Posted in Evangelista Bintang Tiga

Media pembangkang mendakwa “Muslims don’t own the word ‘Allah’; they never have”

Pengarang The Nut Graph Jacqueline Ann Surin dalam rencananya tentang kemelut kalimah Allah bertajuk ‘BN-style resolution to Allah issue‘ telah mendakwa perkataan ‘Allah’ bukan milik orang Islam serta puak Muslim tidak pernah pun memilikinya.

Membalun Menteri Agama Jamil Khir Baharom sebagai seorang yang tidak keruan percakapannya, Jacqueline Ann Surin menulis:

“Hence, Jamil Khir’s proposal for an interfaith dialogue is either a half-baked public relations exercise to demonstrate that the Malaysian government is fair to all, or, Allah help us all, the minister doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”

Jacqueline juga membidas Hishamuddin Hussein yang ketika itu Menteri Dalam Negeri serta berkata serangan-serangan ke atas gereja adalah merupakan satu bentuk “suburban terrorism“:

“And so, what was even more troubling about the home minister was his description of the suburban terrorism happening in modern-day Malaysia. […]

“There is also no doubt that the church’s right to use ‘Allah’ is being attacked by the same government that claims it wants dialogue.”

Seterusnya pengarang The Nut Graph itu menegaskan bahawa Kementerian Dalam Negeri tidak layak untuk menegah golongan bukan-Islam daripada menggunakan perkataan yang mendahului Islam serta hakcipta perkataan tersebut tidak juga dimiliki oleh Muslim.

(Tulis Jacqueline: “How does this suggestion even resolve the issue of what right the BN government has, through the Home Ministry, to deny non-Muslims the right to use a word that pre-dates Islam and for which Muslims don’t own copyright over? Let’s be clear. Muslims don’t own the word ‘Allah’. They never have.“)

Seterusnya dia menuntut:

“First, the government needs to admit it was wrong. There is no historical, cultural or scriptural basis for the ban they have imposed on the Catholic church from using “Allah”. Second, drop the court appeal against the High Court decision. Third, stop pandering to the ignorant and fearful among Muslim pressure groups, whether within or outside the administration.

“And finally, learn respect. Respect for the legitimate concerns and rights of all Malaysians.” (sumber: The Nut Graph, lihat screenshot di kaki halaman)

***   ***   ***

Rujuk juga ‘Bekas pengarang akhbar SinChew kata Pemuda Umno sokong Kristian guna kalimah Allah

Kita tidak hairan sekiranya Ketua Pemuda Umno Khairy Jamaluddin boleh menyokong kaum Kristian menggunakan kalimah Allah kerana setiausaha akhbarnya pun seorang evangelista juga.

http://www.thenutgraph.com/bn-style-resolution-to-allah-issue/
http://www.thenutgraph.com/bn-style-resolution-to-allah-issue/

Author:

I have no Faceook or Twitter.

135 thoughts on “Media pembangkang mendakwa “Muslims don’t own the word ‘Allah’; they never have”

    1. Whether the word is in Bible or not is not important. Let the Christian have their ajaran sesat and confused their own East Malaysian Christian. The Malay Muslim I thought should have strong faith in their religion and know their Allah very well.

      1. ‘The Malay Muslim I thought should have strong faith in their religion and know their Allah very well.’

        Yes and the objections was made partly because of the very reason. Otherwise they won’t simply care. Just like non practicing Muslims around!

      2. Malaysian, don’t be an asshole with your sarcasm. Stick to the issue at least in Malaysia unless you can show me that western world incorporated the word Allah in their bible elsewhere.

        1. The issue is, the east Malaysian have been using Allah for past hundred years without being confused and become Muslim. They stay as Christian. Unlike the Malay Muslim, UMNO suddenly in 2009 worried that they may become christian by this mere word Allah in bible.

          the Christian have no intention to use in the peninsular as peninsular Christian never use malay bible. The Home ministry is also insulting the Muslim by claiming that if this is allowed, havoc may happen so they think that by banning the word, the east Malaysian will not create havoc because they are very much well behave but if they allow to use the word, the Muslim will certainly become violent against the christian in this country! What an insult towards the Malaysian Muslim.

          1. ‘past hundred years without being confused’

            Like how many hundred years again? CFM fact sheet highlighted 1500 in some other land. So it is way irrelevant.

            So brader, can provide link or not, like how many hundred years and which bible, printed by whom or brought in by whom (if its from Indonesia), read by whom when it was first brought in and reproduced again by whom?

              1. ‘However, more than 60 per cent of Malaysian Christians only speak Bahasa Malaysia,’

                Standard Bahasa Malaysia?

                ‘and the word used for God in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible (Al-Kitab) since its translation in 1731, is ‘Allah’.’

                1731 translation, where is that bible? Brought in from where? By whom? To Sabah or Sarawak? Used by which community again?

                ‘The word is used by Bumiputera Christians who only have Bahasa Malaysia as their common language in Sabah, Sarawak’

                Really, not local dialects?

                ‘and peninsular Malaysia, and by the Baba community in Malacca.’

                They pray to Allah too? Not god? Which Baba community church again had sermon in Bahasa Malaysia, please name one or two or as many as there is?

                ‘1. The word ‘Allah’ was a term used for the supreme God in a pantheon of gods, before the revelation of Islam. The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam ed., H. A. R. Gibb & J. H. Kramer and The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, ed. John L. Esposito, both affirm and support this contention.’

                This is not a Malaysia context. We are not objecting to the fact that Copt Arabs refering to Allah as God as well since that is the tongue there. Can’t say the same with the Mandarin, Tamil, English and local dialect tongue over here though.

                ‘ed. John L. Esposito, both affirm and support this contention.’

                John L Esposito can sell his books to Anwar and Zaid, he does not speaks for the Muslim the world over.

                ‘• The Kitab salat as-sawai or Christian catechisms in Malay written in 1514 and published around 1545,’

                Written by whom and published where? Just because the Jesuits had the work cut out early, does not make us all Christians are we? As for dates, how about an earlier date of Malays being Muslims.

                ‘Terengganu Inscription Stone (Malay: Batu Bersurat Terengganu; Jawi: باتو برسورت ترڠڬانو) is the oldest artifact with Jawi writing on it. The inscriptions, which are in Malay, believed to be written on 22 February 1303.[1] The artifact proves that Islam reached Terengganu earlier than 1326 or 1386.’

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terengganu_Inscription_Stone

                And how about this batu nisan dated year 903, historically speaking la, of course.

                ‘• The printed version of the Gospel of Matthew in Malay by A.C. Ruyl in 1629,’

                Printed where again? Sabah, Sarawak or Melaka? I need link too BTW…

                ‘• Malay-Latin Dictionary was printed in Rome in 1631 (The Dictionarium Malaicum-Latinum and Latinum – Malaicum)’

                Does not make the Romans belief in Allah do they? So why is this relevant again to our context again? Or Sabah and Sarawak if you must?

                ‘• The translation of Genesis by D. Brouwerius (1662),’

                Where was it printed? Sarawak? Please tell me some one had bought it in the street of KL also at that date? Or somewhere in Bukit Nenas if you must?

                ‘• M. Leijdecker’s translation (1733),

                • H.C. Klinkert’s translation (1879),

                • W.A. Bode’s translation (1938), and’

                Same as above. Please explain why this is relevant to our context first and foremost. When does all this bible made available in Sabah or Sarawak? By whom? Any public records kept by our government on the kemasukan or not? Otherwise any Tom, Dick and Harry also can story macam-macam? Kan?!

                ‘• The complete Malay Bible of 1731-1733 containing the word ‘Allah’ for God.’

                The Malay Archipelago with Selat Melaka sure was and still is important for the Jesuit, I don’t deny this. It does not mean that we are all Christians are we? Sabah and Sarawak Christians speaks standard Bahasa Malaysia and not local tribal dialects even before Malaysia? Dashyat! Another Kiasu project by the kiasus no less!

                ‘3. Therefore, from the very beginning, the word ‘Allah’ has been used in the liturgy, prayers and worship of those Christians who speak Bahasa Malaysia.’

                From when? What beginning? Beginning of time? Before the Big Bang? When please date and link to solid prove, written or batu bersurat is welcome. Cakap-cakap kosong tak mau!

                The funny thing is, if it is beginning before Malaysia was founded, then how can the Christians knows that the had actually speak Bahasa Malaysia? Even the Malays in the peninsulars (what more the Malays in Sabah and Sarawak) had its own dialects wor? Really? Even before DBP?

                ‘But for centuries, there has been no opposition or uproar about their use of ‘Allah’.’

                Like how many centuries again? Uproar started after LBL rulings after Pakiam had brought the issue to court. Like what uproar does the Christians want the Muslims to make again? Takkan no issues nak uproar? This is a new problem created by the Christian Extremists thus the uproar instead of centuries ago. Am I the only one laughing here?

                ‘1. In Semitic languages, the word ‘Allah’ has been widely used in the Middle East dating back to the 5th Century BC and up to the time of the expansion of Islam and the spread of the Arabic language in the 7th century AD.’

                Does the Christians in Sabah and Sarawak as well the Melaka Babas, speaks Aramaic? Are these people Semites to begin with? Or am I missing something here, as they do have loratul arabs? Anyone?

                ‘2. The translation of the Al-Kitab is not from the English translation but based on the Hebrew and Greek text of the Bible. In the Hebrew language, the word ‘God’ has the same root form as the Arabic language. So, when the word ‘God’ was first translated into Bahasa Malaysia, the translators merely followed the Arabic Christian usage and retained the word ‘Allah’.’

                And I thought they want to translate it to BM. Since they had retained the word from the Hebrew language as Allah for God, what they should be doing for now and do it right once and for all is to change it to Tuhan for God in Bahasa Malaysia is Tuhan. Look at the Rukun Negara.

                Since it was for Bahasa Malaysia translation and not Hebrew. Not Arabic. And definitely not Greek. So its Tuhan! Selesai masalah.

                ‘the translators merely followed the Arabic Christian usage and retained the word ‘Allah’.’

                No problem. What was made wrong then can be made right now. Once and for all!

                ‘3. As stated earlier, the word ‘Allah’ pre-dates Islam. It is not a creation of the Muslims and its existence does not begin in the Al-Quran.’

                No. Muhammad saw was the last prophet of Islam. The rest of the prophet was also prophets of Islam. Jesus is also the prophet of Islam.

                ‘Prophet Muhammad talked about Jesus
                Hadith: I am most close to Jesus, son of Mary, among the whole of mankind in this worldly life and the next life. They said: Allah’s Messenger how is it? Thereupon he said: Prophets are brothers in faith, having different mothers. Their religion is, however, one and there is no Apostle between us (between I and Jesus).’

                http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=IC1212-5350

                ‘Should Christians Substitute the word ‘Allah’ with ‘Tuhan’?’

                They should because that is what God means in Bahasa Malaysia. Duh!

                ‘1. In the Malay language, ‘Allah’ means ‘God’ and Tuhan means ‘Lord’. As is obvious when we read the Bible, both God and Lord are used in the Bible, and both have different connotations. Therefore ‘Allah’ cannot be substituted by ‘Tuhan’.’

                Wrong. Take it from me ok. God means Tuhan.

                Lord means Tuan.

                ~ and master, (jocular) a. husband, suami: my ~ and master is waiting for me at home, suami saya sedang menunggu saya di rumah; b. person in authority, tuan: according to our ~s and masters…, mengikut tuan-tuan kita…;

                Kamus Inggeris-Melayu Dewan

                Lord means Raja.

                n 1. ruler, raja, pemerintah: our sovereign ~, the king, raja kita yg berdaulat; 2. British peer, (orang) bangsawan British: shes going to marry a ~, dia akan berkahwin dgn orang bangsawan British; 3. feudal chief, pembesar;

                Kamus Inggeris-Melayu Dewan

                Orang suruh belajar Bahasa tak nak. Ini lah natijahnya! Kerajaan nak tambah masa untuk belajar BM pun tak nak sampai nak bawa Kerajaan Malaysia pi makhamah. Tapi kalau orang kata tak faham bahasa, marah pulak!

                ‘2. The word Tuhan has been applied to Jesus Christ and read as Tuhan Yesus.’

                Jesus Christ means Nabi Isa, according to Google translate-English to Malay. So tak ada masalah di situ.

                Kalau Lord Jesus pula ialah Tuhan Yesus, its Google Translate English to Malay, OK. Bukan saya kata!

                http://translate.google.com.my/#en/ms/Lord%20Jesus

                ‘If Christians are to substitute the word ‘Allah’ for Tuhan, it will render many Biblical references to God and Jesus incoherent because:’

                Well the confusion does not start with us, is it?

                ‘• The meaning of ‘Allah’ and Tuhan are different.’

                BINGO! SO WHY SO ADAMANT brader?!

                I say it again. Allah is Allah. Tuhan is God. You got it right the first time. Allah and Tuhan are different!

                So jangan nak menipu lagi. You said it yourself Herald, ALLAH AND TUHAN ARE DIFFERENT. So can we celebrate Hari Malaysia in peace now?

                ‘• This is obvious in just one example. In Isaiah chapter 41 and verse 13; also 43 : 3 and 51 : 15. “For I am the LORD, your GOD…” is translated as “Akulah TUHAN, ALLAH kamu…”. (ALKITAB : Berita Baik. 2001. 2nd edition. Published by the Bible Society of Malaysia).’

                Since when the Christian problems with their Holy Bible is the Muslims again?

                In our Holy Quran it is crystal clear that Allah is our Tuhan.

                إِنَّنِي أَنَا اللَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنَا فَاعْبُدْنِي وَأَقِمِ الصَّلَاةَ لِذِكْرِي

                “Sesungguhnya Akulah Allah; tiada tuhan melainkan Aku; oleh itu, sembahlah akan Daku, dan dirikanlah sembahyang untuk mengingati Daku. Surah Taha, Ayat 14

                http://firmanallahtaala.blogspot.com/2011/08/sesungguhnya-akulah-allah-tiada-tuhan.html

                ‘• It creates an absurd situation if Christians have to translate the biblical phrase ‘Lord God’ as Tuhan Tuhan. The repeated words Tuhan Tuhan indicates plural in Bahasa Malaysia, and creates the impression that

                Christians believe in many Gods, which is unacceptable.’

                1 in 3 or 3 in 1 is not many? Can somebody please tell me, 3 is how many again? In case my Melayu mind play tricks on me…

                ‘• Bahasa Malaysia-speaking Christians will not be able to affirm the deity of Jesus Christ and teach the doctrine of the Trinity as these two foundational words are essential to maintain and communicate these truths.’

                I can’t comment on this, since I’m still left confused at 3 actually 1. But for sure Allah is no deity.

                Well in English Surah Taha, Ayat 14 reads

                Sahih International
                Indeed, I am Allah . There is no deity except Me, so worship Me and establish prayer for My remembrance.

                As I’m not a lawyer like some here, I left it for them to answer the legal aspect brought up by the rest of the circular.

                1. Islam1st,

                  From what you say, the Jerusubang Christians are asserting that they translated the Hebrew word for God into ‘Allah’ in keeping with Arabic usage.

                  Then, I feel, they should translate the rest of their Bible into Arabic as well to be consistent with their insistence on keeping the Arabic form of the God word.

                  Then they should hold the service in their evangelical churches in the Arabic language too.

                  1. ‘From what you say, the Jerusubang Christians are asserting that they translated the Hebrew word for God into ‘Allah’ in keeping with Arabic usage.’

                    And mind you, Helen, ini bukan saya cakap OK. Ini Herald yang cakap dalam circular ini, (voice over-Yu Hang) Kenape, tak percaya? Klik sini

                    http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/When,-why-and-how-Christians-use-the-word-%E2%80%98Allah%E2%80%99-%E2%80%94-CFM-16735-36-1.html

                    ’2. The translation of the Al-Kitab is not from the English translation but based on the Hebrew and Greek text of the Bible. In the Hebrew language, the word ‘God’ has the same root form as the Arabic language. So, when the word ‘God’ was first translated into Bahasa Malaysia, the translators merely followed the Arabic Christian usage and retained the word ‘Allah’.’

                    This has been taken verbatim from Herald Malaysia Online.

                    1. No issue of not believing you arose.

                      I was merely being careful about attribution (to the speaker). It’s a lifetime habit carried over from scribbling notes as a reporter.

                      e.g. Rather than saying — “Din Turtle blogged that it was a dark and stormy night in Dungun on Wednesday” (meaning I didn’t read it myself)

                      I might prefer to phrase the sentence as “Islam1st read from Din Turtle’s blog that it was a dark and stormy night in Dungun on Wednesday” (which in no way implies that I disbelieve what DT says about the dark and stormy weather but only clarifying I that didn’t see the storm myself).

                    2. Faham Helen. Its just that I over dramatise the whole thing, only to prove for those who wanted to see la, kan, the hypocrisy practiced by these people!

                      I just thought, BINGO alone is not enough and I should skimmed it MORE!

                      Thus the Yu Hang VO. Hehe.

                2. Islam1st

                  Feel free to pose your questions to the Herald. There is a comment box at the bottom of the article. (refer link)

                  1. Why? You cuci tangan and wants nothing to do with them already? For someone who had post the link here, the least you could do, if you don’t have the capacity nor the conviction to defend it, is to link this to them.

                    For Christians sake, the burden is on you. As far as I’m concerned these are merely lies and I don’t have the time to entertain liars. For what I did was merely a favour to you, HH, so that you may see, since you posted the link here. Otherwise I won’t bother.
                    We Muslims are never confused. The same can’t be said about you, CFM and the lots!

                    1. Islam1st

                      You asked for the link. I provide. FOC.

                      Quote: “For Christians sake, the burden is on you.”

                      What burden? Frankly speaking, I am under no illusion I can resolve a 1000 over years Christian-Islam struggle. I’m just being real, K?

                      Quote: ” I’m concerned these are merely lies ..”

                      If you truly believe the Herald needs to be corrected, just let them know. It’s a fight I’m not getting involved though.

                      Quote: “We Muslims are never confused. The same can’t be said about you,”

                      Speak for yourself but please don’t speak for me or Christianity. It’s just too presumptuous on your part if you do.

                      Cheers

                    2. Dear HH,

                      ‘You asked for the link. I provide. FOC.’

                      I have asked for the link? Which link? What link? I

                      I did not ask for the herald link. My question posed to the poster above is as open as the blue ocean.

                      He kept mum, for there is no of such link.

                      Then the hero in you, for whatever sake, provided the Herald link.

                      Now don’t tell me you did it blindly without first trying to read and understand the claims or at least believe in it.

                      Or did you, really?

                      ‘Quote: “We Muslims are never confused. The same can’t be said about you,”

                      Speak for yourself but please don’t speak for me or Christianity. It’s just too presumptuous on your part if you do.’

                      So, WHY THE CONFUSION?

                      1)The Hebrew Scriptures clearly teach that God has a begotten Son. The Old Testament reference can be found in Psalm 2:6-7, which states:

                      “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. (7) I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.”

                      Quran, Sura Al Ikhlas, Ayat 112-Sahih International

                      Say, “He is Allah , [who is] One,
                      Allah , the Eternal Refuge.
                      He neither begets nor is born,
                      Nor is there to Him any equivalent.”

                      Why the confusion?

                      In Psalm 2:7, the Hebrew word yalad is used, Strong’s 3205. This word refers to an actual begetting, bearing, birthing and siring. Therefore, this passage clearly teaches that the God of the Bible has an actual begotten Son. As fulfilled in the New Testament, Luke 1:30-32, 34-35 declares that He was born of a virgin:

                      “And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. (31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David…(34) Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? (35) And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

                      When referring to the New Testament, Acts 13:33 cites Psalm 2:7 indicating that it was Jesus Christ, born of a virgin, who is the fulfillment of God’s begotten Son. Acts 13:33 attests: “God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”

                      It is also significant to note that, in Acts 13:33, the Greek word gennao is used, Strong’s 1080. Regarding this word’s definition, it is the equivalent to the Hebrew word yalad. This word also refers to an actual begetting, bearing, birthing and siring.’

                      It seems to be me HH, that you and your CFM lots are rather, shall we say, LOST?!

                    3. Islam1st

                      Quote: “My question posed to the poster above is as open as the blue ocean.”

                      You asked a legit question for proof. The Herald article did answer most of your question. So what is the issue? If you are sincere in seeking answers, I trust the article by the Herald should be most helpful.

                      With regards to scriptural arguments, I do not wish to prolong. While I can easily google and refute, but, what is the point in parroting other people’s view? I am honest enough to admit I do not know Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew. So I am not exactly the right person to be arguing about scripture translation.

                      ******* taken from the internet****************

                      ** if you are interested in the full refute, visit http://www.satyatoday.org/begotten%20Son%20of%20God.php

                      The Hebrew word is ‘YALAD’ is used in Psalm 2:7 and literally it does mean ‘BEGOTTEN’ as can be seen above. However, the meaning of ‘BEGOTTEN’ when used for Christ in Hebrews 5:5 (i.e ginomai) cannot be literal for ‘ GINOMAI ’ has allegorical meaning too apart from literal. Let us see :-

                      “ Helps word studies

                      1096 gínomai – properly, to emerge, become, transitioning from one point (realm, condition) to another. 1096(gínomai) fundamentally means “become” (becoming, became) so it is not an exact equivalent to the ordinary equative verb “to be” (is, was, will be) as with 1510 /eimí(1511 /eínai, 2258 /ēn).
                      1096 (ginomai) means “to become, and signifies a change of condition, state or place” (Vine, Unger, White, NT, 109).

                      M. Vincent, “1096 (gínomai) means to come into being/manifestation implying motion, movement, or growth” (at 2 Pet 1:4). Thus it is used for God’s actions as emerging from eternity and becoming (showing themselves) in time (physical space).”

                      Source :- http://concordances.org/greek/1096.htm

                      ‘Ginomai’ can also be referred to a change of state or condition or being transited from one form to another and that is what the Holy Bible means when it speaks of Christ as the begotten (not ONLY BEGOTTEN) Son of God in Psalm 2:7 which can be corroborated from the following :-

                      “ But God raised Him from the dead. He was seen for many days by those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses to the people. And we declare to you glad tidings—that promise which was made to the fathers. God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm:

                      You are My Son,
                      Today I have begotten You ” . Acts of the Apostles (13:30-33) NKJV

                      God raised Jesus from the dead and in that sense, He was resurrected back to life from death or underwent a change of form i.e dead to alive (resurrected).
                      So the implication here is this that God brought forth Jesus Christ from death to life or raised Him from the dead.

                      Psalm 2:7 was actually a foretelling about Christ’s resurrection which fulfilled when He was raised from death to life.

                      And the same is what Hebrews (5:5) means that Jesus Christ was raised back to life from death by ‘ginomai’.

                      And consequently, the Hebrew word ‘Yalad’ (in Psalm 2:7) and the greek word ‘ginomai’ (in Hebrews 5:5) doesn’t have literal meanings but allegorical or metaphorical or in a figurative sense.

                      (3) A view at Qur’an’s strawman attack on the Christian standpoint in this concern.

                      The Qur’an multiple times accuses Christians of believing or saying that Jesus Christ is the biological Son of God. Few illustrations of the same are as under :-

                      “They say: “(God) Most Gracious has begotten a son!” Indeed ye have put forth a thingmost monstrous! ” Surah Maryam verses 88-89; Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s Translation

                      “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!” Surah Toubah (Repentance) verse 30; Pickthall’s Translation

                      And now lets see what does the Qur’an understands by God having a Son :-

                      “Yet, they join the jinns as partners in worship with Allah, though He has created them (the jinns), and they attribute falsely without knowledge sons and daughters to Him. Be He Glorified and Exalted above (all) that they attribute to Him. He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife? He created all things and He is the All-Knower of everything.” Surah Anam verses 100-101; Hilali- Khan’s Translation

                      Have a look at the rhetoric question that Qur’an poses :-

                      “He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife?”

                      Now let me ask my muslim brethren that did any Christian ever state, “God has a wife through whom He begat the Lord Jesus Christ ” JUSTIFYING HIS/HER STATEMENT FROM THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES ?

                      Or does the Christian scriptures say anywhere as above ?

                    4. ‘Now let me ask my muslim brethren that did any Christian ever state, “God has a wife through whom He begat the Lord Jesus Christ ” JUSTIFYING HIS/HER STATEMENT FROM THE CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES ?’

                      Well I don’t know, you guys uses Yalad and Ginomai, from Hebrew to Greek, faster than Captain Kirk of Star Trek transport himself from A to B.

                      HH, correct me if I’m wrong. Are you refering this:

                      ‘One of the basic fundamental principles of Christianity is the concept of the Godhead, or Trinity. Christians do not believe in three Gods; they believe in a Triune God. They are taught that the LORD manifested Himself to the world in three ways. Secondly, His Word was made flesh in the form of His only begotten Son, John 1:1,14. And finally, His Holy Spirit was manifested to the world. In John 16:13-15, Jesus describes the Spirit as follows:

                      “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. (14) He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. (15) All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”

                      Furthermore, in John 14:16-18, Jesus describes the Holy Spirit as “another Comforter:”

                      “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; (17) Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. (18) I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.”

                      According to the Book of Acts, this was fulfilled in the upper room on the day of Pentecost. Acts 2:1-4 explains that, on that day, the Holy Ghost descended upon the disciples and they all began to speak in tongues:

                      “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. (2) And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. (3) And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. (4) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

                      In conclusion, the God of the Bible manifested Himself to the world in the person of Jesus Christ when His Word was made flesh, John 1:1,14. Furthermore, He manifested Himself to the world when His Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples in the upper room on the day of Pentecost, Acts 2:1-4. This is a brief illustration of the Godhead, or Trinity: three persons in one God or God manifesting Himself in three persons. ‘

                      Right?

                      So again, HH dear, WHY THE CONFUSION?

              2. I do have some question though…

                1)The Hebrew Scriptures clearly teach that God has a begotten Son. The Old Testament reference can be found in Psalm 2:6-7, which states:

                “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. (7) I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.”

                Quran, Sura Al Ikhlas, Ayat 112-Sahih International

                Say, “He is Allah , [who is] One,
                Allah , the Eternal Refuge.
                He neither begets nor is born,
                Nor is there to Him any equivalent.”

                Why the confusion?

                In Psalm 2:7, the Hebrew word yalad is used, Strong’s 3205. This word refers to an actual begetting, bearing, birthing and siring. Therefore, this passage clearly teaches that the God of the Bible has an actual begotten Son. As fulfilled in the New Testament, Luke 1:30-32, 34-35 declares that He was born of a virgin:

                “And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. (31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David…(34) Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? (35) And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

                When referring to the New Testament, Acts 13:33 cites Psalm 2:7 indicating that it was Jesus Christ, born of a virgin, who is the fulfillment of God’s begotten Son. Acts 13:33 attests: “God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”

                It is also significant to note that, in Acts 13:33, the Greek word gennao is used, Strong’s 1080. Regarding this word’s definition, it is the equivalent to the Hebrew word yalad. This word also refers to an actual begetting, bearing, birthing and siring.

                So again, WHY THE CONFUSION?

                1. Islam1st…memang sudah terang lagi bersuluh….
                  manusia jenis mereka ini tiada bernafsu lain kerana telah jelas kita telah diingatkan oleh Allah SWT bahawa sesungguhnya mereka tidak akan membiarkan kita aman sehinggalah kita mengikuti (kehendak) mereka….

                  1. Semestinya saudara. Sesungguhnya kebenaran Al Quran itu tidak pernah disanggah!

                    Bagi mereka yang melihat tapi buta, yang mendengar tapi pekak saja yang berprasangka buruk!

          2. Friend, your after thoughts is without any conviction. Please elaborate when and how the Muslims in Malaysia had created havoc unless provoked. Do you know why in 2009 UMNO become alerted?

            Do you understand or digest the political shift or how it was mannered to fit a Christian agenda using Hindus, Buddhist and the rest against Islam? Maybe a revisit to South Sudan might refresh why the Muslims are apprehensive of a Christian agenda and rightly so in Malaysia. Let’s not be hypocrites as and when it suits us.

            1. re: “to fit a Christian agenda using Hindus, Buddhist and the rest against Islam?”

              True.

              I hope the Malay-Muslims will realise that the conniving Christians are exploiting and using Hindus and Buddhists such as the Nut Graph articles which talked about “the state’s prohibition against the use of ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims” when it is actually ONLY THE CHRISTIANS who are picking a fight with Muslims and certainly not the Buddhists or Hindus.

              I also hope the Malay-Muslims can see how the conniving Christians are using the very same Politics of Hate, like MiNY said about pitting the Hindus, Buddhists and the rest of the minority religions against Islam. The Christians are guilty of incitement to hate.

              1. Christian Extremists no less! We hear you Helen.

                But its seems for most non-Muslims, especially Cina DAP, its always ‘us’ against the Melayu apartheid wor?

                You with your understanding is very rare indeed.

              2. Helen

                Quote: ““the state’s prohibition against the use of ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims” when it is actually ONLY THE CHRISTIANS who are picking a fight with Muslims and certainly not the Buddhists or Hindus.”

                Yes, it is a Christian vs Islam fight at the moment, the ‘Allah’ saga unfolding now in court is being fought on constitutional grounds on the right to practice one’s faith. Yes, it’s very much a non-Muslim issue as opposed to a Christian only thing.

                Quote: “I also hope the Malay-Muslims can see how the conniving Christians are using the very same Politics of Hate, like MiNY said about pitting the Hindus, Buddhists and the rest of the minority religions against Islam. The Christians are guilty of incitement to hate.”

                Christians are guilty of incitement to hate? The Christians pitting the Hindus and Buddhists and the rest of the minority religions against Islam? Such assumption is without merit and to assume the Hindus and Buddhists are non-entities in this saga are faulty. The recent debacle that comes to mind would be the ordered demolition of the surau accidentally ‘used’ by the Buddhists and the rampant demolition of Hindu shrines throughout the country.

                Christianity is a peaceful religion. The Christians are a docile lot. Sometimes too meek, but heck, that ‘s the essence of their faith teachings.

                1. re: “the ‘Allah’ saga unfolding now in court is being fought on constitutional grounds on the right to practice one’s faith. Yes, it’s very much a non-Muslim issue as opposed to a Christian only thing.”

                  It is only Christian applicant(s) who are in court. No Buddhist or Hindu has sued for the right to use/publish the word ‘Allah’.

                  re: “The recent debacle that comes to mind would be the ordered demolition of the surau accidentally ‘used’ by the Buddhists and the rampant demolition of Hindu shrines throughout the country.”

                  Neither the Buddhists in the Sedili surau nor the Hindus at the shrines are using Allah.

                  re: “Christianity is a peaceful religion.”

                  Christianity is a blood-soaked religion. It wiped out countless native civilizations and peoples, putting them to the sword.

                  re: “The Christians are a docile lot.”

                  Google ‘conquistadors’.

                  1. As I had mentioned before that the Church is treating this as a constituitional issue,ie, the right to practice their religion, is a highly irresponsible action. This turns the entire issue into Christians vs Muslim struggle pits both religions. So who’s the turning this into a class of religions ? Sometimes I yearn for ISA and Tun Mahatir’s rule…these Christian Talibans would be in the Grand Church of Kamunting in those days…..

                  2. Quote: “It is only Christian applicant(s) who are in court. No Buddhist or Hindu has sued for the right to use/publish the word ‘Allah’.”

                    Of course not. Neither the Buddhist nor Hindu say their convenant with God started from the Torah as with Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In correct order of seniority too.

                    Quote: “Neither the Buddhists in the Sedili surau nor the Hindus at the shrines are using Allah.”

                    Yes, but they get demolished too anyway. Your early contention was the conniving Christians are trying to sow seeds of discontentment into other faiths to rally them onto their side. This just show the seeds were sown in other faiths long before the Allah row.

                    Other faiths no doubt have their own experiences to share on ‘brushes’ with the state sanctioned religious authorities.

                    From custodial dispute to body snatching. Temples demolition to denial of construction permit.

                    Quote: “Christianity is a blood-soaked religion. It wiped out countless native civilizations and peoples, putting them to the sword.”

                    The same could be said about Islam. The Christians acknowledged their folly during the Middle ages. Christians did not try to weasel out of their dark past. What has happened can never be undone. It is a bloody blemish in their history they have to live with.

                    Has any bloody uprising and coup staged in the name of Jesus happened recently?

                    1. re: ” Your early contention was the conniving Christians are trying to sow seeds of discontentment into other faiths to rally them onto their side.”

                      The conniving Christians are trying to sow seeds of discontentment among other faiths to rally the Buddhists and Hindus to the side of the evangelistas in the fight to own Allah.

                    2. Well with or without Bush, Sr and Jr, it seems, with the current Christians Ultimatum to Bashar Asad, the Christian Crusades are alive and kicking, is it not, HH?

                      Hail the second coming to fast track the Armagedon, shall we?

                    3. Islam1st

                      “Quote: it seems, with the current Christians Ultimatum to Bashar Asad, the Christian Crusades are alive and kicking, is it not, HH?”

                      You are mistaken. Assad is more of an ally to the Christians than the Islamists that region ever was. It is in the interest of the Middleast Christian community Assad not be removed by force.

                    4. NO you are mistaken.

                      http://islam1st.org/2013/01/anhar-kochneva-askar-pemberontak.html

                      ‘Assad is more of an ally to the Christians than the Islamists that region ever was.’

                      Right. So the Christians, Assad allies armed soldier of fortune to kill Muslims in Syria under the watch of Assad, much to the detriments of Syria and Syrian people? [YouTube]

                      ‘It is in the interest of the Middleast Christian community Assad not be removed by force.’

                      I know that he enjoys the support of Syrian Christians, but not the whole of Middle East though. Got link or not? [YouTube]

                      The Crusade is coming to Syria, next.

                2. “Christianity is a peaceful religion. The Christians are a docile lot. Sometimes too meek, but heck, that ‘s the essence of their faith teachings.” –
                  =============================
                  Seriously ?? This is the religion that massacared more innocent people than all other religions combined. Can I have the name stuff that you been smoking lately ?

                  1. calvinsankaran

                    Quote: :”This is the religion that massacared more innocent people than all other religions combined. Can I have the name stuff that you been smoking lately?”

                    Don’t confuse Christians who kill with Christianity.

                    Christianity is explicit about its stand on killing. There is no justification for killing in the bible under any circumstances, There is no incentive, reward or virgins for killing in Christianity.

                    For all the man-made ills in Christianity, its positive contribution to mankind is undeniable. And its beneficiaries extend beyond its followers. Let’s start with women’s right, education and abolition of slavery.

                    1. What about you confuse Muslim from Islam? Can’t the same be said about Muslim who kills or who commit coup to Islam stance on these issues?

                      Lets not forget it was you who had blamed the religion for some south asians tribalism!

                    2. Islam1st

                      Quote: “Lets not forget it was you who had blamed the religion for some south asians tribalism!”

                      I’ve no such recollection . You have to be more specific.

                    3. ‘I’ve no such recollection . You have to be more specific.’

                      Of course you don’t. We have the Baling Batu Sembunyi Tangan saying, not for nothing, isn’t it. Its best describe the selective amnesia you and some tuak drinking ayya often had.

                      HH, try potong hidung isteri, got it?

                    4. Just when you thought HH had done some soul searching along with the Herald and CFM, here we being introduced again to HY, taking all the shit to himself. Same MO, time and again.

                      [edited-deleted]

                      HY, I want to start taking you seriously from now on. Try rebut me on these thread. Take your pick.

                      a)islam1st | September 12, 2013 at 1:24 am

                      b)islam1st | September 12, 2013 at 1:42 am

                      If you can, of course, lets not forget about the caveat there, shall we?!

                    5. Islam1st

                      OK, the nose cutting Pakistanis. You contended the nose cutting practises by Pakistani husbands are a cultural thing. Not Islamic.

                      Fair enough.

                      ***nothing to do with this thread***

                      I first brought up Pakistan because I was asked to explain what I meant by extreme Islam vs moderate Islam. I used countries as example.

                      That naturally begged the question are Muslims defined by their religion or their culture? Culture should be observed, only if it is not contradictory to the teachings of scripture/God. Fair enough?

                      If a professed Islamic country like Pakistan can at the same breath proclaim itself Islam and yet not fully adhere to the Islamic law (in letting these crimes go mostly unpunished), it demonstrate certain inconsistency with regards to the context of ‘Islamic countries and practices’ across the board. For lay person like me, the differences or discrepancy is translated as extreme or moderate.

                    6. HH, same can be said about Christians and Christianity. If you can understand why Christians don’t behave as opposed to, perhaps their teachings, then why the BIG puzzled on Islam and Muslims?

                      Is it really hard for you to understand human nature/errors?

                      Does the Tamil Tigers suicide bombers being taught by their Hindu scriptures?

                      Common sense la brader!

                    7. Islam1st

                      Quote: “Is it really hard for you to understand human nature/errors?
                      Does the Tamil Tigers suicide bombers being taught by their Hindu scriptures??”

                      I have no problem acknowledging human error or people using religion for selfish reasons. And you know what? If you are honest, you should acknowledge Islam being used for less than noble reason.

                      You talked about Tamil Tigers. Do Tamil Tigers kill in the name of their God? Do they tell young men and women to blow themselves up to glorify their God with promises of salvation and virgins in their other life?

                      There are people who kill and then there are people who kill in the name of God.

                      I don’t know. Some Muslims say Islam is a religion of peace. They may be right….I don’t know. Muslims do have an obligation to their faith, if not their God to acknowledge all these hanky panky manipulation done in the name of their God and put an end to it.

                    8. Oh BTW HH, here some potong hidung cerita I have googled for you FOC.

                      Malas la you!

                      Cerita SATU

                      ‘Q-Is it true Native Americans cut off the noses of adulterous wives? Sounds like European propaganda about “savages.”

                      A-Evidently some did, which unarguably is savage behavior.’

                      Read more here
                      http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2939/did-native-americans-cut-off-the-noses-of-adulterous-wives

                      Cerita DUA

                      ‘Realizing eventually that the brothers were making fun of her, the humiliated and jealous Surpanakha attacked Sita but was thwarted by Lakshmana, who cut off her nose and sent her back to Lanka.’

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surpanakha

                      Cerita TIGA

                      ‘In Egypt, at the time of the Pharaoh Ramses III (XX dynasty, 1192-1166 BC), a famous trial was held involving those responsible for the so-called “great harem conspiracy” some of whom were condemned to mutilation of the nose and ears, including two of the judges, responsible for having succumbed to the seduction of some of the women involved in the plot. Indeed, more than one century earlier, General Horemheb, who had become Pharaoh during the XVIII dynasty, had made a decree which punished, with deportation and amputation of the nose, magistrates who had taken advantage of their role.’

                      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2689568/

                      Read more. Don’t be so malas okay!

                      HH, do have a great reading and the next time again, when you tries to belittle Islam and Muslims, lets first have some respect for yourself, will you?!

                    9. HH dear,

                      ‘Do Tamil Tigers kill in the name of their God?’

                      I don’t know. I can’t imagine what their motives are. Do you? You speak for the Tamil Tigers now?

                      ‘Do they tell young men and women to blow themselves up to glorify their God with promises of salvation and virgins in their other life?’

                      Who did? If you can’t name names, how can we get to the bottom if this?

                      ‘If a professed Islamic country like Pakistan can at the same breath proclaim itself Islam and yet not fully adhere to the Islamic law (in letting these crimes go mostly unpunished), it demonstrate certain inconsistency with regards to the context of ‘Islamic countries and practices’ across the board. For lay person like me, the differences or discrepancy is translated as extreme or moderate.’

                      Geez, really? So what do you think about this?

                      http://sabahancrew.blogspot.com/2012/08/gambar-makan-bayi-di-china.html

                      Or this.

                      ‘A town in the southern province of Canton (Guangdong) is now on trend taking baby herbal soup to increase overall health and stamina and the power of sexual performance in particular.’

                      http://www.globaltruth.net/side112.html

                      Does that define the religion of the people over there? Are you blaming Buddhism and Ancestor Worship now?

                      I don’t. But with your dumb down thinking its not hard to gauge where lies the blame!

                    10. Islam1st

                      Bro, your argument is all over the place.

                      Quote: “You speak for the Tamil Tigers now?”

                      You were the one who brought up Tamil Tigers. I can tell you the LTTE did not kill in the name of their God. Period.

                      Quote: “Who did? If you can’t name names, how can we get to the bottom if this?”

                      It is disingenuous of you to totally brush off the possibility of militia jihadist group recruiting young suicide bombers using the name of your God. You want names? Why? So you can do a background check to verify my claim?

                      I can’t recall the names or faces of suicide bomb victims either, does that mean no one died? Not a child, woman, innocent bystander died when the jihadist blew himself up in the crowd?

                      http://al-shorfa.com/en_GB/articles/meii/features/2013/09/10/feature-01

                      Quote: “Does that define the religion of the people over there? Are you blaming Buddhism and Ancestor Worship now?”

                      What has Buddhism got to do with the Chinese? The PRC was founded by Mao in 1949 and it is a Communist country. (still is, though I say a capitalist-communist combi) Communists do not have religion. Mao called religion ‘opium’ and he subscribed to atheistic socialism of Marxism-Leninism.

                      Quote: “I don’t. But with your dumb down thinking its not hard to gauge where lies the blame!”

                      Christians have no qualms accepting the dark chapter in their faith during the Middleages etc. We learned from our mistake and move on. We don’t bask ourselves in denial and get all hyped up when others mention the fallacy of our ways while whining how misunderstood our religion is.

                      I’m tired with this topic. Like I said, it serves no purpose when I am talking and you take refuge in your fortress of denial.

                      I’ll have to stop here.

                    11. ‘Bro, your argument is all over the place.’

                      Maybe it’s you that is easily confused! No?

                      So, WHY THE CONFUSION?

                      ‘You were the one who brought up Tamil Tiger.’

                      Yes I did. To give you a breath of fresh air, so to speak. A different perspective perhaps of humans, being humans and the motives behind their actions apart from Muslims and Christians, for which we have talked about.

                      ‘I can tell you the LTTE did not kill in the name of their God. Period.’

                      So you did speaks for the Tamil Tigers then.

                      Here watch this for a change.

                      http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b6e_1215088397

                      ‘It is disingenuous of you to totally brush off the possibility of militia jihadist group recruiting young suicide bombers using the name of your God. You want names? Why? So you can do a background check to verify my claim?

                      I can’t recall the names or faces of suicide bomb victims either, does that mean no one died? Not a child, woman, innocent bystander died when the jihadist blew himself up in the crowd?’

                      I want you to be specific. Your baling batu sembunyi tangan act was understood, but I don’t want to simply assume.

                      OK.

                      But you seem oblivious to the fact that Muslim countries, as we speak, have been raining bombs, thanks to thousand of Fighter Jets and Drones, from the Christians in the name of the Crusades?

                      I’m sure you can’t recall the names and the faces either. Me too. It’s just too many of them anyway. And you have the cheeks to say “Christianity is a peaceful religion. The Christians are a docile lot. Sometimes too meek, but heck, that ‘s the essence of their faith teachings.” And the Pakistanis potong hidung in the name of Allah and Islam?

                      What about the Inquisitions, that took place all over Europe? Christians, Jews and some Muslims are not spared by this act in the name of Christian’s God nonetheless. Whatever that was, then.

                      And what about the Christians journeys into the so called New World? Do you know what they did to the Filipinos? What about the Latin Americans? While we are at it, lets talk about what they did to the Malays and the so called Indonesians? Do you need links?

                      You don’t read history do you?

                      How do you enjoy your reading on the rest of the ‘potong hidung’ stories? Are they appears to be Muslims or Pakistanis to you?

                      ‘What has Buddhism got to do with the Chinese? The PRC was founded by Mao in 1949 and it is a Communist country. (still is, though I say a capitalist-communist combi) Communists do not have religion. Mao called religion ‘opium’ and he subscribed to atheistic socialism of Marxism-Leninism.’

                      So it’s not that simple isn’t it? There you go. You at last understood the very thing I wanted you to see. It’s not too late HH. Repent!

                      BTW HH, while you proudly telling HY that you ‘dislike getting into scriptural arguments. There is no end going thru and forth’, the secular you have the gut and conviction to say this,

                      ‘Of course not. Neither the Buddhist nor Hindu say their convenant with God started from the Torah as with Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In correct order of seniority too.’

                      In answering calvinsankaran.

                      Boy or boy. For someone who dislike going back and forth talking about religion, you have no moral to stop yourself from making stupid and irresponsible remarks like the one above. I taught you know zilch about scriptures and honestly wants nothing to do with it.

                      FYI, HH, Islam was never the ‘adik kecil’ of Christianity. NEVER. We believe since time immemorial Allah SWT had sent countless Prophets to mankind. Mind you too, Abraham as was never a Jew nor that he teaches Judaism. And surely Jesus as was not sent to introduce a new religion either,

                      Matthew 5:17

                      Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

                      http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-5-17/
                      – King James Bible “Authorized Version”, Cambridge Edition

                      And so did Prophet Muhammad saw. Islam was never anew religion. It was never a new law. So it does not play ‘adik kecil’ to Judaism and Christianity. Period.

                      And who says I know a lot about scriptures either. The Herald lies was rebutted mainly through linguistic means than scriptural means. If you read it carefully. Mostly are pretty linguistics. No?

                      But in all seriousness, I don’t think you have the capacity to rebut me linguistically do you.

                      Kalau Bahasa Malaysia pun lemah, macam mana nak berbahas, ye dak?

                      Yam Pui!

                      And watch a movie [YouTube] for change, I don’t think you can stand the book though!

                      Lets have some culture in you, shall we? Don’t be so typical, OK?

  1. That’s correct. Allah adalah milik Muslim Malaysia terutamanya Muslim UMNO. Because only in Malaysia, the Malay especially is so easy to be confused by just one word. By just seeing this word, they would believe the Bible is the words of God. Due to this, it is utmost important to suppress the Christian from using this word.

    1. ‘Allah adalah milik Muslim Malaysia terutamanya Muslim UMNO. Because only in Malaysia, the Malay especially is so easy to be confused by just one word. By just seeing this word, they would believe the Bible is the words of God. Due to this, it is utmost important to suppress the Christian from using this word.’

      Here we go again. Funny la u!

        1. Yup. God is Tuhan in Malay. OKM the Doctor takkan tak tahu pasal ni. But then again BM among the non Malays is like bahasa Aramaic to us all!

          Oik was way ahead by giving that scary example on how Allah SWT will be insulted should we go the Indonesian way, not that this will make him less of a God anyway, I might add!

          And we as the hamba-hamba Allah simply cannot entertain the very idea thus the oppositions!

          Rukun Negara pun jelas…kepercayaan kepada Tuhan digunapakai sebab tak nak bagi yang tidak percaya kepada Allah SWT offended or terasa hati, thus the nama khas, Allah SWT tidak digunakan!

          1. The real probem actually was they don’t understand bahasa malaysia, period. They tried to translated the bible with their limited bahasa malaysia vocabulary thinking they already know how the tatabahasa dan perbendaharaan kata been used.

            Unbeknown to them, that in bahasa malaysia, there’s a lot more they need to learn. For example just thinking the word brilliant will bring you with a lot of word in bahasa malaysia like bijak, pandai, bijaksana, berilmu, serba tahu, cerdik, and etc etc. Each have a different used but with the same meaning.

            The issue can be solved if they refering to master in bahasa malaysia to translate the bible, but they didn’t do that. They just take the word Allah and thinking it the right word to descripte the God word. And fight for it like it is their God name.

            They don’t do that. They just want to used whatever they think they want thinking that is the prefect translation while ignoring everything people try to point out to them. Like they the master of bahasa malaysia but the one who fight it can be descripe bahasa berterabur when speaking in Malay. Duh…..

            :( sarah

            1. Same goes to the Belandas yang kahwin wanita Jawa yang terjemahkan bible. These are pendatang, penjajah lebih tepat lagi, yang bukan native speakers. Sama macam alih bahasa yang terdapat pada Li Channel milik jerusubang group. Ketawa terbahak2 bila kita tonton!

              As for non native speaker, the same be said about Munsyi Abdullah. He is not a Tun Sri Lanang, is he, lets not kid ourself.

              But of course kalau nak menipu macam Herald dan CFM, semua dia orang sapu, macam Eposito!

              1. Yeh, they didn’t know or don’t want to know it’s not as easy a they thinks at all. After all telur ayam and ayam telur are two different things. Try to translate this two and then translate it back to bahasa malaysia ;D.

                :P sarah

                1. Lagi keributan tentang Alkitab.

                  Perkataan Tuan dan Tuhan.

                  ‘Dalam kitab suci Nasrani bahasa Melayu beraksara Latin terjemahan Brouwerius yang muncul pada tahun 1668, untuk kata yang dalam bahasa Yunaninya, Kyrios, dan sebutan ini diperuntukkan bagi Isa Almasih, diterjemahkannya menjadi tuan. Coba kita periksa itu dalam buku kelima Perjanjian Baru, dari bagian surat injili Paulus kepada umat di Roma. Kita baca bagian 1:1-4, yaitu, “Paulo Jesu Christo pounja hamba, Apostolo bapangil, bertsjerei pada Deos pounja Evangelio, (Nang dia daulou souda djandji derri Nabbi Nabbinja, dalam Sagrada Scriptoura). Derri Annanja lacki lacki (jang souda berjadi derri bidji David dalam daging: Jang dengan coassa souda caliatan jang Annac Deos, dalam Spirito yang bersaksiakan carna bangon derri matti) artinya Jesu Christon Tuan cami.”

                  Berhubung terjemahan Brouwerius ini dianggap sulit, antara lain banyaknya serapan kata bahasa Portugis, dan karenanya hanya mudah dipakai di kalangan komunitas bekas-bekas budak Portugis, para Mardijker, maka timbul gagasan orang-orang saleh di antara bedebah-bedebah VOC untuk menerjemahkan kembali seluruh bagian Alkitab: Perjanjian Lama dan Perjanjian Baru dengan bahasa Melayu yang benar-benar bagus. Tugas itu diserahkan kepada Melchior Leijdecker, pendeta tentara yang berlatar pendidikan kedokteran.

                  Melalui terjemahan Leijdecker-lah kita menemukan perubahan harafiah dari Tuan menjadi Tuhan. Dalam kitab terjemahannya ini, ‘Elkitab, ija itu segala suat Perdjandjian Lama dan Baharuw atas titah Segala Tuawan Pemarentah Kompanija, pada perikop yang sama dengan terjemahan Brouwerius di atas, teksnya adalah, “Pawlus sa’awrang hamba ‘Isaj ‘Elmeseih, Rasul jang terdoa, jang tasakuw akan memberita Indjil Allah, (Jang dihulu telah dedjandjinja awleh Nabijnja, didalam Suratan yang khudus). Akan Anaknja laki (jang sudah djadi deri beneh Daud atas perij daging: Jang telah detantukan Anakh Allah dengan kawasa atas perij Rohu-’Itakhdis, deri pada kabangkitan deri antara awrang mati,) janij ‘Isaj Elmeseih Tuhan kamij.”’

                  http://jalanibrahim.wordpress.com/2011/04/09/asal-mula-kata-tuan-menjadi-kata-tuhan-dalam-bahasa-indonesia/

                  Gua lagi pusing nih?! Gimana ya? CFM bisa jelasin ngak?

    2. Really!!! suppressing the Christians in Malaysia. I wonder what the Hindus would say when the Christians were in a free flow converting the Hindus into Christianity by dangling the material carrot in the 80s to the neglected & deprived plantation workers during the development process.

      Are you sure Christians are suppressed? Learn to argue with substance not just tembak-tembak. This is the problem with any gullible religious fanatics, jumping the gun without identifying the root cause. Religion is not there to create a division for one’s own fancy on which is better but rather a unity amongst us on the basis of humanity without regard to the any religion.

      It is like in a family, all five fingers are not alike but what holds it together is the tolerance and compromise without infringing into another’s space. Why create animosity and cast speculation without understanding the root problem induced by political hillbillies.

        1. Quote: “As we speak these evangelistas are using money, pretty girls and music to convert poor Indian youths…..”

          … and this is supposed to be bad? Bear in mind Christianity stresses on liberty and choices. People are free to walk away anytime.

          1. ‘People are free to walk away anytime.’

            And how can they ever leave, for they have not sinned do they?

            John 19:16-18 “Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away. (17) And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: (18) Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.”

            The Holy Scriptures specifically teach that Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, was crucified approximately two thousand years ago for the sins of mankind. They hung Him on a cross to die a criminal’s death. 1 John 2:2 further testifies: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”

            According to the Bible, everyone can achieve redemption and everlasting life through God’s only begotten Son and His shed blood at the cross. The wages of sin is death, Romans 6:23, and Jesus died for all of us so that we can live forever. This is the Good News of God’s saving grace for mankind.

            The Crucifixion, which begs the BIG question, WHY THE CONFUSION?

            For the Quran, rejects crucifixion as follows:

            The Woman
            Sura 4.157 “And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure..”

            Additional Christian view…

            With respect to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, it is apparent that the Gospel message in the Bible is radically different from the message given by Allah through his prophet Muhammad. The denial of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ by Muhammad in his teachings in the Koran leads to the undeniable fact that the God of the Bible cannot be Allah. Their messages are substantially different since both Muhammad and Allah reject the God of the Bible’s only begotten Son.

            So again HH, WHY THE CONFUSION?

            Of course I won’t deny your right to post this to CFM or Herald either, for your own sake.

            1. Islam1st

              Quote: “And how can they ever leave, for they have not sinned do they?”

              Why complicate yourself? My, you do think too much. Leave means leave. Just leave the faith. No strings attached.

            1. Calvinsankaran

              Quote: “Are you serious ? Are you saying that the Church allows the conversion of minors without parent’s consent using sex and money? ”

              Why ask me? You were the one who alluded the church ‘using money, pretty girls and music to convert poor Indian youths’ (your actual words) was a bad thing.

              BTW, the ‘sex’ part was not in your original comment. You brought it up. Which church in Malaysia offer sex?

  2. First of all, may I ask why are the christians hell bent on using the word “Allah” now when all this while the word “God” has been fine…

    That’s what the muslims find it hard to comprehend…

  3. Pengarang The Nut Graph Jacqueline Ann Surin kata “perkataan ‘Allah’ bukan milik orang Islam serta puak Muslim tidak pernah pun memilikinya”……????

    Hahahahahaha! Rasa nak pecah perut saya gelak!
    Gelihati saya…..betul-betul kelakar apabila seorang bukan Islam yang tidak pernah seumur hidup dia menyembah Tuhan yang bernama Allah, tiba-tiba membuat kenyataan berkenaan yang juga membawa maksud di sebaliknya iaitu:

    ‘Allah’ adalah milik orang kristian evangelis serta puak mereka yang berhak memilikinya? maka:-

    1. kerana itu mereka berhak menuntut untuk mencetak nama Allah di dalam ‘buku’ yang mereka namakan ‘bible bahasa melayu’?

    2. mereka berhak menggunakannya selepas ribuan tahun tidak pernah terfikir untuk menggunakannya dalam semua terbitan ‘Bible’ mereka yang telah diterjemah kepada begitu banyak bahasa?

    alahai…..!

    betapa jahil-murakkab beliau ini!

  4. …And finally, learn respect. Respect for the legitimate concerns and rights of all Malaysians…

    Mulai esok I nak ajak anak2 sya pi berak kat tangga Church. Jacqueline jangan duk marah pulak ya.. She must learn to respect my rights as a human being..

    This a/p Surin ni ahli kitab ke atau sekadar google sana sini for information? Curious nak tau dia ni keturunan Portugese ke atau dari keturunan apek atau anugerek, nama dia cekop sana sini..

    1. Certain words this person use has aura of far right movement in US, although the overall writing is not in the league of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer yet.

      Is this writer inspired by them or by any chance getting funding from the same funder?

  5. Tuhan ‘Allah’ kau beranak dan ada bini… hahahaha lawak-lawak. Lepas tu Tuhan ko mati telanjang kena salib, ko orang pula kena tanggung dosa-dosanya? lawak -lawak. Tuhan-tuhan ko tak bergaduh rebut kuasa ker?. Kenapa ko sembah patung ‘Jesus’ dalam masa yang sama ko nak sembah Allah? Nanti apa kata ‘Bunda Mariam’ yang kununnya mengandungkan anak ‘Allah’ ko. Tidakkah itu perbuatan orang yang bodoh? Lojik ler sikit berkurun-kurun lamanya evangelist ditipu hidup-hidup oleh para pendeta yang korup lagi gay.

    Jangan marah, ini adalah hak saya untuk bersuara di sebuah negara demokrasi!.

    1. Re. Jangan marah, ini adalah hak saya untuk bersuara di sebuah negara demokrasi!.

      Sebagai peringatan.

      Firman Allah dalam surah Al-An’am ayat 108:

      “Dan janganlah kamu cerca benda-benda Yang mereka sembah Yang lain dari Allah, kerana mereka kelak, akan mencerca Allah secara melampaui batas Dengan ketiadaan pengetahuan. Demikianlah Kami memperelokkan pada pandangan tiap-tiap umat akan amal perbuatan mereka, kemudian kepada Tuhan merekalah tempat kembali mereka, lalu ia menerangkan kepada mereka apa Yang mereka telah lakukan.”

      http://tokkupasirgudang.blogspot.com/2009/08/hukum-menghina-agama-dan-kepercayaan.html

      1. Atas dasar ini lah Orang Islam di sini tidak pernah nak ambil pusing pasal conduct agama-agama selain Islam.

        Depa bawak masuk paderi ka, sami ka daripada mana-mana hala pun orang kebanyakkan tidak pernah nak kata apa!

        Rumah kedai depa jadikan church xdak permit pun orang ramai tutup sebelah mata. Sama macam tempat sembah kay bawah pokok, dekat busut dan tengah padang.

        Tetapi nampaknya kesemua kebaikan ini dipandang sepi dan tidak pernah dihargai mereka.

        Malah ada yang semakin membenci dan dengan terbuka sudah berani untuk menghina Islam, Muslim dan Allah SWT sendiri.

        Semua ini merupakan ujian kepada Muslim Malaysia. Bukankah sudah dikhabarkan kepada kita semua tentang kesudahan kepada semua ini?

        1. “Sama macam tempat sembah kay bawah pokok, dekat busut dan tengah padang.”

          Looks like the Arab-wannabes have forgotten their own heritage. Some of these ‘shrines’ are actually ancient spirits of the land revered as ‘Datuk’s’. That is why if you look at the offerings there are no porks but rather Nusantarian type like rokok daun, sireh pinang, etc.

          No different than the mata sepet evangelistas being whiter than white with their anglophilic education and religion. These jerusubangites, like their arab-wannabe counterparts, have forgotten their own roots of Confucian philosophy and ancestral respect which many have confused with pagan and satanic practices.

          1. ‘Looks like the Arab-wannabes have forgotten their own heritage.’

            Like what heritage again are we talking about? The heritage that you guys recycle and guna pakai is it? Datuks can give number and advice on buka kilang is it? Take la all the Malay speaking Datuks you want! I know for a fact that some of you, Datuk worship pun kena pakai translator cause BM tatau!

            How sad. Nasib baik Datuk minta rokok daun only! Speaking of which, msleepyhead, some minta puting susu kan?

    2. @Akhi Salleh

      memang lawak sial. cam mamat sorang tu yang lepak dalam gua dan dengar suara dalam kepala otaknya pastu kata malaikat cuba bercakap dengan dia. “lawak -lawak.”

      “Jangan marah, ini adalah hak saya untuk bersuara di sebuah negara demokrasi!.”

  6. The outcome of an appeal by the Home Ministry to set aside the judgment handed by High Court judge Lau Bee Lan in 2009, is set to be delivered next month.

    The Christian maintained the right to use the word ‘Allah’ is a constitutional issue and now await the outcome next month. Were there voices of discontentment or criticism hurled at the judiciary by the Christians? No. Just saying.

    This article by Jacqueline Ann Surin is dated 2010. Many things have happened since. The writer is entitled to her opinion and her opinion has little to do with the outcome of the trial.

    1. re: “This article by Jacqueline Ann Surin is dated 2010.”

      She had an article out just yesterday, see http://www.theantdaily.com/news/heated/2013/09/10/love-malaysia

      Also her older article titled “Insulting Muslims” was reproduced in the Malaysian Bar website, see http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/insulting_muslims_101.html

      Her kind of voice (opinions) is given airing in the English media while the pro-establishment views are stifled. BN is put on the back foot where communication in the English language is concerned.

      1. Poking fun at those who don’t speak English. Just the way that they chooses to poke fun at those who does not speaks Mandarin, Tamil and other vernakulars!

        Shame!!!

  7. Yes, we Muslims do own Allah. When we first swear the Syahadah, we uphold that there is no god but Allah. If Allah is not a name then we would be saying there is no god but god, which makes the sentence redundant, and there is nothing redundant about Islam.

    I believe that people will interpret the word Allah depending on how and why they want to use it. Some Muslims say its used in Arab-speaking countries by the Christians, but maybe for the same reason that the Christians in Malaysia want to use it? The Arabs maybe hope that they can persuade the non-Muslims to question their belief and start reading the Quran for comparison and maybe convert to Islam. The same way Christian missionary find it easier to use Allah in a non-arab speaking Muslim population to proselytise.

    Here’s a link to http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-allah.htm where I presumed the Christian writer does not want to associate the Bible with the word Allah and here’s another link where the Arab Bible is written without the use of the word Allah http://www.arabbible.com/t-Allah.aspx. And if you are too lazy to read long boring texts, there’s always Wikipedia and WikiIslam for context.

    So before you claim to know everything and write such a leading article, aggressively suggesting that you know better than us Muslims about our Allah, it is better for this Jacqueline person to do some heavy research. In this day and age, information is at your fingertips if you care to exercise them

  8. This is all PAS fault. Yes, I blame them. They came out in support of using Allah in the bible due to their simplistic view that whatever is done in the middle east is ok to be adopted in Malaysia.

    Sometimes i hope that Malaysia descends into havoc like that seen in Egypt. That will teach the Islamists. They are stupid to think that fundamentalist Islam and democracy can live together. It can’t!

  9. Helen

    Quote: “Her kind of voice (opinions) is given airing in the English media while the pro-establishment views are stifled. BN is put on the back foot where communication in the English language is concerned.”

    Her kind of voice. I would translate her kind of voice as the voice of moderation. I stand corrected.

    If ‘her kind’ of moderate views are seen as ‘not pro-establishment’, then do we need to paddle to the far right then only to be seen as pro-establishment? :)

    Many times you have alluded the English media is partial towards the opposition. I do find the English media mostly on the middle ground and on account of that, seen to be in favor of the opposition.

    NST is unbashfully pro-establishment, no? Perhaps the English media reading demographics are the voice of moderation thus the dismal NST circulation numbers.

    1. re: “Her kind of voice. I would translate her kind of voice as the voice of moderation. I stand corrected.”

      Regular commenter ‘mfma’ @ 2013/09/11 at 5:22 pm remarked on this thread that part of Jacqueline Ann Surin’s writings has the “aura of far right movement in US although … not [yet] in the league of Pamela Geller”.

      Her kind of voice – and here I agree with ‘mfma’ – is close to Pamela Geller.

      1. Sure, Gellar or whatever. As much as the Muslim community hate Bush, they have no problem adopting his ‘with us or against us’ when it comes to their religion.

        There is no rationality and the frightening thing is, they know it. Someone up the thread said to teach their kids to pee on the steps of a church….and they opined JAS has ‘the aura’ of the far right movement? Geez, how can JAS measure up?

        Cheers.

    2. re: “Perhaps the English media reading demographics are the voice of moderation thus the dismal NST circulation numbers.”

      The J-Star sells b’cos its top and obsessive stories are about the Bosnian sperm (most recently), Mylie Cyrus’s twerking, the Alvivi sex bloggers with J-Star coverage of 17 stories over a long weekend of 3 days (see MalaysianFacts here) and a cursory look at the J-Star‘s abundant sex stories — list here

      https://helenang.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/no-stability-lah-just-sex-and-sabotage/

      1. Wow. I just realised the JStar is the equivalent of The Sun (UK). Thanks Helen for pointing that out. You think they gonna print nudies next??? Lols

        1. re: “You think they gonna print nudies next??? Lols”

          They’re almost there. The Mylie Cyrus “twerking” photo on the cover of the 7 Sept 2013 J-Star pullout has the young popstar wearing a ‘nude’ (skin colour) bikini.

          To know why the Jerusubang paper thinks that twerking might be of interest to its readers, well, we’re all aware of what kind of activities the J-Star’s evangelista readership engage in.

          Photo below is taken from the website of the evangelical Subang Jaya church that hosted Nurul Izzah’s forum where she opined that Malays should be given the freedom to leave Islam.
          null

      2. Yet they used to ridicules Harian Metro for being almost tabloid-y with their headlines!

        ps-Helen, I can’t seems to jumpa the link. But I sure remembers this story of dengki by one pihak to another, just because they can;t lawan the numbers! So they belittle the paper so that Advertisers would shy away.

        Kalau tak laku they belittle you as being kampung and tak moderate enough!

        Kalau paling laku seantaro Malaysia aslo they belittle you as being tabloid-y!

        Such is the bully game they play! Zamkata had a lot to say about this bully game as well!

        1. Yes, they are are bullies. Still remember how the Dapsters bullied the cowherd families of Kampung Buah Pala.

          Each time the Dapsters open their mouths, it is to mock and to insult.

          re: “remembers this story of dengki by one pihak to another, just because they can’t lawan the numbers!”

          It was The J-Star mempertikaikan the circulation number of The Sun b’cos the latter is a free newspaper. The Sun circulation is higher but then it is given away free everywhere.

          1. Yes, at times this was brought up by Nades or Terence if I’m not mistaken. talking about the industry does not take them seriously for the size and price-less, when theSun had won some awards.

            Lest we forget on how these kakis try to bully you, don’t we?

    3. re: “NST is unbashfully pro-establishment, no? Perhaps the English media reading demographics are the voice of moderation thus the dismal NST circulation numbers.”

      To explain why The J-Star has a higher circulation than NST, one only has to look at the cover of the J-Star pullouts.

      Below is a J-Star feature cover page of 7 Sept 2013. The young lady in the bikini (on the cover of The J-Star page) who is “twerking” is popstar Mylie Cyrus.

      null

      1. This LGBT and low morals stuff used to be highlighted by thesun. Star pun sudah join the bandwagon! After albabi couple, they had just realised that sex sells!

  10. In the age of Internet, people will say stupid thing. The word Allah is mentioned in the Quran for more than 2600 times. Take any translated version of Quran in any language you will find the same amount of times Allah is being mentioned because no translator of Quran will ever translate the word Allah into anything else because there is no other equivalent word to the word Allah as it is the name of God worship by the Muslim.

    And yet there is some bugger claimed that Muslim don’t own the word Allah. I challenge her to show me in English bible the word Allah ever being mention.

    What we have seen here is an outright evil provocation to the Muslim. Allah is dearer to the Muslim than anything else, including their mother. What if someone come to you and say that you don’t have the right to the name of your mother. Wouldn’t you be angry?

    1. Or like what the Israeli did to the Palestinians 24/7, ‘you don’t have the right to keep staying in this house, because the land belongs to us since the Torah time!

  11. Padri gunakam Bahasa Melayu/Indon pakai “Allah”. Manakala Padri yg menggunakan Bahasa Inggeris pakai istilah “Lord Jesus”.

    Pelik sungguh ajaran org xtian.

    Pope pakai istilah apa ya? Lazimnya Pope gunakan Bahasa Latin maka tiadalah istilah “Allah” dlm bible latin. Pihak pendakyah xtian dah merapu.

    1. The picture selection is a good barometer of who The J-Star loves and who the paper hates.

      The most TLC is lavished on the selection of Hannah Yeoh photos while Shahrizat’s and Mukhriz’s photos, sorry lah. They want to bayangkan that orang Umno semuanya wajah Idi Amin belaka kecuali sebiji bintang permata yang rajin digilap oleh si Karim Raslan tu.

      1. Re. They want to bayangkan that orang Umno semuanya wajah Idi Amin belaka kecuali sebiji bintang permata yang rajin digilap oleh si Karim Raslan tu.

        ROTFL. Helen the “Kak Nam”

        1. hahahahahahahaaa! sampai nak putus urat kentut saya bila nama Idi Amin disebut….sebab i bayangkan wajah PM Najib macam Idi Amin….berkilat engkauuu……….!!

    1. I like this ” Adalah lebih bermanfaat jika semua makhluk yang mengasihi Tuhan untuk menumpukan usaha untuk kebaikan manusia sejagat”

      Tuhan as Truth, has been a treasure beyond price. May Tuhan be so to every one of us as manusia sejagat. So how Madam Kalyani – 3rd generation estate worker in Bukit Rajah Klang only 60 years old under stress by Sime Darby to vacate with police force and bulldozers yesterday to vacate their quarters so that Sime Darby can build dream houses and sell double storey house for future rich Malaysians. Oops!!! I forgot, she died today. Not that it matter to me or you.

    2. Incidentally contextualization ni lah yang dipelopori oleh Paul untuk berdakwah ajaran Jesus kepada gentiles. Walaupun Jesus sendiri diutuskan untuk Bani Israel.

      Since CFM and gangs nak go the Indonesian way, sekarang kita lihat pautan ini yang bercakap pasal Jesus yang dihantar untuk Bani Israel semata-mata dari beberapa sudut pandang Alkitab sendiri. Bapa-bapa, Ibu-ibu ayuh, mampir yuk!

      “Dan (ingatlah) ketika Isa Putra Maryam berkata: “Hai Bani Israel, sesungguhnya aku adalah utusan Allah kepadamu, membenarkan kitab (yang turun) sebelumku, yaitu Taurat dan memberi kabar gembira dengan (datangnya) seorang Rasul yang akan datang sesudahku, yang namanya Ahmad (Muhammad)”(Firman Allah dalam Al-Qur’an Ash Shaff 6)

      Benar, Isa Al Masih diutus hanya untuk bani Israel dan bukan untuk segala bangsa. Berikut 8 dalil yang kami ambil secara alkitabiah.

      Dalil 1 Yesus hanya untuk Bani Israel

      Matius 10:5-6. Kedua belas murid itu diutus oleh Yesus dan beliau berpesan kepada mereka: “Janganlah kamu menyimpang ke jalan bangsa lain atau masuk ke dalam kota orang Samaria, melainkan pergilah kepada domba-domba yang hilang dari umat Israel.

      Dalil ke 2 Yesus hanya untuk Bani Israel

      Yohanes 17:9 Kata Yesus “Aku berdoa untuk mereka (Bani Israel), bukan untuk dunia aku berdoa, tetapi untuk mereka..

      Dalil ke 3 ketika para murid terbatas mengajarkan Taurat Injil kepada umat Israel di pembuangan.

      Kisah Para Rasul 16:6 karena Roh Kudus mencegah mereka untuk memberitakan Injil di Asia

      Dalil ke 4 Ketika dikatakan bahwa nubuat datangnya Raja orang YAHUDI…bukan raja segala bangsa

      Matius 2:2 dan bertanya-tanya: “Di manakah dia, Raja orang YAHUDI yang baru dilahirkan itu?

      Dalil ke 5 menunjukkan bunyi nubuat bahwa MESIAS tertuju HANYA UNTUK MENGGEMBALAKAN UMAT ISRAEL…selain itu tidak

      Matius 2:5-6 Demikianlah ada tertulis dalam kitab nabi: “Dan engkau Betlehem, tanah Yehuda, engkau sekali-kali bukanlah yang terkecil di antara mereka yang memerintah Yehuda, karena dari padamulah akan bangkit seorang pemimpin, yang akan menggembalakan umat-Ku ISRAEL.”

      Dalil ke 6 adalah ucapan Simeon bahwa kelak jabang bayi sang Nabi akan menjadi Nabi untuk menjatuhkan atau menaikkan derajat bagi BANI ISRAEL..bukan untuk yang laen

      Lukas 2:34 Lalu Simeon memberkati mereka dan berkata kepada Maria, ibu Anak itu: “Sesungguhnya Anak ini ditentukan untuk menjatuhkan atau membangkitkan banyak orang di ISRAEL

      Dalil ke 7 ketika sang Nabi berwasiat bahwa tugas para murid-murid beliau adalah berdakwah menginjil ke kota-kota dimana Bani Israel banyak berdiam

      Mat 10:23Sesungguhnya sebelum kamu selesai mengunjungi kota-kota Israel, anak manusia sudah datang.

      Dalil ke 8 Sangat tegas menunjukkan bahwa sang Nabi tidak hendak melayani permintaan gentile non bani Israel

      Matius 15:24 Jawab Yesus: “Aku diutus HANYA kepada domba-domba yang hilang dari umat Israel.”

      Dengan demikian benarlah sebuah sabda dari seorang Nabi :

      Diriwayatkan dlm Al-Bukhari dan Muslim dari hadits Jabir bin Abdullah radhiallahu ‘anhuma bahwa Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam bersabda:

      أُعْطِيْتُ خَمْسًا لَمْ يُعْطَهُنَّ أَحَدٌ مِنَ اْلأَنْبِيَاءِ قَبْلِي: نُصِرْتُ بِالرُّعْبِ مَسِيْرَةَ شَهْرٍ، وَجُعِلَتْ لِيَ اْلأَرْضُ مَسْجِدًا وَطَهُوْرًا فَأَيُّمَا رَجُلٍ مِنْ أُمَّتِي أَدْرَكَتْهُ الصَّلاَةُ فَلْيُصَلِّ، وَأُحِلَّتْ لِيَ الْغَنَائِمُ وَلَمْ تُحَلَّ لأَحَدٍ قَبْلِي، وَأُعْطِيْتُ الشَّفَاعَةَ، وَكَانَ النَّبِيُّ يُبْعَثُ إِلَى قَوْمِهِ خَاصَّةً وَبُعِثْتُ إِلَى النَّاسِ عَامَّةً

      “Aku telah diberikan lima hal yg tdk diberikan kepada seorangpun dari kalangan para nabi sebelumku: Aku diberi pertolongan dgn ditanamkan rasa takut sejarak satu bulan perjalanan. Dan telah dijadikan bagiku seluruh bumi sebagai masjid dan alat bersuci. maka siapa saja di kalangan umatku yg mendapati waktu shalat hendaklah dia shalat. Dan dihalalkan bagiku harta rampasan perang dan tdk dihalalkan kepada seorangpun sebelumku. Dan aku diberi syafaat dan adalah nabi sebelumku diutus kepada kaum secara khusus sedangkan aku diutus kepada seluruh manusia.”

      http://jalanibrahim.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/delapan-dalil-alkitabiah-yang-menegaskan-misi-terbatas-yesus-isa-nabi-allah-untuk-bani-israel/

      Baca komentarnya sekali deh! Asyik banget dong!

  12. Extracts from – http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-allah.htm

    – Contrary to Muslim claims, the word “Allah” is never found in the Bible in either Hebrew and Greek.

    – ALLAH is a unique word for the only God. Arabic, like every other language, also has its rules of grammar, but in Arabic you cannot make a plural form for Allah, nor can you make a feminine of Allah.

    – Commentators opinions are no proof Allah is in the Bible!

    Jika ini pendapat org Christian Canada, kenapa pendapat org Christian Malaysia berlainan ?

    Bukankah ugama mereka sama-sama Christian ?

      1. Re. di sesetengah negara arab juga kanak2 perempuan dikahwinkan dengan orang yang lebih tua dan dihalalkan.

        Di Tongsan dan “Mother India” perkahwinan kanak-kanak masih berlaku.

        “Child brides resurface in China with shortage of females”

        http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20110530000003&cid=1503

        Why is that there is shortage of females in TONGSAN?

        With China one child policy. Parents prefer boy over girl, thus resulting in the current shortage and cruel and barbaric practices:

        200 Million Girls Killed in China, Where Are the Feminists?

        http://www.lifenews.com/2012/11/02/200-million-girls-killed-in-china-where-are-the-feminists/

        Some Chinese Leaving Baby Girls for Dead

        http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=130158&page=1

        SEBELUM NAK MENGATA BUDAYA ORANG LAIN, CUBA CERMIN DULU BUDAYA ASAL USUL SENDIRI DULU.

      1. That’s right… In this country, I feel like I am back in “1984” because it is so Orwellian… Anti-racist champions use race to win votes, Malaysian Firsters putting national interests last, anti-violence crusaders threatening various harms, supporters of clean election using dirty tactics in party polls, democratic defenders running the party like North Korea, peace-lovers spewing hatred… the list goes on and on…

  13. Not just the Church is re-writing history, they are also trying to change the Bahasa Malaysia. See below for their warped explanation for not using Tuhan word for God. Unbelievable !
    —————————————————————————-
    Should Christians Substitute the word ‘Allah’ with ‘Tuhan’?

    This is not possible for the following reasons :

    1. In the Malay language, ‘Allah’ means ‘God’ and Tuhan means ‘Lord’. As is obvious when we read the Bible, both God and Lord are used in the Bible, and both have different connotations. Therefore ‘Allah’ cannot be substituted by ‘Tuhan’.

    2. The word Tuhan has been applied to Jesus Christ and read as Tuhan Yesus.

    If Christians are to substitute the word ‘Allah’ for Tuhan, it will render many Biblical references to God and Jesus incoherent because:

    • The meaning of ‘Allah’ and Tuhan are different.

    1. Calvin,

      they tried to write and speak a perfect bahasa malaysia without knowing the tatabahasa and limited perbendaharaan kata. What happen was, after getting a prise on how good their bahasa was, they, they think they are smart enough to translate from english to malay. Un known to them, there is a lot more in bahasa malaysia.

      Limited perbendaharaan kata and mis used of tatabahasa will change the meaning. Making the sentance confusing. It not as simple as translate every word to bahasa. What this people never understand was how direct translation will never work. That what they try to justified. If given the right, even the bible will be up side down. Then how they try explained it.

      :( sarah

  14. Just sharing….maaf kalau terlalu panjang tetapi ini adalah copy paste yang saya terima daripada Dato’ Hj Mustapha Ma, Presiden MACMA:

    DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN DI MALAYSIA
    (BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN)
    RAYUAN SIVIL NO. W-01-1-2010

    Dalam perkara keputusan Responden-Responden bertarikh 7.1.2009 yang mengatakan bahawa Permit Penerbitan Pemohon untuk tempoh 1.1.2009 sehingga 31.12.2009 adalah tertakluk kepada syarat bahawa Pemohon dilarang menggunakan istilah / perkataan “Allah” dalam “Herald-The Catholic Weekly” sehingga Mahkamah memutuskan perkara tersebut.

    Dan

    Dalam perkara Permohonan untuk Perintah Certiori di bawah Aturan 53,Kaedah 2 (1) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi

    Dan

    Dalam perkara Permohonan Deklarasi-Deklarasi di bawah Aturan 53, Kaedah 2 (2) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi 1980

    Dan

    Dalam Perkara Roman Catholic Bishops (Incorporation) Act 1957

    ANTARA

    1. MENTERI KESELAMATAN
    DALAM NEGERI
    2. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
    3. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM DAN ADAT MELAYU
    TERENGGANU
    4. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN
    5. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM NEGERI MELAKA
    6. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM NEGERI JOHOR
    7. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM NEGERI KEDAH
    8. MALAYSIAN CHINESE MUSLIM ASSOCIATION
    9. MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR … PERAYU-
    PERAYU
    DAN

    TITULAR ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCBISHOP
    OF KUALA LUMPUR … RESPONDEN

    [DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR
    DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN
    PERMOHONAN UNTUK SEMAKAN KEHAKIMAN NO. R1-25-28-2009

    Dalam perkara keputusan Responden-Responden bertarikh 7.1.2009 yang mengatakan bahawa Permit Penerbitan Pemohon untuk tempoh 1.1.2009 sehingga 31.12.2009 adalah tertakluk kepada syarat bahawa Pemohon dilarang menggunakan istilah/perkataan “Allah” dalam “Herald-The Catholic Weekly” sehingga Mahkamah memutuskan perkara tersebut.

    Dan

    Dalam perkara Permohonan untuk Perintah Certiori di bawah Aturan 53,
    Kaedah 2 (1) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi

    Dan
    Dalam perkara Permohonan Deklarasi-Deklarasi di bawah Aturan 53, Kaedah 2 (2) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi 1980

    Dan

    Dalam Perkara Roman Catholic Bishops (Incorporation) Act 1957

    DI ANTARA

    TITULAR ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCBISHOP
    OF KUALA LUMPUR … PEMOHON
    DAN
    1. MENTERI KESELAMATAN
    DALAM NEGERI
    2. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA … RESPONDEN-
    RESPONDEN]

    —————————————————————————————–
    8TH APPELLANT’S (MACMA’S) ADDITIONAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
    —————————————————————————————–

    It is pleases this Honorable Court,

    1. This appeal is against the Order of the High Court dated 31.12.2009, allowing a Judicial Review application by the Respondent of the decision made by the 1st Appellant (the Minister) dated 7.1.2009. Hence this appeal revolves around the legal principles applicable in judicial review application.

    2. The Respondent had inter alia complained that the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009 was unreasonable / irrational / illegal, on the basis amongst others, that the Minister:

    a) Had failed to appreciate that the actual meaning of the word God in Bahasa Malaysia is “Allah”, and not Tuhan; and

    b) That in reaching his decision of 7.1.2009, the Minister had run foul of the Respondent’s rights under Article 3 and 11 of the Federal Constitution (amongst others)

    3. MACMA’S Additional Submissions herein, will cover the above two issues.

    THE ACTUAL MEANING OF THE WORD GOD

    4. It is trite law that the Respondent, as the applicant in the judicial review application is duty bound to prove his case. If the Respondent says that the actual meaning of the word God is “Allah” and not Tuhan, then it is the duty of the Respondent to prove so. Only if the Respondent successfully proves this fact, then can it be said that the Respondent was correct in complaining that the Mininster was unreasonable in applying the wrong meaning to the word God in coming to his decision of 7.1.2009.

    5. The above trite principle of law is pronounced in our Section 101 and 102 of the Evidence Act 1950:

    101 Burden of proof.

    (1) Whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability, dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist.

    (2) When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person.

    102. On whom burden of proof lies.

    The burden of proof in a suit of proceeding lies on that person who would fail if on evidence at all were given on either side.

    Refer: Tab A, 8th Appellant’s Additional Bundle of
    Authorities (8 ABOA)

    6. Now, MACMA will demonstrate by reference to the Respondent’s own affidavit in support of the judicial review application that the Respondent has miserably failed to discharge his burden as to the meaning of the word God to be “Allah” in Bahasa Malaysia.

    Refer: Para 52 of the Respondent’s Affidavit in Support dated 16.2.2009 (pages 195-200 Jilid 2 Rekod Rayuan)

    7. In that affidavit, the gist of the evidence relied upon by the Respondent to support his contention that the Bahasa Malaysia meaning to the word God as “Allah”, is on the reliance upon various chronological purported publications, which all go back to the purported dictionary meaning relied upon from a dictionary published in the year 1631, and exhibited therein as “MP27” (page 447-448, Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan).

    8. That dictionary (MP 27) was written by Davidis Haex, whose expertise in Bahasa Malaysia is not confirmed. Surely, if the Respondent wishes any court of law to accept the meaning which is put forward in that dictionary, the expertise of the author in both languages, ie English and Bahasa Malaysia, must be proven first. Secondly, putting the Respondent’s case at its highest (which of course is denied) the dictionary relied upon (MP 27) states the meaning of word God / Deus to be “Alla” (and not Allah), which is completely in contradiction with the wishes of the Respondent to use the phrase Allah.

    9. Further scrutiny to other references annexed to the Respondent’s Affidavit in Support will also crystallize various other weaknesses and contradictions to the Respondent’s proposition, which we would highlight as follow:

    a) Exhibit MP 26 therein (at page 441 Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan), will show that the purported extract from a prayer book in 1894, has God referred to as Tuhan (and not “Allah”), in certain parts of the prayer book.

    b) Also, all the other publication produced by the Respondent and marked as MP 28, MP 29, MP 30 and MP 31 (pages 450-467, Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan), fail to proof that the author of those materials were experts in Bahasa Malaysia, as well as their local language.

    10. As night follows day, since the Respondent had failed to tender cogent proof to support his contention, his complaint on the impropriety of the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009, must therefore crumble and fall.

    11. It is our humble submissions, that the learned High Court Judge did not address her mind on the failure of the Respondent to proof his case on the issue as to the meaning of the word God, by the very fact that in her Judgment (at pages 36 to 41, Jilid 1 Rekod Rayuan ), she merely accepted all the exhibits above referred without going through the test of sufficiency of evidence. In fact at Para 12.1, 13.4 and 15.5 therein (pages 40, 44 and 48, Jilid 1 Rekod Rayuan ), Her Ladyship tends to wrongfully shift the burden to the Minister/1st Appellant, when in fact the Respondent himself had not crossed the threshold required to proof his case. Hence, Her Ladyship’s decision can not be allowed to stand in support of the decision for judicial review.

    ARTICLE 3 AND 11 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

    12. Her Ladyship, upon the error in accepting the Respondent’s contention, without proof, that the word God in Bahasa Malaysia means “Allah”, made a further erroneous finding that the Respondent had made out a case that the use of the phrase “Allah” is an essential part of the worship and instruction in the faith of the Bahasa Malaysia speaking community of the Catholic Church in Malaysia, then made the concluding error that the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009, was unconstitutional, since it infringed the Respondent’s constitutional rights under Article 3 and/or 11 Federal Constitution. ( see para 15.5 at pages 48-49 Jilid 1, Rekod Rayuan ).

    13. Her Ladyship then referred to the Federal Court decision in Meor Atiqulrahman Ishak & Ors v. Fatimah Sihi & Ors [2006] 4 CLJ 1 to support her finding that the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009 would infringe Respondent rights under both Article 3 and Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.

    14. To the contrary, we would submit (based on our earlier submissions under the 1st issue hereinabove), that the Minister’s decision was in fact and in law, in consonant to the provisions of Article 3 and 11 of the Federal Constitution.

    15. The real meaning and application of Article 3(1) has been clarified on various occasions by our courts. First and foremost, the High Court decision in Meor Atiqulrahman v Fatimah Sihi and others [2000] 1 MLJ 393, reported in 2000, wherein the then Justice Mohd Noor Abdullah stated;

    “Islam ialah ugama bagi persekutuan tapi ugama-ugama lain boleh diamalkan dalam aman dan damai. Islam adalah ugama utama di antara ugama-ugama lain yang dianuti di negara seperti Kristian, Buddha, Hindu. Islam bukan setaraf dengan ugama lain. bukan duduk berganding bahu dengan agama lain atau berdiri sama sama tegak. Ia duduk di atas, berjalan dahulu, terletak di tempat medan, dan suaranya lantang kedengaran. Islam ibarat pokok jati. Tinggi, teguh, dan terang. Jika bukan sedemikian, Islam bukanlah ugama bagi persekutuan, tetapi adalah salah satu di antara beberapa ugama yang dianuti di wilayah ini, dan setiap orang sama-sama bebas mengamalkan mana-mana ugama yang dianuti. Tiada lebih di antara satu sama lain.”

    Refer: Tab B, 8th Appellant’s Additional Bundle of
    Authorities (8 ABOA)

    16. That decision of the High Court undeniably was overruled by the Court of Appeal and thereafter by the Federal Court. However, that above-quoted portion of the High Court judgment was never reversed or expunged. In fact the decision of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court was based on some other issues independent to the position of Islam vis-à-vis Article 3(1).
    The then Abdul Hamid, FCJ, decided the issue in that case, i.e. whether or not a Muslim boy can wear the serban to school, on his finding as to whether wearing a serban is a prescribed sunnah under the Islamic principles. His Lordship on his own volition and conclusion decided that wearing a serban is not a prescribed sunnah. Hence he decided that it was not a religious duty or obligation under any Islamic principles for a Muslim boy to put on a serban to school. In no way did the Federal Court (and even the Court of Appeal) decide that the High Court judgement on the position of Islam vis-à-vis article 3(1) was incorrect. In fact, the very reason that the Federal Court had to go into its own finding as to whether wearing a serban is a sunnah or not itself, is opined, is due to the recognition of the Federal Court as to the position of Islam under article 3(1).

    17. Secondly, even in the case of Lina Joy v Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan [2007] 3 CLJ 577, the then Chief Justice, Yang Amat Arif Tun Ahmad Fairus said:

    “Islam itu bukan sahaja suatu himpunan dogma-dogma dan ritual-ritual tetapi ianya juga suatu cara hidup yang lengkap merangkumi semua bidang aktiviti manusia, persendirian dan awam, perundangan, politik, ekonomi, sosial, budaya, moral atau kehakiman etc”

    Refer: Tab C, 8th Appellant’s Additional Bundle of
    Authorities (8 ABOA)

    18. It would be timely now to refer to the Article written by Muhammad Imam, Freedom of Religion under Federal Constitution of Malaysia-A Reappraisal [1994] 2 CLJ Ivii (June) with regards to the meaning and intent of Article 3(1) which is as follows:

    “Article 3 (1) is not a mere declaration. But it imposes positive obligation on the Federation to protect, defend, promote Islam and to give effect by appropriate state action, to the injunction of Islam and able to facilitate and encourage people to hold their life according to the Islamic injunction, spiritual and daily life.”

    Refer: Tab D, 8th Appellant’s Additional Bundle of
    Authorities (8 ABOA)

    19. It is our humble submission that the above quoted references enhance the duties upon the government of the state to promote Islam in all manner permissible, to crystallize the intent and spirit of Article 3(1).

    20. Hence, the Minister was within his constitutional duties in imposing the condition prohibiting the use of the phrase “Allah” by the Respondent in their publications, vide his decision of 7.1.2009, in the sense to ensure that the reference to the phrase “Allah” will not be confused with the polytheist concept of God proposed in the religion of Christianity, which confusion would have been unavoidable, in the event the Respondent was to be allowed the use of the phrase “Allah” in place of Tuhan, in their Bahasa Malaysia publication. That confusion, if not curtailed, would result in relegating the position of Islam, against the provision, spirit and intent of Article 3 Federal Constitution.

    21. Therefore Her Ladyship who fell into the error, as pointed out herein above, especially at para 15.5 of Her judgment ( pages 48-49 Jilid 1 Rekod Rayuan), had failed to appreciate the constitutionality of the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009, in toto. That led Her Ladyship’s erroneous conclusion in para 16.3 of Her judgment (at page 52 Jilid 1 Rekod Rayuan )

    CONCLUSION

    22. For all the above additional reasons, we would also humbly submit that this appeal is to be allowed, and the decision of the High Court dated 31.12.2009 is to be reversed.

    We are very much obliged.

    Dated 4th September 2013

    …………………………………….
    Counsel for the 8th Appellant

    8TH APPELLANT’S (MACMA’S) ADDITIONAL WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS is prepared by Messrs Tajuddin Razak, Solicitors for 8th Appellant’s named above whose address for service at NW-02-42, Cova Square, Jalan Teknologi, Kota Damansara 47810 Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan.
    Tel : 03-61422857 Fax : 03-61422867
    [Ruj: TR/003-09/L/MACMA]

    1. Abang alwieabdullah, terima kasih dengan perkongsian. Kirim salam dengan Hj. Mustapha Ma, dan beritahu dia, kita semua bersyukur dan berterima-kasih kepada beliau dan saudara-saudara di Macma, khasnya.

      Ada beberapa perkara yang menarik yang saya nak panjangkan di sini.

      1-GOD is TUHAN IN BAHASA MALAYSIA and should the Christians says otherwise, its them who had to prove it so. HH, got prove or not?

      ‘THE ACTUAL MEANING OF THE WORD GOD

      4. It is trite law that the Respondent, as the applicant in the judicial review application is duty bound to prove his case. If the Respondent says that the actual meaning of the word God is “Allah” and not Tuhan, then it is the duty of the Respondent to prove so. Only if the Respondent successfully proves this fact, then can it be said that the Respondent was correct in complaining that the Mininster was unreasonable in applying the wrong meaning to the word God in coming to his decision of 7.1.2009.

      5. The above trite principle of law is pronounced in our Section 101 and 102 of the Evidence Act 1950:

      101 Burden of proof.

      (1) Whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability, dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist.

      (2) When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person.

      102. On whom burden of proof lies.

      The burden of proof in a suit of proceeding lies on that person who would fail if on evidence at all were given on either side.’

      2-Translated into Bahasa Malaysia by a Non Native Speakers.
      These guy got sijil or not to prove their authority first and foremost? Got any degree or Phd in Bahasa Malaysia, to give them the authority to do the translation? Was it Bahasa Malaysia that they were translating into or Bahasa Indonesia? Had they been screened and certified by Institut Terjemahan Negara or not?

      ‘7. In that affidavit, the gist of the evidence relied upon by the Respondent to support his contention that the Bahasa Malaysia meaning to the word God as “Allah”, is on the reliance upon various chronological purported publications, which all go back to the purported dictionary meaning relied upon from a dictionary published in the year 1631, and exhibited therein as “MP27” (page 447-448, Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan).

      8. That dictionary (MP 27) was written by Davidis Haex, whose expertise in Bahasa Malaysia is not confirmed. Surely, if the Respondent wishes any court of law to accept the meaning which is put forward in that dictionary, the expertise of the author in both languages, ie English and Bahasa Malaysia, must be proven first. Secondly, putting the Respondent’s case at its highest (which of course is denied) the dictionary relied upon (MP 27) states the meaning of word God / Deus to be “Alla” (and not Allah), which is completely in contradiction with the wishes of the Respondent to use the phrase Allah.

      9. Further scrutiny to other references annexed to the Respondent’s Affidavit in Support will also crystallize various other weaknesses and contradictions to the Respondent’s proposition, which we would highlight as follow:

      a) Exhibit MP 26 therein (at page 441 Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan), will show that the purported extract from a prayer book in 1894, has God referred to as Tuhan (and not “Allah”), in certain parts of the prayer book.

      b) Also, all the other publication produced by the Respondent and marked as MP 28, MP 29, MP 30 and MP 31 (pages 450-467, Jilid 3 Rekod Rayuan), fail to proof that the author of those materials were experts in Bahasa Malaysia, as well as their local language.

      10. As night follows day, since the Respondent had failed to tender cogent proof to support his contention, his complaint on the impropriety of the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009, must therefore crumble and fall.’

      Yes it should crumble and fall. The Indonesians themselves are now debating and scrutinizing the translations made by these pendatang ie, non native speakers with no academic credentials to prove.

      Surely its not Bahasa Malaysia they were translating since Malaysia then, was not in existence. DBP alone was founded in 1956. So what Bahasa Malaysia again are the CFM talking about?

      ‘Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP) atau nama asalnya Balai Pustaka ditubuhkan pada 22 Jun 1956 di Johor Bharu, Johor sebagai sebuah jabatan kecil di bawah Kementerian Pelajaran. Penubuhan DBP adalah untuk mengembangkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan dan bahasa rasmi negara yang akan merdeka ketika itu. Di peringkat awal itu, DBP mengorak usaha murninya di Bukit Timbalan, Johor Bharu.’

      http://www.dbp.gov.my/lamandbp/main.php?Content=vertsections&SubVertSectionID=251&VertSectionID=7&CurLocation=8&IID=&Page=1&PHPSESSID=1d528d3a6b922fdb150e4a662910b592

      3-Islam in Malaysia.

      ‘ARTICLE 3 AND 11 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

      12. Her Ladyship, upon the error in accepting the Respondent’s contention, without proof, that the word God in Bahasa Malaysia means “Allah”, made a further erroneous finding that the Respondent had made out a case that the use of the phrase “Allah” is an essential part of the worship and instruction in the faith of the Bahasa Malaysia speaking community of the Catholic Church in Malaysia, then made the concluding error that the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009, was unconstitutional, since it infringed the Respondent’s constitutional rights under Article 3 and/or 11 Federal Constitution. ( see para 15.5 at pages 48-49 Jilid 1, Rekod Rayuan ).

      13. Her Ladyship then referred to the Federal Court decision in Meor Atiqulrahman Ishak & Ors v. Fatimah Sihi & Ors [2006] 4 CLJ 1 to support her finding that the Minister’s decision of 7.1.2009 would infringe Respondent rights under both Article 3 and Article 11 of the Federal Constitution.

      14. To the contrary, we would submit (based on our earlier submissions under the 1st issue hereinabove), that the Minister’s decision was in fact and in law, in consonant to the provisions of Article 3 and 11 of the Federal Constitution.

      15. The real meaning and application of Article 3(1) has been clarified on various occasions by our courts. First and foremost, the High Court decision in Meor Atiqulrahman v Fatimah Sihi and others [2000] 1 MLJ 393, reported in 2000, wherein the then Justice Mohd Noor Abdullah stated;

      “Islam ialah ugama bagi persekutuan tapi ugama-ugama lain boleh diamalkan dalam aman dan damai. Islam adalah ugama utama di antara ugama-ugama lain yang dianuti di negara seperti Kristian, Buddha, Hindu. Islam bukan setaraf dengan ugama lain. bukan duduk berganding bahu dengan agama lain atau berdiri sama sama tegak. Ia duduk di atas, berjalan dahulu, terletak di tempat medan, dan suaranya lantang kedengaran. Islam ibarat pokok jati. Tinggi, teguh, dan terang. Jika bukan sedemikian, Islam bukanlah ugama bagi persekutuan, tetapi adalah salah satu di antara beberapa ugama yang dianuti di wilayah ini, dan setiap orang sama-sama bebas mengamalkan mana-mana ugama yang dianuti. Tiada lebih di antara satu sama lain.”’

      And

      ’17. Secondly, even in the case of Lina Joy v Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan [2007] 3 CLJ 577, the then Chief Justice, Yang Amat Arif Tun Ahmad Fairus said:

      “Islam itu bukan sahaja suatu himpunan dogma-dogma dan ritual-ritual tetapi ianya juga suatu cara hidup yang lengkap merangkumi semua bidang aktiviti manusia, persendirian dan awam, perundangan, politik, ekonomi, sosial, budaya, moral atau kehakiman etc”’

      Sikap Tidak Apa among the Muslims must go. Artikel 3 and 11 of the Constitution had proven the superiority of Islam, Agama Persekutuan as oppose to lain-lain agama. So this time around, at all time Muslims must make sure that is protected and observed. Because the last time that we didn’t, they try to pijak our kepala and mocks us-big time in return.

Comments are closed.