COMMENT How should the Bible regulate the translation of God’s word into another language? It is by the example shown in the translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek, called the Septuagint.

Jesus Christ and the apostles showed their approval of the Septuagint by using it in their teaching and worship. This is clear from their many quotations from the Septuagint which are found in the New Testament. Jesus Christ, the apostles, and the early disciples spoke Greek as well as Aramaic.

The Septuagint had been in circulation for over two hundred years before the coming of Christ. The Pentateuch in Greek was in circulation by 280 BC, while all the books of the Old Testament had been translated by 180 BC (13).

christian faith 030108 cross Koine Greek was the lingua franca of the Roman Empire. When the New Testament, written in Koine Greek, was completed, it was combined with the Septuagint to form the Greek Bible, and used by the early church. How the names of God are translated from Hebrew into Greek in the Septuagint, and how the apostles refer to God and to Jesus Christ in the Greek New Testament, would be binding examples for us in the work of translating the Bible.

How is ‘Elohim’ translated into Greek in the Septuagint? ‘Elohim’ is translated by the word ‘theos’ in the Septuagint. An example is the Hebrew ‘torah haElohim (law of God), as in Nehemiah 8:8, which becomes ‘nomos theou’. Another example is Genesis 1:1, ‘b rashith bra aleim’ (In the beginning God created) which is translated as ‘en arche epoiesen o theos’.

How is ‘Jehovah’ translated in the Septuagint? In Deuteronomy 6:13 we have ‘the LORD your God’ translated as ‘Kurion ton Theon sou’. Here, ‘Jehovah’ (or ‘LORD’ in English, with uppercase letters throughout) is translated by ‘Kurios’, while ‘Elohim’ (or ‘God’ in English) is translated by ‘Theos’.

Similarly, in Psalm 7:1 & 3 we have ‘O LORD my God’ which is translated as ‘Kurie ho Theos mou’. Again, ‘Jehovah’ (or ‘LORD’ in English, with uppercase letters throughout) is translated by ‘Kurios’, while ‘Elohim’ (or ‘God’ in English) is translated by ‘Theos’.

How are God and Jesus Christ referred to in the Greek New Testament? God is always referred to by the word ‘Theos’, while Jesus Christ is addressed by the title of ‘Kurios’. For example, in John 20:28 we have, ‘Ho Kurios mou kai ho Theos mou’ which in English is ‘My Lord and my God!’

English Bible follows Septuagint pattern

We see now that the English Bible follows the pattern set in the Septuagint by translating the word ‘Elohim’ with the generic word ‘God’, and ‘Jehovah’ with the word ‘LORD’ (meaning ‘MASTER’). The English Bible follows the Greek New Testament by using the generic word ‘God’ to refer to the Creator, and ‘Lord’ (meaning ‘Master’) as a title for Jesus Christ.

Although the translation for Jehovah, viz. ‘LORD’ (in uppercase letters throughout) is distinguished from the title ‘Lord’ for Jesus Christ in print, the same word meaning ‘Master’ is used just as in the Septuagint and the Greek New Testament. We see, therefore, the pattern set by Scripture being followed in the English Bible. The same can be said of the Bible in other European languages and in Arabic.

christians praying church attacks This is not the case with the Malay/Indonesian Bible, the Alkitab. Instead of using the generic word ‘Tuhan’ for translating ‘Elohim’ and ‘Theos’, a borrowed word, viz. ‘Allah’ is used. Instead of translating ‘Jehovah’ and ‘Kurios’ with a word meaning ‘Master’, a word meaning ‘God’ (‘Tuhan’) is used. By so doing, the translators are not following the example set in Scripture.

In the earlier article of 2009, I have suggested using the word ‘Yamtuan’ for ‘Lord’ and ‘Jehovah’. The word ‘Yamtuan’ is equivalent to ‘Yang Dipertuan’ or ‘Baginda’, i.e. ‘the highest Lord’ or ‘his Majesty’ in English. It is a word registered in the standard Malay dictionary.

‘Yamtuan’ is the ideal translation for ‘Kurios’ in reference to Jesus Christ and to Jehovah, not only because of its meaning but also because it is a dual-syllable word that rhymes with ‘Tuhan’, which makes for easy amendment of existing Malay hymns.

The use of ‘Tuhan’ for ‘God’ and ‘Yamtuan’ for ‘Lord’ would solve the present linguistic and theological difficulties, while being more consonant with the principle of ‘sola scriptura’. Following the English Bible, we can then spell ‘YAMTUAN’ (LORD), with uppercase letters throughout, to denote ‘Jehovah’, in distinction from ‘Yamtuan’ (Lord) for ‘Kurios’.

We summarise the reasons against the use of ‘Allah’ in reference to God and ‘Tuhan’ as a translation for ‘Jehovah’ and ‘Kurios’.

i. The word ‘Allah’ in the Malay language is a personal pronoun used in reference to the god of the Quran. It is not a proper noun derived from a common/generic noun, since ‘allah’ and ‘ilah’ (with lowercase ‘a’ and ‘i’) have not been adopted into the Malay language.

ii. The attempt to use ‘allah’ (with lowercase ‘a’) as the plural of ‘ilah’ (with lowercase ‘i’) is grammatically incorrect because, quite apart from the fact that they are not words of the Malay language, it breaks the rule of plural inflection.

iii. Using ‘Allah’ and ‘Tuhan’ for ‘God’ and ‘Lord’, respectively, introduces subtle inaccuracies into the end results of the translation.

iv. Using ‘Allah’ for God inevitably leads to the wrongful association of the true God with the god of Islam, since ‘Allah’ is inextricably linked with the Quran and increasingly associated with Islam.

v. Using ‘Allah’ for ‘God’ and ‘Tuhan’ for ‘Lord’ is not following the example set in Scripture of how these words are to be translated, and therefore breaks the principle of ‘sola scriptura’.

The next steps

We have offered theological and linguistic arguments against the use of ‘Allah’ by Christians other than the Arab Christians. Compared to the arguments for the retention of the word, which are socio-political and historical in nature, I contend that the theological and linguistic ones should prevail with Christians.

The essence of our concern is the translation of the Bible. The socio-political aspects of the problem loom large at the moment and need to be addressed, but we must not lose sight of the key issue.

We should be asking questions like: How should the first translators of the Alkitab have rendered the words for ‘God’ and ‘Lord’? If the present socio-political considerations are somehow resolved, or rendered irrelevant, should we continue to use ‘Allah’ for ‘God’ and ‘Tuhan’ for ‘Lord’? If not resolved, would not the spread of the gospel and the growth of the Malay-speaking church continue to be hindered?

A Malaysian Christian family leaves a church after a Sunday service in Petaling Jaya It is coming to 30 years since the problem first arose. I hazard the prediction that this problem will not go away even with a complete change of government in Malaysia.

I am also putting forward the suggestion that Christians should continue the legal battle for the right of using ‘Allah’ to be sustained, but declare at the same time that we intend to drop the use of the word, in favour of ‘Tuhan’ for ‘God’ and ‘Yamtuan’ for ‘Lord’. By so doing, we are accomplishing a number of important things:

i. We are making the point that non-Muslims in Malaysia have the inalienable right to use the word ‘Allah’;

ii. We are acknowledging the fact that the translation of the Alkitab could have been more accurate, a fact which we now want to put right;

iii. We are showing forth our desire to follow the biblical injunction to forego our rights for the sake of those with a weaker conscience (Rom. 14:1 Cor. 9: 19, 22; 10:31-32).

Evangelical Christians would be able to say right away that the root of the problems faced by the Muslims, in common with all the descendants of Adam, is sin. Evangelical Christians would be able to say that the solution lies in the new birth wrought by the Holy Spirit. It is regeneration alone that will ennoble the human spirit, not education or religion.

The Holy Spirit works via the instrumentality of the word of God. ‘So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God’ (Rom. 10:17). If the Alkitab is a banned book, we would not have the liberty of proclaiming God’s word in Malay. If Muslims are forbidden to hear the word of God, the means of the Holy Spirit to give the new birth is being taken away.

That is why, instead of frightening the Muslims with the possibility of proselytisation, we should be fighting for ‘the liberty of conscience’ to be upheld across the board. God alone is Lord over the human conscience. No one should be made to accept any belief by force, threat, or law. The freedom of speech and association would include the freedom to teach and propagate what one believes, without encroaching on the rights of others.

The Muslims are free to preach what they believe, and they must allow others the freedom to preach what they believe. Others are free to hear what the Muslims have to say, and Muslims should be given true freedom to hear what others have to say.

No choice in birth, but a choice in belief

The individual has no choice in his birth, but he has a choice in his belief. One’s birth and one’s belief should not be tied together. God determines our birth, and God demands that we be responsible for our own belief. That religion is a sensitive matter which leads to violence is a myth that must be shattered. It is immature, self-conceited and irrational passion directed criminally against others that causes violence. It is that that constitutes violence.

Currently, the so-called freedom of religion in Malaysia is nothing more than grudging tolerance of non-Muslim religions. I dream of a Malaysia in which true liberty of conscience is recognised and upheld, in which institutionalised discrimination by colour, class and creed is a thing of the past, and in which justice, mercy and honesty are valued as universal virtues.

The place to begin is to have true liberty of conscience - something unknown and unheard of by a nation founded on imperfect principles. We can expect some surprises when there is true liberty of conscience. More individuals might be won to Islam than is presently the case, and with more happy consequences, although the Muslims must expect that there would be those from their numbers who turn to Christ.

What practical steps may we take while awaiting the outcome of future court battles over the right to use ‘Allah’?

i. We would attempt to persuade as many Christians as possible in this country of the propriety - indeed, the imperative - of dropping the use of ‘Allah’ and adopt ‘Tuhan’ for ‘God’ and ‘Yamtuan’ for ‘Lord’.

ii. We could make a trial publication of, say, a thousand copies of the Alkitab using ‘Tuhan’ and ‘Yamtuan’ as replacement words. For this, we would need to raise sufficient funds, while procuring pre-publication orders to ensure quick dissemination and use of the new version of the Alkitab.

We would also need to seek the help of the Bible Society of Indonesia in amending these words, as well as others, to suit the Malaysian situation. For example, we would spell the word ‘kerana’ (because) instead of ‘karena’, we would use the word ‘perigi’ (a well) instead of ‘sumur’, and we might even use the word ‘Kristian’ (Christian) instead of ‘Kristen’.

iii. We would attempt to persuade the churches in Indonesia of the propriety and advantages of using the terms ‘Tuhan’ and ‘Yamtuan’, while retaining the Indonesian spellings and preferred words such as ‘karena’, ‘sumur’ and ‘Kristen’. Cross-border exchange of teaching and publications would be facilitated by a common theological vocabulary, leading to the mutual edification of the churches in Malaysia and Indonesia.

Conclusion

The current use of the words ‘Allah’ as a translation for ‘God’ and ‘Tuhan’ for ‘Lord’ is linguistically and theologically incorrect. Instead of those words, ‘Tuhan’ and ‘Yamtuan’ are proposed as ideal replacements for ‘God’ and ‘Lord’, respectively.

The task of promoting the use of these replacement words in a revised version of the Alkitab among Christians will not be smooth and easy. We foresee opposition from various quarters arising from fear of change, insistence on the legal right to continue using ‘Allah’, and unworthy personal considerations in certain church leaders.

As I send forth this article, I crave the prayer support of friends and fellow servants of God who see the crying need for a usable version of the Alkitab.

Use of the ‘Allah’ term: What next? (Part 1)

BS POH is an apolitical, politically-concerned, pastor and a former detainee under ‘Operasi Lalang’. His persistence in confining his interest to spiritual issues may be seen here .