1. Malaysiakini (http://www.malaysiakini.com)
Sibu church grants: Keep or give back?, 27 May 2010
'The timing for the grant is not under the control of the churches. It is sad that they have been 'dragged' into this by the unscrupulous actions of BN.'
Sibu churches won't give up 'by-election grant'
Justitia: If the allocation was before the by-election, in my view, it should be okay to keep it. It reminds me of the joke about a very poor religious woman who lived next door to an atheist. Every day, the woman would pray and thank God for her daily provisions and each day she would find a basket of food in front of her door.
After about a week, the atheist approached the woman and said, "See, there is no God. I am the one who puts the basket there every day." The woman replied, "That's what you think." She picked up the basket, went in and closed the door. Then she prayed. "Thank you, Lord for the daily provisions, and thank you that you made the devil pay for it."
The timing for the grant is not under the control of the churches. It is sad that they have been "dragged" into this by the unscrupulous actions of BN.
Myop101: Now it becomes clear that the churches did apply for the allocation and go through due processes. I don't see this as a bribe. It is unfortunate that BN politicised this by giving it during the Sibu by-election. They should just keep the money.
The Shrimp Warrior: The money was given with an obviously ulterior motive. The money was received to further noble intentions. The gesture to return the money should have been done immediately for the greatest moral impact. That would have been most effective.
For now, keep the money, and learn your lesson, oh you holy men and women of the church.
Perakian: It's taxpayers' money, not BN's. Just take it. It belongs to the rakyat.
Newdawn4pg@wordpress: Let's not drag God into this issue. The timing of this grant, given by 'BeEnd' (BN), is entirely well-planned - to place the churches in the most difficult situation and to gain political mileage at the same time.
It was just too bad that (PKR disciplinary committee member) Goh Keat Peng fell into BeEnd's trap. Why couldn't he keep his mouth shut and just let it be? It is the rakyat's money, so what's the problem for churches to accept them? We all know there is evil purpose behind BeEnd's handling of these grants, but come on... they still lost, didn't they?
Mikey: I think we don't have to subscribe to any religion to understand the moral question or dilemma posed by Goh. I guess the answer is that it is on your conscience and between you and whatever god you subscribe to. For me, I will take it and give to the poor and needy. I won't use it to build nice beautiful churches.
Lonestar: The money given is obviously not BN's but the taxpayers'. But do all taxpayers support the money given this way? There is no need to bring God into the picture. Others might just think it is Satan giving away taxpayers' money for nefarious purposes. But having been given the money, please use it to do the Lord's work.
Kong: Food for thought: Should we also stop going to schools and hospitals, and drive on roads built by the government?
John The Baptist: "(Sing Ang Tong Methodist Church chairperson Robert) Kwang described the grant of RM400,000, given on the eve of polling day, as a 'special opportunity given by God' for which the church should be grateful."
Robert Kwang, I wonder whether God knows that the gift he gave you is tainted with corruption to gain your votes. Sure, the timing was before the by-election, but if there was no election, you think God as you put it, would have delivered the money to you?
This is not a Christian problem, but a human problem. Goh was right in his call. Greed has a big part to play in this. Kwang, I hope you can keep God out of it.
Paul Warren: The intent of the giver was not exactly kosher. There were ill-founded expectations. The money went through (hands that were) tainted. To the pastors who have indicated their intention to keep the money, just know this: It's dirty money!
Would you guys also receive 10 percent of a drug pusher's money if his giving was a reprieve that he hoped to buy in this world? Priests, you guys don't fool me. I, as a Christian, should know.
Ozhero: Why can't they just donate the monies to the poor, homeless and needy, rather than keeping it? They give, I just take, lah. So typical.
Of course, this money is taxpayers' money. So these guys should hear the will of the people. They already know the motive behind these grants. It has nothing to do with helping them to do God's work. That line of argument is total rubbish. They think the money they have can buy them a place in Heaven. As a Christian, I'm totally appalled and disgusted with them.
StevenForMalaysia: Yes, it's a bribe considering the timing. Prime Minister Najib Razak had given the money with the clear intention of getting the votes from the churches.
And based on what Najib had said at another place in the same election campaign that 'you help me to deliver Robert Lau, I will help you by signing the RM5 million cheque', his behaviour has clearly testified his intention when he approved the allocation to the churches.
Didn't the Bible says that we should distant ourselves from sinful acts?
Terry Netto: Timing is everything. When money is given just before elections, the intention of the giver is obvious. It is a bribe, whatever name you call it. Why else would Najib give the money to these four churches and ignore the hundreds of other churches in East Malaysia? What's the special need of these four churches at this critical moment of time?
If the churches were morally upright, they would have told Najib: "Keep the money. However, after the elections, if you still want to give it to us with no strings attached, we'll be happy to receive it."
The four churches of Sibu have made monetary gains, but the 'Church' (i.e. body of Christians) across Malaysia will pay the price of such lowering of moral standards. I'm sad that we seem to lack true Christian leaders in Sibu - or, at least, true Methodist Christian leaders.
It's a sad day for Christianity in Malaysia. I do hope that the central leadership of the Methodist Church counsels its Sibu brethen to do the right thing.
Barking Dog: In case of doubt, pray to the Lord Jesus and you will receive the answer. Everyone else, please smoke cigar in the hallway.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only Malaysiakini subscribers can post comments. Over the past six months, Malaysiakinians have posted 50,000 comments. Be part of the Malaysiakini community and help set the news.
2. The Star Online (http://thestar.com.my)
Blasphemy can lead to apostasy, 25 May 2010
by DR WAN AZHAR WAN AHMAD, Senior Fellow/Director, Ikim
Though Islamic tradition offers no exact equivalent for the term blasphemy, Muslims without proper knowledge who criticise the religion may fall into infidelity or apostasy.
BLASPHEMY, derived from the Greek term meaning “speaking evil”, is contemptuous or irreverent words or speech about God or things regarded as sacred.
Its synonyms, among others, are abuse, desecration, execration, profanation, repudiation, derogation, denunciation, heresy, insult, impiety, sacrilege, scurrility and reviling.
“To blaspheme” is to speak about the Divine or those sacred things impiously, disrespectfully.
In Islam, words that pierce the Almighty God with insults (sabb), insinuate the Prophet Muhammad, or mock any part of the Revelation constitutes religious crimes.
Though Islamic tradition offers no exact equivalent, these situations are analogous or comparable to blasphemy. The Quranic term that comes fairly close to blasphemy is “words of infidelity” (kalimat al-kufr).
Theologically speaking, blasphemy may overlap with or lead to infidelity, i.e. deliberate rejection of God and Revelation.
To a lesser degree, but equally destructive, expressing religious opinions at variance with the standard established Islamic worldview or creed could easily be looked upon as blasphemous.And this blasphemy may also be defined as any verbal expression that possibly gives grounds for apostasy (riddah).
Blasphemy can also be considered as equivalent to heresy (zandaqah). This pre-Islamic Persian term is employed in Islamic literature to describe the heretics (zindiqs) whose teaching becomes a threat to the state and religion. Originally zindiqs was used to refer to the followers of Mani (d. 277 AD) who deviated from the original teachings of Zorostrianism.
From the inception of Islam, the religion has been confronted with a lot of opposition. The Prophet Muhammad himself encountered vehement rejection from the Arab people and leaders of Mecca. They disputed, abused, rejected and ridiculed many Quranic teachings brought by him. They not only mocked his claim as the prophet of God but also accused him of many derogatory names and professions.
Based on the Noble Quran and Sunnah, the nature and conditions for blasphemy have been elaborated upon by scholars. They describe it as the expression of denigration, contempt or scorn for God, the Prophets, the Quran, the angels, or the traditional religious sciences based on Revelation.
The list goes to those remarks that offend the qualified and true religious scholars. Insults to the authoritative religious scholarship is tantamount to rejection of religious knowledge itself. It implies that the Revelation is untruthful, implicating the Prophet and ultimately Almighty God.
The aforementioned antagonism has been taking place in Islamic history since the time of the Prophet. It is still happening today and will continue to the future.
What is more unfortunate, is that it is done by Muslims themselves, the confused ones. They question the rationale and even validity of certain religious pronouncements, claiming injustices and discrimination, for example, against gender, as well as violation of human rights on the part of Islam.
The terms blasphemy and heresy are invoked here to remind and caution many modern educated Muslims who are inclined to follow the footsteps of those early blasphemers and zindiqs by criticising their religion without having proper knowledge.
It appears that those educated but ignorant Muslims become zindiqs or “free thinkers” making their external profession of Islam not sufficiently sincere due to improper guidance.
Therefore, Muslims must always be careful with their intentions, words and actions. They are supposed to be sensible enough to realise that whatever they do, it must be done in accordance with the true teachings of Islam.
All arguments must be constructed upon premises based on right knowledge. And true Muslims must always be ever willing to come back to the right path and correct themselves if what they are holding to is proven wrong.
Blasphemous Muslims must be aware that they may fall into infidelity or apostasy if they choose to remain obstinate after being told the truth.
© 1995-2010 Star Publications (Malaysia) Bhd (Co No 10894-D)
(End)
