Saturday, November 13, 2010
Anniversary
Tomorrow is our wedding anniversary. Can't believe we have been married for a year. It has been a wonderful for both of us. We will be moving in together, finally, in December. It will be another new phase of life for both of us. Living together is very different from meeting each other daily and then go back to our own abode after that. But I believe the move will bring us even closer to each other. Which married couple doesn't live together right? I look forward to it but also a bit anxious about it. However, we will prevail because we love each other deeply.
Friday, September 24, 2010
A Story
“You certainly go to the Church quite often,” one person said.
“I usually go very early in the morning and leave sometime later that afternoon,” said the second.
“Lots of people?”
“No, not really. Most of the time, I’m usually sitting by myself.”
“Really? Then you must have lot of things that you pray for,” said the first.
“No, nothing at all.”
The first man was shocked. “Well, then, what do you do?”
The second man shrugged. “Mostly I just sit and look at God.”
“And what does God do all this time?” the confused man asked.
“Well,” said the man, “Mostly, He just sits and looks at me.”
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Women in the Church
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing – if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.” (I Timothy 2:11-15)
There are many churches nowadays that are readily condemning homosexuality (which only mention very briefly, in passing, in the Bible) and claim they are following scriptures. These churches ordain women pastors and have many women leaders leading men. This is a clear violation of the above scripture. In fact, there are more scriptures in the Bible telling women to keep silent and submit to men than saying homosexuality is a sin. However, how many women in church nowadays are following those scriptures? Why pick and choose scriptures that are convenient to practice?
The above is my response to one of the letters in Malaysiakini (http://malaysiakini.com/letters/142706). I don't think I want to argue with evangelical Christians about whether homosexuality is biblical or not because they have already made up their minds that it is a sin. However, just as Jesus says about a plank in your own eye, the evangelical Christians don't seem to see the inconsistency in the way they interpret scriptures. The role and position of women in church is the best example. If one just read the Bible and let the Bible speaks for itself, one basically will come to the conclusion that women should submit to men because God created them as helpers to men. In fact, if you look at out Muslim women in Malaysia, they follow the biblical guidance of how to be a godly woman much better than many evangelical Christian women.
Why no one says anything about that violation of the Bible? First, there are still few Bible believing denominations that are keeping their women in line with the biblical teaching (Brethren, Presbyterian etc) so that kind of become like a denominational thingy. Second, women nowadays have a lot of power and not easily bullied (LGBT don't have that kind of power so they are easily targeted). I bet these church women will be up in arms if any of the church minister were to preach that women should keep silent and submit to men. Thirdly, this basically reflect the homophobic prejudice of the church.
These Evangelical Protestants may not realize that Protestantism is about diversity. Look at the number of denominations in the Protestant community. For an evangelical to actually claim he/she has the correct way to interpret the Bible is basically a bunch of bull. They can't even agree among themselves what is the right way to interpret the Bible. Women's role in the church is one. Throw in speaking in tongues you will have these evangelicals tongue and cheek arguing with each other.
This is the folly of people who think they have already found the truth and have the correct way to interpret the truth. They can only see the saw dust in others' eyes but can't see the plank in their own eyes.
BLISS
There are many churches nowadays that are readily condemning homosexuality (which only mention very briefly, in passing, in the Bible) and claim they are following scriptures. These churches ordain women pastors and have many women leaders leading men. This is a clear violation of the above scripture. In fact, there are more scriptures in the Bible telling women to keep silent and submit to men than saying homosexuality is a sin. However, how many women in church nowadays are following those scriptures? Why pick and choose scriptures that are convenient to practice?
The above is my response to one of the letters in Malaysiakini (http://malaysiakini.com/letters/142706). I don't think I want to argue with evangelical Christians about whether homosexuality is biblical or not because they have already made up their minds that it is a sin. However, just as Jesus says about a plank in your own eye, the evangelical Christians don't seem to see the inconsistency in the way they interpret scriptures. The role and position of women in church is the best example. If one just read the Bible and let the Bible speaks for itself, one basically will come to the conclusion that women should submit to men because God created them as helpers to men. In fact, if you look at out Muslim women in Malaysia, they follow the biblical guidance of how to be a godly woman much better than many evangelical Christian women.
Why no one says anything about that violation of the Bible? First, there are still few Bible believing denominations that are keeping their women in line with the biblical teaching (Brethren, Presbyterian etc) so that kind of become like a denominational thingy. Second, women nowadays have a lot of power and not easily bullied (LGBT don't have that kind of power so they are easily targeted). I bet these church women will be up in arms if any of the church minister were to preach that women should keep silent and submit to men. Thirdly, this basically reflect the homophobic prejudice of the church.
These Evangelical Protestants may not realize that Protestantism is about diversity. Look at the number of denominations in the Protestant community. For an evangelical to actually claim he/she has the correct way to interpret the Bible is basically a bunch of bull. They can't even agree among themselves what is the right way to interpret the Bible. Women's role in the church is one. Throw in speaking in tongues you will have these evangelicals tongue and cheek arguing with each other.
This is the folly of people who think they have already found the truth and have the correct way to interpret the truth. They can only see the saw dust in others' eyes but can't see the plank in their own eyes.
BLISS
Friday, September 10, 2010
Response From My Darling
After reading Pang's thoughts published on Malaysiakini (and elsewhere), I think I have to agree with one of the comments in response, namely "I really do not believe the average Malaysian is homophobic".
I am older than Pang and I come from a severely Christian / Protestant background, from a baby (not even a convert at an older age). Christianity has always been a part of my life.
Yet, at the age of 11, I accepted that I could be bisexual, and by the age of 13, I knew I was gay. Not once was there ever a conflict with my faith. Of course, by the time I was in my teens, I kept away from church, not because of Christ, but because of the people. If I may be 'authentic', in my eyes (and this is something I still believe to a lesser extent) church people are boring, square, narrow minded and have little imagination. I guess I instinctively recognised this when I was younger.
At the age of 13, I became friends in 2ndary school with a guy who became my best friend. He too was gay. We'd discuss Dynasty and the scenes with Stephen (the gay son). He'd read Danielle Steele and tell me about the the gay son who invariably appeared in the storylines. We'd ogle boys, and he conquered the school. I would cover up for him during recess, when he was 'busy' with a hockey player or with a softball player etc. All this took place in the mid to late 1980s.
We'd have crushes and infatuations and eventually, we pulled in a 3rd friend, whom we both knew had to be gay. And he was. After SPM, when we were 17, we crashed into Blue Boys and met so many wonderful people. Those were fun times.
Life then was all about cruising, because there was only Blue Boys. In pre-Uni, we ended up in the same college and continued our escapades. We fell in love with men, we had plenty of sex, but we eventually expanded our wings, with me making trips to Europe, and our 3rd friend eventually moving to the USA.
All the while, mind, I prayed. I read the Bible. It seems odd to me even now that some people keep on saying that the Bible doesn't allow homosexuality. By the time I was 21, I had read the Bible, from Genesis all the way to Revelations, in Good News (easy start), King James, New King James, NIV and finally the Catholic Bible (the Apocrypha is so cool!).
My best friend and I moved to the UK and our 3rd friend, as mentioned, ended up in the USA. Now and then, we'd make trips back to KL. I was delighted to find more and more venues popping up. But my best friend wasn't.
In fact, along the way, I found there are many older gay men who are not happy that we have plenty of other gay venues. They are not happy that we don't have to hide (we don't really, if you think about it). Why? Because they liked the way things were. Gay life was forced underground, and that lent it a sense of danger, a sense of naughtiness, who knows? Up to now, you'll find older 'veterans' unhappy about the change.
Now, in our 30s, the three of us have grown apart. My closest friend is now anti current state-of-affairs and living the life of cruising and picking up boys at bus stops. In fact, he wasn't happy at all about my union. That was 'joining the straight world', treason to the 'gay world'. My friend in the US has become a militant pro-gay activist. I guess the LGBT in the USA have to be this way, considering what they're fighting. And I? Well, I have settled down happily, and I couldn't ask for a better spouse than BLISS.
And these are the journey of three people.
Of course, I knew people and heard of stories of their families kicking out their children because they were gay. But I also knew of parents who kicked out their daughters for unwanted pregnancies. I also knew of families who abandoned their children for no reason. To my mind, this has nothing to do with homosexuality.
It has to do with PARENTING. And the social pressure for people to get married and have children even if they aren't even proper human beings. How can they be parents?
So what's the issue about this whole issue?
To my mind:
1. Everyone has their own journey. I didn't go through what Pang went through. But I never immersed myself in church life. The church can be a dangerous place.
2. Even the boring narrow-minded unimaginative people in church have their own journeys. Some make it out of church alive, and learn how dangerous church is. Some don't. Some convert to other religions, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The church attracts broken people. And society is full of broken people. Broken people make even more broken people. This needs to be addressed, but I'm not sure how...
3. The reaction of people in response to situations depends on their journey. I actually don't believe Malaysians are homophobic. Some dumb churches are, especially the hyper fundamentalist or charismatic types, usually exported out from the USA. The lesson? Don't go to a US-based church. My recommendation - try the Eastern Orthodox church.
4. A response which works in one country does not necessarily work in another country. Before sexual rights, there is the ISA. There is the OSA. There is the Sedition Act and the offence of criminal defamation. If you take these away, fighting for sexual rights will be that much easier. Throughout my writing here, I have committed sedition against the church countless number of times!
5. To crush out the imagination is to crush out one of God's greatest gifts. That's the blasphemy taking place in churches today.
And those are my rambling thoughts...
I am older than Pang and I come from a severely Christian / Protestant background, from a baby (not even a convert at an older age). Christianity has always been a part of my life.
Yet, at the age of 11, I accepted that I could be bisexual, and by the age of 13, I knew I was gay. Not once was there ever a conflict with my faith. Of course, by the time I was in my teens, I kept away from church, not because of Christ, but because of the people. If I may be 'authentic', in my eyes (and this is something I still believe to a lesser extent) church people are boring, square, narrow minded and have little imagination. I guess I instinctively recognised this when I was younger.
At the age of 13, I became friends in 2ndary school with a guy who became my best friend. He too was gay. We'd discuss Dynasty and the scenes with Stephen (the gay son). He'd read Danielle Steele and tell me about the the gay son who invariably appeared in the storylines. We'd ogle boys, and he conquered the school. I would cover up for him during recess, when he was 'busy' with a hockey player or with a softball player etc. All this took place in the mid to late 1980s.
We'd have crushes and infatuations and eventually, we pulled in a 3rd friend, whom we both knew had to be gay. And he was. After SPM, when we were 17, we crashed into Blue Boys and met so many wonderful people. Those were fun times.
Life then was all about cruising, because there was only Blue Boys. In pre-Uni, we ended up in the same college and continued our escapades. We fell in love with men, we had plenty of sex, but we eventually expanded our wings, with me making trips to Europe, and our 3rd friend eventually moving to the USA.
All the while, mind, I prayed. I read the Bible. It seems odd to me even now that some people keep on saying that the Bible doesn't allow homosexuality. By the time I was 21, I had read the Bible, from Genesis all the way to Revelations, in Good News (easy start), King James, New King James, NIV and finally the Catholic Bible (the Apocrypha is so cool!).
My best friend and I moved to the UK and our 3rd friend, as mentioned, ended up in the USA. Now and then, we'd make trips back to KL. I was delighted to find more and more venues popping up. But my best friend wasn't.
In fact, along the way, I found there are many older gay men who are not happy that we have plenty of other gay venues. They are not happy that we don't have to hide (we don't really, if you think about it). Why? Because they liked the way things were. Gay life was forced underground, and that lent it a sense of danger, a sense of naughtiness, who knows? Up to now, you'll find older 'veterans' unhappy about the change.
Now, in our 30s, the three of us have grown apart. My closest friend is now anti current state-of-affairs and living the life of cruising and picking up boys at bus stops. In fact, he wasn't happy at all about my union. That was 'joining the straight world', treason to the 'gay world'. My friend in the US has become a militant pro-gay activist. I guess the LGBT in the USA have to be this way, considering what they're fighting. And I? Well, I have settled down happily, and I couldn't ask for a better spouse than BLISS.
And these are the journey of three people.
Of course, I knew people and heard of stories of their families kicking out their children because they were gay. But I also knew of parents who kicked out their daughters for unwanted pregnancies. I also knew of families who abandoned their children for no reason. To my mind, this has nothing to do with homosexuality.
It has to do with PARENTING. And the social pressure for people to get married and have children even if they aren't even proper human beings. How can they be parents?
So what's the issue about this whole issue?
To my mind:
1. Everyone has their own journey. I didn't go through what Pang went through. But I never immersed myself in church life. The church can be a dangerous place.
2. Even the boring narrow-minded unimaginative people in church have their own journeys. Some make it out of church alive, and learn how dangerous church is. Some don't. Some convert to other religions, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. The church attracts broken people. And society is full of broken people. Broken people make even more broken people. This needs to be addressed, but I'm not sure how...
3. The reaction of people in response to situations depends on their journey. I actually don't believe Malaysians are homophobic. Some dumb churches are, especially the hyper fundamentalist or charismatic types, usually exported out from the USA. The lesson? Don't go to a US-based church. My recommendation - try the Eastern Orthodox church.
4. A response which works in one country does not necessarily work in another country. Before sexual rights, there is the ISA. There is the OSA. There is the Sedition Act and the offence of criminal defamation. If you take these away, fighting for sexual rights will be that much easier. Throughout my writing here, I have committed sedition against the church countless number of times!
5. To crush out the imagination is to crush out one of God's greatest gifts. That's the blasphemy taking place in churches today.
And those are my rambling thoughts...
Monday, September 6, 2010
Strain out a Gnat but Swallow a Camel (Matthew 23:24)
An openly gay pastor publicly announced he wanted to start an inclusive church that welcome everyone including gays and transsexuals, what do you think he might be inferring? How do you think the Malaysian public will think? Even the gay community is telling each other it's a gay church.
There are a lot of passages in the Bible against women being leaders and teachers in the church but why is there not a single debate in the public about that? Why is there not a single theologian or priest or pastor making any statement against that practice that is clearly a violation of biblical principles. There are lots of women pastors and leaders teaching and leading in many churches (not the Roman Catholic Church though, thank God!).
What have gay people done to make all these religious people up in arms against them? What evil have gay people done in human history that cause such violence reaction toward them? Gay people have no political power, civil rights and recognitions in many societies in the world including our lovely country Malaysia. They are in constantly danger of being humiliated, discriminated, rejected, jailed, persecuted, and even killed. We can learn all about it in history. Oscar Wilde was a good example.
All these people have against gay people is what written in the Bible and the Qu'ran, the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, is there any archaeological or scientific evidence or proof that these two cities were destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality? Have there any other solid examples other Sodom and Gomorrah, that a country or city was destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality?
How could anyone against a people group based on writings that they believe is the word of God? Can they scientifically and objectively prove that the Bible or the Qu'ran is the word of God? There are so many injustices and immoralities in our Malaysian society which are clearly against the Bible or the Qu'ran but I don't see any of these religious people up in arms against them.
In the Gospels, the only people whom Jesus got angry with were the religious people. And these religious people were the ones who nailed him on the cross.
There are so many ethical principles written in these two holy books but very few are being practiced. Perhaps, before we point our fingers to anyone whom we think may be violating the word of God, we should first ask ourselves whether we are practicing those principles so perfectly that we can march into the Kingdom of God without fear and trembling.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3
BLISS
There are a lot of passages in the Bible against women being leaders and teachers in the church but why is there not a single debate in the public about that? Why is there not a single theologian or priest or pastor making any statement against that practice that is clearly a violation of biblical principles. There are lots of women pastors and leaders teaching and leading in many churches (not the Roman Catholic Church though, thank God!).
What have gay people done to make all these religious people up in arms against them? What evil have gay people done in human history that cause such violence reaction toward them? Gay people have no political power, civil rights and recognitions in many societies in the world including our lovely country Malaysia. They are in constantly danger of being humiliated, discriminated, rejected, jailed, persecuted, and even killed. We can learn all about it in history. Oscar Wilde was a good example.
All these people have against gay people is what written in the Bible and the Qu'ran, the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, is there any archaeological or scientific evidence or proof that these two cities were destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality? Have there any other solid examples other Sodom and Gomorrah, that a country or city was destroyed by God because they practiced homosexuality?
How could anyone against a people group based on writings that they believe is the word of God? Can they scientifically and objectively prove that the Bible or the Qu'ran is the word of God? There are so many injustices and immoralities in our Malaysian society which are clearly against the Bible or the Qu'ran but I don't see any of these religious people up in arms against them.
In the Gospels, the only people whom Jesus got angry with were the religious people. And these religious people were the ones who nailed him on the cross.
There are so many ethical principles written in these two holy books but very few are being practiced. Perhaps, before we point our fingers to anyone whom we think may be violating the word of God, we should first ask ourselves whether we are practicing those principles so perfectly that we can march into the Kingdom of God without fear and trembling.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Matthew 7:3
BLISS
Friday, September 3, 2010
So Scary
By Agence France-Presse, Updated: 9/3/2010
Malaysia to monitor Internet for 'harmful' blogs
Malaysia has formed a task force to scour the Internet for blog postings deemed harmful to national unity, authorities said Friday in the latest of a series of actions against new media.
Home ministry deputy secretary general for security Abdul Rahim Mohamad Radzi said the unit would involve the police, Internet regulators, the information ministry and the attorney general's chambers.
"It is a mechanism that will coordinate these various agencies to help monitor what is being said in cyberspace and to take action against those that are trying to stoke racial tensions and disunity," he told AFP.
Abdul Rahim said the group would also monitor alternative and mainstream media for similar content.
"There is a disturbing trend now appearing on the Internet where some people are inciting racial unrest and causing confusion and this will damage the peace we have in the country," he added.
Abdul Rahim cited the recent case of a Facebook page that insulted Muslim Malays. They make up the majority of Malaysia's multicultural population, alongside large ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.
Police are also investigating ethnic Chinese rapper Wee Meng Chee for sedition, after he posted a three-minute rap on YouTube criticising a Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against minority students.
The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities, who complain their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".
In another case, Malaysian journalist Irwan Abdul Rahman was charged this week over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.
The prosecution caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.
Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.
The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.
Malaysia to monitor Internet for 'harmful' blogs
Malaysia has formed a task force to scour the Internet for blog postings deemed harmful to national unity, authorities said Friday in the latest of a series of actions against new media.
Home ministry deputy secretary general for security Abdul Rahim Mohamad Radzi said the unit would involve the police, Internet regulators, the information ministry and the attorney general's chambers.
"It is a mechanism that will coordinate these various agencies to help monitor what is being said in cyberspace and to take action against those that are trying to stoke racial tensions and disunity," he told AFP.
Abdul Rahim said the group would also monitor alternative and mainstream media for similar content.
"There is a disturbing trend now appearing on the Internet where some people are inciting racial unrest and causing confusion and this will damage the peace we have in the country," he added.
Abdul Rahim cited the recent case of a Facebook page that insulted Muslim Malays. They make up the majority of Malaysia's multicultural population, alongside large ethnic Chinese and Indian communities.
Police are also investigating ethnic Chinese rapper Wee Meng Chee for sedition, after he posted a three-minute rap on YouTube criticising a Malay headmistress accused of making racial slurs against minority students.
The government has ordered a probe into the case which caused anger among Malaysia's minorities, who complain their rights are being eroded as the country becomes increasingly "Islamised".
In another case, Malaysian journalist Irwan Abdul Rahman was charged this week over a satirical blog which made fun of the state power firm Tenaga, and faces a year's jail if convicted.
The prosecution caused a stir because unlike the mainstream press, the web and online media in Malaysia have remained relatively free, despite occasional raids, bans and government criticism.
Major newspapers and broadcasters are closely linked with the ruling coalition, so the Internet has become a lively forum for dissent and debate.
The government in 1996 pledged not to censor online content as part of a campaign to promote its information technology sector.
Monday, August 23, 2010
I quit being a Christian
The following quotes are from Anne Rice on her facebook:
For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian. I'm out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being "Christian" or to being part of Christianity. It's simply impossible for me to "belong" to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten ...years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.........
........As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of ...Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.
My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me. But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been, or might become.
Who is Jesus Christ? The following are my personal thoughts:
Jesus is a human being. Imagine a Nelson Mandela Jesus, a Mother Teresa Jesus, a Dalai Lama Jesus … when we imagine the human Jesus on earth, he could be any of these people.
These people don’t evoke fear. They inspire compassion, justice, equality … and people will have very little hesitation to go up to these people to present their problems, their short comings, their weaknesses and their needs because they know they wouldn’t be rejected or judged.
Imagine a gay person going up to Mother Teresa to tell her that he is gay. What would the mother’s response? “You filthy dirty smelly worthless sinner! Get behind me!”???? I doubt it.
Imagine a transsexual going up to Nelson Mandela to shake his hand. Will he say, “Go away, you rubbish! I shall not shake nor have any fellowship with degenerates like you!”??? I guess not.
Imagine a prostitute going up to the Dalai Lama and say “Bless me, your holy one.” Will he say, “No! You are so debauched that you are beyond blessed.”??? Impossible!
Jesus as a human being is a good human being. He loves sinners. He accepts sinners. He dines with sinners. Jesus in the Gospels loves dinning with people, especially the outcast and the sinners. Having a good meal with people he loved was so important that he instituted the Holy Communion during his last supper for us to remember him. Such is the humanity of Jesus. He loves parties. He loves having a good time and good meal with people. He loves people and being with people.
Jesus is a human being and he is a good human being. He is the combination of all the good and great people we know. He is Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, the Dalai Lama, Bishop Tutu, Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Vivekananda, and anyone you know who has sacrificed him/herself for the good of humanity.
These people don’t evoke fear. They inspire compassion, justice, equality …
Jesus is a good human being who accepts and loves all human beings. Christianity may have rejected so called "sinners", the rejects of the church, but Christ hasn’t.
BLISS
For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian. I'm out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being "Christian" or to being part of Christianity. It's simply impossible for me to "belong" to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten ...years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.........
........As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of ...Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.
My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me. But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been, or might become.
Who is Jesus Christ? The following are my personal thoughts:
Jesus is a human being. Imagine a Nelson Mandela Jesus, a Mother Teresa Jesus, a Dalai Lama Jesus … when we imagine the human Jesus on earth, he could be any of these people.
These people don’t evoke fear. They inspire compassion, justice, equality … and people will have very little hesitation to go up to these people to present their problems, their short comings, their weaknesses and their needs because they know they wouldn’t be rejected or judged.
Imagine a gay person going up to Mother Teresa to tell her that he is gay. What would the mother’s response? “You filthy dirty smelly worthless sinner! Get behind me!”???? I doubt it.
Imagine a transsexual going up to Nelson Mandela to shake his hand. Will he say, “Go away, you rubbish! I shall not shake nor have any fellowship with degenerates like you!”??? I guess not.
Imagine a prostitute going up to the Dalai Lama and say “Bless me, your holy one.” Will he say, “No! You are so debauched that you are beyond blessed.”??? Impossible!
Jesus as a human being is a good human being. He loves sinners. He accepts sinners. He dines with sinners. Jesus in the Gospels loves dinning with people, especially the outcast and the sinners. Having a good meal with people he loved was so important that he instituted the Holy Communion during his last supper for us to remember him. Such is the humanity of Jesus. He loves parties. He loves having a good time and good meal with people. He loves people and being with people.
Jesus is a human being and he is a good human being. He is the combination of all the good and great people we know. He is Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, the Dalai Lama, Bishop Tutu, Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Vivekananda, and anyone you know who has sacrificed him/herself for the good of humanity.
These people don’t evoke fear. They inspire compassion, justice, equality …
Jesus is a good human being who accepts and loves all human beings. Christianity may have rejected so called "sinners", the rejects of the church, but Christ hasn’t.
BLISS
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Blog again, insya Allah!
My last blog was in February, right after the passing of Ceasar. Why is this long interval? I don't know. May be I have been busy? May be I have too many on my plate? Or perhaps I am lazy? I can find many excuses but the simplest reason is, I lost the motivation to blog.
Then why am I blogging now? Perhaps I feel I am responsible to blog because I started this blog and actually has a few followers. Perhaps it's something I am called to do but I just have been neglecting it and am feeling guilty about it. Oh well, the simplest reason, I feel I should start blogging again. Insya Allah, I will keep up. I think it's good for my soul if I at least blog once a week even if I am writing garbage (sorry, my dear followers). It should be good for my soul.
Just got back from a long needed holiday with my darling. Because of financial restrain, we only went to P.D. but it was a good holiday. We just spend time in the room watch movies and made love or by the pool to get a tan (I got burnt) or eat (both of us are so fat). Now we are back, refreshed and ready to face our busy schedules and workloads. May be this is why I blog again.
Watched a movie on DVD last night in the room with my darling, "Black Death". A well written, acted and directed movie about religious fanaticism. I highly recommend it.
BLISS
Then why am I blogging now? Perhaps I feel I am responsible to blog because I started this blog and actually has a few followers. Perhaps it's something I am called to do but I just have been neglecting it and am feeling guilty about it. Oh well, the simplest reason, I feel I should start blogging again. Insya Allah, I will keep up. I think it's good for my soul if I at least blog once a week even if I am writing garbage (sorry, my dear followers). It should be good for my soul.
Just got back from a long needed holiday with my darling. Because of financial restrain, we only went to P.D. but it was a good holiday. We just spend time in the room watch movies and made love or by the pool to get a tan (I got burnt) or eat (both of us are so fat). Now we are back, refreshed and ready to face our busy schedules and workloads. May be this is why I blog again.
Watched a movie on DVD last night in the room with my darling, "Black Death". A well written, acted and directed movie about religious fanaticism. I highly recommend it.
BLISS
Friday, February 19, 2010
Remembering Caecar Chong
Yesterday at 7 am, Caecar Chong, a dear friend of my darling, passed away. He's 36. Caecar suffered from lymphatic cancer since late last year and the doctor gave him only two months to live. He lived for 4 months.
My darling and I went to the wake. It was a very sad affair. Caecar was a well-known dancer and theater personality. To die at such a young age in such a short time was tragic. What made it more difficult was Caecar only wanted a few people knew that he was dying. So when the news came that he was dying about two weeks ago, my darling found it difficult to accept. The last time he heard from him was when he was going to Tibet in the middle of last year.
I have only talked to Caecar a handful of time briefly and I don't think he remembers me. But I feel I have known him well because of my darling. He talked about him once awhile and told me the things they did together. My darling also described his artistic eccentricity and his independent personality. He did what he liked to do and be who he wanted to be.
"He made me realize that I could get married too. He gave me my first freelance break. He taught me how to take photos. He gave me an appreciation of performing arts. He showed me a whole community that I never knew existed. And when I left him 5 years ago, he was fine. Now he's gone. But I know he is free and happy. I think this is the way he was always meant to be."
My darling sms me the above after the wake.
I am sad, mainly because my darling is sad. However, I am also sad because we have lost a great talent in our Malaysian performing arts community.
Caecar Chong, you will be missed by many. May your soul rest in peace.
BLISS
My darling and I went to the wake. It was a very sad affair. Caecar was a well-known dancer and theater personality. To die at such a young age in such a short time was tragic. What made it more difficult was Caecar only wanted a few people knew that he was dying. So when the news came that he was dying about two weeks ago, my darling found it difficult to accept. The last time he heard from him was when he was going to Tibet in the middle of last year.
I have only talked to Caecar a handful of time briefly and I don't think he remembers me. But I feel I have known him well because of my darling. He talked about him once awhile and told me the things they did together. My darling also described his artistic eccentricity and his independent personality. He did what he liked to do and be who he wanted to be.
"He made me realize that I could get married too. He gave me my first freelance break. He taught me how to take photos. He gave me an appreciation of performing arts. He showed me a whole community that I never knew existed. And when I left him 5 years ago, he was fine. Now he's gone. But I know he is free and happy. I think this is the way he was always meant to be."
My darling sms me the above after the wake.
I am sad, mainly because my darling is sad. However, I am also sad because we have lost a great talent in our Malaysian performing arts community.
Caecar Chong, you will be missed by many. May your soul rest in peace.
BLISS
Friday, January 29, 2010
Fundamentalist Buddhists
The following was a correspondence I had with Mr V, a good Buddhist friend of mine. I had a very unpleasant experience in his temple on this past Monday night.
Hi Mr. V,
How are you? I guess you are like me, back to the busy teaching schedule in the college.
I am writing this email with a heavy heart because of the experience I had at P the monk's class last night at the M temple. I feel that I should write to you and let you know what'd happened and how I feel and perhaps we can come to a resolution of the issues that were brought up in last night class.
Last night (Monday night) was my first time attending his class. I went to his Thursday meditation session but not his Monday teaching session. The topic of the lesson was "theology and God", something like that. All were well and good and I was enjoying and learning in the class. However, I was a bit uncomfortable when he talked about Christians and our belief and concept of God because there were a bit of distortions as well as misinformed on his part. For example he said Christians think Buddhists are evil people because Buddhists don't believe in God. Well, perhaps that may be true in California, USA but definitely that's not true in Malaysia. Evangelical Christians in Malaysia think Buddhists are all idol worshipers and need to be saved from the fire of hell. Besides, I thought it wasn't fair to make sweeping statements about God, concept of God and the belief in God. Moreover, the religious and spiritual experiences of Muslims and Christians should be taken into consideration. In a nutshell, we don't really have any rights to comment on other faiths which we haven't had or limited experience, especially we bound to make mistakes and distortions when come to theology, interpretation and experience. I would be ok with him if he just this is what Buddhist believe without criticizing other religions who don't believe like Buddhists do.
It was under that pretext that I asked him the question "what do you think about people's experience with God". Perhaps was the way I asked him or I not sure what triggered the situation, he started to bombard me with questions like "tell me about your God", "explain what you mean by personal experience", "if you can't explain it, means you don't know" etc... I was very disturbed by those line of questioning and answering. He told me since I couldn't explain it he couldn't answer me, bringing the discussion down to a personal level.
I couldn't answer those questions without using Christian terminologies and words he had ridiculed during the lesson. The line of questioning he threw at me was actually cornering me into admitting what he had said was the "mistakes" or "dreams" that Christians have in their belief system. At one point, I was actually forced to tell my conversation experience which was very personal (involved my mother who had passed away) and yet instead of hearing me out he immediately dismissed my experience as self induced or influenced by my upbringing etc...basically it was a no win situation for me to have any intelligent and respectful dialog with him. The moment I said I was a Christian, that's it, I have been judged and everything I said was to be discredited.
Another question that was impossible to answer and to me, was intended to discredit, was when I told him that this was my spiritual journey, he asked me "what journey? where are you going?" and the rest joined and said if I don't know where I am going then I am not really "knowing".
This is what made the situation worst, the class which consisted of about 50 people joined in. I was told since I couldn't explain my spiritual experience so I didn't understand or I didn't know. One told me to discard what I belief then I will understand. Well, I understand and continue to understand more but that doesn't mean I have to discard what I have been believing because God has done a lot of good in my life. My walk with the Lord Jesus has made me a better person. Who I am today has a lot to do with my faith and my experience with God. However, these people seem to choose to disregard that...which is ironic. When P the monk said Christians think Buddhists are evil people because Buddhists don't believe in God. Here, I became an evil person because I believe in God.
After the lesson, people came up to me to talk to me. None of them asked me where I am from, what I am doing, why am I there etc. Every single one of them, one way or another, was trying to convince me that believing in God is an illusion, is wrong. One even came up to me and said, you Christians don't think! The other said to me she went to a church and they said bad things about Buddhism also. I can't see the logic, just because Christians in a church say bad things about Buddhism, Buddhists can say bad things about Christianity in their temple? Two wrongs wouldn't make one right. Later my friend (yes, I have a Buddhist friend attending the class also) took me out for a drink and again, he was trying to convince me that Buddhism is right and Christianity is wrong.
For a moment, I thought I was back to the churches I have grown up in. May be is my karma because those churches used to ridicule other religion so I was reaping what I had indirectly sow. However, last night experience has brought me into the following conclusion:
1. As much as I want to respect P the monk as a spiritual leader and a knowledgeable monk, I have lost respect for him. Because he made statement about other faiths without having thorough understanding (he may think he has thoroughly understood the faith) and showing respect for those faiths. In that aspect, he to me is no different than any dogmatic priest, pastor, and imam. Definitely he can't be the "guru" I'm looking since there is not even a tiny connection in spirit between us. But what disturbed me the most is the perpetuation of stereotyping of other religious faiths by religious leaders. I thought at first Buddhists will be different, surely that's the impression I got from reading some Buddhist books. But last night experience definitely has changed my view.
2. My impression about Buddhists have changed. I told my friends once that I felt that the Buddhists I met in the temple were not much different than the Christians in the Church. Each hold on to what they believe in strongly, which is ok, as long as they have the realization of other people's faith and experience are as valid, and not shoveling their own opinion into others' throat. Not what I had experienced last night.
3. In Malaysia, as leaders of any religious organization, we have to be very careful to foster and cultivate spirit of peace and tolerance. Yes, each religion will hold on to what they believe is the truth, that's inevitable. But every religion also teaches their believers to respect and accept others who are different. "There is no compulsion in religion", "do unto others as you would have others to do unto you" are universal. What surprises me the most is this kind of I'm right and you are wrong mindset is actually cultivating in a Buddhist temple. The Roman Catholic Church that the few people in the class had "ridiculed" as narrow minded, not thinking and dogmatic is having inter-faith dialog and lessons to foster good understanding and relationship with other faiths regularly but what I have noticed is there are very few Buddhists attending such meetings and talks. And I haven't heard of any Buddhist temple actually organizing any inter-faith talk or meeting. Maybe they have and I don't know about it.
Last night was not pleasant for me but it was a good experience for me. I may not want to go back to the class or the meditation session again but I have no hard feeling towards anyone in that temple. I was judged, stereotyped, and put in a box the moment I said I was a Christian (in fact, I hate telling people I'm a Christian) and there is something I feel very disturbed about. If even the Buddhists who are reputed to be compassionate, accepting, tolerance etc have this "I am right and you are wrong attitude (fundamentalism), we have a lot of work to do in cultivating inter-faith dialog, understanding, respect and cooperation.
The recent "Allah" issue is the prime example.
I'm sorry to put you through this long letter. Hope you can forgive me if I have written something that is offensive to your belief and faith. I stand to be corrected. Thanks for your patience and willingness to hear me out.
May you be peaceful, free and healthy.
BLISS
Hi Mr. V,
How are you? I guess you are like me, back to the busy teaching schedule in the college.
I am writing this email with a heavy heart because of the experience I had at P the monk's class last night at the M temple. I feel that I should write to you and let you know what'd happened and how I feel and perhaps we can come to a resolution of the issues that were brought up in last night class.
Last night (Monday night) was my first time attending his class. I went to his Thursday meditation session but not his Monday teaching session. The topic of the lesson was "theology and God", something like that. All were well and good and I was enjoying and learning in the class. However, I was a bit uncomfortable when he talked about Christians and our belief and concept of God because there were a bit of distortions as well as misinformed on his part. For example he said Christians think Buddhists are evil people because Buddhists don't believe in God. Well, perhaps that may be true in California, USA but definitely that's not true in Malaysia. Evangelical Christians in Malaysia think Buddhists are all idol worshipers and need to be saved from the fire of hell. Besides, I thought it wasn't fair to make sweeping statements about God, concept of God and the belief in God. Moreover, the religious and spiritual experiences of Muslims and Christians should be taken into consideration. In a nutshell, we don't really have any rights to comment on other faiths which we haven't had or limited experience, especially we bound to make mistakes and distortions when come to theology, interpretation and experience. I would be ok with him if he just this is what Buddhist believe without criticizing other religions who don't believe like Buddhists do.
It was under that pretext that I asked him the question "what do you think about people's experience with God". Perhaps was the way I asked him or I not sure what triggered the situation, he started to bombard me with questions like "tell me about your God", "explain what you mean by personal experience", "if you can't explain it, means you don't know" etc... I was very disturbed by those line of questioning and answering. He told me since I couldn't explain it he couldn't answer me, bringing the discussion down to a personal level.
I couldn't answer those questions without using Christian terminologies and words he had ridiculed during the lesson. The line of questioning he threw at me was actually cornering me into admitting what he had said was the "mistakes" or "dreams" that Christians have in their belief system. At one point, I was actually forced to tell my conversation experience which was very personal (involved my mother who had passed away) and yet instead of hearing me out he immediately dismissed my experience as self induced or influenced by my upbringing etc...basically it was a no win situation for me to have any intelligent and respectful dialog with him. The moment I said I was a Christian, that's it, I have been judged and everything I said was to be discredited.
Another question that was impossible to answer and to me, was intended to discredit, was when I told him that this was my spiritual journey, he asked me "what journey? where are you going?" and the rest joined and said if I don't know where I am going then I am not really "knowing".
This is what made the situation worst, the class which consisted of about 50 people joined in. I was told since I couldn't explain my spiritual experience so I didn't understand or I didn't know. One told me to discard what I belief then I will understand. Well, I understand and continue to understand more but that doesn't mean I have to discard what I have been believing because God has done a lot of good in my life. My walk with the Lord Jesus has made me a better person. Who I am today has a lot to do with my faith and my experience with God. However, these people seem to choose to disregard that...which is ironic. When P the monk said Christians think Buddhists are evil people because Buddhists don't believe in God. Here, I became an evil person because I believe in God.
After the lesson, people came up to me to talk to me. None of them asked me where I am from, what I am doing, why am I there etc. Every single one of them, one way or another, was trying to convince me that believing in God is an illusion, is wrong. One even came up to me and said, you Christians don't think! The other said to me she went to a church and they said bad things about Buddhism also. I can't see the logic, just because Christians in a church say bad things about Buddhism, Buddhists can say bad things about Christianity in their temple? Two wrongs wouldn't make one right. Later my friend (yes, I have a Buddhist friend attending the class also) took me out for a drink and again, he was trying to convince me that Buddhism is right and Christianity is wrong.
For a moment, I thought I was back to the churches I have grown up in. May be is my karma because those churches used to ridicule other religion so I was reaping what I had indirectly sow. However, last night experience has brought me into the following conclusion:
1. As much as I want to respect P the monk as a spiritual leader and a knowledgeable monk, I have lost respect for him. Because he made statement about other faiths without having thorough understanding (he may think he has thoroughly understood the faith) and showing respect for those faiths. In that aspect, he to me is no different than any dogmatic priest, pastor, and imam. Definitely he can't be the "guru" I'm looking since there is not even a tiny connection in spirit between us. But what disturbed me the most is the perpetuation of stereotyping of other religious faiths by religious leaders. I thought at first Buddhists will be different, surely that's the impression I got from reading some Buddhist books. But last night experience definitely has changed my view.
2. My impression about Buddhists have changed. I told my friends once that I felt that the Buddhists I met in the temple were not much different than the Christians in the Church. Each hold on to what they believe in strongly, which is ok, as long as they have the realization of other people's faith and experience are as valid, and not shoveling their own opinion into others' throat. Not what I had experienced last night.
3. In Malaysia, as leaders of any religious organization, we have to be very careful to foster and cultivate spirit of peace and tolerance. Yes, each religion will hold on to what they believe is the truth, that's inevitable. But every religion also teaches their believers to respect and accept others who are different. "There is no compulsion in religion", "do unto others as you would have others to do unto you" are universal. What surprises me the most is this kind of I'm right and you are wrong mindset is actually cultivating in a Buddhist temple. The Roman Catholic Church that the few people in the class had "ridiculed" as narrow minded, not thinking and dogmatic is having inter-faith dialog and lessons to foster good understanding and relationship with other faiths regularly but what I have noticed is there are very few Buddhists attending such meetings and talks. And I haven't heard of any Buddhist temple actually organizing any inter-faith talk or meeting. Maybe they have and I don't know about it.
Last night was not pleasant for me but it was a good experience for me. I may not want to go back to the class or the meditation session again but I have no hard feeling towards anyone in that temple. I was judged, stereotyped, and put in a box the moment I said I was a Christian (in fact, I hate telling people I'm a Christian) and there is something I feel very disturbed about. If even the Buddhists who are reputed to be compassionate, accepting, tolerance etc have this "I am right and you are wrong attitude (fundamentalism), we have a lot of work to do in cultivating inter-faith dialog, understanding, respect and cooperation.
The recent "Allah" issue is the prime example.
I'm sorry to put you through this long letter. Hope you can forgive me if I have written something that is offensive to your belief and faith. I stand to be corrected. Thanks for your patience and willingness to hear me out.
May you be peaceful, free and healthy.
BLISS
My dear Bliss,
As I read your letter, I kept saying, over and over again, “Oh, my god!” I am really very sorry for what you had to go through. I wish I had been there to gauge exactly what the undercurrents were and how others were ‘misreading’ your cues. However, I do feel partly responsible because I think I had recommended P the monk to you. On hindsight, it was a mistake because P the monk is not the most tactful person I know. He has purportedly studied Religion and Philosophy in the US and I would have expected him to have been more respectful of you as a person although he might not have agreed with your beliefs. Others also have had such experiences with him. His line of argument against you is unpardonable. His disregard for your views as a Christian, trying to learn about Buddhism is also unpardonable. I feel he has done Buddhism a great injustice. I really wish you had the opportunity to have met our late Chief, Ven Dhammananda. He would have treated you very differently. We Buddhists have an extra reason to hang our heads in shame, because we make such a big deal about how tolerant we. Those of us who belong to the ‘ism’ are just as intolerant as everyone else who holds fundamentalist views.
In a broader context,in trying to come to terms with this episode, I am wondering why people reacted as they did last night. I think they are under a siege mentality, as much as the Muslims are over the Allah issue. The fundamentalist Christians have made Buddhists, (especially those not too strong in their understanding) feel they are threatened. They have been fed with stories of families being broken up, and underhand means being used to promote their faith. The story of Buddha prophesizing the coming of Christ is a case in point. When you are threatened and feel defenseless you react negatively. This is certainly not good. Buddhists must be more knowledgeable and be empowered to discuss religious issues rationally without hurting the feelings of others, using expressions like ‘evil’ and so on.
I am going to discuss this issue with the President of the Temple to alert him to the dangers of people who give a bad impression of Buddhists. I have learnt from this too. I have to be extra careful when I deal with the public, because there may be people of other faiths involved, and you never know whom you will be hurting.
Apologetically yours
V
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Muslims Have Human Rights too
The Malaysian Insider
Wednesday January 13 2010
JAN 13 — One thing that has become clear in recent days is how separate the various religious communities in Malaysia have come to live and how we have come to see ourselves. We have witnessed ministers talking of inter-faith dialogue as if it were something daring and revolutionary.
And the fact that Muslim ministers or MPs are visiting churches appears to be something worth remarking on, as if it were unusual that elected representatives should want to meet and seek to represent the interests of all the people for whom they are supposed to be responsible.
Like in Northern Ireland, religions have come to be mutually exclusive categories that define who we are, where we belong and where we don’t belong.
And as in Northern Ireland, just as increasingly among the secular Europeans who have suddenly become “Christian” in distinction to “those Muslims” living in their countries, religion is importantly a way of defining who we are not.
Many non-Muslim parents in Malaysia, it would appear, would rather their child married an alien from outer space than a Muslim.
It is easy in this to blame the government, who have branded us Muslim or non-Muslim as plain as anyone can see on our identity cards.
It is easy to blame the law, which turns second-generation South Asian or Indonesian Muslims into “sons of the soil” who then turn around accuse fourth- and fifth-generation non-Muslims of being interlopers or pendatang.
And it is just as easy to blame the religious fanatics who invade inter-faith meetings and colloquia on freedom of religion, or who seek to divide Selangor into Muslim and non-Muslim zones for the purpose of licensing the sale of alcohol.
What I believe this Allah episode has shown us is that we non-Muslims have also ourselves to blame if we find ourselves in a country where religious liberty has gone down the drain. The Allah episode is a major controversy in Malaysia because it affects the way a non-Muslim, Christian, group conducts its own affairs and communicates with its own members.
In reality, it is only really a big issue among non-Muslims because it has crossed the line between what we see as “our” business and what we see as “their” business.
But can we be surprised if those same governmental authorities who are used to being able imprison Muslims in “re-education centres” for months or years for not believing what they are supposed to believe, who can storm into private homes and hotel rooms demanding that brown-skinned tourists get out of bed and show them their passports and marriage certificates, and who can sentence a woman in a holiday resort to be caned for having an apéritif before dinner, now feel aggrieved that they should give an instruction on something vaguely Islam-related (namely, the word Allah) and not be entitled to immediate and unquestioning obedience?
The truth is that we are all guilty of what Pastor Niemöller spoke of when he said: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist / … then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew / Then they came for me—and there was no-one left to speak out”.
For how many non-Muslims protested when Lina Joy was told she could never leave Islam and marry her fiancé? How many non-Muslim senators and MPs spoke out against the 2005 Islamic Family Law amendment bill, which set back women’s rights in the Federal Territories, when it went through Parliament?
And how many non-Muslims objected when they learnt that the penalty for prostituting your wife in Pahang is less severe than the penalty for drinking alcohol? Every time the latest teapot-worshipping “deviationist sect” is rounded up and imprisoned, their place of worship demolished and their leaders locked up under the ISA, our silence speaks volumes for our lack of commitment to freedom of religion when it does not concern us personally.
As a warning as to the way our country may be heading, let me relate the story of the Ahmadis in Pakistan. The Ahmadis are a Muslim-revivalist community founded in the Punjab in the 19th century by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom Ahmadis believe to be a prophet. Although the Ahmadis, who now form 3-4% of the population of modern-day Pakistan, accept most of the tenets of Islam and consider themselves to be Muslims, other Muslims in Pakistan do not.
In 1984, General Zia, the military ruler of Pakistan, passed an ordinance prohibiting them from calling themselves Muslims or “posing as Muslims”. This means that they are not allowed to worship in Muslim mosques, to call their places of worship masjid or to use the azan, to say assalamualaikum, to quote publicly from the Qur’an, to display or proclaim the shahada, or to preach or publish any materials in public.
The courts in Pakistan have even held that the Ahmadis are guilty of “copyright infringement” and blasphemy when they use certain Islamic phrases. Ahmadis who display Quranic verses have been imprisoned, and the authorities have forcibly obliterated the shahada from the walls of Ahmadi mosques. Ahmadis are also prohibited from undertaking the hajj to Mecca. Outside the official sphere, many Ahmadis have been murdered by lynch-mobs simply because of their beliefs.
It all sounds like the Allah ban gone mad. But surely Pakistan is Pakistan and Malaysia is Malaysia? Surely this would never happen in our country?
Well, in December 2008, Selayang Municipal Council, under the control of the Selangor PR government, ordered an Ahmadi central mosque to remove the shahada from their building. There is apparently a 1975 Selangor fatwa, which you can access on the e-fatwa website, that declares Ahmadis to be non-Muslim, and states that ideally they should be killed, but as this is not currently legal (lucky for them), they should be stripped of all privileges belonging to Muslims or Malays.
In April 2009, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council, ordered an Ahmadi mosque to cease performing Friday prayers with immediate effect, threatening them with imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of RM3,000 for non-compliance. The chief culprit behind this appears to be Dr Hassan Ali of PAS. Again, the silence from other members of the Pakatan Rakyat state government is somewhat astonishing.
Certainly, Malaysians should accept that Islam is the official religion of the Federation and of the states (save I think in Sabah and Sarawak, where I believe the 20-point and 18-point agreements had something to say about the matter), but that does not mean that Malaysians should blindly accept everything that the mullahs in charge of the various state Islamic affairs councils have to say on matters of religion.
If Saudi Arabia, the model of religious intolerance, can allow Shia Muslims to practise their religion (albeit not without some discrimination), then why must Malaysia, the poster child for Muslim moderation, lock up Shia Muslims under the ISA for simply following their faith?
There is a desperate need in our country for Muslims and non-Muslims to accept that what they do does affect one another, whether because marriages break down when one spouse converts to another religion, or because widows and children are disinherited when conversions happen without the family’s knowledge, or because of the activities of places of worship affecting neighbouring residents.
For a supposedly multi-religious country, there is surprisingly little education in schools about any religion other than one’s own. Unlike in England or America, students are segregated into religious groups and learn little about what other faiths practise or believe.
Non-Muslims in particular need to learn about Islam and to engage with what over the past few decades has become one of the strongest forces moving our country; for they should understand that it is not Islam that is their enemy, but racists and bigots claiming a monopoly on religion.
“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” – Sura Ankabut 46 (tr. Yusuf Ali).
Andrew Yong
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/opinion/breaking-views/49417-muslims-have-human-rights-too--andrew-yong
Wednesday January 13 2010
JAN 13 — One thing that has become clear in recent days is how separate the various religious communities in Malaysia have come to live and how we have come to see ourselves. We have witnessed ministers talking of inter-faith dialogue as if it were something daring and revolutionary.
And the fact that Muslim ministers or MPs are visiting churches appears to be something worth remarking on, as if it were unusual that elected representatives should want to meet and seek to represent the interests of all the people for whom they are supposed to be responsible.
Like in Northern Ireland, religions have come to be mutually exclusive categories that define who we are, where we belong and where we don’t belong.
And as in Northern Ireland, just as increasingly among the secular Europeans who have suddenly become “Christian” in distinction to “those Muslims” living in their countries, religion is importantly a way of defining who we are not.
Many non-Muslim parents in Malaysia, it would appear, would rather their child married an alien from outer space than a Muslim.
It is easy in this to blame the government, who have branded us Muslim or non-Muslim as plain as anyone can see on our identity cards.
It is easy to blame the law, which turns second-generation South Asian or Indonesian Muslims into “sons of the soil” who then turn around accuse fourth- and fifth-generation non-Muslims of being interlopers or pendatang.
And it is just as easy to blame the religious fanatics who invade inter-faith meetings and colloquia on freedom of religion, or who seek to divide Selangor into Muslim and non-Muslim zones for the purpose of licensing the sale of alcohol.
What I believe this Allah episode has shown us is that we non-Muslims have also ourselves to blame if we find ourselves in a country where religious liberty has gone down the drain. The Allah episode is a major controversy in Malaysia because it affects the way a non-Muslim, Christian, group conducts its own affairs and communicates with its own members.
In reality, it is only really a big issue among non-Muslims because it has crossed the line between what we see as “our” business and what we see as “their” business.
But can we be surprised if those same governmental authorities who are used to being able imprison Muslims in “re-education centres” for months or years for not believing what they are supposed to believe, who can storm into private homes and hotel rooms demanding that brown-skinned tourists get out of bed and show them their passports and marriage certificates, and who can sentence a woman in a holiday resort to be caned for having an apéritif before dinner, now feel aggrieved that they should give an instruction on something vaguely Islam-related (namely, the word Allah) and not be entitled to immediate and unquestioning obedience?
The truth is that we are all guilty of what Pastor Niemöller spoke of when he said: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist / … then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew / Then they came for me—and there was no-one left to speak out”.
For how many non-Muslims protested when Lina Joy was told she could never leave Islam and marry her fiancé? How many non-Muslim senators and MPs spoke out against the 2005 Islamic Family Law amendment bill, which set back women’s rights in the Federal Territories, when it went through Parliament?
And how many non-Muslims objected when they learnt that the penalty for prostituting your wife in Pahang is less severe than the penalty for drinking alcohol? Every time the latest teapot-worshipping “deviationist sect” is rounded up and imprisoned, their place of worship demolished and their leaders locked up under the ISA, our silence speaks volumes for our lack of commitment to freedom of religion when it does not concern us personally.
As a warning as to the way our country may be heading, let me relate the story of the Ahmadis in Pakistan. The Ahmadis are a Muslim-revivalist community founded in the Punjab in the 19th century by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, whom Ahmadis believe to be a prophet. Although the Ahmadis, who now form 3-4% of the population of modern-day Pakistan, accept most of the tenets of Islam and consider themselves to be Muslims, other Muslims in Pakistan do not.
In 1984, General Zia, the military ruler of Pakistan, passed an ordinance prohibiting them from calling themselves Muslims or “posing as Muslims”. This means that they are not allowed to worship in Muslim mosques, to call their places of worship masjid or to use the azan, to say assalamualaikum, to quote publicly from the Qur’an, to display or proclaim the shahada, or to preach or publish any materials in public.
The courts in Pakistan have even held that the Ahmadis are guilty of “copyright infringement” and blasphemy when they use certain Islamic phrases. Ahmadis who display Quranic verses have been imprisoned, and the authorities have forcibly obliterated the shahada from the walls of Ahmadi mosques. Ahmadis are also prohibited from undertaking the hajj to Mecca. Outside the official sphere, many Ahmadis have been murdered by lynch-mobs simply because of their beliefs.
It all sounds like the Allah ban gone mad. But surely Pakistan is Pakistan and Malaysia is Malaysia? Surely this would never happen in our country?
Well, in December 2008, Selayang Municipal Council, under the control of the Selangor PR government, ordered an Ahmadi central mosque to remove the shahada from their building. There is apparently a 1975 Selangor fatwa, which you can access on the e-fatwa website, that declares Ahmadis to be non-Muslim, and states that ideally they should be killed, but as this is not currently legal (lucky for them), they should be stripped of all privileges belonging to Muslims or Malays.
In April 2009, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council, ordered an Ahmadi mosque to cease performing Friday prayers with immediate effect, threatening them with imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of RM3,000 for non-compliance. The chief culprit behind this appears to be Dr Hassan Ali of PAS. Again, the silence from other members of the Pakatan Rakyat state government is somewhat astonishing.
Certainly, Malaysians should accept that Islam is the official religion of the Federation and of the states (save I think in Sabah and Sarawak, where I believe the 20-point and 18-point agreements had something to say about the matter), but that does not mean that Malaysians should blindly accept everything that the mullahs in charge of the various state Islamic affairs councils have to say on matters of religion.
If Saudi Arabia, the model of religious intolerance, can allow Shia Muslims to practise their religion (albeit not without some discrimination), then why must Malaysia, the poster child for Muslim moderation, lock up Shia Muslims under the ISA for simply following their faith?
There is a desperate need in our country for Muslims and non-Muslims to accept that what they do does affect one another, whether because marriages break down when one spouse converts to another religion, or because widows and children are disinherited when conversions happen without the family’s knowledge, or because of the activities of places of worship affecting neighbouring residents.
For a supposedly multi-religious country, there is surprisingly little education in schools about any religion other than one’s own. Unlike in England or America, students are segregated into religious groups and learn little about what other faiths practise or believe.
Non-Muslims in particular need to learn about Islam and to engage with what over the past few decades has become one of the strongest forces moving our country; for they should understand that it is not Islam that is their enemy, but racists and bigots claiming a monopoly on religion.
“And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, “We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)” – Sura Ankabut 46 (tr. Yusuf Ali).
Andrew Yong
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/opinion/breaking-views/49417-muslims-have-human-rights-too--andrew-yong
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Let Allah be Allah
Yesterday was probably one of the saddest days in Malaysia. Three churches were attacked with molotov cocktail and two exploded. One explosion did a little damage but the other gutted an office. The third, by the grace of Allah, did not explode.
The irony of the attack is, the explosions occurred in two Evangelical Protestant churches which may not support the idea of Christians calling God Allah. They believe Allah is the God of Islam and by calling Yahweh or Jesus (which is specifically stated in the Bible as the name of God for the Christians and Jews) Allah is not biblical.
The one that didn’t explode was the one thrown into the compound of Assumption Church in PJ, which is a Roman Catholic Church. The RC Church is the one that brought about the judgment of the high court that Christians can call God Allah.
Later, during the demonstration (must be a great disappointment because only few turned out; I was disappointed because I was waiting to see FRU water gunning these people and beating them with their batons), one of the demonstration leaders said Christians might have staged their own arson on those churches. The statement shows how ignorant and well, stupid, these people are. They couldn’t even tell the difference between Protestants and Roman Catholics and didn’t know that these two have been enemies for hundreds of years, though they may be grudgingly getting along well now.
Personally, I think Allah is showing His muscles. There were people praying in Assumption Church during the time of the attack and if the bomb were to explode, we can imagine the worst case scenario. But it did not and to me that was Allah’s protection.
The two exploded in the Protestant Churches, to me, could be a warning from Allah that we should not disgrace His name. Allah is God for all people and to say Allah is only for the Muslims are first, it is not what the Quran teaches, and second, it insults Allah, locked Him with a group of fanatic followers that constantly malign His name in the world. As for these Evangelical Protestant Christians, they usually believe that all other religions (including the Roman Catholics) are from the devil, deceiving people from believing in the Protestant faith hence lead them to hell. Therefore, to these Evangelical Protestant Christians, the name Allah may be from the devil, deceiving people from the true faith in the Evangelical Protestant Church. (I heard some told me that Allah is actually the name of the moon god).
As for these Muslims, to fight so passionately without using their brain and having proper understanding of what Islam is, they are basically telling Allah that He is incapable of protecting Himself and keeping His name pure. That is an insult to Allah, that He needs our protection and that He needs us to fight for Him.
I could be wrong saying that the two Protestant Churches are supporting Allah is only for the Muslims. There are many Protestants who want to be able to pray to Allah as well, especially the ones from East Malaysia. And I apologize to these two churches if I imply that perhaps it’s the judgment from Allah because they may not have supported the usage of “Allah” for Christians. I was very upset and shaken up yesterday with these churches being attacked and burned and felt very sorry for these two churches. I stand by the conviction that everyone is entitled to his/her own belief and opinion and will die for these two churches to defend their rights to their own beliefs and opinions.
The point I’m trying to make here is, there are so much misunderstanding, mistrust, and fear among us because of our differences, it’s time for all of us to come together to get to know each other better and to understand one another instead of telling one another that you are of the devil because you believe differently.
The Greek root word for demonic is to divide. To divide ourselves like that is actually demonic. The Bible says that the devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. How would it do it? To steal away our peace then make us fight one another and at the end destroy one another. It has already stolen the peace and harmony in this country that used to pride itself to be the model of plurality. Up till now, there has not been any initiative from the authorities to mediate a dialog between Muslims and Christians on this issue and the ruling party's newspapers have been fanning the fire. If this is not demonic, what it is?
However, I also think the church attack incident yesterday could also be a message from Allah; do not play play the name of Allah, and Allah is the God of everybody. It's a wake up call from Allah.
“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.” Gal 6:7
“…I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Rom 9:15
Allah is sovereign and He does not need us to protect Him or to tell Him what He should do. He can fight for Himself and defends Himself. He decides which bomb should explode in which church and how much damage could be done in the explosion. He decides how many people will show up in the demonstration and, whether BN or PR will win in the next general election in 2012 or Malaysia will sink into the South China Sea in 2012.
Let Allah be Allah and let us humble ourselves before Him and submit to Him.
“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my (Paul) presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” Phil 2:12-13
BLISS
The irony of the attack is, the explosions occurred in two Evangelical Protestant churches which may not support the idea of Christians calling God Allah. They believe Allah is the God of Islam and by calling Yahweh or Jesus (which is specifically stated in the Bible as the name of God for the Christians and Jews) Allah is not biblical.
The one that didn’t explode was the one thrown into the compound of Assumption Church in PJ, which is a Roman Catholic Church. The RC Church is the one that brought about the judgment of the high court that Christians can call God Allah.
Later, during the demonstration (must be a great disappointment because only few turned out; I was disappointed because I was waiting to see FRU water gunning these people and beating them with their batons), one of the demonstration leaders said Christians might have staged their own arson on those churches. The statement shows how ignorant and well, stupid, these people are. They couldn’t even tell the difference between Protestants and Roman Catholics and didn’t know that these two have been enemies for hundreds of years, though they may be grudgingly getting along well now.
Personally, I think Allah is showing His muscles. There were people praying in Assumption Church during the time of the attack and if the bomb were to explode, we can imagine the worst case scenario. But it did not and to me that was Allah’s protection.
The two exploded in the Protestant Churches, to me, could be a warning from Allah that we should not disgrace His name. Allah is God for all people and to say Allah is only for the Muslims are first, it is not what the Quran teaches, and second, it insults Allah, locked Him with a group of fanatic followers that constantly malign His name in the world. As for these Evangelical Protestant Christians, they usually believe that all other religions (including the Roman Catholics) are from the devil, deceiving people from believing in the Protestant faith hence lead them to hell. Therefore, to these Evangelical Protestant Christians, the name Allah may be from the devil, deceiving people from the true faith in the Evangelical Protestant Church. (I heard some told me that Allah is actually the name of the moon god).
As for these Muslims, to fight so passionately without using their brain and having proper understanding of what Islam is, they are basically telling Allah that He is incapable of protecting Himself and keeping His name pure. That is an insult to Allah, that He needs our protection and that He needs us to fight for Him.
I could be wrong saying that the two Protestant Churches are supporting Allah is only for the Muslims. There are many Protestants who want to be able to pray to Allah as well, especially the ones from East Malaysia. And I apologize to these two churches if I imply that perhaps it’s the judgment from Allah because they may not have supported the usage of “Allah” for Christians. I was very upset and shaken up yesterday with these churches being attacked and burned and felt very sorry for these two churches. I stand by the conviction that everyone is entitled to his/her own belief and opinion and will die for these two churches to defend their rights to their own beliefs and opinions.
The point I’m trying to make here is, there are so much misunderstanding, mistrust, and fear among us because of our differences, it’s time for all of us to come together to get to know each other better and to understand one another instead of telling one another that you are of the devil because you believe differently.
The Greek root word for demonic is to divide. To divide ourselves like that is actually demonic. The Bible says that the devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. How would it do it? To steal away our peace then make us fight one another and at the end destroy one another. It has already stolen the peace and harmony in this country that used to pride itself to be the model of plurality. Up till now, there has not been any initiative from the authorities to mediate a dialog between Muslims and Christians on this issue and the ruling party's newspapers have been fanning the fire. If this is not demonic, what it is?
However, I also think the church attack incident yesterday could also be a message from Allah; do not play play the name of Allah, and Allah is the God of everybody. It's a wake up call from Allah.
“Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap.” Gal 6:7
“…I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” Rom 9:15
Allah is sovereign and He does not need us to protect Him or to tell Him what He should do. He can fight for Himself and defends Himself. He decides which bomb should explode in which church and how much damage could be done in the explosion. He decides how many people will show up in the demonstration and, whether BN or PR will win in the next general election in 2012 or Malaysia will sink into the South China Sea in 2012.
Let Allah be Allah and let us humble ourselves before Him and submit to Him.
“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my (Paul) presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” Phil 2:12-13
BLISS
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Happy New Year, Allah!
Allah must be shaking His head in heaven. He has given a golden opportunity to His people, the submitters, to share the true faith to the non-submitters but what they do, they bring the non-submitters who call on His name to court to stop them from calling upon Him!
If I were the submitters, I would take this opportunity to explain to the non-submitters what the real meaning of this name "Allah" is and have many dialogs sessions with the non-submitters to educate them about this name "Allah". This is the best chance to open their eyes to see the real faith, to have the real worship towards Allah. Imagine half of the non-submitters, after the dialogs sessions, come to the realization that they are not really worshiping Allah correctly and turn to the real faith. The kind of rewards and grace Allah would grant to His people, the submitters, are beyond anyone guess.
However, the submitters here are fighting to stop non-submitters from calling upon Him. They are accusing them of trying to confuse the submitters and thus convert the submitters to their wrong faith. These submitters have successfully blocked and turned away potential non-submitters from knowing the true faith and the correct understanding of Allah.
All the faiths in the world believe in this principle, you reap what you sow.
Allah is the most powerful and He doesn't need anyone to protect Him or His name. People who try to do that are basically insulting Him; Allah is incapable to protect His own people from confusion, He needs us to protect His name from being wrongly used.
The problem is, these people who are protecting the name Allah, they are not doing what Allah wants them to do. They are not submitting to Allah the way Allah wants them to. Perhaps, the non-submitters who have been calling upon Allah long before even there is a country called Malaysia, are more submissive to Allah than these so called submitters. Yes, their understanding on Allah may not be 100% correct, but their submission to Allah may be more sincere than these so called submitters who want to protect the faith.
Submitters, this is the golden opportunity for you all to teach and correct the non-submitters about Allah. They are already submitting to Him, all they need are gentle guidance and proper teaching to correct their faith.
To teach, guide, dialog, and understand are a more submissive way than threatening and insulting the intelligence of the non-submitters.
Well...you reap what you sow. May Allah have mercy on us.
Happy New Year!
Bliss
If I were the submitters, I would take this opportunity to explain to the non-submitters what the real meaning of this name "Allah" is and have many dialogs sessions with the non-submitters to educate them about this name "Allah". This is the best chance to open their eyes to see the real faith, to have the real worship towards Allah. Imagine half of the non-submitters, after the dialogs sessions, come to the realization that they are not really worshiping Allah correctly and turn to the real faith. The kind of rewards and grace Allah would grant to His people, the submitters, are beyond anyone guess.
However, the submitters here are fighting to stop non-submitters from calling upon Him. They are accusing them of trying to confuse the submitters and thus convert the submitters to their wrong faith. These submitters have successfully blocked and turned away potential non-submitters from knowing the true faith and the correct understanding of Allah.
All the faiths in the world believe in this principle, you reap what you sow.
Allah is the most powerful and He doesn't need anyone to protect Him or His name. People who try to do that are basically insulting Him; Allah is incapable to protect His own people from confusion, He needs us to protect His name from being wrongly used.
The problem is, these people who are protecting the name Allah, they are not doing what Allah wants them to do. They are not submitting to Allah the way Allah wants them to. Perhaps, the non-submitters who have been calling upon Allah long before even there is a country called Malaysia, are more submissive to Allah than these so called submitters. Yes, their understanding on Allah may not be 100% correct, but their submission to Allah may be more sincere than these so called submitters who want to protect the faith.
Submitters, this is the golden opportunity for you all to teach and correct the non-submitters about Allah. They are already submitting to Him, all they need are gentle guidance and proper teaching to correct their faith.
To teach, guide, dialog, and understand are a more submissive way than threatening and insulting the intelligence of the non-submitters.
Well...you reap what you sow. May Allah have mercy on us.
Happy New Year!
Bliss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)