Christians must judge RIGHTEOUSLY..

michael sibinil said,

January 8, 2010 at 3:27 am

Dear Tiwas,

I supposed you have read what I have written some 6 months ago. Praise the Lord JESUS CHRIST that you posed the question: "WHAT’S WRONG IN REFERRING TO GOD AS ALLAH?" A valid question no doubt.

Would you call yourself a Christian if you had not thoroughly examined the Bible and found that it is true, not just some religious fables concocted by some deluded Jews who were followers of a religious lunatic named "Jesus of Nazareth"? The Jews of that day referred to my Savior and God as a lunatic; if you were alive during His time, wouldn’t you have cried out aloud thus: "Crucify Him! Crucify Him"?

The Jewish zealots genuinely believed that they had the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob on their side and yet Jesus told them that they had the Devil as their father! To them the son of Mary was a confirmed lunatic; one who professed to be able to forgive the sins of sinners and that if they would reject Him as the Way, the Truth and the Life, the consequence was eternal damnation! Just how many took Him seriously? Would you have if you were there listening to His no-nonsense, hard-hitting, nerve wrecking, and absolutely offensive preaching? Did Jesus tell them that it did not matter what ‘god’ or ‘gods’ they wanted to believe in and worship?

Did He say: "For you who hailed from India and beyond, because you came from that part of the world, you have your Buddha who came into the world before me. He’s OK, for in his teachings, goodness abounds and that’s where god exists. You do not have to embrace my name as your Saviour and God. There are also so many names of gods from which you may choose to worship.

You worship anyone of them and you are actually worshiping Me. Call your god ‘Sahng-Ti’ or ‘Buddha’, it makes very little difference. And to you descendants of Ishmael, be happy with your desert gods. For it doesn’t really matter what names you ascribe to the Creator of the universe – Buddha, Zeus, Kinoringan, Allah, Shang-Di, Caesar, Hitler, the Popes, et al… – your salvation is assured.

Just be honest with your god or better believe in as many gods as you like. The way to heaven is wide and broad. Who said it is strait and narrow is the way to eternal life?" Doesn’t the name of God matter? It sounds as if it’s no big deal to you. What’s stopping you from calling the name of your god as Kinoringan or Apollos or Zeus? These are "gods" aren’t they? Are you saying that etymologically, though different in their pronounciation, these words/names actually refer to the SAME God of the Bible – who is called JAH, YHWH, YAHWEH or the "I AM" by the Jews or JESUS CHRIST by the Christians?

I have posed a hundred and one questions in my previous articles, why don’t you answer EACH one of them with OBJECTIVE EVIDENCES to support whatever your theories are pertaining to Allah being the Arabic word for Elohim or God? You are NOT being fair to me, are you? Anyone can ask "What’s wrong with the use of Allah in the Kitab?" Have you ever pondered upon all the questions that I have posted in this forum? Are you without a shadow of a doubt that the pronoun "Allah" is truly and genuinely the Arabic word for "GOD" or "ELOHIM"? Give me a proof.

Give me proofs that JESUS referred to Elohim as Allah in the Arabic? Or that Abraham referred to Yahaweh as Allah when he shared his Elohim with Hagar (his Egyptian concubine who bore the Ishmaelites)?

Are you saying that EVERYTHING in the Bible is to be taken by FAITH alone? And that historical, archeological evidences for the existence of the various characters and places in the Bible are irrelevant? Are we not to examine the Word of God as how the Berean Christians did? If Jesus claimed to be the "ONLY begotten Son of the Living God", aren’t there Bible verses or Scriptures that evidenced Hios cliamed of Divinity and His Deity?

If you were a Protestant, who did you get the idea that Mary has many other sons and daughters? Or was Mary a perpetual virgin all her life till the day she died and that in sometime in 1950 (therabout), God crowned her in the 3rd Heaven as the "QUEEN OF HEAVEN"? Do you believe that without asking for an evidence? Or, do you reject SOLA SCRIPTURA? May be you don’t and that your religion is akin to EVOLUTION – both progressive and ever-changing according to the signs of the times; i.e., if 1500 years ago, one Roman pontiff rejected outright the very idea that Mary was born without sin (Immaculate Conception) whilst only recently (as early as the ’50s), a neo-ecumenical papist "god" (who had the audacity tp refer to himself as the "HOLY FATHER", a title only reserved for the Almighty od of the Christians) made a declaration in the Vatican II catechism (a.k.a ‘magestirium) that Mary is NOW confirmed to have been born WITHOUT a stain of sin (preserved so-called from the original sin of Adam).

And papists have fallen for this blatant heresy without even asking the Holy Spirit whether such a new dogma is true or false! So, can Christians refer to the God of the Bible as "Allah"? Absolutely "NO!" for the simplest of all arguments (philosophical or otherwise) that according to the Quran of Islam (and you can also challenge the Quran (contend for this case) in court) the name "Allah" was REVEALED to their prophet Muhammad (Ahmed)" just like the name of JESUS was announced by the angel Gabriel to Mary even before He was born!! Since you have already "half-won" (almost actually) the court case (no surprise to me since the judge was a non-Muslim – what do you expect?), why don’t you challenge the claim of the Quran that the name "Allah" was revealed to Muhammad alone by Elohim/Yahweh? It is one stupid thing to poke some fun in the characters of one’s religious prophet, but to challenge the entire Islamic world that the name "Allah" was not revealed to Muhammad in circa 630AD is akin to waging a religious war with Islam. Don’t you think so?

I mean where does it all end? You win the court case and enjoy the privilegeto use "Allah" in all your Malay Bibles, periodicals and call on the name of "Allah" each time you raise your hands in prayer of kneel down on your knees when you worship your god, Mary and the Roman Catholic ’saints’, what’s next for you? Will you then be telling the whole of Islam that "we must now come to an amicable agreement that we share the same god which we shall refer to as Allah from henceforth"? The Roman Catechism has in its so-called magestirium / dogma that Islam is actually embracing the god of Roman Cathgolicism; isn’t this a fact?

And because Roman Catholics and Muslims can now call on the name of Allah, there is then absolutely NO stopping these two (2) major religions of the world to UNITE and become ONE (as what has been the SOLE objective of the Inter-faith movement championed by thelate Karol Wojtyla). Read the Roman Catechism; it mentions the word "ISLAM" in one of its statements of faith. You’d be shocked to know what else is written in this new Bible of the Roman Catholics. To the papists, the Old and New Testaments are merely a bunch of fables (religious stories) whilst the real essence of Christianity (according to them) is found in their Catechism. The latter is where salvation lies and not in the former. That’s why they reject SOLA SCRIPTURA. And having said all the above, if you are still NOT convinced that the name "ALLAH" is EXCLUSIVELY for Muslims ONLY, then there is not a fact in the world that can convince the likes of you.

But remember the words of Paul in Galatians 1: 8-9, "BUT THOUGH WE, OR AN ANGEL FROM HEAVEN, PREACH ANY OTHER GOSPEL UNTO YOU THAN THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PREACHED UNTO YOU, LET HIM BE ACCURSED. AS WE HAVE SAID BEFORE, SO SAY I NOW AGAIN, IF ANY MAN PREACH ANY OTHER GOSPEL UNTO YOU THAN THAT YE HAVE RECEIVED, LET HIM BE ACCURSED." Attempting to introduce soething alien to the Bible, be it a religious statement, a doctrine, a dogma or even names and words that are NOT found in the Bible are a blatant act that defies the admonition of the Apostle paul and God shall not be silent on it.

A Muslim writer has asked the likes of you thus: "WHY DON’T YOU USE THE MALAY WORD "TUHAN" TO DENOTE "GOD" IN YOUR BIBLE INSTEAD OF ADOPTING THE NAME "ALLAH" WHICH IS NOT A MALAY WORD FOR GOD?" Why don’t you FIRST answer this question before you asked in return thus: "WHAT’S WRONG WITH USING THE NAME ALLAH IN THE MALAY KITAB?"

By answering an honest question with another question that tries to evade the issue is an act of sheer religious arrogance. My advice to you is: "JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION…"

By answering a valid question with a cynical question invites the wrath of the opponents and shall lead to a more grievous consquences instead of trying to clarify your points of view or beliefs.

You are treading on a very dangerous ground that might even result in a severe backlash. Why don’t you and the likes of you RESPECT their demand to let them use the name of their god exclusively for themselves alone without interfering in their religious affairs? They have already given their full blessings to so-called ‘Christians’ to us the Malay word "TUHAN" in your Kitab.

It is most mind-boggling and bordering on insanity why you must provoke the Muslims by inferring that CHRISTIANS HAVE THE CUSTOMARY RIGHT TO CALL THE CREATOR GOD AS ALLAH BECAUSE LONG BEFORE THE ADVENT OF ISLAM, THE NAME HAS BEEN WIDELY USED BY THE CHRISTIAN ARABS IN THE MIDDLE EASTERN REGIONS. But when uslims asked you where in the Bible is it mentioned the name of Allah…., the arrogance of the proponents to the use of Allah in the Malay Kitab would NOT even have the courtesy to give a gentle and humble response. WHY? Have you no regard for the feelings of these people?

A Christian brethren would welcome the admonition of another brethren instead of questioning why judge yet another brother. Are you referring to Matthew 7:1? Have you not read that Christians must judge RIGHTEOUSLY? What is judging "righteously"? Isn’t the word of God to be used wisely to admonish an erring brethren? Why do you reprimand me for correcting a false and most dangerous (even fatalistic) opinion? Do you disagree with the Berean Christians who search the Scriptures day and ight to find out for themselves whether whgat they heard from the Apostles of Jesus Christ was CORRECT or FALSE, whether they have their source from Scriptures or from Satan? Do you not have any concern at all?

You go to college to find out whether water can be turned into vapour or into Hydrogen and Oxygen molecules; yet you care less about the FALSE religious notions brought unto you by some misguided fools sitting in a religious committee/organisation that receives no inspirations from the Holy Spirit pertaining to the name Allah. Judge me for what I say / write, but please tell me exactly how I have contradicted Scriptures! Explain yourself and justfy your claims. Don’t just quote the Bible without any qualifications (justifications and objective evidences to support your theories or hypothesis). We are not babes that feed on religious fables without contending for the truths.

If Paul found it justified to warn those who blatantly deceived the brethren with some foreign religious fables (not from his own mouth or from the mouth of the other Apostles of Jesus Christ), with disastrous and even damnable consequences, what do you think you can further gain by NOT rejecting and removing from your possessions something that is NOT right to keep? What I do with it is up to me. I TRASH it or make a BONFIRE out of it, is actually the very CORRECT thing to do and it does not run contrary to the advice from the Apostle Paul.

I purchase a Bible that I now found out to be erroneous; having devastating consequences on my Christian faith, it would be a damnable sin for me to preach the Christian doctrines using such Bible adulterated with false teachings or containing the name(s) of the god(s) of other religions which I might have been decieved into believing that they all refer to the same God of the Bible! What ’s wrong with burning a talisman? Burning a charm or a pagan paraphenalia?

Is God wrathful? Am I being disrespectful to you or to others who propound such fallacies? If what I do incur the absolute wrath of so-called ‘Christians’ who are not, I only need to please Jesus Christ and no one else. If I an my entire family truly believe in what we are doing, and the rest of the world shuns us for that matter, we shall not be moved an iota.

Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be that go in thereat: Because strait is the gate and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life, and FEW (emphasis mine) there be that FIND (emphasis mine) it (KJV, Matthew 7:13-14).

I do not regard my Christian brethren with contempt. However, it is my Christian duty to admonish an erring brother (and what I say to you can be found in th Bible; not a concoction of mine). I admonish you to re-read my two articles above and answer ALL the questions posed therein together with the pertinent questions asked by a Muslim writer, i.e., the EVIDENCE for Allah in the Malay Kitab and the RATIONALE for using a so-called Arabic term (which has no proof to adduce that the term "Allah" itself is an Arabic language). Islam owes you that much for now….

And to my Muslim acquaintances (colleagues at work) or fellow Malaysian Muslims and elsewhere, let me make it absolutely crystal clear that I have ABSOLUTELY no part in the earlier campaigns made the papists (Roman Catholics) and their "symphatizers" (Anglicans, SIBs, SDAs, Basels, Baptists, Charismatics, et al…) to promote the use of the name ALLAH in the Malay Kitab (Bible) for I and my immediate family members have long DISCONTINUED the use of the name "ALLAH" in our worship of the Christian God, JESUS CHRIST.

For our unshakeable stand against the use of "Allah" in the Malay Bible, we have incurred the WRASTH of many who professed to be Christians and even "Born Again" followers of the Christian God! They have even labelled us as "mental pygmies" and "enemies" of the "brethren". But we are NOT ashamed of our stance on this matter which we believe to be so dear to Muslims not only in this country but elsewhere. Whilst the news of the court ruling have made hundreds of thousands of Roman Catholics and Protestants in Malaysia and elsewhere feeling absolutely triumphal and elated to the 3rd heavens, we reacted with dismay at their absolute religious arrogance and ignorance. I am NOT a part of it and will NEVER EVER be – not NOW or EVER.

I have written / compiled the opinions of Christian apologetics/ apologists whose credentials far outweigh whatever I know of the Bible who have spent all their lives researching, writing and holding conferences / talks on why they genuinely believe that "ALLAH IS THE NAME OF THE MUSLIM GOD AND THEREFORE EXCLUSIVELY FOR MUSLIMS ALONE." I concur with ALL y heart and soul.

I would also like to put one thing STRAIGHT concerning who are the Christians in this land.
I believe that to the Muslims, all peoples who own Bibles and worship their "god" in churches are termed Christians. This is as far as the majority of Muslim understand concerning who are the CHRISTIANS. Roman Catholics are not the Christians per se. They serve many "gods" including the worhip of the earthly mother of Jesus named Mary whom they have now elevated to the level of a "deity" possessing the OMNIPRESENT attribute to be EVERWHERE at the SAME time to listen to the prayers of Roman Catholics who recite the rosaries.

To the Roman Catholics, no one can enter heaven EXCEPT through the Queen of Heaven (the Mary of Roman Catholicism). For anyone to get to Heaven, he/she must go THROUGH the Queen of Heaven since she is also the REDEEMER apart from Jesus Christ. It is all written in the Roman Catechism. And further, it is a Roman Catholic dogma that says: "GOD SHALL NOT ANSWER A PRAYER THAT IS NOT MADE THROUGH THE QUEEN OF HEAVEN…" for it is alleged that she has been entrusted by God to COLLECT all the prayers of the "Christians" – sort them out, trash prayers that do not eulogise the Queen of Heaven – and bring before the presence of God in the 3rd heavens (the abode of God besides being in the hearts of all believers).

To the Roman Catholics, only THEY shall enter heaven; and that for man or woman to enter heaven, he or she MUST embrace the religion of Roman Catholicism. They also deny that the sacriofice of JESUS CHRIST on the cross was NOT sufficient to save one’s soul. It must be that one must partake in the sacrifice of the Mass. If not, damnation awaits the soul. There are so many more false teachings of Roman Catholicism; they call the pope as "GOD", hence the label "HOILY FATHER" (a title reserved ONLY for YAHWEH).

The pope is also the REPLACEMENT of JESUS CHRISYT and the HOLY SPIRIT, thereby, referring to himself as the VISIBLE Holy Spirit of God. The Bible clearly says that these religious dogmas are blasphemies against God. God does NOT have a replacement on earth in the person of the pope or his cardinals, bishops and priests. Whilst the Christian Bible declares that the "CHURCH" is represented by those who are termed "Born Again" Christians, Roman Catholicism declares that the church is Roman Catholicism as a religion and that salvation is through the Roman Catholic religion (again all these are written in the catechism). And because the teachings of Roman Catholicism are spurious and ever-changing according to the "whims and fancies" of the reigning pope, it therefore comes under the category of a CULTIC religion (in which its head, i.e., the pope demands absolute allegiance to himself instead of allegiance to God). Roman Catholicism is therefore NOT Christianity in every sense of the word. Strickly speaking, it is a pagan religion. I hope that Muslims in this land shall no longer be at odds as to who/what are the "Christians" and what is the "CHURCH". It does NOT refer to the building (house of worship) but a "body of peoples" who are "Born Again", whose true allegiance is ONLY to the God of the Bible, JESUS CHRIST, and NOT to some fallible individuals who claim to be "GOD".

Mike Sibinil

Penampang, SABAH.

Its a sin committed against the YAWHEH..!!!

peter said,

December 12, 2008 at 9:49 am
We Ibans in Sarawak use the term ‘Petara’ to refer to God, which was also used to refer to the God of our old ancestral religion. Does this mean that Iban Christians are pagans? No, because it is the actual Iban term referring to a higher power/deity/God. As far as I know, Arab Muslims take no issue to Arab Cristians referring to God as Allah either.

Reply

mike sibinil said,

June 1, 2009 at 2:58 am

Pagans declare that they are full of imaginations and perhaps even secular philosophies. To be honest with anyone, that’s all they got apart from the meagre knowldge that they ahve acquired through several years of learning in that so-called HISL (Higher Institution of Secular Learning).

Some PhDs have been known to have been acquired through dubious means – one doesn’t even have to leave one’s own confort zone to get one – through the marvels of distant learning available today I suppose. I got mine through ’sweat and blood’ – no shortcut, no dubious means. What’s so great about "imagination"? How do you apply that term in your faith – atheistic or otherwise? What can you imagine of God to be like? Is He like the tail of an elephant? Its trunk; its hide (skin); its leg? Is God what anyone can imagine Him to be? Is He the God of all religions?

Can the Biddhists claim to have the SAME deity or God as the Judeo-Christians? Is YAHWEH or Judeo-Christianity EXACTLY the SAME as the ALLAH of Islam or BUDDHA of Buddhism? Can YAHWEH be called by ANY other NAME? How do you differentiate between NAMES and NATURES or CHARACTERISTICS or ATTRIBUTES of God? Do you know the difference?

The Word of God (Holy Bible) declares that the God of the Bible is the true God and that there is none other; all other so-called "gods" are false if they do NOT have the ATTRIBUTES, NATURES and CHARACTERISTICS of the God of the Bible! Does God have a "daughter"; does He reside amongst the rocks and the trees? Does He reside in animals, plants and other non-human organisms?

Tell me more about your "petara"? Does this pagan deity (a mere mystical folklore deity which is actually one of Satan’s demons) possess the natures, attributes and characteristics of YAHWEH? Where does this "petara" live/reside? What are his attributes and characteristics? Is he/she any different from the KadazanDusun mystical pagan deity named "Kinoringan’ whom the Roman Catholics, SIBs, SDAs, as well as Protestants of Borneo of the KadazanDusun tribes of people ALSO worship apart from YAHWEH?

If I examine every statement you made above (Dec 12, 2008), I believe you have either plagiarised or concocted them without ANY qualifications whatsoever. It is PURE arrogance and ignorance to declare that Arab Christian have no qualms in referring to YAHWEH as ALLAH unless of course they have never been genuinely BORN AGAIN. It is absolutely amazing why people find it so easy to coin a few statements out of some dusty and unsupported hypothesis and conveniently calls it as a true statement of faith.

Don’t you know that God shall judge people by what they say and believe in? Who said that He shall judge anyone by good works? By hypothesizing that ALL of Islam do NOT mind you calling your "petara" god as ALLAH is smacked of ignorance and trodding on dangerous grounds. I do NOT believe that you have examined diligently what I have posted earlier in Dec 2008. You just skimmed through a few lines and got so enraged when what I have posted collided head on with what you have pampered all this while. It must have been so excruciatingly painful to your emotional pride when at last someone stood up disagreeing with you and your religious organisation.

Lately, the Sarawakians have joined the bandwagon to challenge the authority concerning the term "ALLAH" found in the Indonesian Bible. I tell you, this was a mistake, a major blunder and a mountain of a SIN committed against YAHWEH by

1) the Bible Society of Malaysia,

2) the ‘christiansed’ people of Borneo, and

3) the priests, bishops and pastors who did NOTHING to oppose the BSM’s decision to adopt the name "Allah".

The dire implication of this blunder is that those who shall stubbornly pamper this false idea or notion that the term "Allah" is the Arabic word for "Elohim" are worshiping >1 "god". It takes only 1 hole to sink a boat (a biblical phrase).

The righteous thing to do NOW is to BURN all the Indonesian Bibles and replaced them with a Bible in Bahasa Melayu WITHOUT the name of the Muslim god called "ALLAH" and revert back to using the original Hebrew names like David, Joseph, Mary, Jesus, Abraham, Moses, etc., instead of using translating these proper nouns (names) into Daud, Yusof, Mariam, Isa, Musa, etc. Why don’t you ask the Jews what they think about translating Hebrew names into Arabic? Can you do this please and submit to me an objective evidence to adduce the claim that Hebrew names can be transliterated and that "Allah" is a direct translation from the Hebrew word "Elohim"?

Again, no one has yet to produce proofs or evidence which I needed earlier pertaining to the Apostles or disciples of Jesus Christ at Pentecost prosyletizing the pagan Arabs who came to Jerusalem into embracing the cross of Jesus Christ and that the Jewish-Arabs during the time of the patriarch referred to YAHWEH as ALLAH. I challenge you that if you can produce just ONE objective evidence to rebut my theory / claim against yours, then I shall forever SHUT my mouth. Give me NO secular writings by unbelievers; or unsubstantiated heresays. Give me HARD evidence in the form of religious periodicals and documeted evidence being kept by the Jewish religious authorities or the "early" writing of the co-called "Chruch Fathers" that have been declared as authentic or canonical by the latter.

I await your response….

Mike Sibinil

Kinoringan for Sabah Kadazandusun?

michael sibinil said,

February 9, 2008 at 1:13 am

A Single Hole Sinks A Boat……

It was reported over the media that SUHAKAM and a few others were bringing the Malaysian government to court on January 29, 2008. Was there a mention or it was aborted at the 11th hour? Why no mentioned concerning this vital issue in any Malaysian newspaper and not even MalaysiaKini? Are we afraid that this might cause the downfall of the government of the day come election anticipated to be in March 2008? Whatever it is…., the silence is rather unusual!

Can I share something with you?

The title I chose above has a strong concordance to the fallacy of a few misguided people of Sabah and other so-called ‘Christian’ organisations who dared confront the Msulim ulamas and those in the government pertaining to the use of the name of the Muslim god "Allah" in the Malay version of the Christian Bible. As I have affirmed earlier in a pretty long treatise titled "Allah Is A Name, Not A Word", I say it again that you will surely lose the court case. I do not want to bet with you but the case is overwhelmingly on the side of Islam and not yours. If the premise for the usage of the word is purely based on the use of the name by ‘Christian Arabs’ in the Middle East, the case shall surely be thrown out of court at its first mention. If the contention is in the etymological consideration of the word "Al-Ilah" or "Elah", the burden is on you to prove that "Allah" is a contraction form either one of these Arabic words for "god".

I tell you what…. If you can prove to me that the word "KINORINGAN" is also a contraction or a transliteration from the Hebrew word "ELOHIM" for God, then I can believe that you have my confidence that SUHAKAM and the others are going to win the court case.

For the benefit of the ignorant, "Kinoringan" is believed by almost 99.9% of the non-KadazanDusun tribes of Borneo to be EXACTLY the SAME as the Judeo-Christian God called YAHWEH except for some exceedingly disturbing "minor" differences (only etymologically…. so they proclaimed).

Again, the burden is entirely on you to provide me (and the others) that:

1. "Kinoringan" bore a daughter called "Huminodun".

2. Kinoringan sacrificed Huminodun to save humanity from a terrible death due to a severe depletion in the staple food called paddy.

3. That Huminodun was turned into a paddy stalk, having multiplied thus saving all of humanity (or only the KadazanDusun tribes).

4. That the Judeo-Christian God called YAHWEH or Kinoringan in the KadazanDusun language resides in a Banyan tree.5. That the origin of Kinoringan is at the Nunuk Ragang in Ranau, Sabah.

6. That Kinoringan is a word and not a name concocted out of a folklore by the pagan priestesses.

7. That the Kinoringan god is a Judeo-Christian God having exactly the same attributes, characters and personalities.

8. That the practice of worshipping this mythical god by the likes of the Kadazan Huguan Sious (Paramount Leader) and all his "political advocates" within the KadazanDusun Cultural Association (and everyone else associated with it…., even sympathizers to its cause) is indeed BIBLICAL and would NOT contradict the Gospels of Jesus Christ.

9. That the Judeo-Christian God truly has both a daughter called "HUMINODUN" apart from the fact that YAHWEH also has a begotten Son named Jesus Christ.

10. That Kinoringan is truly the Judeo-Christain god YAHWEH.

Many religious journals have been written by "eminent" KadazanDusun Roman Catholic apologists and scholars in Sabah eulogizing Kinoringan so much so that they have hoodwinked (deceived) almost the entire KadazanDusun populace that "KINORINGAN IS INDEED THE YAHWEH OF JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY" and that "WORSHIPING KINORINGAN IS ACTUALLY WORSHIPING THE GOD OF THE BIBLE". There is one Roman Catholic "brother" who dared published his treatise to affirmed that those Kinoringan priestesses are actually "anointed" by the Judeo-Christian God to perform the pagan rituals called "magavau" – i.e., a ritual to appease the spirits of the paddy; and that they are the "equivalence" to the Roman Catholic nuns and priests!!

How is this possible is absolutely out of my wit!! And to know that this diabolical heresy is being encouraged (therefore the most unusual silence from the Roman Catholic religion) represents the epitome of religious madness. And to note that this "madness" is also being promulagted by the intellectual elites (no lesser than those who pride themselves with strings of doctrate degrees) tantamounts to embracing doctrines of devils. And the "local churches of Jesus Christ" do not even make a proclamation whether to "CONDEMN" or "ALLOW". But as we have been told…, "SILENCE IS A CLEAR SIGN OF APPROVAL."

So then. examine for yourselves…. If those who stubbornly propagate the false notion that Allah is a WORD and not a NAME of the Muslim deity can seriously err by equating the Kinoringan demon-god with the YAHWEH of Judeo-Christianity, isn’t this a clear indication that the same bunch of intellectual elites are equally ignorant of the total EXCLUSIVITY of the name Allah to the religion of Islam? And, that "Allah" is NOT a word (generic for God) but a name of the Muslim deity revealed to Mohammed back in the 7th century AD? If these same people can give us an undisputed PROOF that "Allah" is the Arabic word for "God" (in English), that "Allah" is NOT the name of the Islamic deity revealed to Mohammed, or that the Arabic word for "GOD" or "god" is NOT "Al-Ilah" or "Ilah", then you shall WIN the court case.

In any case, you still have to proof to me that "KINORINGAN" and "YAHWEH" are ONE and the SAME God of the Bible. Or, that "KINORINGAN" is a WORD and not a NAME and that YAHWEH too is a WORD and not a NAME of the God of Israel / Judeo-Christianity. Is "ELOHIM" a WORD or a NAME? Isn’t YAHWEH Elohim? And, when the Jews declare "THERE IS NO ELOHIM BUT YAHWEH", what do you actually understand when the Muslim declares thus: "LA ILAHA ILLALLAH"?

All questions above demand documented proofs. The real onus is on you to prove me entirely wrong concerning my belief that when you seriously err with your understanding of the Kinoringan deity/god, you have also seriously erred in your claim the name "Allah" was spoken of first by the Jewish-Arabs and the Christian Arabs during the time of Abaraham and Jesus Christ, hence, Judeo-Christianity possesses a ‘religious right’ to the name of the Muslim deity called "Allah".

I have also stated in this short discourse that the Kinoringan that you worship is indeed a "demon-god" concocted by the demon-worshiping priestesses (bobohizans) out of the bottomless pit of hell. The onus is also on you to prove me entirely wrong. Because you also claim to be a ‘Christain’, all unscriptural/unbiblical quotations taken from "unknown/dubious/spurious sources" are NOT acceptable for obvious reasons. But if you were a professing pagan and a worshipper of the demon-god KINORINGAN who has a ‘fictitious’ daughter called "HUMINODUN", this challenge is not for you.

Pilgrim

Allah is a Name, not a Word - Michael Sibinil

michael sibinil said,
February 8, 2008 at 11:23 pm

Allah is a Name, not a Word

Any professing Bible thumping Christians who promote the false doctrine that it does not matter what word or term we use to refer to the name of the God of the Bible is an antichrist, a liar and a deceiver.

I am a baptised ‘Born Again’ Christian, yet I strongly disagree with the assertion that Christians can refer to the God of the Bible as ‘Allah’ or that the ‘Allah’ of the Qur’an is the same God as the God of the Bible just because the Middle-Eastern ‘Christianianized’ Arabs call their God as ‘Allah’.

I concur fully with the stance taken by the Islamic government of Malaysia that the term ‘Allah’ is exclusively for Islam and no other faiths or religions must be allowed to use it. Absolutely ridiculous? I say "NO!" to the contrary.

Let us start our short treatise with the Muslim’s prayer chant / recital that goes like this : "La ilaha illAllah", "La ilaha illAllah". What do you suppose they are talking about?
A word for word translation into English would read: ‘La’ [‘no’] ‘ilaha’ [‘god’] ‘ill’ [‘except’ or ‘but’] ‘Allah’ [‘Allah’] and so forth. If ‘allah’ were the word for ‘god’, then the phrase would read, "there is no allah but Allah." Does it make any sense? Clearly, it does not. The Qur’an itself claims that (i) ‘Allah’ is the personal name of their god, and (ii) there is no translation for ‘Allah’ to any other language.

There are scores of Qur’anic verses that either say that ‘Allah’ is the name of the god of the Qur’an or that ‘ilah’ is the Arabic word for ‘god’. Here are a few for your edification:Qur’an 3:62 "This is the true account, the true explanation: There is no ‘ila’ (god) except Allah."Qur’an 52:43 "Have they an ‘ilah’ (god) other than Allah? "Qur’an 5:4 "Pronounce the Name of Allah: and fear Allah; for Allah is swift in reckoning."Qur’an 21:107 "Say: (Muhammad) ‘It is revealed to me that your ‘ilah’ (god) is only one ‘ilah’ (god). Will you submit to his will? But if they (disbelievers, Christians, and Jews) turn away (from Islam) say: ‘I give notice (of war) to be known to all. But I know not whether the (torment which you are) promised and threatened is nigh or far."Qur’an 114:1 "Say: I seek refuge in the Lord of men and jinn [demons], the King of men and jinn, the ‘ilah’ (god) of men and jinn."Qur’an 20:8 "Allah! There is no ‘ilah’ (god) save him. His are the most beautiful names. To him belong the most beautiful attributes."Qur’an 20:14 "Verily, I am Allah. No ‘ilah’ (god) may be worshiped but I. So serve you me, and perform regular prostration prayer for my praise. Verily the hour is coming. I am almost hiding it from myself."Qur’an 20:96 "Now look at your ‘ilah’ (god), of whom you have become devoted. We will (burn) it and scatter it in the sea! But your ‘ilah’ (god) is Allah: there is no ‘ilah’ (god) but He. Thus do We relate to you some stories of what happened before from Our own Remembrance."Qur’an 2:132 "And this was the legacy that Abraham left to his sons by Yah’qub (Jacob); ‘Oh my sons! Allah has chosen the faith for you – the true religion; then die not except in the faith of Islam as Muslims. He said to his sons: ‘What will you worship after me?’ They said: ‘We shall worship your ‘ilah’ (god), the ‘ilah’ (god) of your fathers, of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac, the one ‘ilah’ (god): To Him we submit in Islam.’"Ishaq:324 "He said, Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals."Qur’an 8:45 "O believers! When you meet an army, be firm, and think of Allah’s name much; that you may prosper."Qur’an 73:8 "But keep in remembrance the name of your Lord and devote yourself to Him whole-heartedly. Lord of the East and West: there is no ‘ilah’ (god) but He."Qur’an 87:1 "Glorify the name of your lord, the most high, who creates, then proportions, who has measured; and then guided."Qur’an 87:14 "He indeed shall be successful who purifies himself, and magnifies the name of his lord and prays." [Allahu Akbar!]Qur’an 59:22 "Allah is he, no other ‘ilah’ (god) may be worshiped; who knows both secret and o’ ‘ilah’ (god); the sovereign, the holy one, the source of security, the guardian of faith, the majestic, the irresistible, the superb, the compeller: glory to ‘Allah’! He is ‘Allah’, the creator, the evolver, the bestower of forms (or colors). To him belong the best names: whatever is in the heavens and on earth declares His praises and glory: and he is the mighty, the wise." (Qur’an 17:110) "Say, Call Him Allah or call Him Ar-Rahman; whatever the name you call Him, all His names are beautiful." (Qur’an 5:4) "Pronounce the Name of ‘Allah’: and fear ‘Allah’; for ‘Allah’ is swift in reckoning."

‘God’, ‘Elohim’, ‘Eloi’/’Elah’/’Elohi’, ‘Ilah’ are all words to mean exactly the same in the English, Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic languages. But, ‘Allah’ is not a word just as ‘Yahweh’ is not a word. They are names. And names should never be translated. For example, we can and should translate the word for the profession of a "baker", but we would be wrong to translate "Mr. Baker" into another word/name. As an analogy, does it imply that the mystical ‘Kinoringan’ deity concocted out of a folklore by the ‘bobohizans’ (pagan priestesses) must also be construed as the word for ‘God’ in the KadazanDususn language just because the KadazanDusun pagans refer to their god as ‘Kinoringan’,? Or, that the Chinese can refer to the Christian God as Shang Di (a.k.a pinyin or Shang Ti) which is believed to be the Supreme God (out of hundreds of other ancestral demon gods) in the original religious system of the Han Chinese people, a term used from the second millennium BC to the present day?

Islamic scholar Montgomery Watt adds an interesting footnote. He says, "The name [not word] ‘Allah’ has throughout been [wrongly] translated as ‘god.’ It should be kept in mind, however, that in the pre-Islamic period it does not necessarily mean "god" in a monotheistic sense." Going back to pre-Islamic times, ‘al-Ilah’ or ‘Ilah’ had appeared prominently or frequently attested to in pre-Islamic poetry. By frequency of usage, ‘al-ilah’ was contracted to ‘allah’. 18 (Encyclopedia of Islam, eds. B. Lewis, V.L. Menage, C. Pellat, J. Schacht, Vol. II, p. 1093).
It is known from the Qur’an (29:61 and 39:38) that many pre-Islamic Arabs believed in ‘Allah’ as a god who was superior to the other gods whom they also recognized. From the above, we can deduce that ‘Allah’ is a name – not a word – much like the Judeo-Christian deity called ‘Yahweh.’

Arabic, like Hebrew before it, is a Semitic language. In Hebrew, ‘el,’ was the word for god – lower case ‘g’ – as in idols. ‘Elohiym’ was used with the article to convey ‘God’ with a capital ‘G.’ In Arabic, ‘el’ became ‘il.’ Then, over time, Arabs derived a secondary word for god, ‘ilah.’ With ‘al’ being the Arabic word for ‘the,’ ‘Allah’ is not a contraction of ‘al’ and ‘ilah.’ The first pillar of Islam contradicts this claim when it says: "There is no ilah but Allah."

If "Allah" were the Arabic word for god it would have been written: "There is no Allah but Allah" Moreover, the Qur’an itself uses ‘Ilah’ when ‘Allah’ claims to be "the God of Abraham" (Qur’an 2:132). And that even at this point, the debate should end because the only way scholars can claim ‘Allah’, not ‘Ilah’, is the Arabic word for ‘God’ is for the Qur’an to be errant or for its author to be either ignorant or deceitful.

Similarly, ‘il’ and ‘ilah’ are Arabic words for ‘god’, not the ‘names’ of ‘gods’. Words for things must always be translated, while the personal names of deities and people should never be. ‘Allah’ and ‘Yahweh’ are the personal names of very different gods. Anyone who replaces the name ‘Allah’ with the word ‘God’ is guilty of deceiving their audience and of contradicting the Qur’an.

Consider very carefully when the Muslim prays thus: "There is no ‘ilah’ but ‘Allah’, and Muhammad is His Messenger." If ‘ilah’ and ‘Allah’ mean exactly the same, the prayer becomes irrational and even illogical. It would then sound like: "There is no ‘god’ but ‘God’, and Muhammad is his Messenger." Do you not see the absurdity of the statement if ‘Allah’ is merely generic and not the specific name of the Islamic god? If the same argument is to be adduced for the Hebrew God, then the phrase: "There is no Elohim but Yahweh" would then sound like "There is no Elohim but Elohim" since both Yahweh and Elohim are construed as to mean "god", i.e., both generic.

Three millennia (3,000 years) before Christ, the Sumerians had a well-organised and highly developed pantheon of gods which they worshipped. Enlil’ (the principle god of the Sumerian pantheon). The name "Enlil" is The greatest of the Sumerian gods after the distant sky-god ‘Anu’ (who had little to do with human affairs) was the active and vigourous atmospheric god ‘a compounded Sumerian word meaning "lord of the storm/air" (‘en’ = lord, ‘lil’ = storm, air). It is from this deity – ‘enlil’ – that we find the beginnings of the philological track which leads us to al-Ilah, which was mentioned above as the title ("the god").As stated before, the name "Enlil" is a compound of "en" and "lil". This latter particle, "lil" is of interest in this discussion because it is the source of the word "il/ilu" which came to mean "god" in the branch of Semitic languages, starting with Akkadian, from which the Arabic word "ilah" ultimately derived.

It is likely that the term later used to describe deity throughout Arabia originated from the Sumerian god ‘Enlil’.The god "il" [Western Semitic term "El" used by the Hebrews, Aramaeans, Canaanites, and others in the Syro-Palestine region], often lengthened to "ilah" in northern Arabian languages which penetrated even into southern Mesopotamia by this time, was spreading from his Mesopotamian origins. Indeed, scholars have recognised the origin of the Arabian use of god-names with "il/lil", and hence the origin of "al-ilah", as Mesopotamian."

Among the Northern Arabs of early times, particularly in the region of Safa, the word ‘El’ "God" was still very commonly used as a separate name of the Deity. The ‘Il’ and ‘Ilah’ formations come much later. This means that ‘El’ was used by the Arabs at one time as the name of God. This would be verified in the Bible, where the father of the Arabs, Ishmael, was given a name with the name of God, ‘El’, in it."29 (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. J. Hastings, Vol. I, p. 664)There are many more inscriptions that show evidence of how the whole of Southern Arabia was saturated with the consciousness of the high god who was a Lil/Il derived deity."30

Many Muslim apologists will attempt to associate the God of the Bible with Allah upon the basis of an argument that ‘Allah’ is basically the same term as the ‘Eloah’ of Biblical Hebrew (an intensive form of El) and the ‘Alaha’ of Aramaic. Jamme, Sabaean Inscriptions From Mahram Bilqis, p. ix"Etymologically, ‘Allah’ itself comes directly from "al-ilah", so the "al" in "Allah" comes from the article, and is not a part of the Arabic term for "god" itself. This is not the case with ‘Eloah’ and ‘Alaha’, neither of which contain the article, and which are self-contained terms meaning "god". Further, as has been shown above, it is widely recognised by scholarship that the ‘El’ related terms for deity in the Western Semitic areas are not related to the Il/Ilah of Mesopotamia and Arabia. Hence, no direct connexion between ‘El’ and ‘Alaha’ can be made with ‘Il/Ilah’.

Some of the Muslim scholars might come heralding a banner that says: "Let there be no doubt – Muslims worship the God of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus – peace be upon them all" but is that what the Muslim majority say? The argument that the Arabic and Malay speaking Christians in the Middle East and Indonesia refer to their Christian God as ‘Allah’ is absurd. Didn’t it come from the false premise that ‘Allah’ is an Arabic word for ‘God’ (in English)?

There is enough evidence to suggest that the word ‘Allah’ is not Arabic in its origin. There is enough evidence to suggest that the word ‘Allah’ is not Arabic but a name claimed by Mohammed to have been revealed to him by his god through the angel named Jibriel (Gabriel).Seriously though, what’s severely wrong or shameful in using the word "TUHAN" to denote the Christian God in the Malay language?? What’s so glamorous about using the word ‘Allah’ in the Malay Bible? If the Muslims are adamantly reluctant to allow Bible believing Christians to use the word ‘Allah’, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves for insisting that the word ‘Allah’ can be used by Christians to denote the Biblical God and that "Allah" is the same as the God of the Bible! Did you get a revelation from the Holy Spirit concerning this or from some ignorant individuals who sit in a secular organisation called the Bible Society of Malaysia and the Malaysia Council of Churches? I do not believe that the Holy Spirit inspired them to adopt the name ‘Allah’ to mean ‘god’.

If Islam tells you straight to your face: "I CLAIM EXCLUSIVITY TO THE USAGE OF THE NAME OF MY OWN GOD", why do you insist that "‘ALLAH’ IS A DIRECT TRANSLITERATION OF THE ENGLISH WORD ‘GOD’ IN THE ARABIC LANGUAGE"? The plain fact is that the God of the Bible is NOT the same as the ‘Allah’ of the Quran and that’s the final nail to the coffin. If it is not divinely revealed, then the sensible advice is "Do not adopt something for which you are not absolutely sure of its origin…"

What do you lose by calling the name of the God of the Bible as ‘TUHAN’?? Are you telling all of Islam that you have the "customary right" to the name ‘Allah’ because you believe that ‘Allah’ existed before the founding of Islam by Mohammed? Where is the Biblical proof to support your theory?

Did the Apostles of Jesus Christ after Pentecost taught and preached using the word ‘Allah’ when they spoke to their Arab audience who came to Jerusalem listen to the Gospels of Jesus Christ and to witness signs and wonders performed by the Apostles? Are we not told by priests, bishops and pastors that there is no such proof? If the word ‘ilah’ is really a direct transliteration from the Hebrew word ‘Elohim’ for God, then most probably the Apostles could have referred to ‘Elohim’ as ‘ilah’ in Arabic but does it sound any nearer to the ‘Allah’ of the Qur’an? The Qur’an tells us that the name ‘Allah’ was revealed to Mohammed and not copied from any written religious manuscript?

I once questioned an Anglican priest whether there is an absolute proof that the exact word "Allah" (both in its spelling and pronunciation) was ever uttered by the Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ at Pentecost when they were teaching and preaching to their mainly Arabic audience in Jerusalem since the Holy Bible tells us Christians that the Apostles were able to speak in different languages due to the anointing of the Holy Spirit and that includes Arabic….., to which he replied thus: "UNFORTUNATELY, THERE IS NONE THAT I KNOW OF…BUT WE STICK BY WHAT THE BIBLE SOCIETY OF MALAYSIA TELLS US WHAT TO ADOPT OVER THE MATTER."

Well, it speaks for itself, doesn’t it? And even if the Apostles uttered the word "AL-ILAH" or "ILAH", which is the Arabic word for "God" (in English), it still does not sound exactly like ALLAH nor does it refer to the ALLAH of the Koran for the very reason that the Koran explicitly denies its associations with around 360 pantheon idols gods worshipped by the pagan Arabs of Saudi Arabia much less deriving the name Allah from the pagan deity called "Al-Ilah" or "Enlil" which was popularly worshipped before the advent of Islam in circa 632AD."There is absolutely no reason whatsoever, therefore, to accept the idea that the word/name "Allah" passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews". 95. (C. Farah, Islam: Beliefs and Observances, p.28). Or, that it was the Jews and Christians first who referred to Elohim as Allah in the Arabic language, for clearly, Allah is not entirely in itself an Arabic language but "Al-Ilah"or "Enlil" is to mean "God".

How would you react when some Hindus come telling you that the pagan mystical pagan god ‘Kinoringan’ which resides in a huge banyan tree having its origin at the Nunuk Ragang in hinterland Ranau, worshipped by Pairin and his political clouts and supporters, of the KadazanDusun people of North Borneo is actually one of the many thousands of Hindu gods? Would you also bring the whole of Hinduism to court? As such, the Islamic authorities and individuals in this land are ABSOLUTELY correct to forbid Christianized people to call the Bible God as ‘Allah’. Have you considered all the arguments for and against the use of the word ‘Allah’ adduced by other Christian scholars? Or, perhaps you have only been reading and listening to one side of the argument?

So, what then can we deduce from the above?We say: "’Elohim’, ‘Eloi’/’Elah’/’Elohi’, ‘Ilah’, ‘Minamangun’, ’Tuhan’, etc" refer to the generic terms for ‘god’ (in English), but "Yahweh", "Allah", "Kinoringan" and "Shangdi" which all possess different attributes, natures and characters, are the "specific" names of "different gods" exclusively for Judeo-Christians, Muslims, the animistic KadazanDusuns pagans and the ancestral worshiping Chinese.
Scholars have debated the issue for more than a millennia. This short treatise did not attempt to usurp the intelligence of eminent religious scholars or apologists from both sides of the divide (Islam and Biblical Judeo-Christianity) over the 11 centuries. Volumes of periodicals and scholastic materials of great substance, both from the Christian perspectives as well as contributions from Islamic scholars to support my point above have been abundantly written over that period of time. As for me, it is my ‘non-rattle-able’ (unshakable) belief that Christians cannot use the name Allah to refer to Yahweh, the God of Judeo-Christianity.
Fundamental Muslims, since the early 7th century AD, had claimed total exclusivity to ‘Allah’ as the name of their deity/god. Therefore, the right thing for Christians to do now instead of suing the Malaysian government in response to its exclusive claim to the name of ‘Allah’ is to simply say: "AMEN" or "SO BE IT".

Hence, I strongly advocate the immediate removal of the name ‘Allah’ from the Malay translation of the English Bible and replace the same with the word "Tuhan" instead. It is a proven fact that the ‘Allah’ of the Quran is not the same as the ‘Yahweh’ of Judeo-Christianity. By so doing, Christians will not be seen as unashamedly robbing Islam of its glory by claiming that Judeo-Christianity lays ‘first claim’ to ‘Allah’ on the sheer premise that pre-Islamic Christian Arabs in the Middle East used the name ‘Allah’ first to denote ‘Elohim’, ‘Elah’, ‘Eloi’ or ‘Ilah’ which are different words for "god" expressed in Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic. There is enough evidence to suggest that the word ‘Allah’ is not Arabic in its origin. And that the freedom to use the name ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims has nothing to do with national integration. But, on the contrary, it does more harm than good.

The Pilgrim.