The Case Against Ergun Caner

See over at my other blog, I embedded Dr. White's video on the Case against Ergun Caner, and other links with the documentation; and also another video done by a Muslim, who made a video of news reports about Caner going to Brewton-Parker College in Mount Vernon, Ga. The discussion in the combox is also interesting so far, as it is with a Muslim concerning the doctrines of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Qur'an's mistakes about those doctrines and also the Qur'an's mistkae about the crucifixion and death of Christ as established historical fact, which the Qur'an denies. (Surah 4:157)

The Balance of Apologetics and Agape Love

My friend, Mark, in the combox of my previous article on "Khoda or Allah??" (Another Mistake by Ergun Caner) asked about "The Camel Method" of Evangelizing Muslims, which is referenced in a NY times article about it and Ergun Caner.

UPDATE: Please see the updated information in the comboxes on the Camel Method. Because of this new information to me; especially the letter from Phil Parshall, and my need to read the Camel Method again; I will refrain at this time from speaking about the Camel Method and take the references to it out; but I will leave my analysis and critique of the C-5/Insiders Movement/"Common Ground" methods. I confess I was speaking out of my years of conflict/tension and confrontation with fellow missionary types on the C-5 level and the emotional tension that that caused. I apologize for including the Camel Method in with the clearly wrong C-5 level methods. But I do need to study that book again. I want to thank Erwin for coming here and commenting.

Dr. Ergun Caner and Dr. James White are right that certain kinds of missionary methods that put methodology over the Scriptures and the power of God to change people, can be deceptive to Muslims. Especially if we are not careful in our communication and exercise discernment and wisdom in how we use methodologies. For example, the C-5/ Insiders Movement / “Common Ground” teaching methods appear to affirm the Qur’an as an inspired book; and suggest that Muhammad was a true prophet from God. There is a lot of post-modern hermeneutics and American pragmatism and “emerging church” / seeker-sensitive type of philosophy and ideas that are the roots of these methods that put the methods over the power of God’s word (Hebrews 4:12), the power of the gospel (Romans 1:16), and it seems that the people who use these methods are not trusting the power of the Holy Spirit to blow where He wants and change people. (John 3:8)

The problem with these methods are that if they are actually opening up the Qur’an and studying it as if you are treating it as a Muslim would, as, “this is what God says”; it is treating it like an authoritative, “God-breathed” book – this is deceptive because the Muslim thinks you are affirming everything in it as inspired. I have had former Muslims tell me this when I quoted a verse from the Qur'an to make a point. In their contexts, you would have to respect the Qur’an, wash your hands, and put it on a stand with Muslims in order to actually “get into it” deeply with serious Muslims. If you don't say anything about the parts of it that are wrong, we can give the wrong impression to our Muslim friend.

The C-5 level methods of calling oneself a “Muslim” is deceptive also, especially without qualification and explanation that we actually believe in Christian submission to God. They can see through that game. The word “Muslim” means “one who has surrendered” or “one who submits”. (but it is understood in an Islamic context of “submission to Allah, and following the example of the prophet Muhammad, and following the Qur’an and the Sunna in the Hadith, and other Islamic sources, etc.) The concept of submission can be explained to Muslims in a biblical way, especially if you have a context of hospitality and love, where you can explain that the Bible speaks of submission to God’s will and we also believe in submission, that repentance and faith in Christ is true submission to God. (Mark 1:15; Luke 22:42; Romans 12:1-2; Romans 6:11-14) Muslims need to understand that we believe in repentance and that Jesus demands repentance. (Luke 13:1-5; Acts 3:19; Matthew 3:8; Luke 3:8; Acts 17:30-31; Acts 26:20; Revelation 3:19) Muslims think that Christianity is "easy believe-ism", (No repentance from sin and no Lordship of Christ)- “that you just get fire insurance from hell, and live like the devil.” Many Muslims, in 26 years (10 in witnessing to Arabs, and the last 16 in witnessing to Iranians) have said to me, “We know this is true, that you get forgiveness and live like the devil, because we see the results in your sensual, sex-saturated, materialistic, selfish, rebellious, individualistic western cultures.”

Basically, there are some things in the Qur'an that are true, because they actually came from the Christians and the Bible. The things that are true in the Qur’an came from previous revelation. The problem is that Muhammad took information from the Bible and changed some of the details and most of the meaning and significance of most of the stories that the Qur’an uses from the Bible. The Bible had not been translated into Arabic yet; and the early church had left their first love (Revelation 2:4-5) and allowed the Mary cult of statues and icons and praying to her as mediator; and the church at the time of Muhammad had fallen into a works/rituals/externalist/sacerdotal controlled religion to overshadow salvation by grace alone and justification by faith alone. Muhammad and the Arabs could not see Christ, because of all the false doctrines and practices that existed at the time. Furthermore, the “Christians” closest to Arabia were mixtures of heretics and Gnostics and nominal Christians.

The biggest problem with contextualization methods like the C-5 / Insiders / Common Ground teaching is that it appears/gives the impression that it is treating the Qur'an as an inspired book. Without biblical discipleship teaching, these large numbers that people are claiming is happening in some parts of the Muslim world through these methods, will naturally create lots of syncretism and heresies. And it already has. They don't seem to be willing to teach on the Trinity or the hypostatic union/2 natures of Christ. It also angers the Muslim authorities when they find out what is going on. They know it is heresy and syncretism of mixing the two religions into something that is neither one. It gives the Muslims that impression, when you open it up and look to it for study; and if one takes too long to actually get to the Injeel (NT); then many Muslims have later said, “You did not tell us that at the beginning; you deceived us!” This has created even more anger.

Dr. White’s saying is true: “Whatever you win them with, that is what you win them to.” And his saying, "Theology matters" is true also.

The “Insider’s Movement” (C-5 level contextualization) is definitely deceptive; and suggests Muhammad may have had the NT gift of prophesy (! Can you believe this?); and it suggests and implies that the Qur’an is an inspired book. They also encourage Muslims who come to Christ to keep doing all the Islamic rituals and keep on going to the Mosque. This does not teach them salvation by Grace alone, justification by faith alone, nor the biblical doctrines of what church (ekklesia) is. They will quickly fall into the Galatian heresy of legalism and mixing works and rituals in order to “earn points with Allah”. These methods do not teach a clear repentance from the false system of works and to the Tri-une God of the Bible. Jesus said, “unless you believe that “I am”, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24) They reinterpret everything that does not agree with the NT.

These kinds of methods can be deceptive, because the missionary of this method seems to be actually opening the Qur’an on certain verses, and is not saying he disagrees with the rest of the Qur’an; he is trying to focus only on some good "bridges" in the Qur’an. They don't seem to call for repentance from the false religious system of Islam and its "faith +works" righteousness.

Generally, I agree with the principle of focusing on Jesus Christ and His character and His word in the NT and avoiding direct attacks against Muhammad. Muslims are eastern people; they will understand when you focus on Jesus and that He and His rasoolan (apostles) were the final revelation. (John 17:8; John 16:12-13; Jude 3, Hebrews 1:1-3; Ephesians 2:20; Revelation 22:18 (by principle).

When Muslims read that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey and was meek and gentle and endowed with Salvation; (Matthew 21:1-10); they immediately get the contrast with Muhammad, who rode in a horse and sword to conquer. They understand this without you having to directly point it out. I have seen this many times over the years.

Jesus was also eastern, and the Bible is an eastern book. He asked questions and many times, especially at the beginning, He spoke indirectly to the Monotheistic and zealous Jews in their context. (Later, Matthew 23 is certainly very direct.) When Jesus asked, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.” (Mark 10:18), Jesus was not denying He is God, He is actually saying that He is God, because He is good, and if people recognize Him as good; then they should recognize Him as God. It was an eastern method of indirect communication. Zealous and Monotheistic Muslims can be approached in the same way to get them thinking. That is their culture. The parables of Jesus are like this. They teach a powerful truth in an indirect way in stories and illustrations. When Jesus said, “The Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”, the Pharisees and scribes understood that He was claiming to be God. (Mark 2:1-12)

Having said that, I do think that the questions that David Garrison asks in the NY times article are good questions to ask Muslims. Let’s be balanced and wise and think.

I don’t see a problem with asking Muslims these questions and then getting into the Injeel (the NT), especially Luke and Matthew with them.
He [Garrison] explained that after reading the sura in which Maryam, or Mary, gives birth to Isa, a missionary might ask a Muslim, “Do you know of any other prophets born of a virgin?”
And, Dr. Garrison continued: “It says in that passage that Isa would be able to cleanse the leper, even raise the dead. At that point in the conversation with Muslims, we say, ‘Isn’t it interesting that Isa had this tremendous power that God gave to him? Even death was under his power.’
“Then you ask the question, ‘Is there any other prophet that had this kind of power?’ And in Islam, there isn’t.”

And I think that we can use some truths that are mentioned in the Qur’an about Jesus and the books before the Qur’an as starting points with Muslims. We should know that the Qur’an says these things and use them in witnessing, mentioning them, but opening up the Injeel with them. The Injeel, Islam teaches, is the revelation that was given to Jesus by Allah. Popularly understood, Muslims believe it is “the book of Jesus” and some Muslims assume that Jesus wrote it. For Christians, it is whole gospel message, summarized in I Corinthians 15:1-9, but includes all of the whole NT message; Injeel is the Arabic word for “Gospel”, which is a corrupted form of the Greek word, the shorter version, “Euangel”; from “euangellion” (The Gospel; good news). It assumes our sinfulness and condition of being under the just wrath of God (John 3:36; Romans 1:18; Ephesians 2:1-3), which is bad news. (Mark 9:48; Matthew 5:21-30)

I do think that these below are good and truthful concepts that are in the Qur’an that we can use as starting points in conversation with Muslims and getting into the Gospels with Muslims: I am not affirming the Qur’an as an inspired book; but I am saying that some of the information that Muhammad got from the Christians was true. The problem is, it got distorted and corrupted and then Muhammad re-interpreted most everything he got from the Jews and Christians.

1. Isa (Jesus) was born of the virgin Mary. (Surah 3:45-48; 19:19-21) This is why the Jesus film was done from the Gospel according to Luke, and why it is good to start with Luke or Matthew with Muslims. They need to read the Gospels first to get the whole birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. The Holy Spirit uses His word. John 3:8; I Peter 1:23-25.
2. Jesus is called Al Masih many times in the Qur’an. (The Messiah)
3. Jesus was sinless. (Surah 19:19)
4. Jesus is the Son of Mary. (many times)
5. Jesus did miracles. (Healed the lame and blind, and raised the dead.)
6. Jesus is called “the Kalimat’allah” (Qur’an 4:171; “The word of God”. Kalimeh کلمه is equivalent to “logos” in John 1:1; 1:14 and I John 1:1; Revelation 19:13.) Muhammad got this information from heretical, and nominal Christians and Gnostic gospels that were mixed in with a growing cult of Mary encircling Arabia (N. Arabia, Jordan, Yemen) and Palestine/Lebanon/Syria. Islam denies that “Kalimat’allah” means the Deity of Christ in the way that John 1:1, 14 teaches, but it can be a useful phrase to use in discussing Jesus with Muslims.
7. Jesus is called “a Spirit from God” - Qur’an Surah 4:171; The concept that Jesus is a “spirit from Allah” is an important one to use to show that His divine nature is His Spirit and soul inside of Him; and He, as "spirit" (God is Spirit, John 4:24) was incarnated – He became flesh and entered into time and creation. I use Luke 1:34-35 and Hebrews 10:5 with Muslims, “A body, you have prepared for Me”, Jesus said.
8. The problem with this verse (4:171) in the Qur’an is that same verse also denies His Deity and denies the Trinity. “Say not three” -can be interpreted from a Christian point of view that we do not believe in three gods, which is what Muslims think – tri-theism. Unfortunately, Muhammad did not understand that the word Trinity is from 2 Latin words, "Trinitas – Unitas" (Theophilus of Antioch, around 180 AD, and Tertullian, around 200 AD). The “Unitas” (one, oneness, unity; see the Spanish: “Uno” – this emphasis is lost and we have to work extra hard to help Muslims understand that we do not worship three gods and that “Son of God” does not mean marriage and sex and that the Roman Catholic usage of “Mother of God” is wrong; along with the statues of Mary and prayers to Mary. ) Also, I always take the opportunity to say to Muslims that that is what the Mormons have taught in the past – that God has a body, was once a man, and had sexual relations with Mary and pro-created Jesus. I take that opportunity to call Mormonism a cult and a non-Christian religion and the Muslims usually say, “Oh, I did not know that; I though you are all Christians.”
9. The Qur’an affirms the books revealed before it as the Word of God. (Surah 2:136; 29:46; 5:46-48; 5:68)
10. The Qur’an encourages the Christians “to judge by that which Allah has revealed therein”, in the Injeel. (The Gospel) ( Surah 5:47). Dr. White uses this verse in his debates with Muslims, and missionaries have been using this verse in the same way for decades, even centuries, in order to show that the Bible at the time of Muhammad was not corrupted. So, it is not wrong to use some verses from the Qur’an, depending on what it is and how it is used.
11. One of the most powerful verses in the Qur’an to know when dealing with Muslims; “If you are in doubt about what we are revealing to you, go and ask the people of the book.” (Surah 10:94) This, along with 5:47 and other verses, show that the Bible has not been corrupted.
12. There is some kind of idea in the text of the Qur’an of a substitutionary sacrifice for sin, even though Islamic interpretation denies this. – “We have ransomed you with a mighty sacrifice.” Qur’an 37:107 See my previous article.
13. The Qur’an also affirms that Jesus’ disciples were “full of integrity”, “helpers of Allah” and honest. (Surah 3:52; 61:14) So, I believe we can use this to teach that Matthew, John, Peter, and Paul did not corrupt the gospel. (Although Muslims will reject Paul as an “apostle”; we have to show them that he was a true apostle.)
14. The Qur’an also says, “no one can change the words of God” (Surah 6:34; 6:116; 10:65; 18:27). So a good question to ask Muslims, when they say that the previous Scriptures have been corrupted, is, “How can puny, sinful man, change the eternal word of God?”

Not everyone can be a formal debater with Muslims like Dr. James White. His work in NT studies and theology is excellent. His book, The King James Only Controversy and NT textual materials are excellent, and are honest with the few textual variants that do exist; and this demonstrates that 99 % of the text we have today is the same as what was revealed originally to the prophets and apostles. No textual variant affects any major doctrine. We can be honest with our Bible manuscripts and how they came down to us in history. His material on affirming the text of the NT is crucial and some of the best, in dealing with Muslim apologists and scholars who use liberals and skeptics to attack the Bible; people like Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan, Robert Price (debate coming up; see www.aomin.org), and atheists like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, and popular liberals like John Shelby Spong and Barry Lynn; and the popular level NPR shows, Bill Maher, and the Comedy Central Shows such as “The Daily Show”, and “The Colbert Report” types of attacks against the Bible.

Everyone will not be a skilled apologetics debater like Dr. White, but all Christians are to witness, and can be equipped and reach out to Muslims with respect and friendship and hospitality. Doctrinal folks like me need to be balanced. I like to call my approach, “The Balance of Apologetics and Agape”. (Jude, verse 3 along with verses 20- 23; I Peter 3:15) We must do both; be equipped in all the apologetic issues that come up with Muslims, but love and respect them as people and learn some of their culture in order to not bring unnecessary stumbling blocks in addition to the necessary stumbling block of the cross and the gospel. Be willing to meet Muslims and accept their hospitality when they invite you to their home; and have a strong cup of Turkish coffee with them; or Iranian tea; or Shish Kebab and Hummus and Pita bread with an Arab. Love them as people created in the image of God. Be the friend of sinners and tax collectors as Jesus did. (Matthew 9:9-13; Luke 5:27-32; Luke 15)If you start with hospitality (eating a meal in their home, and inviting them to your home), love and respect, you can most always create a context where you can open up the New Testament Scriptures with them.

The best chapter of Ergun and Emir Caner’s book, Unveiling Islam, is chapter 16, where they discuss reaching out to Muslims with hospitality and love and respect and cultural issues; and using some key verses from the Qur’an to know.

I also agree with Dr. Caner's point in the NY Times article that George Harrison meant “Hare Krishna” by “My Sweet Lord”, as he clearly praises and calls upon “Hare Krishna” at the end of his song. George Harrison was a Hindu. Hinduism is a false religion; paganism; polytheism. Anyone who knows George Harrison and the Beatles history, understands this.

But, I disagree with Dr. Caner when he says we cannot use the word “Allah” for the God of the Bible, for Arabs and Arabic speakers as my previous article shows.

See Again, here. Doctrinally, Allah of Islam is not the God of the Bible, but linguistically, it is the best word in Arabic to communicate “the one true creator, Sovereign God” and equivalent to Elohim in the OT and Theos in the NT for Arabic speakers.

Another mistake by Ergun Caner

خدا (Khoda) or الله (Allah) ??

Ergun Caner and Emir Caner’s Unveiling Islam, in the chapter on Allah (chapter 6 – “Allah: Names of Terror and Names of Glory” pp. 102-119, Kregel Publishers, 1st edition 2002), on page 106 they wrote:

“Many Arabic speaking Christians use the Persian term khudu for God, rather than cause confusion by calling Allah by the name God.”

This is wrong, Arabic speaking Christians do not use the Farsi/Persian word for God, “Khoda”. (or “Khuda”)

See the Wikipedia article on Khoda/Khuda:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuda

Ergun Caner, also said in an interview documented below:

“Muslims who become Christians who speak Arabic, they don't even use the word Allah. When they speak of God, they call him 'Khoda,' a Persian word, because we are so terrified of confusing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with Allah, the false god that we served as Muslims.”

See the documentation below at Dr. White’s website:

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3801

This is just not true, Arabs or Arabic speaking former Muslims, who become Christians, have no problem with the word “Allah” for Elohim in OT and Theos in the NT. (There may be individual exceptions to this; but generally; they still love their own language.) In fact the Bible in Arabic has translated Elohim in the OT and Theos in the NT as “Allah”. The word means “The God”, meaning, the one true creator, Sovereign, Almighty, Invisible God who is eternal. The word is related to the Aramaic and Hebrew words El, Eloha, alaha, etc. In refuting the controversial "Moon-god" theory of Allah, some excellent scholarship has been done in showing that the Arabic word Allah came from Aramaic and the Peshitta (Syriac) translation of the Bible. (see -
http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Sources/alaha.html and
http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Sources/alaha2.html

The El, Elohim, Eloha, alaha, Allah word-group denotes Power, Sovereignty, and Monotheism; these are the emphases of this word. Now, I agree with the Caners that the doctrine of who Allah is in Islam is wrong, incomplete, and not the God of the Bible, because Allah is defined as “not Trinitarian”, and cannot have within the Trinity ( Latin: Tri-Unitas, "three in one"), an eternal, Spiritual Father and Son relationship. (see Surah 112 of the Qur’an) When Christians speak of The Father and the Son, we are referring to a spiritual relationship from all eternity, not physical. Muslims understand the word "Father" and "Son" to automatically mean that there was a mother and a physical, sexual relationship. (Qur'an 6:101/102) The Roman Catholics and Orthodox churches who call Mary, "The Mother of the God" and pray to her and have statues of her in worship contexts also confirm this misunderstanding in their minds. Jesus had no human father. Mary, His mother, was a virgin. Muslims also believe this. This is why giving a Muslim the gospels of Matthew and Luke are a good place to start, because they believe in the virgin birth of Al Masih. (Qur'an, Surah 19:19-21; 3:45-48) Luke 1:34-35 tells us "for this reason" He will be called the Son of God - because of the power of the Most High, and the work of the Holy Spirit. Christians always understood the Father and Son relationship within the Trinity as spiritual, not physical. Islam rejects the Deity of Christ, and for Muslims “Holy Spirit” means an angel; so the god of Islam is not the God of the Bible doctrinally. However, linguistically, the best word in Arabic for “the one true creator God who is eternal and Sovereign and invisible”; is Allah.

What Caner is confusing is the fact that Persians (Iranians) are not Arabs, and they have their own language which is not Arabic, and their language is called Farsi or Persian. The Persians, from the word “Pars” are a Jephethite (Europeans, Indians (India), Kurds and Iranians are from Japheth) people, not Semitic. Farsi in its pure form, is actually closer to Latin, German, and English, than Arabic. But after the Islamic conquests of Persia, today Farsi has 40 % Arabic words and phrases in it, and the Arabs changed their script to the Arabic script, although Iranians had to add letters because there are four sounds that Iranians have that Arabs do not have. ( P, G, jh, ch ) [The Arabs also have sounds/letters that the Iranians don't make either, so it works both ways.] The Arabs could not pronounce “p” when they attacked Persia (Iran) in Jihad and conquered and converted the Iranians to Islam. That is why “Pars” became “Fars” and “Parsi” became “Farsi”. It took about 3 centuries to fully subjugate them and change their Zoroastrian religion to Islam. Most of the Zoroastrians who kept their religion fled to India. Today Mumbai has more Zoroastrians than their original homeland, Iran (Persia).

Iranians don’t like the Arabs. Remember the Iran – Iraq war from 1980-1988? Deep historical and ethnic tensions were underlying that conflict. Sadaam Hussein and Ayatollah Khomeini exchanged curses at one another. Khomeini considered Sadaam not a true Muslim [which is true, Saddam Hussein was a very secular/Stalinist Muslim; the Baath party has that as its basic philosophy of mixing Stalinism and Islam] and eventually S. Hussein attacked Iran. Remember even centuries before that the Babylonian vs. Persia history? Iranians, Farsi speakers use “Khoda” for God, even Iranian Muslims use “Khoda” mostly because that is their language.

Iranians who have turned from Islam and repented of their sin and trusted Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord use the word “Khoda” and they do indeed have a problem with “Allah”, but Arabs do not have a problem with the word, “Allah”. Arabic speaking Christians use the word “Allah”.

Iranian former Muslims still use “Allah” in compound phrases like “Inshallah” ("If God wills"; which means “I hope so”, in every day speech) and “Al Hamdolellah” (Praise God) and “Allah O Akbar” (God is great).

Modern Turks also do not like the word “Allah” as much, either, as they have their own Turkish word for God, “Tanri”. The letter “i” should be without a dot over it, as it is a special letter sound in Turkish, but my key board won’t let me do that right now. (I don’t have Turkish software.) The Turks are not Arabs either. So, Iranians, Turks, Kurds, Arabs are mostly Muslims religiously, however, they each have their own ethnicity and language that is different from one another.

Many Iranians today are disillusioned with Islam. But, strong Iranian Muslims use "Allah", but usually they are those that are very, very strong. (Those that follow the philosophy and Twelver Shiite Islam of Ayatollah Khomeini (the founder of the Islamic Regime in Iran and who died in 1989) and the current Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i and President Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad.) Most Iranians I know do not like the term "Allah" because it reminds them of the Arab invasions and force and Jihad under Khalif Omar, starting around 633-651 AD and beyond and the current Islamic Regime, started by Khomeini in 1979.

The Caners seem to be confusing their facts. What I think they mean is that Persian Iranian Muslims who come to Christ do not use Allah anymore at all, or very rarely, but they use Khoda. But even non-Christian (nominal Muslims) Persians prefer “Khoda” to “Allah” anyway. Even strong Iranian Muslims probably use “Khoda” more than Allah, just because it is their language. It is an ethnic, language issue.

“Allah” reminds Iranians of Omar, the Arabs, Jihad, force, and the harsh Khomeini regime. Some Iranians have a celebration where they make a puppet (effigy) of Omar and stick fire crackers in his mouth and blow him up and cut him up into pieces. They hate Omar because he attacked Iran in Islamic Jihad and forced the Iranian people to become Muslims. This is also part of the Shiite vs. Sunni hatred from the Iranian side. A Persian Shah by decree decided the Iranians would be Shiites (around the time of the Reformation in Europe) because they did not want to be like the Sunni Arabs and Ottoman Turks. But Southern Iraqi Shiites are ethnic Arabs.

In conclusion, in witnessing to Muslims, we have to start at a place that they can understand us. As Dr. White says in his debates with Muslims, “We both believe that God can communicate.” We both believe in Monotheism, that there is only one Sovereign, Invisible, Creator, eternal God. The Almighty has communicated through prophets, apostles, books; that is, revelation. Also, language is very important, Bible translation is necessary, and communicating the gospel into the heart languages of Muslims, so that they can understand what we are saying, is part of the missionary task. It is ok to use “Allah” for God for Arab Muslims, and other Muslims for whom that is the best word that communicates the one eternal creator, Sovereign God. Other Muslims, prefer their own language, and they prefer the word for God in their mother tongue. From there, we must give the Muslims the Gospel (Injeel) in their own language and encourage them to read the gospels first and let the Holy Spirit work on their hearts to see Al Masih (The Messiah) in the Scriptures.