Thursday, December 17, 2015

Religion, Religiosity and the "Religious" in Malaysia

TMI - Top cop confirms reports lodged over attempts to convert Muslims (extract):


the term 'Church' used here is generic and embraces all religions

likewise for above picture of a 'church' 

Police have received a number of reports, in which Christians groups were attempting to convert Muslims, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar told a news portal today.


Nowadays, such police reports in Malaysia are common and in a large number of cases, made frivolously and usually with a sinister or vindictive political agenda.

Thus, even if the IGP informed us that a number of reports have been made about Christian attempts to proselytize Muslims, I would be cautious about accepting the reliability of those reports. Mind, this is not to say there isn't any such proselytizing.

Alas, the questionable use of police reports cut both ways and is not confined to only one group, political or religious. The Malaysian term for such reports is (in Chinese) char koay teow reports.

We've heard of the deformasi scare-mongering '40K Bangla' during GE-13 wakakaka but which unfortunately saw some over zealous vigilante actions on polling day. On this you may wish to read my Bangla in Pilihanraya, wakakaka.

Then on the other side, we obtain the usual bull, some with very serious dark intent, though one was undeniably the most ridiculous, which should really be entered in the Malaysian Book of Records as what it has been, to wit, THE MOST RIDICULOUS police report ever made in Malaysia, one against a DAP ADUN, RSN Rayer (Seri Delima) for using the word celaka (damn) against precious UMNO, wakakaka, and would you believe it, Rayer has been charged by the 'hardworking' police for that.

In Malaysia, unfortunately we cannot disconnect the political from the religious, where we have parties like UMNO and PAS claiming their at-times ugly actions and words were needed to "defend" Islam and Muslims, while the other side of the coin saw some Christian clerics being very (politically and politicized-wise) naughty, well, at least in my opinion, wakakaka.

Three years ago, in August 2012 (ie. one year prior to the 13th general elections) The Malaysian Insider's Muslim scholar: ‘Haram’ to vote DAP but not MCA, MIC reported that Abdullah Sa’amah, an Islamic scholar, told Utusan Malaysia that it's haram for Muslims to vote for DAP and its two allies PAS and PKR in the coming general election, all because DAP has refused to accept hudud.

On this, poor f* PAS received an unjust rough raw deal from UMNO, its current Islamic brethren, wakakaka. But that same Islamic scholar was f* silent on UMNO which also did not promote hudud.

He then had the brazen thick-skinned face to exempt UMNO allies, namely MCA and MIC (but alas, not, Gerakan, wakakaka) from that haram warning.

Muslims were told that the DAP had the bloody gall to demand equality for Islam and non-Islam, and equality for temples and mosques. How dare these f* kafirs and dhimmis.

OTOH, Abdullah told Muslims it will be halal to vote for MCA and MIC because these two BN branches are prepared to accept Islamic rule. Would that be true, YB Liow Tiong Lie?

Then, we read Free Malaysia Today's GE 13: What would Jesus do? Wakakaka.

Poor Yehoshua ben Yosef, a non-Christian Judean (Christianity did NOT exist in Jesus' time) dragged into today's Christendom's politicking.

It was on 07 August 2012, that a public forum was held in PJ, Section 8, at the Dignity International, A-2-7 Pusat Perdagangan, on the (then pending) 13th general election, to discuss GE-13 from a Christian perspective.

Why a Christian perspective and not a Malaysian perspective? Why bring your religion into my politics?

The pathetic preposterously politicised topic of discussion was 'What will Jesus be doing in Malaysia today?'.

The speakers were Rev Dr Hermen Shastri and Paul Sinnappan.

FMT reported:

A media statement on the forum explained that the cowardly fence-sitters are the sole obstacle in preventing political change in Malaysia.

“As the winds of change blow in this most exciting times of political change in Malaysia, the only obstacle that is preventing the change from actually taking place is the Malaysian ‘fence-sitters’ who for the last 54 years have been afraid to make that choice for change."

“Many among this also reside in our Churches and sit glued to benches and pews during Sunday service without fail, listening fervently to what Jesus may be saying to them,” it read.

The statement added that there is a growing awakening among all Malaysians on the need for real change – a reform of the political landscape for Malaysians.

“Yet there seems to be a disjoint of the faith growth within the Churches and the growth without among all Malaysians. This seemingly two worlds of faith and politics are a challenge to all Christians. Are there two lives or only one life, [which] we live according to the will of God?,” it said.

The speakers, read the statement, will take the audience through the Bible to study the political implications and experiences of being a Christian.

“This is to help us enter into present-day reality of the Malaysian political context, and answer the perennial thought: what would Jesus do in Malaysia Today?” it added.


Just as Islam in Malaysia has been highly politicized, so it seems too with the Christian church, well, at least in August 2012, wakakaka, who considered those who for the last 54 years have been afraid to make that choice for change as cowardly ‘fence-sitters’.

And just who the f* were they to label people who chose/elected as they wished/wanted as cowards? How dare they! Must we vote in accordance with their arrogant dictates?

And what did they mean by 'fence-sitters' when those voters had voted one way or another?

Did the 'change' they advocate meant changing the then-existing majority ruling coalition? Who-TF were they to determine that for us? Were we leemings in the eyes of the church?

As an atheist, may I humbly draw the attention of Christians, not excluding Rev Dr Hermen Shastri and Paul Sinnappan, to what Jesus told us in Matthew 22:21:

"Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."


F* eat that! That's what Jesus would have done and said if he was here today.

Don't believe me? It's all in the Christian Bible, in Matthew 22:21.

But then again, some Christians like some Muslims like some Hindus and like some Buddhists have a convenient  'mudah lupa' mentality when it suits their f* self-interests, wakakaka.

Isn't it troubling enough that we already have so many Islamic clerics politicizing their religion for political gains? We certainly don't need any more clerics of other religious denomination interfering in politics.

We need a f* clear separation between State and Church.


26 comments:

  1. Malay leaders whether they are politicians,religious leaders or Little Napoleans have a fucking mentality of inferior complex.Because they have their heads stuck into the thigh spreaders,of the PKR for an extended period of time,their fucking brains have turn to vegetable status.That is the fucking reason they thought that every Malay and Muslims are vulnerable to conversion to the Christian faith.To these fuckups,I say go fuck your own selves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What a foul-mouthed empty-headed comment. Then again, what do u expect from a big Anwar fan? Hehehe.

      Delete
  2. tokio rain,do not forget that your idol Anwar is included in the lists of these fuckups.Go figure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hahaha. Ahbeng keyboard warrior. Still twerking in front of the mirror ar?

      Delete
  3. Is there any country in this world that had an IGP,who is a moronic clownish twitter happy creep?No wonder,criminals are running loose,like horny dogs chasing bitche down the streets.Malaysia mesti boleh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is working for Ahjib mah. Hehehe.

      Delete
  4. “Compel them to come in” ~ Luke 14:23; perhaps to Rev Dr Hermen Shastri and Paul Sinnappan that’s what Jesus have done and said if he was here today?

    To compel the fence sitters to reformasi or be deformasi-ed or destroyed? To produce proselytes and compel them to blaspheme? All of these I disagree strongly. There will always be doctrinal error and/or biblical misunderstanding, be it intentionally, or unintentionally.

    Well after all Karl Max began his academic career in religious study? But if secularism means no religion – I shall disagree with KT! And didn’t Luther introduce the idea of priesthood for all the believers? And didn't Calvin preach the Doctrine of Election? And wasn’t Newton was impelled in his science by his faith and scriptural ideas? Anyway, I digress too far! In a nutshell, I quite agree with this article of KT. However, my version of secularism is to have/allow many religions, and be that as it may, I will agree with Zaid…Let’s all have the “live and let live” attitude.

    “Is [religious] uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half of the world fools, and the other half hypocrites”. ~ Thomas Jefferson

    In England, secularisation had been secured after a few hundred years of intense physical, political and intellectual war. Now, England has still got her problems. Perhaps, the philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome had erred too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. my dear bro, secularism is NOT atheism, wakakaka. Secularism is about the state not being involved in nor promoting religion in its state affairs and policies on, say, politics, education, judiciary, laws, international relationship, etc.

      Religion should be an individual or private business.

      So in fact, you're right in that secularism allows and tolerates many many religions (including atheism, wakakaka) but not as an intrinsic part of or within its state/official fold.

      Delete
  5. Hahahahahaha........hantam everybody except Najib

    Trademark of Cibai Motherfucker kaytee

    Kaytee should be extremely worried when Najib decides to persecute atheists. Seriously, I wouldn't mind if kaytee is persecuted by Naiib and the chances are extremely high.

    If not, why NSC bill was rushed through with full speed by none other Najib.

    So that cibai motherfucker kaytee can blame Madhater, Anwar or his dead mother, the crucial fact is Najib is the main culprit

    Case close

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you're in reality a far bigger cb-MF* wakakaka. Just to remind/warn you, the Fijian authorities are still after you for seditious meddling with their state affairs, to wit, using your church for nefarious subversive activities

      dun worry, if you're incarcerated there, I'll send some Maggi mee to your cell. It's my socialist genrosity and compassion, wakakaka

      Delete
    2. I am very surprised that my message does go through your censorship. Last time I check, you cry father cry mother when your comment was delayed.

      Again, why no write-up on NSC? Aren't you afraid that Najib will turn to persecute you for violating the first tenet of rukun negara?

      Whatever you say would be useless because Najib is Shah of all Shah.

      I will be grabbing my popcorns and watch with glee when Najib is doing onto you

      Delete
  6. how a christian preference in politics have to do with secularism? either u r bias against the christian, or u do not wan to be too direct n harsh to the malaysia muslim. u worry muslim like hasan n unknown cant defend themselves, u start to concur with ha that muslim is weak n christian is strong wakaka.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It took 30 years to get a Catholic Church to be built in Shah Alam, largely due to political obstruction.
    There is not a very large number of Catholics in Shah Alam, but definitely sufficient to support a substantial Church.

    It was a gross violation of the right of Catholics to practise their religion to tell them they must go to an out of town church for their prayers.

    Just as it is a gross violation of freedom of religion to tell Christians they cannot have scriptures in the language they are most comfortable with, if the language happens to be Bahasa Malaysia. Who are you to do that ?

    It was also a violation for the Malaysian Government to arrogate to itself the power to dictate what specific words cannot be used inside a Bible. Who are you to do that ?

    In the face of such continuing and increasing threats to their personal religious space, Malaysian Christians have no choice but to be political.

    Being Political means you take a clear stand on public issues which impact the right to practice religion.
    That is right, and it is totally different from being Partisan.

    Partisan politics is when you urge support for So-and-So political party, or demonise another political party.

    The Church has not , will not engage in Partisan politics.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If only catholics here were like Irish ones......hahahahaha

      Delete
  8. hy.. kt said "the term 'church' used here is generic and embraces all religions... likewise for above picture of a 'church'." therefore he hentam semua lah..ok la boleh diterima pakai..siapa yang makan cili terasa juga pedas nya.. but it is a good write.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If kaytee put a mosque picture, apa macam? Will you now massacre kaytee? Be honest!

      Kaytee should be thankful that he is not in northern ireland. Perhaps for the first time, unionists and nationalists may join in giving special treatment to kaytee

      Delete
  9. A new bloke has arrived in town and outdone the sapu taxis and leg spreaders of PKR.His name is Ismail Sabri.He is welcoming horny dudes to his whorehouse and offering the first six humpings for free.He sure do need jugs of jelly for his sore ass when the dudes are finished with him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the first one to get his limp dick greased for free is u. Dei tambi, u r supposed to be an Ajib supporter la. Confused alredi ar? Hehehe.

      Delete
  10. " There are a number of things that make particular ideologies dangerous. One of them is the prospect of a utopia: since utopias are infinitely good forever, and can justify any amount of violence to pursue that utopia, the costs are still outweighed by the benefits. Utopias also tend to demonise certain people as obstacles to a perfect world, whoever they are: the ruling classes, the bourgeois, the Jews or the infidels and heretics. As long as your ideology identifies the main source of the world's ills as a definable group, it opens the world up to genocide."
    -----Steven Pinker, author “The Better Angels of our Nature”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “More travels to Antwerp as an ambassador for England and King Henry VIII… One day, More sees …a bearded man whom More assumes to be a ship's captain… Hythloday, who turns out to be a philosopher and world traveler.

      Hythloday has been on many voyages with the noted explorer Amerigo Vespucci, traveling to the New World, south of the Equator, through Asia, and eventually landing on the island of Utopia. He describes the societies through which he travels with such insight… Hythloday points out that the policies of the Utopians are clearly superior to those of Europeans… Hythloday moves to a discussion of Utopian society, portraying a nation based on rational thought, with communal property, great productivity, no rapacious love of gold, no real class distinctions, no poverty, little crime or immoral behavior, religious tolerance, and little inclination to war. It is a society that is superior to any in Europe…

      Hythloday finishes his description and More … concludes that many of the Utopian customs described by Hythloday, such as their methods of making war and their belief in communal property, seem absurd. He does admit, however, that he would like to see some aspects of Utopian society put into practice in England, though he does not believe any such thing will happen”. ~ UTOPIA (1516) – By Thomas More

      Delete
    2. utopia - was it an evidence of the original condition and character of mankind? if so, have we then enchained ourselves with erroneous philosophies and doctrines and built our legislative states upon/within those philosophies/doctrines??

      Delete
    3. interesting questions, P, bringing us back to that eternal adage of "don't fix/change it if it ain't broken", wakakaka

      Delete
    4. The administration of society have always been perilous affair. There is no perfect government, and mankind have come a long way to the present stage of which democratic states so far seem to be the best setup but which still represents an
      uneasy balance between the various centers of power. Humans cannot be trusted with power, it is rare that a benevolent dictator comes along. The democracies we see now is the evolution of many events of history such as Age of Enlightenment, industrial revolution, French Revolution ......etc

      Along came Marx with his version of utopia, after dismissing the other utopias, and he gave credence to his own by claiming his to be "scientific".

      Marx said that the "evil" capitalist system shall eventually give way to the communist system where all will give their best and take only what they need. And no classes, no state, police, no army etc...According to his teachings, this is the way of history whether humans like it or not.

      Many took his words as gospel "Truth", and set to put his words into practice. It was Lenin that franchised Marx, and beget versions like Stalinism, Maoism, Pol-Potism, Kim-il Sungism...... And in the propagation of Marx's teachings,
      countless humans had been persecuted or killed either for not being communist enough, or for just being a communist, depending on which country they were in. Whole nations were run like theocracies where dissenters (unbelievers, apostates)
      are persecuted, and with portraits of Marx/Engels revered just like saints (and embalmed leaders too).

      Delete
  11. Marx/Engels ~ history is a man-made process which could be controlled and modified. Islam was/is an obstacle to the realization of their messianic vision. Thus, Islam must be banished from history. But Islam refused to bury its 15 hundred years of ancient history. It had/ has survivied the demise of its Prophet and Caliphates, European imperialsm and colonization, secularism and modernaization. So, a new strategy is needed to combat Islam. Today, they called it Islamic barbarism/despotism that must be ontologically obliterated by nuclear surgery. No?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My apologies.. typo error for survived and also modernization. And perhaps messianic vision should be understood as utopian vision.

      Delete