah’ and Linguistic Hegemony

Some readers may be forgiven for thinking that the recent controversy arising from the absurd decision of the Cabinet to ban non-Muslims from using ‘Allah’ is nothing more than unnecessary quibbling over a trivial matter. Surely there are more important things to be concerned about than fighting over a word? If only such readers would tell that to the Cabinet and not merely offer well-meaning but misguided advice asking non-Muslims to submit to the Cabinet.

Indeed it is more than just a matter of semantics. Whoever has the sole power to define how I may use my primarily language defines my world and dominates it. The recent policy to prohibit non-Muslims from using certain terms on the ground that they are Islamic is in reality a projection of power for the purpose of controlling minority groups – euphemistically described as cultural and language planning for social harmony when in reality it is cultural and religious cleansing. Continue reading “‘Allah’ and Linguistic Hegemony”

‘Allah’ is for all Malay Speaking People in Nusantara

The article written in Malay refutes the assumption that a few million Muslims in Peninsular Malaysia have the exclusive right and final authority to define how the Malay language may be used for religious purposes.

Sudah di masa pra-Islam, al-ilâh disambung menjadi Allâh. Dan dalam agama orang-orang Arab pra-Islam, kata ini digunakan untuk menunjuk pada dewa yang paling tinggi di antara dewa-dewa yang lain yang masing-masing mempunyai namanya sendiri. Namun kata Allâh itu sendiri bukan nama, seperti di atas diterangkan. Dengan demikian, kata Allâh sudah ada dalam bahasa Arab sebelum Islam dalam zaman jahiliyya atau zaman politeis. Kata itu bukan ciptaan orang Islam, ia juga tidak baru muncul dalam Al-qur’ân Al-karîm, melainkan, dari sudut bahasa, ia merupakan kata biasa dalam bahasa Arab lepas dari ikatan dengan salah satu agama tertentu.

To download PDF version of Article: Click on title “Mengenai Kata ALLAH”

Mengenai Kata ALLAH (Download PDF File)

‘Allah’ is for all Malay Speaking People in Nusantara (Malay Archipelago)

Recently, the Malay media has printed several articles that insist non-Muslims cannot use the word Allah to describe the supreme God they worship. One such article, written by the Director-General of IKIM (Institute of Islamic Understanding), appears in the following site: http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2008&dt=0106&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Rencana&pg=re_03.htm

It is a pity that this article is printed only in the Malay press. Its assertion that only Muslims have exclusive authority to decide how Bahasa Malaysia may be used for religious purposes would certainly draw a vigorous response in the English media (though certainly not in the censored mainstream English newspapers). Perhaps the article is intended more to ‘educate’ Malay readers even though readers of the Malay press show little interest in the issue. Political scientists may also be interested to note that the Government issued a gag order to prevent further discussion of the topic only after Muslim scholars were first allowed to express their views in the press. Continue reading “‘Allah’ is for all Malay Speaking People in Nusantara”

No one Religion can Monopolize or Copyright the Term ‘Allah’

The Deputy Minister of Internal Security, Johari Baharum, recently declared that only Muslims may use the word ‘Allah’ to describe the God they worship…. This article offers a firm, rational and clear rebuttal to the flawed rationale that underlies the Deputy Minister’s declaration.

The declaration is questionable for the following reasons: 1) its logic is flawed 2) it omits historical facts 3) it shows disrespect for cultural identity and 4) it disregards Constitutional rights of Malaysian citizens.

Preface: I wrote this article on Christmas Eve 2007 with reasonable expectation that it will be printed by at least one local newspaper. Unfortunately, this was not to be because of circumstances beyond my control (or rather circumstances that are in full government control).

The controversy arising from the government’s stated policy to prohibit non-Muslims from using the word ‘Allah’ to refer to the supreme God or Creator is a fast developing story. The latest news is that the government has alllowed the Catholic Herald to renew its annual publishing permit without insisting that the Herald stop using the word ‘allah’. Continue reading “No one Religion can Monopolize or Copyright the Term ‘Allah’”

Postmodernity and the Crisis of Truth

Anthony Thiselton links Postmodernity to the crisis of truth. To this one would naturally ask the question, “Why a crisis of truth�?? Is the linkage a matter or causality, that is, to suggest that Postmodernity is the cause of the crisis, or is the linkage merely descriptive? In the latter case, Postmodernity would be a description of a general condition of society where people in general and intellectuals in particular have lost confidence in attaining consensus regarding matters of truth.

What are the contours of the contemporary crisis of truth? One cannot help but be struck by the proliferation of theories spinning across the various disciplines of Western academia. Such proliferation is accompanied by intense disputes with no obvious winner. There is no evidence that the competing theories will be subsumed under an overarching, unifying framework. The resulting fragmentation of knowledge leads to doubts about the viability of the academic enterprise in securing certain or indubitable knowledge

A few years ago, I was asked to respond to a paper written by Anthony Thiselton at a conference on postmodernity. Thiselton subsequently published his paper, but it doesn’t seem like there is any chance that my paper will be published. I might as well share it with my readers and friends before the topic (or at least what I wrote) becomes irredeemably out of date:

—————————-
POSTMODERNITY AND THE CRISIS OF TRUTH
A Response to Anthony Thiselton
POSTMODERNITY ON LOCAL TERMS
Anthony Thiselton’s paper has an obvious polemical thrust. As such, it is easier to determine what Thiselton rejects rather than what he affirms concerning the matters of theory of truth. He mounts a strong critique of the pragmatic version of Postmodernity exemplified by Richard Rorty. In this regard, I share much in common with Thiselton. As such, it would be more useful for me to attempt a critical appropriation rather than a critique of his paper. By critical appropriation I mean the need to identify and analyze the dynamics of Postmodernity. By appropriation I mean my intention to relocate the discussion of Thiselton’s paper from an evidently Western context to an Asian one. Continue reading “Postmodernity and the Crisis of Truth”

A Christian Social Vision for Nation-Building

Christian social engagement aims at building a covenant nation based on justice and religious liberty for all. It may include the following agenda:
1) Educating Christians on the rights and responsibility of citizenship.
2) Promoting civil society through NGOs and voluntary societies.
3) Supporting particular political candidates.
4) Sustaining the prophetic witness of the Church against the arrogance of power by embodying submission to the kingdom of God.
5) Affirming the moral right to civil disobedience as loyal citizens.

A CHRISTIAN SOCIAL VISION FOR NATION BUILDING

A Christian Philosophy for the Common Good
“The Church must exercise prophetic witness towards wider society and to government,” exclaimed the young man as he urged his friends to join a candlelight vigil in front of the High Court to express their concerns over a recent High Court judgment that was seen to be in conflict with fundamental liberties.

I can sense the earnestness of this young man and other young people like him who are willing to fight for social justice. They challenge the older generation not to remain indifferent out of cynicism towards authorities who enforce unjust policies that make life difficult for the common people. These two groups demonstrate two opposing tendencies among Christians on how to relate to wider society. Some Christians retreat into their spiritual ghetto so that authorities will leave them in peace. In effect, these Christians compromise their ideals of justice and end up supporting the status quo. Continue reading “A Christian Social Vision for Nation-Building”

CURRENT CONCERNS FOR CHRISTIAN INTELLECTUAL WITNESS

We must address the challenge of the cultured despisers of Christianity if Christian witness is to gain credibility:
– Secure a thorough understanding of the modern world.
– Identify crucial issues that must be addressed if we are to follow J. H. Bavinck mission strategy to annex culture, to take every thought captive in Christ.
– Re-conceptualize the framework for Christian reflection and set priorities for theological education. All too often activism replaces serious theological reflection when we act under the tyranny of the urgent. But in the absence of a distinct intellectual framework and with our inability to ferret out and critique the presuppositions of dominant thought patterns of the world, we end up merely responding to the agenda set by non-Christian elites and eventually conform to the spirit of the age.
– Ensure that theology is both grounded in Biblical tradition and critically correlated with contextual realities. This demands a fresh look at theological education and how we train Christian thinkers and pastors.

CURRENT CONCERNS FOR CHRISTIAN INTELLECTUAL WITNESS
Themes – Modernity and Resurgence Religion and clash of civilizations; Theology of culture and social engagement; Religion and Culture; Ecclesiology and cultural plurality; Creation and New Age Spirituality; Science and Religion

I. INTELLECTUAL WITNESS TO WIDER SOCIETY
Adolf Harnack observed that the early church gained ascendancy because they not only out-loved their competitors; they also out-thought their critics. The early Christians reveled in the intellectual truth and lucidity of Christian revelation. They were able to rejoice in the order and diversity of nature and social life which they saw as a witness to the greatness of the Creator. They extolled the boundless goodness of God who endow humans with reason, freedom and the promise of immortality. Christianity was commended as enhancement and not an encumbrance to reason and understanding. In short, Christianity was commended as the true philosophy. Continue reading “CURRENT CONCERNS FOR CHRISTIAN INTELLECTUAL WITNESS”

Muslim Reception/Rejection of Modernity (Part 2)

It has been noted above that Islamists opt for a selective appropriation of the rational structures and goods of Modernity without critically submitting their own traditional values to self-critique. The justification for this strategy finds support from the flourishing of the discipline of Civilizational studies in the universities. Islamic thinkers who seek to undermine the suggestion that the supremacy of Western modernity is permanent or that history of progress is linear following the path set by Western nations.

Muslim Reception/Rejection of Modernity (Part 2)
Part 2
Islamic History and Civilizational Studies

It has been noted above that Islamists opt for a selective appropriation of the rational structures and goods of Modernity without critically submitting their own traditional values to self-critique. The justification for this strategy finds support from the flourishing of the discipline of Civilizational studies in the universities. Islamic thinkers who seek to undermine the suggestion that the supremacy of Western modernity is permanent or that history of progress is linear following the path set by Western nations. We find Islamists appealing to Spengler, Toynbee, Malik Bennabi and above, all Ibn Khaldun, to support a cyclical view of the growth and decline of Civilizations. Continue reading “Muslim Reception/Rejection of Modernity (Part 2)”

Disaster: Lost Posts

Disaster Strikes!

Never love blogging more than necessary. It is more unreliable than a fickle lover

DISASTER STRIKES!

Lost data due to file corruption while updating MySQL for the server, and of all things backuped the wrong files. Anyway, after some tweaking we got back most of the posts. Hopefully, I will be able to repost some the lost data sometime in the future.

Never love blogging more than necessary. It is more unreliable than a fickle lover.

Muslim Reception/Rejection of Modernity (Part 1)

My thesis is that there is a deeply felt, but nevertheless unexpressed anxiety among Muslims, especially among the religious elite, that Modernity (in the technical sense that I will describe below) will ultimately undermine Islam as a viable framework for a coherent community in the modern world. Hence, we witness the temptation among Muslims to find solace and security in dogmatic and defensive Islam and the resurgence of intolerant Islam in Malaysia.

MUSLIM RECEPTION /REJECTION OF MODERNITY

Introduction
It is a fact of life that people hold conflicting political and religious views and follow different ways of life. It is imperative that the government frames social policies that encourage people of various cultures to identify commonality (not homogeneity) to build a harmonious society. Such an endeavor in turn requires building a social ethos that allows for tolerance of diversity, dialogue and openness to change in order to equip a citizenry with the intellectual capacity to confront the overwhelming pace of change of the modern world.

But what non-Muslims witness coming from the Muslim community is rejection of the vital pre-requisites for the development of a flourishing modern society. We hear prominent Muslims condemning liberalism although liberalism at its best encourages citizens use reason to weigh moral choices rather than follow traditional authority blindly. Secular politics is rejected as essentially antipathetic to religion when it is specifically designed to provide a neutral platform for different religions to work out compromises that are essential for a plural society. Other Muslim leaders reject the call for interfaith dialog. Religious tolerance is vigorously condemned through mass demonstrations that find their way even into the National Mosque. Finally, there are the regular calls for banning of various cultural activities on grounds that such activities (music festivals or films) are against Islam. Continue reading “Muslim Reception/Rejection of Modernity (Part 1)”