Sabah 20-Point Agreement: Religion

Colonial passport for the colonised people of North Borneo

For the previous installment on the background, please click here.

In his book on Page 101, Dr Jeffrey Kitingan wrote that although there is no objection to Islam being the religion of the Federation there should not be a STATE RELIGION in North Borneo.  Therefore, anything pertaining to Islam in the MALAYAN CONSTITUTION cannot be applied to NORTH BORNEO.

His grouse on this matter came about as a result of the late Tun Datu Mustapha expelling Christian priests from Sabah and accused both Tun Datu Mustapha and Datuk Harris Salleh of acting in such manner to strengthen their political position with the Federal government, therefore Islam should not be the religion of the state of Sabah.

The above controversial statement goes against the agreements reached as recorded by the Cobbold Commission, the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee (MSCC) , and the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) in 1962.

According to the memorandum of the MSCC that was chaired by Donald A Stephens (later Chief Minister of Sabah, Tun Fuad Stephens) with representatives from Singapore, Malaya, Sarawak and North Borneo, the MSCC found that the acceptance of Islam as the religion of the Federation does not endanger religious freedom as evident on Page 120 of the MSCC memorandum dated 3 February 1962:

MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120
MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120

The MSCC had scrutinised the position of Islam in respect of states other than the Malay States and found no objection was made against the then-present arrangement for Pulau Pinang and Melaka to also be adopted by North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore.

Each of the states above would have its own constitution to address the requirement with Yang DiPertuan Agong as the Head of Islam in those states.  The respective State’s Assembly will enact laws to govern Islamic affairs and form a Board to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong on matters pertaining to Islam.

On pages 120 and 121 of the memorandum mentioned it is stated so:

 

MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120-121
MSCC Memorandum dated 3 February 1962 PP 120-121

In the Report of the Commission of Enquiry (Cobbold Commission), North Borneo and Sarawak, dated 21st June 1962 found that there was everywhere agreement that as the Muslims are minorities in North Borneo and Sarawak, there should be no restrictions on complete freedom of other religions in those states.

Cobbold Commission Report dated 21 June 1962 PP 39
Cobbold Commission Report dated 21 June 1962 PP 39

In relation to that, the Inter-Governmental Committee, headed by Lord Landsdowne produced a report in 1962 and made the following recommendations on religion on Pages 5 and 6 which have been passed by the Sabah (and Sarawak) state assembly as follows:

IGC Report 1962 on Religion PP 5-6
IGC Report 1962 on Religion PP 5-6

The IGC, which has representation from the Federation of Malaya representing the states in the Federation, Singapore, North Borneo and Sarawak, recommended that Article 3 needed no amendment.  However, the provision of financial aid to Muslim establishments should only come with the concurrence of the states of North Borneo and Sarawak.  This has since been provided for via Section 3 of the Sabah Islamic Laws Administration Enactment, 1992 where the Yang DiPertuan Agong is the Head of Islam in Sabah, and a Council (Majlis Agama Islam Sabah) was formed to manage and administer the Islamic affairs in Sabah. This has also been provided in the Sabah State Constitution (Articles 5B(1) and 5B(2)).

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, Dr Jeffrey Kitingan was angered by Tun Datu Mustapha’s action to chase out Christian missionaries from Sabah in 11972.  Dr Jeffrey used this as the basis of raising the religion issue that was presented as part of the 20-point memorandum for the inclusion of Sabah into the Federation of Malaysia.

Having understood the reason for his raising the issue again, we must also understand the events that had taken place after Tun Datu Mustapha’s ousting of the Christian missionaries.

Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) won the state elections and formed the Sabah state government in 1985.  From that point up until 1991, the Sabah state government built 825 churches compared to only 216 suraus and mosques.

The state government’s refusal to entertain a request by the Sabah Islamic Council made on the 2nd August 1986 and again on the 12th August 1986 to amend the state’s Shariah Law (Administration) Enactment No.15/77 to accord to the Yang DiPertuan Agong the power to administer Islam in the state of Sabah as required by Article 3(3) of the Federal Constitution (as amended on the 12th August 1976) and Article 5B of the Sabah State Constitution (as amended on the 28th December 1985) clearly denied the Yang DiPertuan Agong His Majesty’s prerogative that was agreed by the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Council, the findings of the Cobbold Commission as well as the Inter-Governmental Committee, and the wishes made by the Muslims of North Borneo in 1962.

The ousting of the Christian missionaries in 1972 was made because the nine missionaries who were foreigners abused the work permit given to them to work in Sabah, not to conduct evagelical missions.  They were Roman Catholics, Anglicans, the Basil Mission and from the Borneo Evangelical Mission.

As Immigration affairs is a Sabah prerogative as accorded in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, the first act by the Sabah state government under Tun Datu Mustapha was to deny them an extension of their work permit.  They were then given a 14-day special pass to enable them to make arrangements to leave Sabah.  However, the missionaries refused to obey the 13-day order.

Consequently, they were removed from Sabah through a Removal Order issued by the Sabah Immigration Department made under Section 32 of the Immigration Ordinance 12/59.

The Federal government had no role whatsoever in the removal of these missionaries.  It was purely a state decision that was made based on a sound reason – the people of Sabah, regardless of race or religion had been living harmoniously.  However, these missionaries have been sowing the seeds of hatred among the Christians of Sabah towards the Muslims by telling them to fear the “Islamisation” of Christians through forced conversions, a claim the missionaries themselves could not substatiate.

There was a plea made by the Christians in Sabah to the then-Prime Minister for the missionaries to be allowed to remain in Sabah.  Tun Abdul Razak however recommended to the Christians of Sabah to instead allow priests from the Peninsular and Sarawak to replace the nine missionaries.

In his book, Jeffrey Kitingan had profusely spoken about alleged digressions from and breach of the Federation of Malaysia Agreement but avoided on the issue of the Sabah state government of 1985 breaching agreements made by the MSCC, findings of the Cobbold Commission, the IGC as well as the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

On the contrary, the Federal government has been fulfilling its end of the agreement by allowing the freedom for other religions to be practiced by its followers as per the agreement.

At no point was there any intrusion made by the Federal government in the affairs of Sabah, and that the removal of the missionaries from Sabah for violating the conditions of the work permit was totally a state issue, made using the powers accorded to the state of Sabah, as agreed by all parties that had agreed on the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.

In the next installement, we shall talk about the second point – LANGUAGE.

When God Is Not Lord

Oh! Here goes a Muslim trying to teach Christians about Christianity. I don’t see the wrong in doing so when I see Christians in the form of DAP politicians quoting the Quran teaching Muslims what ‘true Islam’ is. They even do so within mosques and suraus.
I was reading the Malaysia Outlook’s article on a Catholic activist telling Catholics to stay away from the BERSIH gathering on the 19th November 2016. The activist, Joseph Sta Maria has irked fellow Catholics by asking them to refrain from participating in Saturday’s gathering. Among the condemnations against Joseph include the following:


I find it amusing that some people think that Catholicism was borne out of politics. It wasn’t. Catholicism is the earliest form of Christianity that predates the First Council of Nicaea by 325 years! Followers of Jesus of Nazareth believes that Jesus is the son of God which is part if the Trinity concept. After Jesus was crucified and rose from the date, he appointed Peter as the leader, hence the very first Pope.

Joseph Sta Maria is the head of the Melaka Portuguese Community and was appointed as a representative of minority ethnic communities under the state Barisan Nasional’s social service unit (Pembela), an effort by Malacca Chief Minister Idris Haron to address the needs, and include the views, of minority communities.

Mixing religion with politics started when Anthony Bernard Paul, the Bishop for Melaka and Johor, openly made a statement in support of BERSIH.


The call by Bernard Paul for Christians to participate in the BERSIH rally invited the criticism by Parti Cinta Malaysia’s Vice President Huan Cheng Guan.

As a Bishop, said Huan, Bernard should focus more on church matters rather than meddling into political matters that were irrelevant to religion.

Don’t bring religion into politics. It’s unwarranted. I think this is a half past six Bishop. Why urge the people to participate in Bersih rally?”
A religious figure like him should not encourage the public to go for demonstration or rally. A highly respected religious figure, but he talks like an idiot,” blasted Huan.
I personally find Bernard Paul’s calling as an invitation to anarchy. He gave his reasons for his support of BERSIH which goes along the thinking of Christian supporters if gun rights in the US and Christians might wrongly twist these into excuses for disrespect and disobedience to authorities which is forbidden by God as given in the Bible.

“Every person is to be in the subjection of the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those in exist are eatablished by God.” (Romans 13:1)

The commandment is addressed to all mankind, without exception. Every person is included in this instruction—both believers and unbelievers. Every person is required to be in subjection to the governing authorities. Subjection certainly includes obedience, but it implies even more. Subjection focuses on the spirit or attitude of the individual, which leads to obedience. It recognizes an authority over us to which we are obliged to give not only our obedience but our respect. Whether democratic or autocratic, heathen or God-fearing, every government which has the power to rule over its people has been granted that power and authority by God.

Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

Of course there would still be thise Christians who would believe in Bernard Paul’s calling to the BERSIH rally more than God’s Bible. Given that Christians like Tony Pua, Hannah Yeoh and a few others who continue to lie despite calling themselves Christians, how many Christians actually believe in the Bible?

And how many would remember 2Corinthians 11:14?

“And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.”

The Definition of Integral

When the Turks charged at the British lines during the Battle of Gallipoli, they cried “Allahu Akbar.” The British soldiers retorted, “Come and get your Allah here!”

If the same British soldiers are here now, they would be utmost disappointed that the Christians in Malaysia now want to accept Allah – the name of the God they believed to be false – as the special noun to replace the word “god”.

Why am I still on this issue? Some lawyers now say whatever decree the Agong issues, is not binding for non-Malays and non-Muslims.

Fine. The Malay Rulers may not have intrinsic powers left apart from dissolving or withholding a cabinet or state assembly, appoint a Prime Minister or a Menteri Besar, and protect the religion of Islam and Malay customs. I shall not dwell too deeply into this but my friend SatD has written a very good piece on this in his blog Pure Shiite.

What is most important is that when the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (JAIS) confiscated those Bibles containing the special noun “Allah”, they were acting on the provisions of Section 9 of the Selangor Shariah Criminal Enactment which prohibits the use of 25 or so Islamic words and nouns in non-Muslim publications. You will be committing a crime merely by having one in your house or car, let alone propagate one to a Muslim (or more).

What does the Shariah enactment have to do with non-Muslims, you may ask. Everything! It is NOT an Islamic law, it is a State law! Actually, it is a State Criminal Law! And a state criminal law applies to all be they Muslims or otherwise. And it is a STRICT LIABILITY law! Like I said, you have one, you break the law!

You constitutional law sexperts may also argue that the law is unconstitutional. It may be so. But it is the state law until and until a Constitutional court decides otherwise.

Oh, cry foul all you want and claim that the Apellate Court judges were all Malays. This is the part that I do not understand. All these challenges to the decision of the Apellate Court may be a norm to some of you common criminals and petty lawbreakers; the judges may not even hazard to act against them but the person who should be taking action, the Attorney-General, should. It is in contempt of a court ruling. What does that tell me, a layman? The A-G is simply useless for allowing lawlessness become a norm.

When Muslims cry foul to the Christians saying that “Allah” is an integral part of Islam, it is because the concept of trinity is an antithesis of the “Oneness” of Allah. The special noun refers to The God, One and Only God. Not a God that needs a trike to be able to “stand.”

The Christians lashed back saying that the Muslims should not tell them what is integral and what is not to them, saying that Allah is integral to the Christians. Else why quarrel over the special noun?

The word “integral” means something that if not present, does not complete something. Like tyres to cars.

Let me ask them this: if “Allah” is integral to the Christian faith, does this mean that the Popes, for 2,000 years, all the way from St Peter Petrus, have gotten it all wrong?

Maybe those adamant to use the special noun “Allah” can now shout to the Pope to come get his “Allah” here.

Pushing The Envelope

Malays were born to be fools.

That is from my simple observation of history, and of the media – both mainstream and alternative ones. Whether or not you agree with me is none of my business as nothing that I have written thus far was to beget your seal of approval nor was it to get your agreement. Like it or not, the Malays were born to be fools…

…and to be fooled by others.

Being fools and being easily fooled by others is what other races recognise. Because of that, they keep pushing the envelope.

From 1930 through 1970, the Malays were minorities in their own land. They were sidelined from the riches of their own land and Dr Lennox A Mills noted:

“…when the British came, the Malay was a poor man in a poor country; when the British left, he was a poor man in a rich country.”

The Malays remained backwards and were told to stay as peasants or tillers of the soil, the Chinese inherited all the tradings in the Malay States and became the richest residents, and the Indians remained as rubber-tappers without proper infrastructure. The Malays, according to Chai Hon-Chan:

“…merely retreated from the tide of commercial activity and material prosperity…whereas the British, Europeans, Chinese and Indians had the lion share of the country’s wealth…”

For those reasons up there majority of the Malays rejected the idea of the Malayan Union and automatic citizenship for the immigrants. The only Malays who were keen on an independent Malaya were those who originated from Sumatera and wanted to unify Malaya with the rest of Indonesia under Batavia so the Malays do not come under the rule of other races. However, the. Malays of Malaya were united in wanting a Malay rule with the protection accorded by the Malay rulers i.e the status of Islam as well as the status of the Malays. The Chinese especially, kept pushing the envelope. When the straw finally broke the camel’s back in May 1969, the Malays retaliated with a violent outcome.

Economic advantage post-1969 brought about purchasing power to the Malays. As a result, the Malays began to worship money, as money would bring more power to bring in more money: in short, greed has taken over unity, protection of Islam and the Malay rights as the paramount priority. Malay leaders are seen to live lavishly. With them come the jockeys, parasites in short, much like the Cobias that swim with Whale Sharks hoping for whatever scrap that comes out from the sharks in order to live. When the mule collapse, the jockeys cry foul, as we have seen in 1988 and again ten years later. The greed for power in order to make money remains with the Malays nevertheless, only in a cruel way. The Malays are now more gullible because of the greed, and are willing to sell their values, their rights, their religion, and the Malay rulers institution just so they can grasp at whatever that is within their reach. The fools that the Malays are, they split into several political factions and even dare to bring each other down, supporting the non-Malays in pushing the envelope – Quislings helping the non-Malays destroy Islam and the Malays.

And every single day we find the Malays jeering at those who defend Islam and the Malay rights. Although the majority, the Malays are effectively minorities because of the multi-polar split. And this time around, when the straw breaks the camel’s back, the Malays will die foolishly.

Return, You Muslim Apologists of the Trinity

While some Muslims continue to invite me over Facebook to attend an apologetic forum; while Muslims including the daughter of a very prominent senior politician become apologists upholding the notion that the Trinity God of the Christians and the Muslims One God is one and the same, I remembered one of my postings made in January 2012 called “The Case for God – Part 2” where I made mention of the origin of the concept of Trinity.  It must be remembered that Emperor Constantine 1, a Pagan and worshipper of the Sun God, was the one responsible in introducing the Trinity doctrine to unite the Christians.  Those who did not subscribed to this doctrine were persecuted and banished.

And I found this:

THE SURPRISING ORIGINS OF THE TRINITY DOCTRINE

“Surprise, surprise!” as Cilla Black would exclaim on the show produced for ITV by London Weekend Television.

While it is true that it is a Muslims belief that Allah is The Supreme Being, God for All, Allah as God in Islam neither begets nor is He begotten.  This is the fundamental belief that all Muslims hold to.  The Pope and the Vatican, I believe, worship Deus.  Deus is the Latin word for God, derived from a proto-Indo-European word deiuos or deiwos and cognates with the Sanskrit word Deva or Dewa.  For that reason I do not see any of the die-hard adamant Allah-wannabe-users would still use the name Allah to describe God if they were to migrate to, say, Australia, the UK, USA, or Italy.

Even the origin of the crucifix is said to have come from pagan practice (I know you naughty people have been saying that Allah and Islam are of pagan origins).  Christians only started to use the symbol of the crucifix 300 years after Christ had established his church. The Babylonians of Chaldea were the first to use the crucifix to symbolise the God Tammuz and the use spread to China, India, Mexico centuries before Christ.

In 46 B.C., Roman coins show Jupiter holding a long sceptre terminating in a cross. The Vestal Virgins of pagan Rome wore the cross suspended from their necklaces, as the nuns of the Roman Catholic church do now. The Davis Dictionary of the Bible states about the origin of the cross: “The pre-Christian cross of one form or another was in use as a sacred symbol among the Chaldeans, the Phoenicians, the Eqyptians, and many other…nations. The Spaniards in the 16th century found it also among the Indians of Mexico and Peru. But its symbolic teaching was quite different from that which we now associate the cross” (p. 159).

And for the true believers of Christianity, do read up where the Bible clearly teaches that Christians must not practice or tolerate any pagan ways, customs, traditions or practices, specifically in Deuteronomy 7: 1-6; Jeremiah 10: 1-5; and Revelation 18: 1-4.

And as it goes in John 8:32 – “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

For you Muslim apologists of the Trinity concept, I leave you with this from the Quran 9:30

20140110-121435.jpg

Allah: The Son and the Crescent

20140109-152910.jpg

I wrote a posting early November 2013 on the issue of evangelism and the evangelical efforts to bring Muslims to accept the Trinity concept ( The Herald of Glad Tidings: Messianic Muslim Followers of Isa ).

Discovered on the Internet today is this article on Christian Today that speaks of the Allah issue and how Christians have made headway in getting Muslims to accept that Allah, or God, that is worshipped by the Muslims, is the same as the Trinitarian god worshipped by the Christians.

Go back to my article above after you have read this one and decide for yourself if subtle evangelism is not real:

Christianity Today: The Son and the Crescent

The Herald of Glad Tidings: Messianic Muslim Followers of Isa

20131104-172040.jpg

I write this as a warning to my Muslim brothers and sisters. No matter how you conduct your life, you should never compromise your attestation to Allah being the True One God, and that Muhammad is His Messenger through whom His message was delivered to complete what started millenniums before.

The issue of the use of Allah in the Herald has been resolved…well, more or less. I still see on my timeline some people still tweet about it, or have it as part of their Facebook status. I see the occasional Christian politician from Sabah still trying to flog a dead horse by crying foul over the issue although the ruling does not affect Christians of Sabah and Sarawak; while many others who do not understand the history and reason behind the permit to use of Allah in Bibles and Christian literatures in Indonesia, Sabah and Sarawak but not in the peninsular should read my previous writings on this issue:

The Case For God

I also wrote about the word to describe God in Malay in The Case For God Part 2, and I wrote on the subtle ways to undermine the faith of Muslims in the peninsular. You may say that the issue of faith is petty, but if you have met, as I have, Muslims whom have proselytize, you would be shocked to see the numbers and where they are originally from, and with what background.

If I mention the name Joshua Massey I am sure many Malaysian Muslims do not know who he is. I don’t know who Massey is either but that is the pseudonym of a Christian missionary who has written many articles on how to minister Christianity to the Muslims. Among the articles he has written include Should Christians Use Allah In Bible Translation?

In this article, Massey concluded that it is necessary to use Allah in Bibles and not to discard such easily redeemable terms, but to fill them with Biblical meaning. The more a Muslim’s understanding of Allah is informed by the Scriptures, the more Biblical their theology of God will become. Filling familiar words with new meaning, rather than tossing them aside as irreparable, is something the church has wisely done from the beginning.

Of course, in a non-Arab speaking Muslim country, it would be a lot more difficult to penetrate the Muslim community to spread the gospel. Enter the C5: the so-called liberal Muslims who, amongst us, have been saying that it is a small matter for others to use Allah to refer to God. C5 is a category among a spectrum of Christians ranging from C1, referring to those missionaries who set up churches and conduct masses and prayers in the missionaries’ original language, to C6 – those who still retain their Muslim identity and never reveal their faith to Muslims. This spectrum was introduced by a missionary who writes under the pseudonym John Travis. Like Massey who lives amongst Muslims in Asia, Travis too has spent a large portion of his life living amongst the Muslims.

C5 Muslims do not call themselves Christians. They call themselves the Followers of Isa al-Masih, or Jesus the Messiah. They are the Messianic Muslims who reject any unbiblical Muslim practise, and dare to label Muslim practices barbaric, or against human rights, or restricting women’s rights. Anything and any platform they could use to attack the sanctity of Islam, they would. Do not get me wrong: C5 Christians still go to the mosque to pray, still attain their identity as Muslims, but they will back their Christian friends when attacked by other Muslims, not literal attacks though.

Massey knows that Muslims will not attack, as it is unIslamic to be the belligerent, but will defend to their death their land and faith. So you get the C5s to do the attacks for you, therefore the defenders will then be labelled racists, extremists and other labels already thrown by these liberals. In the words of Travis:

“Some C5 believers adopt Samuel Zwemer’s approach toward Muhammad by affirming all the truth Muhammad brought and never speaking disrespectfully of him. They emphasize that Muhammad was a great statesman and religious reformer, bringing Arabs from pagan polytheism to Abrahamic monotheism. They are quick to add that Muhammad spoke of Isa the Messiah (his virgin birth, miracles and sinless- ness) and acknowledged that the Torah, Zabur and Injil are God’s Word and must be obeyed. When it becomes clear that the Muslim listener is ready for more, they, like Zwemer, share Jesus as Lord and Savior. My observation is that over time, without dictating how new MBBs should view Muhammad, he becomes less and less important to them as they grow in their love and obedience to Jesus”.

20131104-214448.jpg

The above is taken from John Travis’s article in the International Journal of Frontier Missiology, telling how a Muslim was befriended by a Christian friend, not to accept Christianity, but to also accept the other Books: a concept not unfamiliar in Islam. Working on this and the other concept mentioned in the Quran that Allah does not make any distinction between His Prophets, they work towards undermining the Shahadah.

Similar modus operandi have been seen here in Malaysia. In one case that involved a friend of mine putting a stop to it, a Muslim factory worker was befriended by a fellow male worker, a Christian. She got pregnant and was shunned by her family. With nowhere to go, her boyfriend brought her to see a priest who showered her with compassion. Her roommate managed to sniff the method and alerted an agency my friend was with, and rescued her. In fact, among the DUMC attendees whom I had met last year all spoke of similar subtle methods. Some had converted over a few pair of jeans, some money, rice, so on and so forth. For me, I blame the Malay/Muslim society for failing to help the needy, or for driving away family members who are in need. I remember one Pusat Pungutan Zakat officer who argued intensely with me, insisted that there were no poor people in Petaling Jaya, until I showed him a squatter village.

But that is the fact of the matter – we Muslims in Malaysia are not caring enough. And Muslims are oblivious to threats, not just from the outside, but from the inside as well. Muslims always think that they are strong, and at the same time allow every attempt to chip away at the foundations of Islam in this country, namely the Federal Constitution, and the institution of the Malay Rulers as custodians and protectors of the religion of Islam and the Malay customs. Every attempt to defend these institutions are being portrayed as acts of racism and oppression of the minority, when in essence it is the 60.4 percent Muslim population is the minority. They are split into three: two one thirds that have nothing better to do but claw at each other, while the other third collude with the evangelists to attack the other two thirds.

I leave you with an extract from a missiology website about the one third that is helping to destroy us, and urge all you Muslims to pause for a moment and think:

20131104-224842.jpg

Addendum: 5th Nov 2013

For all those who remember my previous posting on the Allah issue (The Case For God – Part 3, I wrote on Christian publications in Malay in the 19th Century, and how similar publications have made their way into modern-day peninsular Malaysia. One must be wary of religious books bearing Arabic terms that may be representing Christianity but with an Islamic image. I was also informed that in some mosques in this country, as mentioned in Massey’s and Travis’s articles, Arab Christians or Christian Malays have begun preaching to youngsters. Dressed as pious Muslims, they confuse the youngsters using the modus operandi mentioned above.

And I will also be meeting with a Christian friend, who has told me how some of his family members and friends have been actively proselytising needy Muslims in the south of the peninsular. Hopefully this time, I will get to learn more of their modus operandi.