Three Churches in the Allah issue

In the Allah issue, three churches are jostling for pole position in Malaysia. 

The Christian church graduated in splitting-hairs and is all gung-ho about vocabulary oppression nothwitstanding that challenging the extreme physical persecution of the founder even, is forbidden by his doctrine, not to mention by the founder himself. While his tenacity and industry are admirable traits, with agonizing fervor, he lays claim to an Arabic word quite alien to him, when a Malay synonym is traditionally available. 

The Muslim church does not know what the fuss is all about. Naturally, he is miffed at the attempt to appropriate what he perceives to be well within his domain. He is peeved, not because defining god by vocabulary is relevant to him in form before function, but because the expression has been traditionally applied as a device in worshipping his 'divine'. 

The third church is the Atheist, perceived by the other two as a hedonist without a 'god'. The Atheist is laughing at the two dogmas but he is inclined to the position of the Muslim church, not because the Christian church had usurped without permission, his own job description of spiltting-hairs, but because its position merely robs him of Vocabulary, not Soul.  

In essence, when an atheist contends a Christian, he attributes his position to logic while he paints his theist contender with psychology. The religionist becomes trapped in the realm of belief not knowing that he is bilingual, armed with one language in the public sphere (when he renders unto Caesar) and another in the private (when he renders unto God) but when the freethinker contends a Muslim he utterly destroys him simply because the dogma-driven debater is obliged to announce his position with one language in the public and private domain and often finds himself doing so from within a self-made hamster’s cartwheel.  

Words - Tommy Peters