You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘religion’ category.
Puak-puak evangelis Kristian masih ingin menegakkan benang yang basah. Mereka masih berkeras menyatakan bahawa penggunaan kalimah Allah untuk terjemahan istilah God adalah satu keperluan. (Saya telah ulaskan bahawa terjemahan tersebut adalah tersasar dari segi kaedah peristilahan di sini: klik untuk baca).
Niat sebenar puak-puak evangelis berbohong untuk mengguna kalimah Allah bagi terjemahan kepada istilah “God” telahpun didedahkan sendiri oleh majalah mereka Christianity Today yang berpusat di Chicago, Amerika Syarikat. Mereka dengan jelas mengatakan bahawa penggunaan kalimah Allah adalah suatu usaha strategik untuk menipu umat Islam agar terkeliru untuk membaca bahan-bahan bacaan Kristian. (baca di sini: Kenapa Evangelis Kristian Risau Apabila Lagu Agnes Monica Diharamkan?).
Untuk kiriman ini saya ingin dedahkan pula apakah puak-puak evangelis ini benar-benar jujur hendak mengguna nama suci Allah itu. Apakah mereka benar-benar percaya bahawa nama yang sepatutnya untuk Tuhan mereka adalah Allah? Apakah mereka akan benarkan pula penganut Islam yang telah tertipu oleh mereka itu berterusan mengguna nama suci Allah apabila telah murtad dan mengamal agama Kristian?
Majalah Christianity Today keluaran Januari-Februari 2013 telah mendedahkan sepasang suami isteri Islam telah ditipu dan berjaya dimurtadkan serta percaya bahawa Tuhan dalam agama Kristian juga bernama Allah. Laporan majalah tersebut menyebut bahawa akhirnya mereka berterusan mengguna nama suci Allah (seperti dalam ucapan Alhamdulillah dan Insha Allah) apabila telah murtad dan masuk agama Kristian.
Maka pada suatu hari, mereka bertemu kembali dengan paderi yang telah memperdayakan mereka untuk murtad. Maka paderi itu bertanya khabar kepada mereka.
One day the pastor came to me and said, “How are you?” I answered, “Alhamdulillah!” (“Praise be to God!”). The pastor was very angry. He said, “No, brother! No more Alhamdulillah. Your God is changed from Allah to God [using the tribal name]. You have to express your thanksgiving to God as a Christian …
Terjemahannya:
Suatu hari paderi tersebut datang berjumpa saya dan berkata, “Awak apa khabar?” Saya menjawab, “Alhamdulillah!” (“Segala puji kepada Allah!”). Paderi tersebut sangat marah. Dia mengatakan, “Tidak, saudara! Tidak lagi Alhamdulillah. Tuhan awak sudah bertukar dari Allah ke Tuhan [dengan mengguna nama Tuhan dalam istilah bahasa tempatan]. Awak perlu menyatakan kesyukuran awak kepada Tuhan sebagai seorang Kristian …
Dengan JELAS dan TERANG, sememangnya paderi tersebut menipu. Dan ini membuktikan bahawa sememangnya puak-puak evangelis ini MENIPU hanya untuk memperdayakan umat Islam dalam tuntutan mereka untuk mengguna nama suci Allah itu.
PENIPUAN dan KEJAHATAN puak-puak evangelis ini semakin ketara apabila majalah mereka sendiri mendedahkan bahawa sebenarnya mereka tidak mahu guna nama suci Allah untuk tujuan nama Tuhan mereka. Malah majalah tersebut mendedahkan lagi bahawa mereka AMAT BENCI dengan nama Allah itu.
Ini yang disebut lagi dalam perenggan yang sama:
He asked me to not use the term Allah because Allah is evil, Allah is the Devil, Allah is the black stone, Allah is an idol.
Terjemahannya:
Dia (paderi itu) melarang saya guna kalimah Allah kerana Allah jahat, Allah adalah Syaitan, Allah adalah batu hitam (Kaabah), Allah itu adalah berhala.
KEBENCIAN puak-puak evangelis ini terhadap nama suci Allah ini sungguh jelas sekali apabila mereka menghina Allah.
PERSOALAN POKOK, jika mereka sungguh bencikan nama suci Allah ini mengapa mereka menuntut hendak gunanya?
BUKTI dari bahan Kristian sendiri mendedahkan kebencian dan kesumat mereka terhadap nama suci Allah. Tetapi kerana tujuan untuk MENIPU dan memperdayakan umat Islam mereka tuntut penggunaan kalimah Allah. Dan fenomena ini nampak jelas bukan sahaja berlaku di Malaysia.
Inilah asas penyebaran kepalsuan ajaran Kristian yang berlandaskan menipu orang untuk masuk agama mereka dan terjerumus sama dalam api neraka selama-lamanya. نعوذ بالله من ذلك
**********
Baca seterusnya:
Tahniah diucapkan kepada Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (MAIS) yang telah mengeluarkan larangan penyiaran lagu “Allah Peduli” nyanyian Agnes Monica, penyanyi dari Indonesia. Larangan ini adalah untuk memelihara aqidah umat Islam dari terjatuh murtad kerana menyanyikan lagu tersebut. (baca lanjut: Boleh Jatuh Murtad Bila Nyanyi Lagu Agnes Monica?)
Apabila larangan tersebut dikeluarkan pada Mac 2009, sebuah majalah Kristian, Christianity Today, mengulas larangan tersebut dalam laporan mereka pada terbitan bulan Julai 2009.
“… using Allah in Indonesia is strategic … The negative impact of not using it is that it would make it harder for a Muslim to pick up a Bible.”
Terjemahannya:
” … penggunaan (istilah) Allah di Indonesia (termasuk Malaysia dalam kes mengulas larangan ini) adalah strategik … Impak negatif tidak membenar penggunaannya ialah bahawa ia menjadi susah untuk orang Islam mengambil (dan membaca) Bible.”
Maka, sahlah niat dan tujuan mereka untuk mengguna istilah Allah untuk terjemahan kepada istilah God adalah bertujuan untuk memperdayakan orang-orang Islam.
Sedangkan kita tahu, terjemahan God kepada Allah adalah tidak tepat malah bersalahan dari segi peristilahannya (baca lanjut: Apa Susah-susah Nak Faham Terjemahan “God”?)
Bukti sejelas ini tidak boleh dinafikan lagi oleh evangelis Kristian kerana pengakuan yang membongkarkan niat jahat mereka untuk menipu serta memperdayakan umat Islam dinyatakan sendiri oleh mereka dalam majalah mereka sendiri.
Menurut risalah yang dikeluarkan oleh Pejabat Mufti Wilayah Persekutuan:
… murtad boleh terjadi dengan melakukan salah satu daripada tiga perkara berikut:-
1. Melalui perkataan atau ucapan dan kata-kata. (Murtad Qawli)
2. Melalui perbuatan atau tingkahlaku. (Murtad Fi’li)
3. Melalui akidah, kepercayaan atau niat. (Murtad I’tiqadi)
Maka, jika seseorang menyanyikan lagu Agnes Monica, penyanyi dari Indonesia, bertajuk “Allah Peduli”, seseorang itu boleh jatuh murtad “melalui perkataan atau ucapan dan kata-kata. (Murtad Qawli)”.
Mengapa begitu?
Di hujung lagu tersebut terdapat senikata yang berbunyi:
Sebab Allah Yesus ku mengerti
Berapa ramaikah orang-orang kita yang menyanyi lagi ini tanpa perasan Allah yang dimaksudkan itu adalah tuhan Kristian?
Jika kita dengar betul-betul lagu tersebut, Agnes Monica tidak menyebut nama “Jesus” itu dengan jelas yang mudah untuk kita sedari. Dengan loghat dan pelat sebutan Indonesia, “Yesus” yang disebutnya sukar untuk orang-orang biasa ketahui maksud perkataan yang disebut.
Setelah beberapa bulan saya memainkan lagu ini dalam siri ceramah penerangan polemik isu kalimah Allah di merata pelusuk negara terutama di kawasan pendalaman, didapati ramai orang-orang kita yang hadir dan mendengar lagu tersebut tidak perasan akan sebutan Tuhan Allah yang dimaksudkan dalam lagu tersebut adalah Tuhan orang Kristian – Jesus/Yesus.
Sebab itu kita kena berhati-hati dalam percakapan kita. Jangan kerana mulut badan binasa dalam api neraka.
**********
Baca seterusnya:
Nama saya Abdul Karim.
Saya seorang lelaki.
Dalam Bahasa Inggeris, lelaki disebut sebagai “man”.
Untuk diterjemahkan “man” ke dalam Bahasa Melayu, ianya ialah “lelaki”.
Bukan “Abdul Karim”.
Kerana itu nama saya, dan nama lain-lain lelaki yang senama dengan saya.
Takkan semua “man” yang ditemui hendak kita kirakan itu adalah “Abdul Karim”.
Begitu juga untuk seorang yang bernama “Mariam”.
Beliau seorang wanita.
Dalam Bahasa Inggeris, wanita disebut sebagai “woman”.
Untuk diterjemahkan “woman” ke dalam Bahasa Melayu, ianya ialah “wanita”.
Bukan “Mariam”.
Kerana itu nama khas kepada wanita itu dan lain-lain wanita yang bernama “Mariam”
Begitulah apabila kita hendak terjemah istilah “God” dari Bahasa Inggeris.
“God” dalam Bahasa Melayu disebut “Tuhan” bukannya diterjemahkan dengan nama khas “Allah”.
Mudahnya nak faham.
**********
Baca seterusnya:
Sekadar untuk renungan bersama.
Apabila kita hendak terjemahankan istilah “car” dalam bahasa Inggeris kepada bahasa Melayu maka kita sebut “kereta”. Dan kalau kita di Indonesia ianya diterjemahkan kepada “mobil”.
Kita tidak boleh, hanya kerana jenama buatan Malaysia ialah Proton, terjemahkan “car” dengan “Proton”. Tidak semestinya semua jenama kereta adalah Proton.
Begitulah kiasannya bagi mereka yang jujur untuk berfikir … terutama dalam polemik isu kalimah Allah. Apakah “man” itu diterjemahkan sebagai “Isa” atau kita sepatutnya sebut “lelaki”?
Persembahan lagu Khalifah of Allah oleh Aiman Amani, Aeshah Adlina, Anisah Afifah and Ahmad Ali semasa Minggu Duat 2009 sempena Karnival Maal Hijrah 1431 di perkarangan Masjid Negeri di Shah Alam.
A brief response to MCCBCHST’s Statement
It is with regret that we must respond to the statement issued by the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) on 5th February 2013. A number of misleading points were made in the statement and this has caused gross misinterpretation of several pertinent aspects on the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation in this country.
On the special position of Islam in the Federal Constitution
As admitted by MCCBCHST, the fact is that Islam is the religion of the Federation in Article 3 of the Federal Constitution. This is not disputed by anyone. It must be stated further that although Article 3 (1) says other religions may practice their religions in peace and harmony, due to Islam’s special position, they can only do so without interfering with the peace and harmony of the practice of Islam.
In simple words, disrespect for Islam’s special position can be construed a bane to other religions, which according to the Federal Constituion, “may be practiced in peace and harmony”. Certainly an encroachment and misuse of Muslim beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines in non–Muslims religious context and even though among non-Muslims themselves is sacrilegious and blasphemous to Muslims in Malaysia. Indeed the intention of the framers of the Federal Constitution not wanting such discontentment, discord and uneasiness from the amongst the Malaysian Muslims to arise framed the whole of Article 11 and in particular Article 11(4).
Article 11 (1) Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.
Take note that freedom to practice religion is subject to Clause (4), reading it gives the notion that there is no absolute freedom. In wanting other religions to practice in peace and harmony other than the special of Islam in Article 3, other religions must understand in tandem that States can restrict and control other religion from encroaching and misusing Muslim beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines in non–Muslims religious context and even though among non-Muslims themselves. Non-Muslims can propagate their religious doctrines to other non- Muslims but not Muslims. The Constitution does not accord such protection to non Muslims.
On Article 11 (4)
It must be made clear that Article 11 which provides for freedom of religion must be read subject to clause (4), where these supreme laws of ours allow for the “controlling or restricting the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.” In other words Federal Constitution guarantees and affirms the rights of Muslims, that non-Muslims cannot be practicing Muslims beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines in what to be perceived as non-Muslims using and practicing Muslim beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines in non–Muslims religious context. Indeed the need to control and restrict such notion against non-Muslims is to prevent confusion which may cause discontentment, discord and uneasiness of Muslims that the non-Muslims practices had encroached into or run contrary to Muslims beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines.
While the Constitution recognizes every individual’s right to freedom of religion, including the right to propagate the religion, but the Federal Constitution allows for the promulgation of laws to control and restrict non-Muslims from encroaching the rights of Muslim as enshrined in the Federal constitution. The perception that non-Muslims can use and propagate Muslims beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines among non-Muslims in their religious practices and doctrine is in actual fact a misuse and misnomer. Certainly what does not come under the purview of freedom of other religion is to misuse Muslims beliefs, percepts and religious doctrines in their religious context. It must be noted that the freedom however is not an absolute one.
In respect of the right to propagate the religion, the Constitution provides the State Legislature the power to legislate law to control, or even to restrict the right to propagation of any religious doctrines or beliefs among Muslims.
It is important to note that laws controlling propagation are meant not only to maintain public order, but more importantly to prevent Muslims from being exposed to heretical religious doctrines, be they of Islamic or non-Islamic origin and irrespective of whether those propagating the doctrines are Muslims or non-Muslims.
MCCBCHST’s claim that the right to freedom of religion as provided for under Article 11(1) connotes an absolute right to propagate the non-Islamic religion is therefore inaccurate in light of the Federal Constitution.
At paragraph 5 of its statement, MCCBCHST has stated that “there are no laws whether Federal or State that enables Muslims body or organization to impose “fatwa” or rulings on non-Muslims. While that may not be a false statement, failure to explain the roles and effects of a “fatwa” will leave a distorted view of its functions in the Malaysian context.
What a “fatwa” exactly does is to affirm that the word “Allah” is indeed within the realm of the Islamic beliefs and precepts. Since a “fatwa” is the highest authority for Muslims, Muslims take it as blasphemous for non Muslims to use it in their practices and religious context.
On the statement of the Selangor Islamic Council
The stand made by Muslim non govermental organizations has been clear in many preceding media statements and public declarations. But since MCCBCHST has chosen to provide a misleading picture of MAIS’ statement on issues related to the name of “Allah’, we shall again clarify this matter.
We submit that MAIS’ statement had been made in accordance with His majesty’s the Sultan of Selangor’s decree on the prohibition of the word of Allah. His Majesty had in fact acted in accordance with his powers and in accordance with the provisions of the Non-Islamic Religious Enactment (Control of Propagation amongst Muslims) 1988, which had been in force since gazetted on July 7, 1988.
This is further strengthened by Section 9 of the Non-Islamic Religious Enactment (Control of Propagation amongst Muslims) 1988 which was promulgated in accordance with Article 11 (4) of the Federal Constitution, expressly inter-alia forbids the use of the term “Allah” by non-Muslims in any matter pertaining to their religion. Charges and penalties in Civil Courts can be meted out for those who violate these provisions.
In addition, the ruling on the prohibition of the use of the term Allah had been enacted in the State of Selangor on February 18, 2010.
On Che Omar bin Che Soh v PP
It is not surprising that MCCBCHST has chosen to provide selective quotation in this respect. The case of Che Omar bin Che Soh, if understood correctly, does not say that Malaysia is a secular nation.
It only said that at the time of the judgment, the laws of the nation were secular laws.
Notwithstanding, the position of Islam had been clarified further by the Federal Court in the case of Lina Joy, where Tun Ahmad Fairuz bin Sheikh Abdul Halim, the then Chief Justice had said that “Islam is not only a collection of dogma and rituals but it is also a complete way of life comprising of all kinds of human, individual or public, legal, political, economic, social, cultural or judicial activities.” And when reading Articles 11(1), 74(2) and item 1 in second list of the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution it was obvious that Islam among others included of (sic) Islamic law.”
For MCCBCHST to keep harping on this matter and misleading the public on the effects of Che Omar by saying it implies that Malaysia is a secular nation is indeed a manifestation of their ill-intentions towards the religion of Islam. It is a blatant disregard of Islam’s true position within the Federal Constitution. We urge MCCBCHST to discontinue from further misusing Che Omar as a point of reference when discussing about the status of Malaysia as defined by the special position of Islam in the Federal Constitution.
by Haji Abdul Rahim Sinwan & Azril Mohd Amin, Muslim Lawyers Association of Malaysia
repost from: Azril Mohd Amin
Keputusan Majlis Syura Ulama’ PAS tidak membenarkan Kalimah ALLAH digunapakai oleh masyarakat bukan Islam (non-muslim) di Malaysia menerima pelbagai reaksi dari kalangan bukan Islam dan juga penyokong-penyokong Pakatan Rakyat. Mereka menganggap PAS sebagai sebuah parti lidah bercabang.
Ada juga yang menyebut ‘Anything But PAS/ Asalkan Bukan PAS (ABP)’ sepertimana laungan ‘Asalkan Bukan UMNO/Anything But UMNO (ABU)’.
Sebagai seorang Islam, sudah pasti kita akan menyokong pendirian Majlis Syura Ulama’ PAS dan menentang sesiapa sahaja yang menyokong kemahuan pihak Kristian menggunakan kalimah ALLAH sebagai terjemahan kepada God/Lord. Penentangan ini tanpa mengira sama ada individu tersebut seorang pimpinan/ahli PAS, pimpinan/ahli PKR, bekas mufti atau kalangan ustaz selebriti.
Berikut SJ paparkan beberapa reaksi terhadap keputusan Majlis Syura ulama’ PAS yang disiarkan di MalaysiaKini (untuk bacaan lanjut klik: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/218949dan http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/218948):
Antara tercatat dalam komen-komen tersebut ialah:
Golongan bukan Islam juga menyatakan Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang serta beberapa pimpinan/ ahli PAS lain yang memenangi pemilihan dalam parti sebagai ‘so-called liberals’, kerana sebelum ini menyokong kalimah ALLAH digunakan oleh mereka:
Baca juga statement berikut yang menganggap Majlis Syura Ulama’ PAS sebagai idiots:
PAS dikatakan sebagai double talk atau lidah bercabang:
Mereka juga bersedia membuang PAS dari Pakatan Rakyat sekiranya telah berjaya memerintah negara!
Penyokong Pakatan Rakyat berkata ‘Asalkan Bukan PAS/Anything But PAS (ABP)’:
***********
reblog from: http://suarajagat.wordpress.com
Adalah jugak faedah bantah perkahwinan sejenis ni. Peliknya ada orang kita yang berjuang untuk kebebasan dan hak LGBT.
dipetik dari laporan Reuters in Paris dari guardian.co.uk, Sunday 13 January 2013.
Several hundred thousand people massed at the Eiffel Tower in Paris on Sunday to protest against President François Hollande’s plan to legalise gay marriage and adoption by June.
Three columns of protesters, waving pink and blue flags showing a father, mother and two children, converged on the landmark from different meeting points in Paris. Many came after long train and bus rides from the provinces.
Hollande has pledged to push through the law with his Socialists’ parliamentary majority but the opponents’ campaign has dented public support and forced deputies to put off a plan to allow lesbian couples access to artificial insemination.
Champ de Mars park at the Eiffel Tower was packed, but turnout estimates varied widely. Organisers claimed 800,000 had protested, while police put the number at 340,000.
“Nobody expected this two or three months ago,” said Frigide Barjot, a flamboyant comedian leading the “demo for all”. At the rally, she read out a letter to Hollande asking him to withdraw the draft bill and hold an extended public debate on the issue.
Strongly backed by the Catholic church hierarchy, Barjot and groups working with her mobilised church-going families and political conservatives as well as some Muslims, evangelicals and even gay people opposed to same-sex marriage.
Hollande’s office said the turnout was substantial but would not change his determination to pass the reform.
“The French are tolerant, but they are deeply attached to the family and the defence of children,” said Daniel Liechti, vice-president of the National Council of French Evangelicals, which urged its members to join the march.
Opponents of gay marriage and adoption, including most faith leaders in France, have argued that the reform would create psychological and social problems for children, which they believe should trump the desire for equal rights for gay adults.
Hollande has angered those opposed to same-sex marriage by trying to avoid public debate on the reform, which justice minister Christiane Taubira described as “a change of civilisation”, and then wavering about some of its details.
His handling of other promises, such as a 75% tax on the rich that was ruled unconstitutional and a faltering struggle against rising unemployment, have dented his popularity in recent opinion polls.
Support for gay marriage in France has slipped by about 10 percentage points to below 55% since opponents began speaking out, according to surveys, and fewer than half of those polled recently wanted gay people to win adoption rights.
Organisers insist they are not against gay and lesbian people but for the rights of children to have a father and mother.
Slogans on the posters and banners approved by the organisers included “marriagophile, not homophobe,” “all born of a father and mother” and “paternity, maternity, equality”.
Civitas, a far-right Catholic group that sees homosexuality as a sin, staged a much smaller march along another route.
Persembahan Qasidah oleh para pelajar tahfiz Dar Al-Qur’an wa Al-Hadith, Taman Permata Ulu Klang Selangor di bawah bimbingan Ustaz Zuhir Abdullah dan Ustaz Yuti semasa perasmian Seminar Dakwah Nasional (SDN) 2012 di Dewan Merdeka PWTC, Kuala Lumpur pada 8hb Oktober 2012.
.
.
.
SDN2012 adalah anjuran Pertubuhan Muafakat Sejahtera Masyarakat Malaysia (MUAFAKAT) http://www.muafakatmalaysia.com
"The Sulaimanian" blog of
Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sultan Sulaiman, Kuala Terengganu
Sultan Sulaiman Secondary School, Kuala Terengganu
Selamatkan Warisan Sejarah Trengganu
Save Our Historical Heritage
Pertubuhan Muafakat Sejahtera Masyarakat Malaysia
Recent Comments