Melampau! Kristian buat hal istilah ‘Tuhan’ orang Cina juga

Disember 29, 2012 at 4:28 pm 42 comments

天 神 yang disebut tian shen ialah Tuhan dalam hanyu (bahasa Cina).

Seorang pengomen bukan Cina di blog ini, jonnymalaya, tahu pun.

JonnyMalaya

Namun orang Kristian keturunan Cina di Malaysia meragam betul.

Seorang pelanggan Malaysiakini bernama Cw Ng telah mengadu:

“Taoism and Buddism also facing the same fate as Muslim. The Christian do not allow Taoism/Buddism to use ‘Shen’ (mandarin word) too.

“The one who did not allow me to use is a convert Christian. She said the Buddha that we prayed is not “Shen” and it is a human (mandarin word is “Ren”). So Buddist absolutely are not allowed to use “Shen”. “Shen” is a Christian’s God. Only Christians are qualified to use, she said.”

Tambah Cw Ng lagi, puak Kristian ini sememangnya terlalu bongkak tetapi orang Buddha mengalah sahaja demi menjaga keharmonian - lihat screenshot, atas: “I feel that Christians are too arrogant. Anyway Buddist use ‘Fo Duo’ or ‘Pu Sak’ and do not want to create inharmony [sic] with the Christian.”

Saya tidak berminat untuk memperinci konsep keTuhanan dalam agama Buddha kerana di antara pengikut aliran-aliran yang berlainan pun wujud perbezaan dari segi pemahaman.

Namun apa yang diceritakan Cw Ng adalah contoh bagaimana saudara baru Kristian yang bersikap cukup ekstrim telah menuntut ‘hakcipta’ ke atas sepatah kata bahasa asing yang tidak pernah menjadi milik kelompoknya. Ini kerana bahasa Cina sudah tentunya bukan bahasa asal agama Kristian.

(Kristianiti dikembangkan pada awalnya melalui bahasa Latin (kitab Vulgate) dan sebelum itu bahasa Yunani (kitab Septuagint). Bahasa ibunda Yesus ialah Aramaic manakala bahasa orang Yahudi ialah Hebrew dan ada juga kitab Hebrew.)

Berani seorang ‘mualaf’ (born again) Kristian yang begitu kiasu mahu mengatakan “shen [istilah bahasa Cina] Tuhan orang Kristian”!

Dia menegaskan hanya orang Kristian sahaja yang layak serta mempunyai hak menggunakan kata Cina ini bagi menggelar Tuhan triniti mereka itu secara khususnya.

Nampak sangat perangai pijak kepala. Sebenarnya dalam polemik Allah ini terserlah sungguh keangkuhan puak Kristian yang cara dan gaya mereka terlalu memprovokasi.

Najib pula disalahkan?!

Guan Eng lah yang cetuskan huru-hara dengan perutusan Krismasnya yang disampaikan pada 24 Disember tetapi perdana menteri pula dipertanggungjawabkan atas kekecohan yang timbul.

Penyokong pembangkang berikhtiar untuk menunggang-terbalikkan garis waktu dengan sebuah dakwaan palsu, “While Mr Lim’s statement today is obviously a reaction to what Mr Najib had said to the Christian community on Christmas day …”

Najib dengan tidak semena-semenanya dituduh menjerat Guan Eng walhal ia Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang itu yang menjolok sarang tebuan.

Lihat screenshot komen seorang yang menggelar dirinya ‘RAW’:

Penganut Buddha diseret masuk

Komen oleh seorang Kristian bernama ‘Chelsea’ (lihat screenshot bawah) adalah amat jahat sekali padahal penganut Buddha tidak ada kena-mengena dengan persengketaan kalimah Allah.

Hujahnya – “kalau pengikut Buddha mahu memanggil Buddha mereka ‘Jesus’ … dipersilakan” – tidak bertempat serta mencari gaduh sahaja.

‘Chelsea’ telah mengomen:

“My God is Jesus. But if the Buddhists want to call their Buddha Jesus… go ahead. I would be proud and not feel threatened.”

“Allah, Tuhan, Tua Pek Kong, whatever… I am ashamed to be a Malaysian, fighting and arguing over the right to use God’s name”.

Allah row Get over it and move on - Malaysiakini 2012-12-29 13-42-41

.

About these ads

Entry filed under: Evangelis. Tags: , .

Anti-Lynas: Betul kanak-kanak yang mogok lapar faham sains radioaktif? Kes membuli oleh samseng DAP, warga emas akhirnya di’usir’

42 Komen Add your own

  • 1. Waris Malaya  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 6:42 pm

    More #DAPsterCancer… #RejectPakatoons #ABCD

    Balas
    • 2. Helen Ang  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 6:43 pm

      Er, what does ABCD stand for?

      Balas
      • 3. Waris Malaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 2:26 am

        ABCD = Asal Bukan Cina DAP

        Now you know why I apologize upfront in a previous comment thread.

        Balas
  • 4. CucuAtok  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 8:00 pm

    Well it seems that this Cristian Evangalis are trying to provoke and to ensure the chaos of the country as what their good book said….

    As a good Cristian, I thought the teaching of the good book said to be peace with your neigbour…. is it not……

    How it can happen….too much arrogant and ignorence…..

    But Helen, in our Holy Book …Quran… we had been warned about this group and personel because if we don’t follow their way, they will not rest until they satisfy….

    So Helen…. good job on your doing and I will support for you for revealing their dirty strategies…..

    Balas
    • 5. Helen Ang  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 8:01 pm

      Thank you. Please recommend my blog to your friends.

      Balas
  • 6. Melonhead  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 8:00 pm

    The more they talk and argue, the more i realise how ignorant the christians are towards their own religion. Kesian…

    Balas
  • 7. CucuAtok  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 8:50 pm

    Thank you Helen…. As what I’ve mentioned earlier…. will do that and seems that they only like to make the true friendship scattered….

    Balas
  • 8. Laksmana Hang Tuah  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 9:17 pm

    Names of God in the Bible..

    Elohim (Yang Maha Berkuasa) di dalam Genesis 1:1
    Adonai di dalam lebih kurang 300 tempat dalam Old Testament & Despot (alih bahasa ke Greek) di dalam New Testament.
    El (Yang Maha Kuat) di dalam Exodus 6:3
    El-Elyon (Tuhan Yang Maha Tinggi) di dalam Genesis 14:18-22.
    El-Shaddai (Tuhan Yang Mencukupkan DiriNya sendiri) di dalam Genesis 17:1
    El-Olam (Tuhan Kekal Abadi) di dalam Genesis 21:33
    YHWH@Yahweh@Yahuwah@Jehovah (Maha Hidup Dengan SendiriNya) di dalam Exodus 3:14.
    YHWH-Elohim (Tuhan Maha Pencipta) di dalam Genesis 1:26.
    YHWH-Jireh (Tuhan Yang Mencukupkan) Genesis 22:13-14.
    YHWH-Rapha@Rophe (Tuhan Yang Menyembuhkan) di dalamExodus 15:25.
    YHWH-Nissi (Tuhan Panji Kami) di dalam Exodus 17:15.
    YHWH-Shalom (Tuhan Yang Mengamankan) di dalam Judges 6:24.
    YHWH-Shammah (Tuhan Yang Ada) di dalam Ezekiel 48:35.
    YHWH-Tsidkenu (Tuhan Yang Maha Benar) di dalam Jeremiah 33:16.
    YHWH-Raah@Rohi (Tuhan Pembimbing Kami) di dalam Psalm 23:1.
    YHWH-Sabaoth (Tuhan Maha Pelindung) di dalam Psalm 46:7.
    YHWH-M’Kaddesh (Tuhan Yang Mengkuduskan) di dalam Leviticus 20: 7-8.

    I ‘cilok’ it from here

    http://satuhala.blogspot.com/2010/01/gerhana-awal-2010.html

    Why don’t they just pick one? Of course they don’t want to.. if they pick one of these names, then what’s left for them to catapult Dearest Leader Lim to Putrajaya?

    Balas
    • 9. Helen Ang  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 9:27 pm

      To enable LGE and his evangelistas to exploit religious issues, there has to be the ‘vector’ (agent of transmission).

      Of course his people are hyperactive in the social media but still, The Star provides them the reach to 1.3 million readers. That’s why he is so confident in playing the religious card. Because he knows that the paper is really The Jerusubang Star.

      Balas
  • 10. forrrestcat  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 9:49 pm

    Orang gundu Sikh nak menyibuk plak! Tahniah Lim Guan Eng. Kamu telah menanam operasi bintang biru di masa hadapan.

    Balas
    • 11. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 11:39 pm

      forrestcat,

      Orang Sikh juga menggunakan kalimah Allah dalam kitab suci mereka.

      http://www.sikharchives.com/?p=2951

      Diharapkan orang disini tidak akan membebel & suruh penganot Sikh bagaimana nak menganut agama mereka…

      Balas
      • 12. Helen Ang  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:00 am

        Do share with us your opinion pls, JM. Karpal said that the Sikhs use the Allah term and he claims so do the Orang Asli and the Baba-Nyonya of Malacca.

        So all these groups all these years using Allah never upset the Muslims but now suddenly the evangelists post 2008 are causing grave upset.

        Why the different reactions?

        Balas
        • 13. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:30 am

          >> So all these groups all these years using Allah never upset the Muslims but now suddenly the evangelists post 2008 are causing grave upset.

          I believe we had this discussion before. This challenge to the use of the term actually started in the 1980s thanks to overzealous officials unaware of its use by Bumiputera Christians.

          http://blog.ameia-kl.com/2010/03/when-allah-was-not-only-word-banned-in.html

          Even in this blog, we can see people unaware of the fact that Bumiputra Christians form the majority of Christians in Malaysia, and that ‘Allah’ has been in use since the 17th century.

          The root cause is basically intolerance & a superiority complex to other religions. The same kind of attitude that makes some upset when they drive past Batu Caves, or ban the construction of the Ma Tzu statue in Kudat… when previously there had been little animosity.

          Balas
          • 14. Helen Ang  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:41 am

            Let’s carry forward the discussion from your input.

            (1) “people unaware of the fact that Bumiputra Christians form the majority of Christians in Malaysia”

            So the Iban/Dayak, Kadazan and other pribumi Christians are the silent majority whereas the evangelistas of Jerusubang the vocal majority?

            So before the DAP evangelicals politicized the dispute, the tensions never exploded into the church arsons? Why did the firebombing occur in the Klang Valley mostly when you say that the majority of the Christians are in Borneo?

            (2) “The root cause is basically intolerance & a superiority complex to other religions. … when previously there had been little animosity.”

            Previously before the DAP ascendency there had been little animosity but since they politicized Christianity (like how PAS politicizes Islam) – during the Sibu by-election, including the banners calling BN “the anti-Christ” during the Sarawak state election – the animosity is openly expressed?

            Balas
          • 15. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 1:30 am

            >> So the Iban/Dayak, Kadazan and other pribumi Christians are the silent majority whereas the evangelistas of Jerusubang the vocal majority?

            1) Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill, a Melanau Christian has an ongoing court case over the issue.

            http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/allah-cd-case-syed-hamid-appearance-to-be-decided-july-12

            2) Sidang Injil Borneo also has a court case;

            Sabah church sues PM over book ban, 24 December 2007 – Malaysiakini

            3) Bernard Dompok also called for the term to be permitted, as it has always been…
            http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2009&dt=0124&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Dalam_Negeri&pg=dn_04.htm

            >> Why did the firebombing occur in the Klang Valley mostly when you say that the majority of the Christians are in Borneo?

            I have earlier posted the demographics showing majority of Christians are Bumiputera, above 60%. Did you not get it?

            Deja vu? This is EXACTLY the same stuff we were discussing 1/2 year ago…

            http://helenang.wordpress.com/2012/07/20/feedback-for-tan-sri-muhyiddin-on-chinese-view-of-mca/

            comment #7:
            >>>>> So is it the 60% Malay-speaking Bumiputra Christians or the 10% Chinese Christians who making a vocal political issue out of it, and is the Malay response (church fire-bombing & arson) a reaction to the 60% in Sabah/S’wak or to the 10% in Klang Valley? — Helen
            Murphy Pakiam was one of those who challenged the ban on the word in Malay Catholic newsletter:

            Sidang Injil Borneo, a major Bumiputera church in East Malaysia
            also challenged the ban:

            “”””Sabah SIB president pastor Jerry Dusing filed the suit on Dec 10, 2007, when the import of six school education book titles were banned after the Customs Department seized the consignment of materials on the grounds that the publications contained words exclusive to Islam.
            “”””The words in contention are ‘Allah’ (God), ‘Baitullah’ (House of God), ‘Solat’ (prayer) and ‘Kaabah’ (The Sacred House).
            “”””Apart from the SIB case, there is also another pending case before the Kuala Lumpur High Court, involving the seizure of religious compact discs (CDs) which also use the word ‘Allah’, from Jakarta in 2008 by Sarawakian Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill.
            “”””Jill, who is from the indigenous Melanau tribe, is challenging that seizure, and is seeking a court order for the return of the confiscated CDs.””””
            As for the attacks related to the issue, I would not say it a Malay response. Rather it is more a reaction of extremists.
            Most people in Peninsular Malaysia think Malaysian Christians are either Chinese or Indian, with some Orang Asli, Dusun, Iban, Bajau, et cetera. The opposite is actually the truth.
            I strongly doubt the extremists know this fact. Their actions were directed towards Christians than a specific race of Christians. Majority of churches that were attacked were not Catholic or S.I.B.

            Balas
      • 16. atas pagar  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 3:24 am

        Orang Sikh rasanya tidak ada niat untuk mencetak buku agama dalam bahasa lain melainkan dalam bahasa yang mereka gunakan sesama mereka, justeru tidak timbul isu Sikh akan guna perkataan a-l-l-a-h secara bercetak.

        Balas
  • 17. forrrestcat  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    Nampkanya jentera DAPster yakni malaysiakini dan kimside sudah mula seret agama lain dalam isu ni.
    http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/unconstitutional-to-ban-non-muslims-from-using-allah-sikh-community-says/

    Balas
  • 18. atas pagar  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 11:09 pm

    Kak Helen,

    Hinduism was established in India and the center of religious activities is in India itself but not somewhere else.

    Taoism was established in China and keeps on expanding in all directions, but majority of the congregation are still centered around the “Tembok Besar”.

    Judaism was established in Middle East. Even though most of the followers have been living a peaceful life away from home, still most of the religious decisions are made in Jerusalem.

    The above examples reveals something: most religions gravitate to where it’s originated from. But there seems to be just one exception to above observations….I’m sure U know which one lar.

    Balas
  • 19. HambaAllah  |  Disember 29, 2012 at 11:09 pm

    wahai orang malaysia tak kira apa bangsa melayu, china, india, iban, kadazan atau apa pun kita berkongsi satu tuhan yang maha esa yang namanya ALLAH . Kita beriman denganNya. Sebagaimana kita berkongsi satu NEGARA iaitu MALAYSIA . hidup kita di dunia ini hanyalah sementara. kehidupan di akhirat adalah abadi (SYURGA) . AMEEN ..

    Balas
    • 20. Kelvin Grove  |  Januari 3, 2013 at 10:50 pm

      Adakah mereka ini semnua menyembah kepada tuhan yang satu?

      Tolong berfikir lebih matang lagi.

      Apakah kau bisa berfikir ?

      Apakah kamu boleh berfikir ?

      Can you think ?

      Balas
  • 21. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:08 am

    Nampaknya Helen cuba mencari & mencipta alasan untuk terus mengutuk orang Kristian. Akhbar The Star pun dikecam kerana tidak turut serta dalam kempen tuang petrol nya… walaupun NST & Edge juga tak join masuk.

    Orang Kristian tidak ada monopoli terhadap kata ‘Shen’ dalam Bahasa Mandarin, serta tiada larangan yang wujud. Muallaf itu jahil.

    Comment daripada ‘Chelsea’ pun diputarnya seolah-olah nak libatkan orang Buddha. Si Chelsea hanya memberi contoh jika ada orang bukan Kristian lain yang nak gunakan nama Yesus, dia takkan marah.

    “My God is Jesus. But if the Buddhists want to call their Buddha Jesus… go ahead. I would be proud and not feel threatened.”

    Sesetengah orang Hindu juga menganggap Yesus sebagai Avatar (bukan filem 3D). Orang kristian tak berang & menyuruh mereka mengugurkan kepercayaan ini

    Inb4 Helen tuduh saya tarik masuk penganut Hindu pulak. :)

    Balas
    • 22. Helen Ang  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:21 am

      Orang Kristian yang kebas Allah, jadi kenapa pula cuba melibatkan penganut Buddha?

      Adakah ‘mualaf’ itu perlu menyampuk, “But if the Buddhists want to call their Buddha Jesus… go ahead”(?)

      Sejak bila pengikut Buddha pernah mahu menggelar Gotama dengan nama Yesus?

      Sebenarnya kenyataan macam yang dikeluarkan Chelsea itulah yang membuat saya geram. Waima bolehlah saya faham kenapa umat Islam sudah kurang sabar dengan puak evangelis yang mengeluarkan komen bodoh sombong yang melambak-lambak mengupas kemelut kalimah Allah.

      Balas
      • 23. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:54 am

        Kebas? Kalimah tersebut sudah lama digunakan beratus tahun, bukan baru-baru ini seperti yang cuba ditonjolkan segolongan disini. Jangan nanti anda nak tuduh orang Sikh pula kebas?

        Nampaknya Helen sudah keliru komen muallaf jahil itu dengan komen daripada si Chelsea, walaupun ialah dua orang berbeza. Malam dah lewat, kot.

        >>Sejak bila pengikut Buddha pernah mahu menggelar Gotama dengan nama Yesus?

        Sudahpun kata Si Chelsea hanya memberi contoh jika ada orang bukan Kristian lain yang nak gunakan nama Yesus, dia takkan marah

        - Bodoh sombong ialah memanggil orang Sikh gundu tanpa mengetahui apapun tentang agama mereka (bukan awak, tapi salah seorang pembaca di atas)
        - Bodoh sombong ialah melatah bila fakta dikemukakan
        - Bodoh sombong ialah menuduh orang lain menggunakan nama tersebut baru-baru ini, dan selepas dibuktikan salah, nak pindah tiang gol dan menyuruh mereka bagaimana menganut agama mereka

        Balas
        • 24. Helen Ang  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 1:01 am

          Oyvey, yang dirujuk kamu sebagai “mualaf jahil” tu si ostad RT ke?

          Balas
          • 25. jonnymalaya  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 1:34 am

            Nope, tu muallaf “born again” yang tadi kamu tulis… yang kata ‘Shen’ kononnya hanya untuk Kristian.

            Balas
            • 26. Helen Ang  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 1:53 am

              Okay.

              Balas
        • 27. Kelvin Grove  |  Januari 3, 2013 at 10:53 pm

          Apakah kristian yang guna nama ‘Allah’ baru muncul pada 200-300 tahun lalu?

          Macam mana pulak dgn kristian 2000 tahun dulu?

          Kristian sentiasa berubah mengikut musim?

          Balas
    • 28. atas pagar  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 2:09 am

      Jonnymalaya,

      Chelsea,

      Yesus statues are usually appear in a crucified posture. Are you both really really feel proud if for some reason the animist would want to name some of the animal statues as Yesus?

      Balas
  • 29. CucuAtok  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:46 am

    JM…. eventhough you cakap mcm tu tapi tetap tidak mengganggu sensiviti umat Islam… contoh telah di beri kenapa nak guna juga?
    Sedangkan dalam kitab kamu tidak menyebut pun……

    Nampak sangat ler nak mengganggu dan provoke org Islam…Ingat sarang tebuan jgn di jolok kelak menyesal….. cubak cari maksud amok dalam kamus Oxford…..dari mana ayat itu datang dan bagaimana ia berlaku…..

    remember….bila perkara itu berlaku… org yang kononnya pejuang akan lari lintang pukang……napetak percaya cubalah…

    Balas
  • 30. atas pagar  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 1:42 am

    Dalam isu nama Tuhan, apabila agama lain mahu mengsinonimkan nama Tuhan dengan sesuatu yang dianggap penghinaan terhadap nama Tuhan berkenaan, tentulah muslim rasa TERSINGGUNG.

    Dalam masa sama, agama lain berasakan mereka berhak menggunapakai nama Tuhan yang sama dan kalau tidak dapat menggunakannya mereka pulak berasa tersinggung!

    Jadinya, kalau komentar Not Confused dalam MK ada menyatakan yang dia “don’t give a damn about the gov jaundiced views…” yakni akan terus menggunakan nama Tuhan yang dipertikaikan, bermakna beliau hanya mahu menghilang perasaan tersinggung DIRINYA SAJA tetapi tidak mahu ambil peduli perasaan muslim yang tersinggung.

    Dan kalau pun gov berubah dari jaundiced views kepada neutral views, yakni akan benarkan Not Confused gunakan nama Tuhan sebagaimana yang dia mahukan, apakah muslim akan hilang rasa tersinggungnya? Tidakkah pulak nanti muslim hendak pulangkan balik ayat Not Confused kepada beliau:

    “we don’t give a damn about the gov unfair decision that allows Not Cofused to use the same god’s name because that would make more people get confused”?

    Balas
  • [...] Anthony Loke, David Nga, Jimmy Chua, Lee Hwa Beng, Lim Guan Eng, Dean Johns, Barack Obama et al who says: Buddha is not “Shen” (but) is a human…. Buddhists (are) absolutely not allowed to use [...]

    Balas
  • 32. forrrestcat  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 11:24 am

    Kepada baghal spt jonnymalaya malah org ekstremis kristian, ini adalah websitr arabbible yg terang jelaskan bahawa God bukan Allah, kefana Allah adakalah bukan kata nama umum tetapi kata nama Khas
    http://www.arabbible.com/t-Allah.aspx

    Now Let’s Talk About IslamIslam deals with the god/God issue as well. The general term for a god is “ilaah”. This Arabic word is a common noun, and can either refer to any supposed god, or may also refer to the unique one. This is universally accepted among all Arabic-speaking peoples. Next, we can talk about the proper noun, or his actual Arabic name. The name universally accepted among Muslims that refers to the deity of Islam is “Allah”. There is a swirl of controversy these days about the linguistic origins of that name, but the fact remains that there is no controversy whatsoever about what Islam’s deity is named. “Allah” is his proper name, the name that he calls himself, and expects others to call him. If someone would like to contest this claim, let him consider the words of Edward William Lane, the sole author of the Arabic-English Lexicon. This eight-volume authoritative series not only took thirty years to compile, but is said to far surpass every lexicon ever produced in any language. Concerning the word “Allah”, Lane says that according to the most correct opinions of Arab grammarians, which are more than thirty in number, Allah “is a proper name”. Also, Abdul Mannan Omar, the editor of the Encyclopedia of Islam, and translator of the Qur’an into English, says directly that Allah “is not a common noun” and, like Lane, declares it to be a “proper name” (The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an p.28, 29). We immediately face a dilemma. The Hebrew Scriptures tell us that the eternal proper name of the one true deity is YHWH, while Islam and the Qur’an itself tells us that the eternal proper name of the one true deity is Allah. We must make a choice; it cannot be both. There is no room for fence-sitting here. The word “ilaah” is the universally accepted Arabic name for “a god”. That’s why it is called a common noun. However, our problem is not there, but rather in the decision of what proper name to use for the eternal deity. Remember, the Hebrew Scriptures clarify who this is: He is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And the New Testament also reinforces the Old Testament revelation, that God still identifies Himself with these three men, by virtue of an eternal covenant. In fact, Jesus himself reminds the Samaritan woman that “Salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). How should we think about this? Could it be that when we talk about YHWH and Allah, we are actually talking about two different “gods”? One god who may identify himself with Abraham, but certainly not Isaac, and absolutely not Jacob (Israel); and the other who unquestionably identifies Himself as the God of all three. Their personal names with which they identify themselves are clearly different (note that YHWH is never even mentioned in the Qur’an); and it is likewise obvious that even their character and actions are different, so why do we insist that they must be the same? Perhaps we are making more of this “Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” thing than we should? Perhaps God’s identifying Himself with all three of these men is not so important? But like it or not, this is what He calls Himself, and whether it’s in the Biblical Hebrew of the Old Testament or the Koine Greek of the New Testament, both clarifications makes sure that we do not mistake Him for the god of any other nation. It turns out that indeed this is a critical distinction, because in the Psalms, it tells us who the gods of all the other nations actually are: For all the gods of the nations are (worthless) idols:but the LORD (YHWH) made the heavens. Psalm 96:5It’s interesting that He contrasts His name, the proper noun YHWH, with the common noun “gods”. The God of Israel, in fact, utterly contrasts Himself with the gods of all other nations – all of them. YHWH stands apart from them all, including Allah, who never once identifies himself as “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”. 

    Balas
  • 34. marhaeman  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 12:21 pm

    Helen,

    Kalau disebut “Osama Ben Laden” di depan ABU, nama seperti itu mungkin mengingatkan ABU kepada seseorang tetapi tidak lebih dari itu.

    Kalau nama “Osama Ben London” tercatat dalam passport yang sedang dibelek oleh seorang pegawai imigresen Barat berkulit putih, nama itu akan otomatik mengingatkan pegawai berkenaan bahawa dia perlu berhati-hati dan teliti dalam berurusan dengan pemilik passport itu.

    Tetapi, kalau nama “Obama Ben London” tercatat dalam passport yang sedang dibelek oleh seorang pegawai imigresen kulit hitam, pegawai berkenaan akan tiba-tiba jadi lebih berhemah dari biasa – tidak perlu teliti berlebih-lebihan – kerana nama berkenaan akan mengingatkan pegawai berkenaan kepada seorang presiden berkulit hitam.

    Ini menunjukkan beberapa perkara:

    • Nama yang sama mungkin dikaitkan dengan perkara yang berbeza oleh dua kelompok masyarakat berlainan bergantung kepada pengalaman negatif atau positif yang ditepuhi oleh masyarakat bersabit dan nama berkenaan. Dan seperti semua maklum pihak media ada keupayaan istimewa untuk sama ada menjadikan persepsi negatif jadi positif atau sebaliknya menjadikan persepsi positif jadi negatif.

    • Masyarakat global masih perlu belajar pelbagai bentuk senditiviti dalam kalangan masyarakat yang berlainan kerana dalam masyarakat paling terbuka mindanya, tidak semua individu adalah “insensitive”.

    Sebenar-benarnya, tidak ada formula ajaib untuk masyarakat majmuk mengekalkan persefahaman melainkan ada perasaan hormat terhadap orang lain.

    Contohnya, Fernandez boleh letakkan gambar separuh bogel di depan pintu rumahnya dan dia boleh berbuat begitu kerana itu rumahnya. Tetapi kalau Fernandez ada perasaan hormat terhadap jiran-jirannya, sudah tentu dia tidak akan melakukan perkara berkenaan.

    Dalam konteks agama, Fernandez boleh buat apa saja terhadap agamanya dalam premis tertutup tetapi sebagai penganut yang baik, apabila maklumat tentang agamanya berlegar-legar dalam premis awan, pastinya beliau perlu berusaha sebaik mungkin supaya maklumat tentang agamanya itu tidak menyentuh kepekaan lain-lain agama.

    Balas
  • 35. Antihipokrit  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 6:24 pm

    Berapa kerat Kristian semenanjung aka Cina yg nak bongkak sangat konon nak tunjukkan sesuatu pada GE 13? Saya fikir Kristian Sabah Sarawak tidak sebodoh Kristian Cina kerana selama ini pun mereka tahu betapa tolerannya Umat Islam di Malaysia. LGE ni dan DAPster ni memang patut dihukum SULA je. Zaman Mahathir takde sekor pun yg berani buat hal mcm ni.

    Balas
  • 36. Antihipokrit  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 6:24 pm

    Dan Cina Kristian ini merasakan bahawa Kristian Sabah dan Sarawak yg majoritinya kaum pribumi akan menyokong mereka?

    Balas
  • 37. shamshul anuar  |  Disember 30, 2012 at 10:53 pm

    Helen,

    I asked many of my Christian friends who they worship? all of them said “jesus”. None mentioned Allah”.

    Questions were asked several years ago. Initially these people could not understand why Muslims are so upset. They thought it was UMNO that purposely objected to lock Malay votes. I told them it was the other way around. The Malays are very upset and told off UMNO to defend the word from being used by Christians.

    I explained the rationale. Sharing the name will eventually dilute the very meaning and concept of Allah to Muslims.In plain languages, it affects the very basic foundation of Islam. It is like telling christians that Jesus is not God.

    Guan eng, being a useless politician, of course uses the word to instigate the Christians to hate the muslims (meaning the Govt of the day).

    But in reality, Christians whom i met began to appreciate Muslim concern after my explanation. They are of course not the over zealous Subang evengelists. they are Christians who lack understanding.

    I warn PAS that it will be routed for its tacit approval of DAP championing the issue. PAS method is not condemning Guan eng but hopes the issue will be forgotten.

    Balas
  • 38. Malaysian  |  Januari 1, 2013 at 12:02 am

    Dear friends,

    I am not an expert in religious matters. I would not want to comment on the meaning of the word Allah and so forth. For those who insisted that non-Muslims should not be allowed to use the word Allah, kindly respond to my question below:-

    On what basis a follower of a religion (i.e. Muslim) can dictate or instruct to a follower of another religion (i.e. Christian) on how to practice the latter’s religion?

    I would appreciate any reply to the above. Thanks.

    Balas
    • 39. Metro Blue  |  Januari 2, 2013 at 7:58 am

      Under the concept of freedom, in theory we are all born free to decide what we want to do. In real life there is no such thing as ‘freedom’ to do whatever we want to do because our action affect another person, or the community that we live in. If you don’t believe me, look at what is happening to Julian Assange.

      Balas
      • 40. Malaysian  |  Januari 3, 2013 at 11:51 pm

        Metro Blue,

        I can agree with your statement “In real life there is no such thing as ‘freedom’ to do whatever we want to do because our action affect another person, or the community that we live in.”

        Let us be more specific since we have reached a consensus on the general principle as mentioned by you above.

        What the Christians are doing are confined to their followers only. They are not compelling or causing adverse harm to the Muslims. Muslims claimed that the use of the word Allah will cause confusion among the Muslims.

        Under what circumstances a muslim will actually confront a situation that the word Allah is not referring to the Muslim god but is referring to the Christianity god instead?

        Did the above Muslim did the following:-

        1. accidentally taken a copy of the Bahasa Melayu bible and read it where the word Allah denoted Christian god?
        2. accidentally entered into a church where the preacher used the word Allah to denote Christian god?

        Just because of some silly Muslims who did the above things, can this justify the interference of Muslims on the Christians? You should go and reprimand the silly Muslims and leave the Christians peacefully.

        Unless you can proof this:-

        1. The Christians by force caused a Muslim to read the Bahasa Melayu bible where the word Allah denoted Christian god.
        2. The Christians by force caused a Muslim to listen to the preacher who used the word Allah to denote Christian god.

        Then, you can proof that the actions of Christians above have ‘adversely affected the Muslims’ and thus, can justify the Muslims in demanding a prohibition against the use of the word Allah by Christians. Even if you can proof the above, you should reprimand and punish the forceful Christians only and spare the majority of the innocent Christian. Just because of the misdeeds of the selected few, we cannot deprive the entire Christians in Malaysia from using the word Allah.

        Remember, we are about to interfere in the matters of another faith. Unless we have strong, solid, irrefutable evidence, we should never interfere in the affairs of another religion. Merely shouting that ‘Muslims will be confused’ is not enough. We need to do better than that.

        Balas
    • 41. Kelvin Grove  |  Januari 3, 2013 at 10:56 pm

      All things in this world have their own lines. So please draw your own border.

      You cannot trespass other people’s ground without permission or legal rights!

      Christianity must maintain your originality.

      Balas
  • [...] blog helen laporkan, ada kegelisahan drpd komuniti tao dan buddha juga ini kerana ada tuntutan keatas tuhan mereka juga [...]

    Balas

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Tukar )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Tukar )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Tukar )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Tukar )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


The Lion Sleeps Tonight

KARPAL SINGH

Evangelista

Tudung as political accessory

They always call Utusan

the “Umno mouthpiece”

Dear readers,

If you like my writing, please introduce my blog to 3 of your friends. Thank you.

Helen Ang

CLICK ON IMAGE TO READ

'Condolence' in Oik's blog

'Mereka perlu disekolahkan' in Sarah's blog

'10 alleged ghost sightings' in Alizul's blog

'The Calovinia' in Anisah Afifah's blog

Kiriman Terbaru

Pengunjung

  • 3,739,894 hits

Kalender

Disember 2012
I S R K J S A
« Nov   Jan »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Arkib

Suapan


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 304 other followers

%d bloggers like this: