Another trick, but not tricky enough

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Mar 18, 2008 at 06:06

IF the first translation of the Bible into Arabic occured, say, 90 A.D. instead of the 9th century A.D., "Allah" could not have been used for the mono-theistic God of the Bible, as "Allah" (in all it's glory) was used by poly-theistic religion to pay tribute to whichever "god" you at the time most venerated.

The fact that "Allah" was not considered mono-theistic until Mohammed started his jaunt of mono-theism negates pre-Islamic use of the word "Allah" for mono-theism. Period.

Oliver - this seeming conundrum of semantical exploration is resolved in scripture - which is how God is revealed. While I admire your dedication - the heart of the issue is, when anyone uses today the name "Allah" - are they adhearing to Islamic scripture or Biblical?

I've yet to hear from ANY Muslim-turned-Christian refer to God as ALLAH. What does that tell you?

It's another trick, but not tricky enough, as scripture reveals the difference.

FOR THOU HAS MAGNIFIED THY WORD ABOVE THY NAME - Psalm 138:2

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".