W

Very well said. This controversy really is mostly about “differing perceptions of the same historical person,” as you said.

Isa, while the name may not be etymologically related to the original Aramaic Y’Shua, should be considered an acceptable name for the Biblical Jesus, considering the many ethno-linguistic groups (not only the Malay, but several Turkic Central Asian ones, the Persian/Dari language groups, and probably others) which use it consistently in their translations of the New Testament. While it is true that the Q’uranic understanding of the “prophet” Isa is very different than the Biblical understanding of the Savior and Messiah, that does not mean they were different people, but rather that there are differing perceptions of the same historical person. There is no record of a DIFFERENT person named Isa (other than the historical, Biblical Y’Shua), and it is clear that the Muslim use of the name intends to indicate the same person, though it departs from historical accounts much closer to the actual events and person in question in serious ways, such as claiming that He did not die on a cross.

Christians speaking Kazakh, Uzbek, or Persian who use the name “Isa” consider Him to be the Son of God, the Savior of the world, the One who died and rose again to conquer death. Muslims in these places use the same name to refer to someone they consider to be just another prophet, with some special titles (including “Messiah” and “Spirit of God.”) Interestingly, in Arabic, as was mentioned in several of the posts, there is a differentiation of the names, as most Arab Christians and Arabic Bibles use the word “Y’Sua” instead of “Isa.”

To me, the essence of the issue is that there is one Jesus, whose Name is powerful, regardless of the language or translation you use, and regardless of misperceptions about Him from any variety of angles. Any name can be distorted, just as many people use the word “God” or “god” and mean an astounding plethora of self-defined things. But I am pretty sure the Almighty is smart enough to figure out if you’re talking to Him.

Thanks for listening.

I just wasted minutes of my life reading what you all had to say because I was wondering if anyone was ever going to get to the real issue.

The issue is; What Are You Doing On Earth for Heaven’s Sake!

Warren, Driscoll and so many others have made it plain by there fruits that they love God and people by following him and by winning the lost.

We would be wise to follow their lead and their encouragment.

By the way you don’t slow down these guys, you just grieve God’s heart by speaking against his anointed.

I am out of here. They are closing the doors to the place.

moe

Perhaps he would have been better off to stick to his beliefs and dispite the pressure to stick to the English language that the rest of his speach was in – just using the English name for Jesus.

perhaps it would have been even better if he had used the FULL NAME = Lord Jesus Christ. That would have left no doubt. Anyone could then have translated the name (and the rest of the speach) into whatever language they so desired.

I certainly do not support Rick Warren. I read and appreciated the excellent book, “Deceived on Purpose” by Warren Smith, exposing Rick Warren’s New Age leanings. Having said this, though, I hesitate to assail him for his use of the name “Isa” in his prayer.

I lived in Malaysia, a Muslim country, for six years, and “Isa” is the one and only word in the Malay language used to refer to Jesus. This word was borrowed from Arabic hundreds of years ago, and has long been a mainstay in the Malay language. The handful of former Muslims I had the privilege to know, who are now genuine followers of Christ, continue to use “Isa” to refer to Christ. Their understanding of who He is, of course, has dramatically changed, and they affirm with conviction that He is God and the Son of God.

In my interactions with Muslims there (speaking in the Malay language), I did use “Isa” to refer to Christ. With many of my friends, quite honestly, I would have received a blank look had I attempted to use the English name “Jesus” or any other alternative to “Isa.” [Any other alternative would have involved the use of a language foreign to them. Many of my friends there did not speak English.]

Question #1: Should the Malay believers in Malaysia (still a small number, by the way) introduce a new term for Christ other than “Isa”?

Question #2: Isn’t it true that many Americans also have misconceptions about who Jesus is? As we share our faith, is it not our responsibility to help clear these up, and to share who Jesus is according to Scripture?

P.S. I have very little knowledge regarding whether or not Arabic Christians use the name “Isa” to refer to Jesus. I only know that Malay speaking believers in Malaysia and Indonesia do. Incidentally, they also refer to God as “Allah.” The only other alternative in the Malay language (which is spoken in Malaysia and Indonesia) for God is “Tuhan.” However, “Tuhan” often denotes “Lord” when coupled together with a reference to “God.” So, for example, “Allah Tuhan” = “Lord God” in numerous Scripture texts in the Malay-language Bible.

P.P.S. While there aren’t yet very many Malay believers in Malaysia, there is a very significant number of Malay-speaking believers in Indonesia. Unless my reasoning is flawed (and it certainly could be), it seems to me that if Rick Warren is preaching another Jesus because he prayed in the name of “Isa,” then more than 10 million believers in Indonesia are guilty of the same.

“We to the Father, through the power and leading of the Spirit, in the Name of the Son. This is the general trend for prayer in the bible. We can pray to the Spirit, or the Son, but generally, we should pray in the aforementioned way.”

That, however is not the general thrust of this discussion. It appears that Warren wanted to be explicitly clear that he was praying in the Name of Jesus Christ and no other name. He probably consulted many former muslims and would have chosen the word they recommended. Regardless, the muslim world knows that Warren was regarding Jesus (Isa, if you will) as God.

Now whether it was appropriate to ask a Christian to pray a Christian prayer for the invocation and benediction is another issue. Should we restrict the president in who he may choose for his inauguration? Should we tell him he needs to include a muslim, jew, hindu, buddhist, etc. in his cabinet? Was George Washington wrong in leading everyone to church even though many of the founding fathers weren’t Christians and some (John Adams and Ben Franklin especially) worked very hard to ensure that America would remain a secular nation and never become a Christian nation?

I know the constitution says that no religion will be hindered or promoted by a government. How far do we take that? Do we say every religion gets their chance to speak, or say that no religion gets a chance to publicly thank God/god (and therefore potentially hinder them)? You see the dilemma…

(P.S. Sorry for the long post. I am not that succinct and I find it important to be specific so that I say exactly what I’d like to say without having the particulars misunderstood.)

I thought that perhaps a recent Muslim convert to Christianity may refer to Jesus as Isa, but I’ve listened to many during their testimonies, and I don’t recall anyone using the name Isa.

Can you please clarify for me who these people of authority are? I am curious…

Kind regards,
Ghada

Kind regards,
Ghada

I haven’t read all the comments here, so my understanding of this article is that there was an objection to the use of “Isa” as the name for Jesus in Rick Warren’s prayer, correct?

Strictly speaking, “Isa” is the Arabic name for Jesus. However, it is not the name that is ever used in Arab churches – at least, not mine. I believe the reason for that is to distinguish our beliefs from those of Muslims. To the Muslims, “Isa” is a prophet born of the virgin Mary. To the Christians, “Jesus” is the Son of God born of the virgin Mary. There is a big difference between the 2, and to avoid any confusion, Isa is never used.

I think in the end the issue is in the motivation behind using the name “Isa”, rather than twhether it is the same name in Arabic. Is he trying to say we have common ground in our belief in Jesus? If so, he’s badly mistaken and misleading – this is exactly the situation my church attempts to avoid, in my humble opinion.

Thank you for your continued efforts in solving this.

I am still waiting to hear back from a friend in Lebanon. His background is Muslim (but he worships the god of techno and raves)… but he says he has a number of Arabic Christian friends living in Beruit. I will post something when I hear from him.

Cheers,
Mike

The end.