"It follows that the rest of your analysis is off" -- response

Submitted by dvd (United States), Nov 1, 2006 at 18:01

> Your assumption about no generic word for "God" is wrong. Note what word the Copts use. It follows that the rest of your analysis is off. <

As I stated above, "If that is incorrect (i.e. there were more generic choices), then I would say those translators of the Bible made a poor choice." I would suspect that if the translators had a choice of more generic words, but chose "Allah" it was a misguided attempt to connect the two religions in ways similar to you and the moslems are doing.

That is similar to some Chinese Bible translations, which choose to use the word "Tao" in places. In both cases, the choice carries with it meanings that were not intended by the original biblical authors. In any case, it certainly does NOT follow that "the rest of [my] analysis is off." ...

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".