Is Zakir Naik is too Stubborn to Understand Jesus’ Claim to be God?

Zakir Naik has just challenged Christians to produce a verse in the bible where Jesus unequivocally claims to be God, and as such people should worship him. This would require a direct statement like “I am God” or “worship me” from the lips of Jesus. The challenge is either misguided or insincere. Zakir Naik displays … Continue reading “Is Zakir Naik is too Stubborn to Understand Jesus’ Claim to be God?”

Zakir Naik has just challenged Christians to produce a verse in the bible where Jesus unequivocally claims to be God, and as such people should worship him. This would require a direct statement like “I am God” or “worship me” from the lips of Jesus. The challenge is either misguided or insincere.

Zakir Naik displays a simplistic mindset in failing to understanding Jesus’ teaching. His demand that Jesus gives a direct proclamation shows no appreciation of Jesus’ wisdom that is needed to address an audience that is hostile and threatening violence towards him. Continue reading “Is Zakir Naik is too Stubborn to Understand Jesus’ Claim to be God?”

Zakir Naik Exposed

Dr. Zakir Naik Makes 25 mistakes in 5 min Zakir Naik gives the impression that he is a very learned man as he effortlessly quotes [selected] verses from the Bible. However, there is much less than meets the eye. Often times he quotes Scripture out of context in order to impose an alien teaching on … Continue reading “Zakir Naik Exposed”

Dr. Zakir Naik Makes 25 mistakes in 5 min

Zakir Naik gives the impression that he is a very learned man as he effortlessly quotes [selected] verses from the Bible. However, there is much less than meets the eye. Often times he quotes Scripture out of context in order to impose an alien teaching on the Bible, like claiming that the Bible teaches about the coming of Muhammad. I shall leave the easy task of refuting his ludicrous claims to other writers.

For the moment I invite readers to view the following YouTube episode which exposes Zakir Naik’s habit of making flippant and misleading claims (some people would call them lies). LINK – Zakir Naik Makes 25 Mistakes in 5 MinutesContinue reading “Zakir Naik Exposed”

God, Christ & Humanity: Christian & Muslim Perspectives (Part 1)

Part 1: God and Humanity in Islam & Christianity Thesis: Ultimately, the difference between Islam and Christianity is that the former views the relationship between God and man within the field of power. The Divine-human encounter becomes a contest of strength where human submission is a matter of expediency in the face of sheer dominant … Continue reading “God, Christ & Humanity: Christian & Muslim Perspectives (Part 1)”

Part 1: God and Humanity in Islam & Christianity

Thesis: Ultimately, the difference between Islam and Christianity is that the former views the relationship between God and man within the field of power. The Divine-human encounter becomes a contest of strength where human submission is a matter of expediency in the face of sheer dominant power. In contrast, Christianity views the relationship as one that is moral: God, despite his sovereignty, treats human beings as persons with inherent dignity (since they are created in His image). God seeks allegiance from man based not on expediency but as a grateful response to a God who passionately cares for his welfare (c.f., pathos in Abraham Heschel’s work).  Man may fail to perceive the depths of divine pathos. Without a personal revelation from God, man can only be dimly aware of divine pathos in pale and fragmented forms, described as divine sorrow, pity, wrath, and compassion because of his psychological limitations, although divine pathos must be perfect and complete within the divine Trinity. However, these partial perceptions of divine pathos are fully revealed and experienced as divine love when manifested at the cross. Hence the glorious declaration in 2 Corinthians 5:19 – in Christ God was reconciling the world to Himself. Continue reading “God, Christ & Humanity: Christian & Muslim Perspectives (Part 1)”

Censorship, Interfaith Dialogue and Democratic Virtues

The recent amendments to the Sedition Act effectively curtail freedom of speech as the prospect of being hauled up by the authorities for alleged sedition will discourage public debates on social-political issues. There is little assurance that the government will not abuse the wide ranging power given by the Act to suppress democratic dissent, given … Continue reading “Censorship, Interfaith Dialogue and Democratic Virtues”

The recent amendments to the Sedition Act effectively curtail freedom of speech as the prospect of being hauled up by the authorities for alleged sedition will discourage public debates on social-political issues. There is little assurance that the government will not abuse the wide ranging power given by the Act to suppress democratic dissent, given it pattern of selective enforcement of the law against opposition leaders, lawyers, journalists and civil rights activists.

It should be noted that some Muslim extremists have found it convenient to accuse leaders of the non-Islamic communities of sedition, when these leaders are only defending religious liberty that is enshrined in the Constitution. The amendments to the Sedition Act will embolden these extremists to continue making unfounded and irresponsible accusations.

It would be regrettable if the government uses the Sedition Act to restrict religious freedom, and apply censorship laws to control religious dialogue and debate, as it ends up depriving its citizens of the very tool that could help overcome ignorance and prejudice between religious communities. Indeed, it is the duty of the government to counter religious extremism by promoting open and honest interfaith dialogue.

It is timely that we analyze the problem of censorship of religious freedom and the imperative for genuine interfaith dialogue so that we may cultivate mutual respect and acceptance between various religious communities. Continue reading “Censorship, Interfaith Dialogue and Democratic Virtues”

Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 2/2

Part 2/2: Implications for Freedom of Religion arising from the Catholic Herald Court Judgments The Federal Constitution provision for freedom of religion has been undermined when the higher courts ruled that the ‘sanctity of Islam’ defines and limits freedom to practice other religions. Surely this unconstitutional restriction also applies to all other fundamental liberties enshrined … Continue reading “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 2/2”

Part 2/2: Implications for Freedom of Religion arising from the Catholic Herald Court Judgments

The Federal Constitution provision for freedom of religion has been undermined when the higher courts ruled that the ‘sanctity of Islam’ defines and limits freedom to practice other religions. Surely this unconstitutional restriction also applies to all other fundamental liberties enshrined in the Federal Constitution since fundamental liberties are an inseparable whole, like a ‘seamless cloth’.

Preview of Conclusion
As a result of the decision by the Court of Appeal in the Catholic Herald, the law as it currently stands appears to be that the term ‘Allah’ should not be used by any non-Muslim group in Malaysia as it is not an essential and integral part of the religion. Article 11 only protects what is mandatory in a religion which according to the CA’s interpretation is a severely restricted freedom. Article 11 has to be read with article 3 which was inserted to protect the sanctity and supremacy of Islam. This means that other religions can be practiced in peace and harmony throughout the Federation as long as it does not affect the sanctity of Islam.

Read the attached document “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Judgments” for a careful and insightful analysis of these disturbing developments:

pdf Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Continue reading “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 2/2”

Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 1/2

  Part 1/2: Backdoor Islamization of Malaysian Laws – State Islamic Enactments Silently Rewrite the Federal Constitution via Illegitimate Use of the Penal Code. Related Post: Part 2/2: Implications for Freedom of Religion arising from the Catholic Herald Court Judgments The recent judgments by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court failed to clarify … Continue reading “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 1/2”

 

Part 1/2: Backdoor Islamization of Malaysian Laws – State Islamic Enactments Silently Rewrite the Federal Constitution via Illegitimate Use of the Penal Code.

Related Post: Part 2/2: Implications for Freedom of Religion arising from the Catholic Herald Court Judgments

The recent judgments by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court failed to clarify and delimit the bounds of authority of the State Islamic Authorities in relation to non-Muslims. The result is an ongoing process of silent rewriting of the Federal Constitution that violates the fundamental liberties of all citizens enshrined in the Federal Constitution. The failure of the higher Courts to address and arrest the backdoor Islamization of the legal system can only result in ascendency and final supremacy of Syariah law for the country.

Read the attached document “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Judgments” for a careful and insightful analysis of these disturbing developments:

pdfFreedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald

 

Highlights from Document Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments Continue reading “Freedom of Religion after the Catholic Herald Court Judgments. Part 1/2”

Selangor Enactment (2003) Says Syariah Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Non-Muslims. MAIS Please Read!

The Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 plainly says Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims! MAIS/JAIS should read section 74 of the Enactment. Surely, “the right and property of a non-Muslim” includes the Bibles illegally seized by JAIS. The decent thing for MAIS/JAIS to do is to return the … Continue reading “Selangor Enactment (2003) Says Syariah Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Non-Muslims. MAIS Please Read!”

The Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 plainly says Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over non-Muslims! MAIS/JAIS should read section 74 of the Enactment. Surely, “the right and property of a non-Muslim” includes the Bibles illegally seized by JAIS. The decent thing for MAIS/JAIS to do is to return the Bibles with an apology!

————————

Enactment No. 1 of 2003
ADMINISTRATION OF THE RELIGION OF ISLAM (STATE OF SELANGOR) ENACTMENT 2003

An Enactment to make new provisions on the administration of the religion of Islam, the establishment and jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts, the establishment and functions of the Majlis Agama Islam Selangor, and other matters related thereto.

[1 September 2003]
[Sel. P.U. 25/2003]

PART IV
SYARIAH COURTS

74. Jurisdiction does not extend to non-Muslims
(1) No decision of the Syariah Appeal Court, Syariah High Court or Syariah Subordinate Court shall involve the right or the property of a non-Muslim.
(2) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared that a Muslim shall at all times be acknowledged and treated as a Muslim unless a declaration has been made by a Syariah Court that he is no longer a Muslim.

Malaya/Malaysia is a Secular State: Minister Jamil Baharom is Wrong

The Malaysian Insider easily refuted Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datul Seri Jamil Khir Baharom who asserted simplistically (and I would venture to say, insincerely) that Malaysia is not a secular state. Re: Look Up the History Books, Malaysia is a Secular State : “A Malaysian minister is insisting that Malaysia is not a … Continue reading “Malaya/Malaysia is a Secular State: Minister Jamil Baharom is Wrong”

The Malaysian Insider easily refuted Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datul Seri Jamil Khir Baharom who asserted simplistically (and I would venture to say, insincerely) that Malaysia is not a secular state. Re: Look Up the History Books, Malaysia is a Secular State :

“A Malaysian minister is insisting that Malaysia is not a secular state, and that is anchored in Islamist roots because there are the Malay rulers and state Islamic laws exist for Muslims. That argument might have worked if it was just Malaya…But you know what, Mr Minister, we are now in Malaysia…The reality is, of course, different. Malaysia is a secular state where the rule of law is supreme. The Federal Constitution is the basic law, not the Quran.”

I would go further and assert that the Minister’s argument won’t work even if we restrict the case just to Malaya. We only need to go back to read the Foundational Documents of the 1957 Federal Constitution at the formation of Malaya. For example, the Reid Commission states unequivocally that Malaya is a secular state: Continue reading “Malaya/Malaysia is a Secular State: Minister Jamil Baharom is Wrong”

No Need to Comply When JAIS Abused its Limited Power to Harass non-Muslim Institutions

Much of the public discussion over the recent JAIS raid on Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM) has focused on who should be held responsible for an illegal raid. I shall briefly note that UMNO went on a road show to support JAIS after the seizure of the Bibles.  We cannot overlook the insincerity and failure … Continue reading “No Need to Comply When JAIS Abused its Limited Power to Harass non-Muslim Institutions”

Much of the public discussion over the recent JAIS raid on Bible Society of Malaysia (BSM) has focused on who should be held responsible for an illegal raid. I shall briefly note that UMNO went on a road show to support JAIS after the seizure of the Bibles.  We cannot overlook the insincerity and failure of the Federal government to honor the 10 points. Selangor MB deserves criticism for not reprimanding JAIS and instructing it to redress its illegal raid (granted he faced political constraints and impossible circumstances after the Sultan’s decree). The issue has become a political football passed between AG, the Home Ministry and the Selangor government. Let blame be rightly apportioned to all these wrongful parties. Continue reading “No Need to Comply When JAIS Abused its Limited Power to Harass non-Muslim Institutions”

Why Allâh is Not Exclusive to Islam: 3 Short Arguments

The Allah dispute is the focus of 3 court hearings this week. Taking the risk of committing the sin of boring repetition – here are 3 short arguments why Allah is not exclusive to Islam. First, ﷲ Allâh (al-ilah) is historically derived from a common noun (ilah), which is not a proper noun/personal name (Nama … Continue reading “Why Allâh is Not Exclusive to Islam: 3 Short Arguments”

The Allah dispute is the focus of 3 court hearings this week. Taking the risk of committing the sin of boring repetition – here are 3 short arguments why Allah is not exclusive to Islam.

First, ﷲ Allâh (al-ilah) is historically derived from a common noun (ilah), which is not a proper noun/personal name (Nama Khas). It is just a common reference to a divine being in general or to the Most High God in monotheist culture, along with other related references in the Semitic languages – Hebrew el, eloah, Syriac alaha etc.  Sibawayh (the father of Arabic grammar), noted the etymology of the word was disputed but suggested a Syriac connection as al-Ilaah, Allah results when one attaches ‘al’ with aliha and alaha. More importantly, the word ﷲ Allâh was used by Christians and other Semites long before the emergence of Islam. Continue reading “Why Allâh is Not Exclusive to Islam: 3 Short Arguments”