Posted in Uncategorized

The Christians MUST be challenged, now!

To all those who are involved with the Allah polemics, please read what I write below … slowly and carefully. It is important that you understand.

Another reason you should read is because there are some hackers out there who are seriously disrupting my blog connectivity to prevent me from providing you information.

***  ***  ***

“64% BM” — betul kah?

Patricia Martinez, in her The Malaysia Insider article today titled ‘Let Christians get back to basics’ has made some { interesting } claims.

The two sentences by Patricia Martinez that I seek her clarification are reproduced below:

  • “What we are simply asking is to continue the peaceful status quo of centuries for 64% of Christians who speak only BM and who have no choice but to use ‘Allah’.”
    .
  • “Go back to basics: the peaceful use of “Allah” for centuries only for 64% of BM-speaking Christians.”

The entire TMI article is screenshot – see bottom of page – with the two relevant sentences highlighted in yellow.

In her article, Patricia Martinez did not tell readers from where (i.e. the SOURCE of the info) she got that her “64% Malay-speaking ONLY” statistic from.

Secondly, I’m sure many Muslims concerned with the Allah row would like to know who are these 1.56 million Christians purportedly only conversant in Malay. Meaning, we’d like to know what are their ethnic sub-groups and where (the districts) in Sabah and Sarawak they live.

In her article, Patricia Martinez writes that the “Bumiputeras, especially from Sabah and Sarawak, have many dialects: they are Kadazan Dusun, Melanau, Murut, Dayaks and others”.

Side note: Since she separates the Murut from the Kadazandusun, I shall adopt Dr Martinez’s format and use the term Kadazandusun, and not KDM (Kadazandusun-murut).

Number of Christians in Sabah and Sarawak

Pay attention now.

SARAWAK

(A)
The 2010 national census puts the country’s population at 28.3 million, out which “9.2 percent only” are Christians. This makes it 2,603,600 or 2.6 million Christian Malaysians.

Therefore 64 percent – the percentage cited by Patricia Martinez – will make it 1.56 million Christians in the country who speak Malay only (64% of 2.6 million is 1,562,160).

(B)
The census also says the Bumiputera are altogether 67.4 percent in Malaysia, out of which the Ibans are 30.3 percent of the total citizens in Sarawak and Kadazan/Dusun 24.5 percent in Sabah.

— Sarawak has a population of 2,471,140
— Ibans are 30.3 percent of the Sarawakians

  • So there are 748,755 Ibans in Sarawak

The majority of Ibans are Christian. However the Ibans have their Iban bible called the Bup Kudus.

(C)
We might toss a ballpark figure saying that there are some 303,951 Sarawak Christians who are not Iban. This is presuming that ALL Ibans are Christians. Of course they’re not but we’re just saying for convenience, and we’ll adjust our calculations later.

— Christians make up 42.6 percent of the Sarawak population

  • So there are 1,052,706 Christians in Sarawak

Roughly (rounded figures), there are one million Christians in Sarawak; and there are three-quarters million Ibans in the state.

Subtracting the three-quarters million Ibans (presuming all Ibans to be Christians) from the state Christian population leaves us with 303,951 Sarawak Christians who are non-Iban.

This number of 303,951 Sarawakian Christians might be those Christians who have adopted Malay as their lingua franca even though they belong to the smaller dialect groups such as Kelabit (Idris Jala’s tribe), Kayan, Kenyah, etc.

(D)
Question 1:
Are these assumed 303,951 non-Iban Sarawak Christians all necessarily Malay speakers?

Answer: Not necessarily. Among these Sarawak Christians who are not Iban could be Chinese living in the towns. They do not need to use the Malay bible. They can use Chinese or English bibles.

Okay now to modify. Assuming that not all Iban are Christians, the non-Iban Sarawak Christian population could well be more than 303,951. We don’t know. But anyway, let’s now generously raise the figure from 303,951 up to 500,000 (estimate).

So we have possibly half a million Sarawakian Christians who might need to use the Alkitab because they speak Malay. (This is on the assumption that the Ibans do not need the Alkitab because they have Bup Kudus, the Iban bible.)

Question 2: Are the (possibly) half a million non-Iban Christians in Sarawak all Malay speakers?

Answer: Not necessarily. These Sarawak Christians could be Chinese or they could be other tribes who are able to speak English. Do remember that Sarawak was still using English in school when the peninsula had already switched to BM, so their English is better than the peninsulans.

Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Christians we might want to readjust the modified figure of 500,000 a bit down to perhaps 350,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sarawak Christians.

Incumbent on Patricia Martinez reveal her data source

I apologize for the sliding up and down the scale as my numbers are merely guesstimates. As I’ve confessed from the beginning, I’m only working from the 2010 national census figures which are not specific in this regard.

Given this uncertainty, it is imperative for Patricia Martinez to share with us the source of the data that she has cited.

To recall for you, she claims that 64 percent of Malaysian Christians are ONLY conversant in Malay and thus require use of the Alkitab since they’re unable to read English. Or for that matter, read Iban.

SABAH

(E)
The Kadazandusun bible does not use the ‘Allah’ word.

— Sabah has a population of 3,206,742
— Kadazandusuns are 24.5 percent of the Sabahans

  • So there are 785,652 Kadazandusuns in Sabah

The majority of Kadazandusuns are Christian. However like the Ibans, the Kadazandusuns too have got the bible in their own language. Unlike the Ibans, they do not use the ‘Allah’ word.

(F)
We might throw a ballpark figure saying that there are some 303,951 Sabah Christians who are not Kadazansusun.

— Christians make up 26.6 percent of the Sabah population

  • So there are 852,993 Christians in Sabah

Roughly (rounded figures), there are 850,000 Christians in Sabah; and there are 785,000 Kadazansusun in the state.

Subtracting the Kadazansusuns (presuming all Kadazansusuns to be Christians) from the state Christian population leaves us with (852,993-785,652=) 67,341 non-Kadazandusun Christians in Sabah.

The 67,341 (the figure may be higher) are those Christians in Sabah who will presumably not be using the Kadazandusun bible since they do not speak Kadazandusun. These Christians, who could be Malay speakers, may require the Alkitab.

(G)
Question 1: Are these assumed 67,341 non-Kadazandusun Sabah Christians all necessarily Malay speakers?

Answer: Not necessarily. These Sabah Christians who are not Kadazandusun could be Chinese living in the towns. They do not need to use the Malay bible. They can use Chinese or English bibles.

Assuming that not all Kadazandusun are Christians, the non-Kadazandusun Sabah Christian population could be more than 67,341. We don’t know. But let’s generously triple the figure up to 150,000.

So we have possibly150,000 Sabahan Christians who might need to use the Alkitab because they speak Malay. (This is on the assumption that the Kadazandusuns do not need the Alkitab because they have the Kadazandusun bible.)

Question 2: Are the (possibly) 150,000 non-Kadazandusun Christians in Sabah all Malay speakers?

Answer: Not necessarily. These Sabah Christians could be Chinese or they could be tribes who are able to speak English. Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Chinese Christians, we might want to adjust the figure of 150, 000 down to perhaps 75,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sabah Christians.

REPEAT: Patricia Martinez should reveal her data source

Dr Martinez is very specific in asserting that 64 percent of the Christians in Malaysia can only speak Malay and must be provided with the Alkitab.

Thus she must reveal her source of information for our benefit and in order to strengthen her case. Without particularized data, the best we can do is extrapolate the census figures and then do guesswork, as I have done here.

Since Patricia Martinez claims that “64 percent” Malaysian Christians only speak Malay, she’s actually talking about 1,562,160 people (64% out of the 9.2% Christians in the 28.3 million Malaysian population).

My generous guesstimate puts it at perhaps 350,000 Christians in Sarawak and 75,000 Christians in Sabah who truly have no other language choice except BM.

There’s a huge gap between my estimate of less than half million with Patricia Martinez’s stated more than 1.5 million solely Malay-speaking Christians. This is the reason I’m asking – and you should be requesting too – for her to reveal the source of her data.

How many Christians are BM-speaking only?

To reiterate: The Alkitab is the Malay language bible. The Ibans possess their own Iban language bible and the Kadazandusuns also have the bible in their own Kadazan language.

Idris Jala’s 10-point solution – before Guan Eng and the evangelistas menjolok sarang tebuan – would have permitted Malay-speaking native Christians to peacefully use the Alkitab in East Malaysia where they live.

The block is in the peninsula.

To get to the bottom of the Allah issue we need accurate numbers. If Patricia Martinez doesn’t wish to divulge how she got hers, then it is incumbent upon the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to release these numbers to the public.

(i) Excluding the Ibans and the Kadazandusuns, how many natives of Sabah and Sarawak are Christians who depend solely on BM?

(ii) How many from the above group (the Kelabits, Kayans, etc) are working in the peninsula so that they require the Alkitab to be used in the Klang Valley and a few other of the west coast towns and cities?

If we were to see the actual numbers, we might find that the Christians have been greatly exaggerating! Is there really a need to make such a big brouhaha as the Jerusubang evangelistas are doing?

(1,545 words)

Let Christians get back to basics – Patricia A Martinez - The Malaysian Insider 2014-02-04 16-16-22

Author:

I have no Faceook or Twitter.

50 thoughts on “The Christians MUST be challenged, now!

  1. Ini martinez ini ada phd in arabic studies. So she is arguing that she knows islam better than most islamic scholar.

    The 64% she is referring is not accurate because she lumped total christian population mainly in sabah and sarawak but like you say she did not do an indepth analysis of the sub- group who dont speak BM and therefore will not require the bm translated bible. Kadang2 yang ada PHD pun bengap. Simple arithmatic fail.

    She needs to answer this – why now? She also contradicts herself.

    She only reads, sees and believes what she wants to. Referring only to the first court case and not the appeal. Typical oppo. Gaji banyak so have to spin.

    She even had the audacity to belittle one respondent as having written chekai english and you will know a malaysian malay wrote it. She is also referring to those muslims yang fighting this issue as being malicious, dangerous and evil.

    Read further in sis fb.

    1. Thanks for alerting us. I don’t usually venture into the FB world as that would be too much on my plate. Same reason I don’t tweet. (If I were to be on Twitter, then I’d not be getting any sleep at all.)

      Would greatly appreciate if you please could cut & paste from the SIS Facebook and share with us. Thanks.

        1. Die lor if I were. Twitter world is 24/7 and much bigger than blogosphere. The RBA would deliberately inundate my timeline and if I were to reply to their onslaught, then I’d have to be on call at all times.

          Urm, could you keep an eye on the tweets by Lee Hwa Beng (the former three-term Adun of Subang Jaya), please?

  2. The Iban Bible, the Bup Kudus, also uses the word ‘Allah’ in it. The Bup Kudus has been subject to prohibition and seizure. So they are a stakeholder in this issue.

    “Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Christians we might want to readjust the modified figure of 500,000 a bit down to perhaps 350,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sarawak Christians.”

    You are saying that 150,000 Christians in Sarawak are of the Chinese race. Even the 500,000 figure you have is based on assumption.

    From Wikipedia, Sarawak has a population of 2.4 million. 24 percent of Sarawakians are Chinese, or 576,000.

    The 2010 census shows that 11 percent of Chinese are Christians. If we take that same distribution, 11 percent of 576,000 is around 63,000. Certainly not the 150 thousand which you claim.

    There may be even less than 63,000 Chinese Christians in Sarawak. Most Sarawakian Chinese Christians are Methodist, and there are around 200,000 Methodists in Malaysia, which includes Bumiputera, Chinese, and Indian groups.

    “We might throw a ballpark figure saying that there are some 303,951 Sabah Christians who are not Kadazansusun.
    – Christians make up 26.6 percent of the Sabah population”

    “These Sabah Christians could be Chinese or they could be tribes who are able to speak English. Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Chinese Christians, we might want to adjust the figure of 150, 000 down to perhaps 75,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sabah Christians.”

    You are saying that 75,000 Christians in Sabah are of the Chinese race. Again, this is based on your assumption of 150,000 non Kadazan Christians, which is very assumptive.

    From Wikipedia, Sabah has 3.1 million people. 9 percent of Sarawakians are Chinese, or 279,000. With 11 percent of Chinese being Christian, that would amount to 30,700. Certainly not the 75 thousand which you claim.

    It appears your article is dealing with Taman Negara park figures.

    1. First of all, 12.8 percent of Sabahans are Chinese according to the 2010 national census — go look in the Stats Dept website, not 9 percent as you claim according to Wiki. (Wikipedia is not accepted for academic citation b’cos any Tom, Dick or Harry can edit the Wikipedia content.)

      And secondly, you’re the one lost in the park. I’ve copypasted below, please read again:

      I wrote:

      “Question 2: Are the (possibly) 150,000 non-Kadazandusun Christians in Sabah all Malay speakers?

      Answer: Not necessarily. These Sabah Christians could be Chinese or they could be tribes who are able to speak English. Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Chinese Christians, we might want to adjust the figure of 150, 000 down to perhaps 75,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sabah Christians.”

      Okay, to address your tail-chasing …

      Let’s say there are 100 Chinese in Malaysia. And allowing your assertion that 11 percent of the Chinese are Christian, that makes 11 Christian Chinese out of the 100.

      You, however, are insisting that this 11 percent Chinese Christians must be evenly distributed state-wise throughout Malaysia.

      You’re blatantly wrong. That’s like saying if there are 11 percent of the Chinese who earn more than 20k a month, it must be the same ratio of 11 percent Chinese high income earners evenly all across Malaysia. In reality, the high income earners are concentrated in KL and Selangor. The Chinese in Kedah or Terengganu would not be earning that much to make up 11 percent of the Kedah Chinese and 11 percent of the Terengganu Chinese earning over 20k a month.

      There are more Chinese in absolute numbers in Sarawak then there are in Perlis. So out of our total 11 Christian Chinese altogether in Malaysia there may be, let’s say, 3 in Sarawak, none in Perlis, one in Kedah, 2 in KL, etc, etc.

      So everyone can see that the 11 percent need not be evenly distributed according to geography. The Chinese Christians are historically strong in numbers in Sabah and in Sarawak particularly because this state was ruled by the white rajahs (the Brookes) who allowed the missionaries in.

      Go to the website of the Roman Catholic church and compare the size of the parishes state by state. The names of the priests, bishops and archbishops are also listed and you can gauge the ethnic breakdown too.

      So you’re the one who’s taking a hike around Taman Negara to insist that it must be 11 percent (national figure) of the Chinese in Sarawak are Christian.

      And yes, I’m aware that the Bup Kudus uses the Allah word. I said so myself in my article above comparing it with Kadazan which does not.

      However the fear is that the missionaries will try to evangelize to THE MALAYS. and hence the restriction on the Alkitab.

      You can give a Bup Kudus bible to a Selangor Malay but he will not be able to read the Iban language. So the fear is not there among the Malays wrt to the Iban bible. Same as why Jais has not confiscated the Sikh Holy Book.

      And lastly, yes, I admittedly made assumptions. I already stated why I am compelled to do so, i.e. simply because there is no detailed breakdown by the Stats Dept as far as I’m aware.

      If the relevant stats were available, then I would not need to ask Patricia Martinez to tell us the source of hers, now would I? And you needn’t refer to the academically unaccredited Wiki either.

      However, if she is willing to tell us from where she got her ” 64% ” percentage, then both you and me can go look see for and save us from quarreling when neither of us are sure.

      Stats should be made available for cross-checking by members of the public, esp when you are making a huge assertion on a matter of such public importance that had previously sparked a round of church firebombings.

      1. “And secondly, you’re the one lost in the park. I’ve copypasted below, please read again:”

        You also wrote;

        Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Chinese Christians, we might want to adjust the figure of 150,000 down to perhaps 75,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sabah Christians.”

        “So everyone can see that the 11 percent need not be evenly distributed according to geography. The Chinese Christians are historically strong in numbers in Sabah and in Sarawak particularly because this state was ruled by the white rajahs (the Brookes) who allowed the missionaries in.”

        Citation needed. Where is your data on the percentage of Sarawakian Chinese who are Christians?

        The British also allowed missionaries in Malaya.

        “You can give a Bup Kudus bible to a Selangor Malay but he will not be able to read the Iban language. So the fear is not there among the Malays wrt to the Iban bible. ”

        That did not stop the Bup Kudus from being subject to seizure and prohibition.

        “If the relevant stats were available, then I would not need to ask Patricia Martinez to tell us the source of hers, now would I? And you needn’t refer to the academically unaccredited Wiki either.”

        Yet you wrote an article reliant upon assumption. A very huge bag of assumptions. It would suffice to ask Patricia Martinez to cite her sources without the need to add your assumptions plucked from your walk in circles around Taman Negara park.

        1. re: “Citation needed. Where is your data on the percentage of Sarawakian Chinese who are Christians?”

          You first. You were the one who asserted that Christians are “11 percent” of the Chinese in Sarawak. I, on the other hand, did not stake any specific figure at all.

          re: “The British also allowed missionaries in Malaya.”

          Yes, they did. But the Negeri-negeri Melayu always had the Sultans as the head of Islam. They are a barrier, just like in Selangor today. Sarawak in the modern era did not have Sultan to protect Islam.

          re: “That did not stop the Bup Kudus from being subject to seizure and prohibition.”

          True. I thought that was an unwise move.

          re: “It would suffice to ask Patricia Martinez to cite her sources without the need to add your assumptions …”

          No, it would not have sufficed. I have need to demonstrate why it is that I suspect/believe that she erred. In order to explain why she might have made a mistake, a show & tell on my part is necessary. Since I had from the very start admitted that I do not have the stats, the best I can do under the circumstances is deductive reasoning.

          Nonetheless, I believe that my range of figures is fair. And contrary to your outlandish claim, they are not plucked from Tmn Negara. The basis of those figures is the national census conducted by the Dept of Stats. I cannot go outside of the plus-minus of the census data, and I had put a disclaimer that it could be higher or it could be lower.

          The easiest way to sort out our disagreement is to look at the source. If you know where Patricia Martinez got her numbers, just tell us. No need to ding-dong.

          1. “You were the one who asserted that Christians are “11 percent” of the Chinese in Sarawak.”

            The eleven percent is the proportion of Chinese who follow the Christian religion nationwide. This is sourced from the census data.

            The Chinese make up 24 percent of Sarawak’s population.
            Buddhists and practitioners of Chinese folk religion are around 20 percent of Sarawak’s population. Then, some Chinese may be atheist, agnostic, or follow other religions, such as Islam, animism, or spiritualism.

            That would leave the percentage of Chinese Christians around 3 percent of Sarawak’s population or less. This means the percentage of Sarawakian Chinese who are Christian, would be close to the 11 percent average across Malaysia.

            “on the other hand, did not stake any specific figure at all.”

            But that did not stop you from writing, without citing a source;

            ‘we might want to adjust the figure of 150, 000 down to perhaps 75,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sabah Christians.”

            “Yes, they did. But the Negeri-negeri Melayu always had the Sultans as the head of Islam. They are a barrier, just like in Selangor today. Sarawak in the modern era did not have Sultan to protect Islam.”

            The Chinese are not Malay Muslims, so the royal institutions of the Malay States as a potential barrier is not applicable. Remember you claimed that Chinese Christians have a strong presence in Sarawak due to the favourable policies of the Brooke Rajahs toward missionaries.

            “True. I thought that was an unwise move.”

            That is what happens when you have bureaucrats who do not or refuse to understand the history of East Malaysia.

            “Since I had from the very start admitted that I do not have the stats, the best I can do under the circumstances is deductive reasoning.
            Nonetheless, I believe that my range of figures is fair.”

            Citation is still needed.

            1. re: “But that did not stop you from writing, without citing a source”

              On the contrary, it is Patricia Martinez who failed to cite her source to back up her claim that “64 percent” of Malaysian Christians only speak BM and thus require the use of the Alkitab.

              re: “Yes, they did. But the Negeri-negeri Melayu always had the Sultans as the head of Islam. They are a barrier, just like in Selangor today. Sarawak in the modern era did not have Sultan to protect Islam.” / “The Chinese are not Malay Muslims, so the royal institutions of the Malay States as a potential barrier is not applicable. Remember you claimed that Chinese Christians have a strong presence in Sarawak due to the favourable policies of the Brooke Rajahs toward missionaries.”

              Which is why until recent times when the evangelistas rose and rose, and our latter day DAP politicians convert to Christianity at the age of 19, the Chinese ‘old’ Christians in Malaysia used to be the Sarawakians.

              Previously before the rise and rise of the evangelistas, esp. in the Klang Valley and Penang, Chinese in the peninsula were more Buddhists than Christians.

              re: “Since I had from the very start admitted that I do not have the stats, the best I can do under the circumstances is deductive reasoning. Nonetheless, I believe that my range of figures is fair.”

              Department of Statistics provided the core data as demonstrated above. My estimated range of plausibility cannot depart far from the 2010 census figures.

            2. The population of Sarawak is 2,471,140, out of which 24.5 percent are Chinese = 605,429 Chinese.

              The population of Sarawak is 13.5 percent Buddhist and 6.0 percent Taoist, Confucianist and other Chinese folk religions. Even allowing that ALL the Buddhists are Chinese (which is not true as some Indians are Buddhists too, and perhaps the pagan natives married to Chinese men or women), that’s 19.5 percent of the Sarawak population, i.e. 481,872.

              Sarawak Chinese = 605,429
              Sarawak Buddhists/Taoists/Confucianists/Chinese folk religionists etc = 481,872

              That leaves Chinese 123,557, presumably Christians

              Earlier my rough estimate was:

              “Hence after taking away the Chinese-speaking Christians we might want to readjust the modified figure of 500,000 a bit down to perhaps 350,000 (possibly) Malay-speaking Sarawak Christians.

              I had assumed the Chinese-speaking Christians to be 150,000. Working deductively from subtracting the Buddhist etc figures gives us 123,557.

              I’m not that far off.

              1. CORRECTION:

                I had assumed the Malay-speaking Christians (non-Ibans) to be 150,000 after subtracting a chunk of the Chinese-speaking Christians which is worked out to be 123,557.

              2. You are assuming there are no Chinese Sarawakians among the remaining five percent who are atheist or agnostic, or practice non-Chinese animism, spiritualism, Baha’i, Islam, and other religions. 2.6 percent of Sarawakians describe themselves as holding no religion.

                1. You are similarly assuming that there are no other races (Indians, animist natives married to Chinese) who practice either Buddhism or the folk religions or the worship of the Goddess Mazu in Kudat, Sabah — recalling the controversy over the huge statue.

                  Plus-minus lah on both your estimates and mine.

                  Since we’re both still doing deductive data, isn’t it the best solution to the impasse for Patricia Martinez to divulge where she got her “64 percent” Malaysian-Christians-only-speak-BM so that everyone can examine the source data for ourselves?

                  Which is the main purpose of this (my) article. I’m asking Patricia Martinez to put her data source on the table.

                  1. “Which is the main purpose of this (my) article. I’m asking Patricia Martinez to put her data source on the table.”

                    Yet there is no need to throw forth your assumptions.

                    1. There is no data and therefore working deductively (NOT throwing “assumptions” in the sense that you put it) is necessary.

                      Patricia Martinez makes a claim that “64 percent” of Malaysian Christians can speak only BM, and we’re still waiting for her to show where she got that from.

                      As for my “assumptions”, they’re worked out to tally fairly close to the national census. I do not pluck my figures from the air.

                      For example, I gave the figure that there might be 150,000 Chinese and other non-Malay speaking Christians in Sarawak who do not require the Alkitab. The estimated 123,557 Chinese presumably Christians in Sarawak derived from the census is pretty close to my estimate of non-Malay speaking Christians (who are not Iban either).

                    2. “For example, I gave the figure that there might be 150,000 Chinese and other non-Malay speaking Christians in Sarawak who do not require the Alkitab. The estimated 123,557 Chinese presumably Christians in Sarawak derived from the census is pretty close to my estimate of non-Malay speaking Christians (who are not Iban either).”

                      Again, the 123,000 odd figure you arrived at disregards the Chinese who are atheist or agnostic, or practice non-Chinese animism, spiritualism, Baha’i, Islam, and other religions.

                      If we factor these in, it would be considerably less than the figure you plucked.

  3. Dear HA

    Tq for doing this screenshot rather than thumbnail so we have the evidence of them or else than they can change the facts and figures in their article………

    As similar to their Al-kitab transalation now changed…..perhaps later they will ask DBP to change Kamus Dewan according to their tongue twister twist everywhere.

    Lionel

    1. Re. perhaps later they will ask DBP to change Kamus Dewan according to their tongue twister twist everywhere.

      There are already moving towards that direction.

      Pemerkasaan Bahasa Melayu Dalam Agama Kristian

      Quote “Kalimah Allah yang ingin digunakan di dalam Bible Bahasa Melayu juga adalah satu pengiktirafan kepada Bahasa Melayu untuk menjadi bahasa perantara bukan sahaja dari sudut keagamaan tetapi juga di dalam sudut linguistik.

      Malah, Datuk A. Samad Said juga menyokong penggunaan Kalimah Allah ini untuk orang bukan Islam kerana ia memartabatkan institusi kesusasteraan Melayu yang ingin diterjemahkan kepada dunia global.

      Jika anda sayangkan Bahasa Melayu maka sokonglah Bible atau Injil yang diterjemahkan kedalam bahasa tersebut.” Unquote

      http://christianunited4malaysia.blogspot.com/2014/02/pemerkasaan-bahasa-melayu-dalam-agama.html

  4. Maybe this Martinez character should visit your blog once in a while and see what’s on the top right banner says, ‘Allah is not a Malay word’.

  5. Posting a comment on your thread has become a challenge. But don’t worry, I love a good challenge.

    Siapa Martinez ini – orang Malaysia ke orang keturunan Sepanyol? Dia sendiri kalau beriya-iya nak pertahankan kegunaan BM untuk Kristian, fasihkah bertutur dalam BM? Atau dia bukan termasuk dalam 64% itu?

    Personally, I’d take your guesstimate over their PHD-researched-plucked-from-the-sky numbers any day. I would like to know also what studies she has conducted for her to give such a conclusive percentage figure.

    On the positive side, the government will be pleased to know that their efforts to mertabatkan BM are bearing fruits ;)

    1. re: “Posting a comment on your thread has become a challenge. But don’t worry, I love a good challenge.”

      It’s clearly that they’re trying to destroy my blog by blocking access and making it about as difficult for you to comment as it is for me to upload new stuff or even to approve comments.

      You know, right up to 2009 I was supporting the oppo. Then they tunjuk belang and subject critics to this kind of harassment.

      With this kind of up close and personal experience of what they’re capable of, how can I help but come to the conclusion that they are much, much worse that the opponent that they criticize?

      Blogging this past week has been frustrating for me.

      1. It seems your troubles are likely coming from the rival faction in UMNO, not the Opposition.

        Several other pro Barisan Nasional blogs aligned with the Mahathir-faction have been having trouble. Meanwhile, the other team’s websites are running smoothly.

  6. Helen,

    What I find more interesting is that when trying to back up the data some people will resorted to used percentages. Then they convinienly forget to provided the data sources. The data creadiblity cannot be checked too. And this people call themselves a learn people of higher degree.

    Interesting fact to pounder, if you distributed the questionaires to local areas where a lot of people’s using Malay as their daily main comunication languages and the local also Critianity in relegions than you can get those data especially if you distributes it to Sabah and Serawak.

    It also interesting to notes that the Sabah and Serawak local Malay languages actually a lot more similer with Indonesian Malay. Thus why the Bahasa Melayu Bible from Indonesia was widely accepted there for century.

    How comes to awares about the existing of this data? A friends kids use to tell me about his studies and one of his assignment need him to do a questionaires studies about the local.

    I cannot provides you with a link because I cannot find anythings on line. I guess the Uni didn’t republish this studies on line. But I saw the articles and known of it’s existings as I’m the one who help him print it out before he’s going back to Serawak.

    You can check Uni Serawak and Sabah for this student articles..

    :)sarah

  7. CikPuan Helen,

    I have a one point solution to end this so called Christians victimization nonsense… Accept the truth.

    The actual base for the basic lies in the heart of the most important commandment of all, that is Allah, He is One and Only. The statement does not only come from Muslims sources, but also quoted by two of the most respectful and powerful figure in the Christian world.

    Moses said it in Deuteronomy chapter 6 verse 4.

    שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, יְהוָה אֶחָד

    Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one.

    Then, Jesus re quoted it in Mark chapter 12 verse 28 to 30.

    28 One of the teachers of religious law was standing there listening to the debate. He realized that Jesus had answered well, so he asked, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

    29 Jesus replied, “The most important commandment is this: ‘Listen, O Israel! The Lord our God is the one and only Lord.

    30 And you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’

    & Muhammad concluded it in al Ikhlas verse 1 to 4

    بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ
    قُلۡ هُوَ اللّٰہُ اَحَدٌ
    اَللّٰہُ الصَّمَدُ
    لَمۡ یَلِدۡۙ وَ لَمۡ یُوۡلَدۡ
    وَ لَمۡ یَکُنۡ لَّهّ کُفُوًا اَحَدٌ

    1. Say:Allah, the One and Only;
    2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
    3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
    4. And there is none comparable unto Him.

    If this country really in need of National Reconciliation, then we better start it with this utmost important commandment of All, that is Allah, He is the One and Only. The Old Testament agrees with it. So does the New Testament. & The Final Testament (al Qur’an) sealed it with surah al Ikhlas.

    Only then we could achieve the ultimate peace.

    After this is achieved, then only the second most important commandment “Love Thy Neighbour As Yourself” could be promoted. (Mark Chapter 12 verse 31)

    But, will the Christians ready to accept the truth and ready to embrace it for the sake of a more peaceful Malaysia?

    Metatron out..

    1. In other words, to you, for a peaceful Malaysia practitioners of other religions must convert.

      That certainly will not bring peace.

      1. In other words, Muslims believe in the teaching of Divine Unity that all the Israelite prophets have been proclaiming down the ages and were it not for the veracity of the Quranic scripture and the Prophet Muhammad’s traditions, humanity would have been hoodwinked wholesale by Pauline Christianity and its innovated Trinitarian godhead whose dogma was initiated with the Nicene creed in the 4th cent. AD. by the emperor Constantine and his select bishops.

      2. Ur wild and wet imagination in pushing my comment beyond what it intended to promote is beyond any sentient & mortal being could grasp.

        What I said was, don’t treat ur Holy book as it is a RM 30 Petaling Street hooker. U bend, kick, slap her and hit ur eureka moment without showing her any respect. It’s nobody’s business to meddle with God’s words.

        If the Christians here are truly peace loving Malaysian, then, they should go back to the actual basic which is their own Bible in God’s and Jesus words. Follow Jesus and not any Herman, Martinez or Pakiam!

      3. Bukan convert, tapi revert, itulah fitrah manusia.

        Beriman pada Allah/God/Tuhan/Eli yang satu tiada sekutu bagi

        nya

  8. The big problem here is that the Malay liberals are the ones that have given the christians the leeway to fight. These people want to be Muslims but to practise it the way they want to. They are the oppoortunists using the christians to their benefit.

    People like marina, sis etc etc want absolute freedom for all including lgbt etc etc. the authorities should leave them alone to be who and what they want to be openly. Label them but do not take any legal action. Let them deal with it themselves. It is between them and Allah.

    Like zarinah anwar said, in her recent article about malaysia being so exposed to western idealogy and styles and not allowed the freedom to do as they please.

    Most of these are western educated and most are government scholars.

    Chicken and egg!!!!!!

  9. As far as the Christians are concern, we should give our 2 thumbs up to Azazel/Lucifer and the Anti-christ for a job well done!

    Or Me? Tor For?

        1. Don’t we all sometimes…
          Better than a – Jung tripped over a Sabina Spielrein.

          Or Me? Tor For?

    1. Some vital information about “Or Me Tor For”

      How do pious Buddhists understand the merits of true faith in the moral and mystical teachings of Amitabha, The Buddha of Infinite Light?

      The Pure Land Paradise of Budhha Amitabha [YouTube]

  10. Er….This is abt the pic u put on ur right of ur blog. “For millionth times Allah is not a Malay word.”……have you try to find the on ur Kamus? I got the word on my Kamus easily, even the kamus online….the word definition is “Tuhan yg esa” Nothing mention abt which religion. Then if the definition is true, sure ppl will choose the word as translation, not yet mention they actually all came from the same origin, God of Abraham. Thats all.
    So, try any Kamus you can get first b4 u claim it is not a Malay word. ^^
    And one more thing, the Arabic word should be الله …not in Roman writing Allah. So, if you talk about the Roman Allah, it must be the Malay, English or something else.

    1. Hullo, the Kamus Dewan says that ‘Allah’ is “Ar” (Arabic).

      Secondly it is Tuhan yg esa, “Tuhan” in upper case (capital letter). The word does not refer to god in general. It refers to God as specifically the One worshipped by Muslims.

      1. Hehe, then it mean the word is already included in Malay isnt it? And like I said …Ar should be الله , not in Roman writing. Can 阿拉 be Arabic? Sure not…. it is Chinese which transfer from Arabic Pronunciation and meaning…. but it is still and already Chinese if the word is included in its dictionary… Mean you can officially use the word on ur exam, no one can give you a “X”

        And the esa and Capital…..sure it is more suitable for both Kristian, Yahudi and all Abraham origin religion.

        Unless the Kamus define the word “Allah” as “Tuhan yg esa, tapi hanya untk Islam” or “God of Islam”… Otherwise, no meter even your refer to the original word الله, the define is more simple…. “the only GOD and almighty God”….Not “the GOD of Islam” regardless any religion. I just mean..If talking abt Wordplay ….. I think that is not a reason for Christian not to use the word in translation…then find another one. ^^

        1. re: “Hehe, then it mean the word is already included in Malay isnt it?”

          ‘Jibril’ is also included in Kamus Dewan with the meaning “malaikat yg menjadi pesuruh Tuhan utk menyampaikan wahyu” but this inclusion does not make ‘Jibril’ a Malay word. It is the archangel’s proper name.

          re: “Unless the Kamus define the word ‘Allah’ as ‘Tuhan yg esa, tapi hanya untk Islam’ or “God of Islam”

          Good idea, Xin. Kamus Dewan should adopt your suggestion when they print the next edition of their dictionary.

          Good faith and trust has so far been extended to the Christian community but if this is the repayment given by the evangelistas (kebas istilah ‘Allah’) to the custodians of the Malay language, then by all means the fine print – ‘Tuhan dalam agama Islam bagi umat Islam’ should be included so that there is no further ambiguity.

          1. First, Dear Helen…I think u ar smart but dont let the political stance and religion prejudice have blinded ur mind. If you want to write abt those use, please keep you mind clean and clear.

            1. Sure a lot of word is “imported” word in Malay. If Allah is not a Malay word, sure it is not Arabic word too….No Arabic word will written in Roman. Then according to you logic, it is not a word.
            Or maybe it is belong to ENGLISH…bc you can get the word on Oxford English Dictionary..The definition is easier “A name of God among Muslim”..hehe .then only Muslim will use the term.
            But, please think normally, How do we consider which word to be use on translation? First, the precise meaning among some choices and the community which using the word. So, when you try to translate something to English, the reference should be Dictionary and the word which ppl common used in their community. When you refer to a Cambridge Dictionary, will you concern that the word “GOD” is actually a German word origin…. But even now is already written in the ENGLISH DICTIONARY…then will you avoid to use it??!! BC maybe it is not a English word?
            When you want to translate a Curry recipe in to Malay, will you consider that “Kari is Indian word, then look for another one.”……will you? Then how abt AlQuran? Is this Malay word or what, or have to use “Kitab Suci Islam” every time we translate the word in Malay? Sure not, if the community is already accept the meaning, then it is the word and meaning you ar looking for.
            Like I said, this is still not yet mention about when both side is talking abt God of Abraham. When ppl saw the whole community is using the word Allah as “Tuhan yg maha Esa”, then sure (no offense and conspiracy) they will first consider the word as translation. But if we really use the Arabic wordالله, then obviously I dont think any translator will consider it as translation.

            The main theologies argument btween Christian and Muslim is “Is Jesus Son of God or God himself?” and “Is prophet Muhammad Prophet of God?”…why would they have such serious argument in pass 1400 years?! Bc the debate is all base on the same GOD.. “God of Abraham”, they use term Allah when debating the theological differences.

            Otherwise there is not such argument between them. So if accept the truth, you will know that is not abt the “Allah”, ….is about “Jesus” and “Muhammad”, bc the whole Middle east know they ar debating under the name of same GOD. But western Christian basically dont accept it, so they defame “Allah” become “God only for Islam” although some of the Islam Missionaries like Ahmed Deedat willing to bring massage to the Western that “Allah is the God of all, the Creator of universe” not like the Western defame as Demon (Bc most of the western ppl havent read any scripture of AlQuran before they accept the Allah is Demon. Yes, Stupid and Prejudice).
            But we all know this two religion is actually Brother and Sister. Then just let it be with open mind when things already happened. If the debate can happen there, then it can be happen here too. I dont think Islam and Muslim is easy vulnerable after 1400years on earth. If after knowing each other as well, Muslim still disagree that Jesus is the son of GOD or Christian still dont accept Nabi Muhammad is the prophet of GOD, thats fine. Every one keep their belie. At least they know what is the same and what is the difference. Kalo ada masa, bincang lagi bila minum kopi kat mamak.

            For what i think, the term “Tuhan” is good, but that will not solve the problem.
            The problem only solve when our ppl are well educated with open mind. Otherwise they will maybe bring out with another prohibited term issu after this. Like “Rasul”~which is also use by Malay bible ….mean apostle ….. Can you find another word in Malay with this meaning? It is also one of the mentioned word should be prohibited.

            2. Yes, I also think it is a good Idea if Kamus Dewan adopt my idea. But it is just a joke……Bc you know why? I think Helen you probably not much understand abt both religion here. Even you wrote alot of article abt this.

            First, this is quite contradiction among all. If the Kamus really want to define the term “Allah” as “God of Islam” or “God which is only can use by Muslim” of “Name of Islam God”……then maybe Malay speaking Christian have to find another word to replace the word. What ever, they can even invent a term like “ELOH” which similar to Hebrew word “Elohim” in bible (which mean almighty God). Then bring it to community and community will bring it to Kamus too. Then define “ELOH” as “Almighty God, the creator”…no need to “()” it is only for Christian or anyone else…regardless who want to use the term, because they dont care.
            Then you will find a problem here…..The term “Allah” is downgrade in bahasa due to the term is only for Muslim use compare with the ELOH is for all….orz. I dont think it is acceptable result for our Muslim friend here.
            Furthermore, if you define word “Allah” as “God of Islam”, that is definitely difference meaning with the original term الله in Arabic already–“God of all”..not “God of Islam”. And that will make ELOHIM(if it include in Kamus) or Tuhan closer to the original Arabic “Allah” meaning. This is the contradiction here…..

            So, my point is……how many percentage of Malay speaking Christian is not the acceptable reason for the prohibition nor whether it is or not a Malay word. Not even bc the theological differences between both religion.
            But bc our Muslim friend are asking with kindness, and when ppl who really have been used the term for few decade on their religion practice agree to let it go with willingly.
            Then I will said the problem is solve peacefully. Otherwise, there is always hidden contradiction and conflict between both site.
            What can we do…..give some time for both side.

            Dont think I’m fully against this issue….actually this is my stand on this issue. My point is clear…I put my advice here.

            http://tambahminyakmalaysia.blogspot.com/

            but Sorry, I cant help them to decide bc my bible is English and Chinese version. I just can give my advice^^
            This is the way I love my country, bukan dgn cara buli-buli minoriti kito.

            1. As the risk of being accused of dogmatism, it nonetheless behooves us to re-forward the formal arguments for our case in this long drawn-out theological issue which the Quran tells us is not a matter for philosophical speculation, that is, specifically the nature of God the Creator and Sustainer, Most High and Sublime:

              The Quranic chapter entitled “Sincerity”:

              “Say (oh Muhammad): Allah is the Unique One and Absolute; neither begetting (offspring) nor begotten (of parents); and nothing is associated with Him (in Essence).”

              1] Heresy Arises From Words Wrongly Used:

              http://www.ikim.gov.my/index.php/ms/artikel/7679-heresy-arises-from-words-wrongly-used

              2] Understanding the “Allah” Controversy:

              http://www.ikim.gov.my/index.php/ms/the-star/8065-understanding-the-allah-controversy

              It also behooves those who will go on grumbling about their case to forward their formal schematic to argue for their case. Otherwise, we will be running down the level of the discourse and as Xin says it: “Kalo ada masa, bincang lagi bila minum kopi kat mamak.” And who’s to say that anyone doesn’t love his country except when he or she turns towards a reactionism which is at once incognizant of the trational and scriptural bases that undergird the current controversy of their making.

              1. Dear Keris,
                1. I fully understand what is all abt the Allah in Islam what the term theologies in Islam belief.

                BUT, my view is clear…..although Muslim and Christian have difference understanding about the word “GOD”….no meter GOD is singularity or Plural or what, they discuss and argue and even debate. but no one will be prohibited to use the term “GOD”.

                Just like ancient Arabic and Jews and Christian, when Christianity first spread to Arabic world. They must have a lot of argument on the nature and divinity of the GOD they knew before. I am sure they must use the same term to discuss and argue on it… I think ALLAH is the word they are using between.
                Bc ELOHIM is the word they use in Hebrew bible…They had used the term from Syriac (Aramaic) language: “alaha” in that region. Allah in Arab. All with same meaning and similar pronounce. Then they can argue on the same base.
                I’m not the expert abt the ancient languages….so, pls refer to some link here. or you can search on Google.

                I wonder this kind of conversation will happen in murid2 Malaysia 1 day in future.
                Kristian: Dalam Al-kitab saya tulis Tuhan yg maha Esa yg mencipta kan kami.
                Muslim: Allah yg mencipta.
                Kristian: Dan Yesus ialah anak Allah.
                Muslim: Salah, Allah tidak beranak.
                Kristian: OK, sebab tu dia anak Tuhan yg maha Esa tapi bukan Allah..
                Muslim: Salah, Tuhan yg maha esa tu Allah lah.
                Kristian: Ok, sebab tu Tuhan yg maha esa dalam al-kitab saya bukan Allah. Tapi Allah ialah Tuhan yg maha esa dalam Quran.
                Muslim: Salah, Tuhan yg maha esa di mana-mana mesti Allah.
                Kristian: sebab tu…? Yesus anak Allah lah.
                Muslim: …….

                Actually we just have to educate them to accept a idea…..
                Idea “Tuhan yg maha esa” dalam Al-Kitab kamu ada beberapa pembezaan dengan “Tuhan yg maha esa” dalam Al-Quran saya….
                Thats mean……We all Know God, but we got difference understanding about the GOD.
                then…..your Allah is not my Allah…
                If they want to keep arguing the nature of “Tuhan yg maha esa”…pls keep going…just make sure they kno what they discuss abt.

                about the term…
                http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Saifullah/bibleallah.htm

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

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

                (Although some might said that Wiki is not the proper way, but I think the references and notes which bring these editors views is quite worth it to study….If you have time.)

                I suggest that maybe local Malay Christian can change the term in to Elohim which is also mean the unique and almighty GOD Hebrew bible. Then they can still pray with the pronunciation that does not change much. Just the changing on printing.
                But do you think it really mater? Elohim….Allah……Actually the same term…I think…Just 1 imported from Hebrew 1 from Arab.

  11. Very diligent of you to try to get your statistics right. However, you have not considered this: when people of different tribes gather as a church, it is the lingua franca that is used. Also, it is unfortunate but true that many bumis are gradually not speaking their mother tongue due to inter marriage n migration to the cities. Please come over and see for yourself how much BM is being used by Christians here.

Comments are closed.