Monday, August 31, 2009
回来了！
上星期三（26/8）晚上，离开神学院到KL友人家，隔天去了基督教书展一趟，然后星期五再到马六甲实习，一直都没有太多时间上网、书写及阅读部落格。昨天回来后，网络又出现障碍，一直到今天下午才恢复，但仍旧断断续续。
这几天的行程是匆忙，但也是愉快的。在书展购了好一些书，认识了一些朋友，迟些会在这里介绍一下自己的战利品。
好了，暂时到这里，去跑步！
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
新约经文鉴别学（NT Textual Criticism）
回想自己上《马可福音》释经时，所面对的经文乃是1.40-45，当中有一个异文（variant）需要处理。异文出现在41节，《和合本修订本》（及其它主要译本）都采用了拥有绝大多数古抄本支持的σπλαγχνισθεὶς（动了慈心），但却有一个重要的古抄本（第5世纪的伯撒抄本Codex Bezae，编号D）及部分古拉丁文抄本（4-5世纪，如ita,d,ff2）却是ὀργισθέις（动怒）。同时，也有一份古拉丁抄本（itb）及10世纪的希腊文经课（l866）是完全了省略了这两个字。当时，基于“more difficult readings are preferred”的文本批判原则，再加上有两份省略的证据（另参太8:3及路5:13，同样省略了），因此选择了ὀργισθέις（动怒）为更可能的原有读法（reading），并进行了释经。那是我第一次接触文本批判（textual criticism）。
圣经文本批判的目的，就是尝试重建一份最接近原稿的圣经文本，可说是释经工作的第一步。在目前最普及的希腊文新约圣经UBSGNT 4 edition 及NA27，分别列出了约1500及10000个异文！然而，在神学院中，这方面的教导却不多。这可能有几个原因：
1. 这项工作需要非常专门及学术性的装备；
2. 老师本身对这部分不感兴趣；
3. 害怕学生无法掌握。
或许，在一般的解经中，一本好的原文圣经（附校勘栏，critical apparatus），及注释书已经能够给予初步的指引，但若要进入深入的研究，这方面的知识是需要掌握的。
以下的汉语作品能提供一些概论式的讲解：
1. 黄锡木：《新约经文鉴别学概论》。香港：基道，1997。这是我认为汉语作品中最佳入门读物，文笔流畅，且提供例子。
2. 麦子格（Bruce M. Metzger）：《新约经文鉴别学》。中译。台北：华神，1981。这是大师级作品，内容丰富，但属于较早期的著作（英文原版1968年出版）。
3. 麦克奈特（Scot McKnight）编：《新约诠释导介》。中译。香港：天道，1999。这本书是研究新约的绝佳入门手册，其中第二章，由Michael W. Holmes执笔的“新约经文鉴别学”有很好的介绍。
英文书目方面，可看参Bruce M. Metzger, K. Aland, Gordon Fee等相关作品。
论文之“序言”
对《林前》8至10章的研究始于两个引发点。第一，“知识使人自高自大，惟有爱心能造就人”（8：1），这句话常常在讲台上被引用，而且讲员总是为了说明爱心的重要性，而贬低知识，在深受敬虔主义影响的华人教会，一种潜在“反智”倾向更是明显的。但保罗真的在批判知识吗？若是，难道他也反智？又抑或他要批判的不是知识本身，而是应用知识的态度？第二，经文的更大脉络乃是保罗与哥林多信徒谈及吃祭物的事项，而自己也曾多次在传福音的过程中，被问及类似的问题，这激发了研究这段经文的兴趣。
毕业论文被视为是这个学习阶段的一个小结，而这一路走来，我欠了许多人情债。首先，深深感谢天父上帝的恩典，是祂让我有学习所需要的悟性及忍耐，而若不是祂的爱，自己也不可能走到今天。另外，要谢谢家人的爱护与照顾，特别是妈妈，是她把我带到上帝面前，并含辛茹苦，又以身作则的让我看见如何成为一位敬畏上帝的人。
完成这篇论文，林家扬博士（Rev. Dr. Lim Kar Yong）居功不小。谢谢他的指导，在最重要的关头，帮助我把其中一个论点锁紧，并进深发展。谢谢他一直关心这论文的写作进展，不时透过Messenger，给予提醒与鼓励，而每当我向他提出借阅其藏书时，总不曾拒绝。还有一点，每一次他阅读我的文章时，其挣扎就如我阅读一篇又一篇，一本又一本的英文专注一样，我完全能体会！
此外，也谢谢郑亨平牧师阅读此论文，并提供宝贵的建议，同时也谢谢他过去的教导与情谊。另外，多位神学院讲师，如郭汉成院长、陈俊明牧师、周建基牧师、萧帝佑博士、吴慧芬老师、陈秀英女会吏、陈昌平传道及吴永基医生，在我学习的过程中，一直给予宝贵的教导与指引，在此表达我的谢意。
还有，这三年的过程中，神学院的群体陪我渡过，谢谢你们忍受了我的放肆、自傲，还有批判。同学之间，无论是分享、讨论、喝茶闲聊，这都是我珍惜的时刻。另外，特别珍惜与武忠、永凯并排坐着听课、发问、批判的日子，还有兰媖、燕晶、俊哲、国兴、文发、洋涛、瑞兰的友谊。同时，也谢谢小梅为我读稿，修饰我“破烂”的文字；谢谢振义夫妇的咖啡；谢谢向勤恒常给予思想上的刺激。当然还有许多人，恕我不能一一提名道谢。
当然，绝对不能忘记在背后支持我的信仰群体。谢谢文冬基督教卫理公会的支持，能在你们当中成长，这是上帝莫大的恩典。同时，也谢谢马六甲基督教卫理公会，过去三年在你们当中事奉及学习是我极大的喜悦，谢谢牧师传道、会友们的爱护，特别是我所爱的青年弟兄姐妹。另外，绝对不能忘记过去在大学一起成长的好朋友们，我们同一届的同学，到目前为止出了4位传道人，这给我无比的鼓励！
最后，绝对不能不谢谢净莹。谢谢她的聆听与分享，谢谢她与我讨论这论文中的一些论证，谢谢她总是很批判性的指出我的软弱，却又以最真最深的爱来回应。在这三年的学习中，认识她，成为了我最大的喜悦！
“凡事都使众人喜欢，不求自己的益处，只求众人的益处，使他们得救”（林前10：33），愿天父怜悯与帮助！
汤鹏翔
2009年8月25日，早上1点44分
马来西亚神学院，B3S3房间内转载：这与回教无关，这是在赚钱！
针对雪州大臣卡立最近在与回教银行的法律诉讼中，被令要摊还马币6千万，Raja Petra在其部落格中分享了过去与回教银行的交易经验，简直是持牌大耳窿！谢谢西西留的翻译。
-----------------------------------
丹斯里卡立（Khalid Ibrahim）和回教银行的纠纷，让我回想起在二十五年前我自己本人与同一家银行的纠纷。实际上有两次的纠纷，两者相隔十年。
第一次是在八十年代初的时候我向他们借的三笔贷款，每笔贷款是五十万令吉，因此全部总额是一百五十万令吉，为了获得这笔贷款，我把三个产业抵押了给他们。其中两个是在瓜拉登嘉楼的店屋，第三个是位于孟沙的一座三层楼洋房，坐落在一块一万英亩的地皮上。每个产业的价值是五十万令吉（提醒你，那是在八十年代）。
可是回教银行不能贷款给我，他们说，他们只能与我成为合作伙伴，他们在产业的收购中成为你的伙伴。这家银行所做的是，向我购买了这三个产业，其实这本来就是我的产业，他们接着再卖回给我。（全文）
第一次是在八十年代初的时候我向他们借的三笔贷款，每笔贷款是五十万令吉，因此全部总额是一百五十万令吉，为了获得这笔贷款，我把三个产业抵押了给他们。其中两个是在瓜拉登嘉楼的店屋，第三个是位于孟沙的一座三层楼洋房，坐落在一块一万英亩的地皮上。每个产业的价值是五十万令吉（提醒你，那是在八十年代）。
可是回教银行不能贷款给我，他们说，他们只能与我成为合作伙伴，他们在产业的收购中成为你的伙伴。这家银行所做的是，向我购买了这三个产业，其实这本来就是我的产业，他们接着再卖回给我。（全文）
Monday, August 24, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
新约研究
以下是新约学者Larry Hurtado对有心进行新约研究者的劝勉：
Q: “If there is one piece of advice you could give to someone entering New Testament scholarship, what would it be?”
A: “Yet again, how to choose one?? I’ll ignore that and offer a few that come to mind! Languages: work on Greek of course (reading, reading, reading, both NT texts and more widely, such as Apostolic Fathers), and other primary-text languages (especially Hebrew, but also Latin if possible), and key languages of modern scholarship (German especially, and French). Context and perspective: aim to familiarize yourself with texts, figures, movements, issues, developments ca. 200 BCE to at least 200 CE! It’s in this slightly wider historical horizon that one sees the remarkable features of the NT texts. Commit yourself also to fair and self-critical engagement with scholarship. My PhD supervisor (E. J. Epp) insisted on one rule above all others, and I re-affirm it: Make sure that you accurately represent the views of others, especially those with whom you disagree. Cheap polemics are of no value to anyone. The NT texts and the scholarship on them will require the most conscientious self-discipline of mind and spirit, and the honing of critical and expressive abilities. But I think these texts are worth the effort!”
我被吓坏了！
Friday, August 21, 2009
N. T. Wright真的那么可怕？
台湾校园为了出版Wright早年的作品，Jesus and the Victory of God（及其它两本代表性著作），竟然还需要办讲座介绍Wright，并以“澄清误解或疑虑”为目的！
希望校园能坚持，让华人教会及学术界能够以熟悉的语言认识这一大师对保罗及新约的解读。
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
15Malaysia之"Chocolate"
Yasmin Ahmad的作品。
这短片真的很短，才不过两分钟多一点，但却刻画出这个国家中，种族之间的矛盾。有一些人、一些报纸、一些政客，他们大玩种族议题，为的只是自己的利益。然而，这一些却破坏着国民团结、破坏着人与人之间最直接的情谊。
这部作品，值得回味！
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
15Malaysia之“Potong Saga”
这几天，全国最红的消息，除了那一千万的争议，及那前后矛盾的“专业”法医以外，就是15Malaysia的起播。
“15Malaysia是一个短篇电影活动，由15个马来西亚导演创作的15部短片电影组成。这些电影探讨的不只是马来西亚的现今社会和政治课题，更招来了国内许多知名人物，包括演员、音乐家和政治领袖参与其盛。您可以把这些影片当成是由15个马来西亚人为马来西亚人民制作的超酷小电影。
欢迎进入，找个舒适的角落。
观赏我们的电影。看看我们的照片。留下您真诚的评语。发表您的电影。获取超酷的小礼物。参与我们的竞赛。与我们交流。帮助我们宣告天下。下载所有您想要的。。。
我们分文不收。”
Monday, August 17, 2009
马国人权亮红灯！
这盏红灯，越来越亮！
Press Release: 23 July 2009
Launch of SUARAM’s 2008 Human Rights Report:
Urgent Need for Reforms to End Increasingly Serious and Repeated Human Rights Violations in Malaysia
SUARAM, in conjunction with the launch of its “Malaysia Human Rights Report 2008: Civil and Political Rights”, today strongly urged the government to urgently implement substantial legislative and institutional human rights reforms.
In its annual report card on the situation of human rights in Malaysia, SUARAM noted the new political realities, especially after the watershed 2008 General Elections which saw the ruling-Barisan Nasional (BN) suffering its biggest loss in Malaysian electoral history since 1969.
Under this backdrop, three main issues were highlighted by SUARAM:
1. The increasingly lack of accountability of law enforcement agencies, which has resulted in serious human rights violations with impunity.
2. The heightened politicisation of race and religion, which has further hampered the grave state of human rights in the country.
3. The failure of the government to heed strong calls and demands for reforms.
The year 2008 was also the final year of Abdullah Badawi’s premiership. According to SUARAM, at the end of 2008, it was apparent that the BN government under the leadership of Abdullah Badawi had failed to implement its many promises for reforms. Much has happened since the end of 2008, including the change of leadership of the country with Najib Razak taking over as the Prime Minister of Malaysia. However, there has yet to be any substantial improvements where human rights are concerned.
“Many pledges made by Abdullah Badawi since 2003, for instance reforming the police force, have not yet been implemented. In fact, in many ways, Malaysia’s human rights record has gone from bad to worse. We are witnessing an alarming number of deaths in police custody while substantial reforms on the police force are still nowhere in sight,” said SUARAM chairperson K. Arumugam.
According to official government statistics cited in SUARAM’s report, there were 13 cases of deaths in police custody in 2008, while 255 deaths were recorded in prisons in the same year. The report also recorded a staggering number of 44 cases of deaths by police shootings with possibly more cases unreported by the media.
“In 2009, we have already recorded so far at least 5 cases of deaths in police custody. Just last week, the death of Teoh Beng Hock while in the compounds of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) under extremely suspicious circumstances leaves little doubt that there is an urgent and critical need to ensure greater accountability of law enforcement agencies,” said Arumugam.
In view of this and the alarming number of cases of deaths in custody, SUARAM strongly urged the government to immediately implement the recommendations of the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code to legislate a Coroner’s Act and to set up a Coroner’s Court and ensure that inquests are held within one months of each case of death in custody.
SUARAM’s report also documented serious violations by other law enforcement agencies, including abuses of the rights of refugees and migrants by the People’s Volunteer Corps (RELA) and Immigration Department officers.
Meanwhile, SUARAM noted that the grave situation of human rights in Malaysia was compounded by a heightened politicisation of race and religion, particularly after the 12th General Elections.
“While racial and religious intolerance has been a major problem in recent years, 2008 saw an increase of this regressive trend, perpetuated by the blatant politicisation of race and religion by the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO)-led ethnic-based BN coalition, especially after the 12th General Elections in an attempt to regain lost ground,” said SUARAM documentation and monitoring coordinator John Liu.
Indeed, in 2008, the BN government justified its repression on human rights by using the excuse of “maintaining racial harmony and social order”. A clear example of this, as documented in SUARAM’s report, was the continued use of the Internal Security Act (ISA). In one instance, the government even claimed that the draconian law was used for the detention of a journalist in September to ensure her own safety after her report quoting racist remarks made by an UMNO politician had apparently caused an uproar.
Commenting on the government’s continued use of the ISA, Liu said, “The government has put it on record that it has no plans to abolish the ISA despite numerous calls from various quarters, including those from within the ruling coalition for the law to be repealed. The BN government’s stand on the ISA on the one hand demonstrates its arrogance in ignoring the will of the people. On the other, it clearly shows the reliance of the BN government on repressive laws and measures as a means to ensure political survival.”
“Nothing can justify the government’s continued use of the ISA,” Liu added. He noted that even former premier Abdullah Badawi has now joined the chorus in demanding for the ISA to be abolished.
“While there is a strong sense of hypocrisy in Abdullah Badawi’s statement as he himself had signed ISA detention orders of hundreds of individuals, his call for the Act to be repealed only goes to show that the ISA is indeed indefensible and unjustifiable,” Liu said.
At the same event, SUARAM also released locally the 2009 annual report on the situation of human rights defenders published by two international human rights groups, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT). In its section on Malaysia, the two groups noted that the government’s attacks on freedoms of speech, assembly and association have put human rights defenders in Malaysia at severe risk of persecution and prosecution of human rights defenders. Citing cases such as the government’s use of laws such as the ISA, the Sedition Act and the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA), the report noted that 2008 “was a dark year for the media and freedom of expression”. The FIDH-OMCT report also voiced its concerns over the “rise in religious tensions” which “put defenders of religious freedom at risk”.
“SUARAM’s 2008 report is the 10th edition of our annual human rights report. The issues and patterns of human rights violations documented in this report are mostly similar to those documented in our first report. We are therefore witnessing serious and repeated human rights violations in the country,” said Liu.
SUARAM, in its concluding chapter of its 2008 report, strongly called on the BN government at the federal level and both the BN and Pakatan Rakyat state governments to immediately implement genuine human rights reforms, such as the rejection of racialised politics and racism, the repeal of Emergency laws and detention-without-trial laws, the reform of the police force, and greater respect and protection of freedom of expression, assembly and association.
For further enquiries, please contact SUARAM documentation & monitoring coordinator John Liu at +603 77843525 or email at suaram@suaram.net.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
“但是你们不常有我”
今天早上在马六甲卫理公会讲道，以约12:1-8，马利亚用香膏抹耶稣的脚之记载，来与会众一同思考教会的主题：“委身于神，人人事奉”。
这段经文同时记载于太26:6-13及可14:3-9，但该两处经文的细节与约翰福音的记载有点分别，然而，那却不是不能处理的分歧。至于路加福音中记载一个道德有问题的女人，用泪水在耶稣的脚前哭，然后用头发抹干的经文，则有更多的相异处，我个人认为那是另外一个事件，但也不排除或许是相同资料来源的可能性。
从叙事文学的角度来看，这段经文有些细节是精彩的。根据约翰福音的记载，耶稣第一次公开事奉是在一个婚宴上，而祂最后一次公开事奉也是在一个宴会中。在第一次公开事奉时，祂说祂的时间还没有到；而这段经文的开始，清楚注明是逾越节的前6天，祂的时间快到了！另外，这段经文的前后都记载着法利赛人及祭司长商议要杀害耶稣，而在这段叙事中，耶稣则清楚说明马利亚的行动是为祂安葬而预备，这文学形式有如一个“三文治”形式，要叫人注意马利亚的行动与其意义。
在信息的中心，我借用Bruce Milne的整理，并加以发挥，同时也比较马利亚与犹大，以凸显这两者之间的差异。Milne认为，马利亚在5方面可以让我们学习：
1. 谦卑的心灵；
2. 敏锐的心怀；
3. 及时的行动；
4. 不惧怕批评；
5. 完全的奉献。
期待早上的信息，能鼓励弟兄姐妹在这破碎的世界中，能一起事奉上帝，服侍他者！
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
纪念加尔文500周年部落格神学会议
由天鸣提倡并努力落实的纪念加尔文500周年部落格神学会议即将开始，天鸣已经在其部落格公布了初步的发表论文之题目及时间表，欢迎大家留意。愿这首创的部落格会议能在马国中文教会与神学圈引起良好的回响。
愿荣耀归三一上帝！
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
一个马来西亚？
刚刚读过了唐南发在《独立新闻在线》的最新文章，忽然想起了曾经在这部落格转载，一位朋友的文章。他问，1 Malaysia 还是 I Malaysia？是“一个马来西亚”？还是“我的马来西亚”？最近政局的发展，这个问题更为贴切！
以下这篇是唐氏的文章：
纳吉就任首相之时，信誓旦旦推动“一个马来西亚”为其施政之最高“指导思想”，但四个月下来，与此相关的相应措施，除了1Malaysia信托基金引发全民投入抢购之外，丝毫激不起一丝涟漪。
尤有甚者，巫统的喉舌《马来西亚前锋报》自2008年3月8日全国大选以来就不时打出耸动的标题，试图制造族群关系紧张的假象，并且见缝插针，一旦民联成员党之间出现矛盾，则加大力度煽风点火，试图使争论升温，字里行间充斥着种族与宗教情绪，不在话下。
Sunday, August 9, 2009
转载：马其顿人需要什么？
以下之讲章转载自龚立人教授的部落格。一般上，我们谈起“马其顿呼声”（徒16:9-10）时，我们总是想到宣教，因着这个呼声，保罗把福音带到欧洲，开始了其宣教之旅重要的一环。然而，这呼声就只是我们所理解的“福音”之呼声？龚教授的讲章给我们看见一个公共性面向的关怀。
----------------------------------------------
昨晚深夜從韓國回港, 帶著疲勞的身體準備今日的講道. 今日要去的教會是平安福音堂 (吳主光傳統). 2-3年前曾到一趟. 那次講道完後, 長老跟我說, 我們對你所說的有點不習慣, 但仍可以明白的. 不錯的評語, 也因此, 2-3年後, 平安福音堂沒有忘記我吧!
年幼時，牧師常常提醒我們「馬其頓人」呼聲（使徒行傳十六9－10）。簡單來說，「馬其頓人」呼聲指我們要回應人對福音的呼求，但問題是：為何馬其頓人呼聲就等於對福音的呼求呢？查實，這個馬其頓人只說，「請過來幫助我」，但保羅卻以傳福音來理解他的呼求。換句話說，保羅是否因對福音某一種理解，以致他對「馬其頓人」呼聲錯誤理解？當然，我也不能否定保羅的正確，因為我沒有經歷他的異象。
雖然這異象是這個馬其頓人與保羅的事，但這異象已成為基督徒對周遭人的責任之典範。因此，我們有需要對這異象有進一步思考。第一，這個馬其頓人是否可以成為一個典範，讓我們留意其他人的呼求？若可以的話，甚麼人向我們呼求呢？第二，保羅是在異象中聽見這個馬其頓人呼求。我們是否需要訓練，以致能聽見？第三，保羅以傳福音來回應這個馬其頓人的呼求。我們如何回應不同人的呼求呢？或許，更基本的問題是：基督的福音是否只關乎救人靈魂？（全文）
年幼時，牧師常常提醒我們「馬其頓人」呼聲（使徒行傳十六9－10）。簡單來說，「馬其頓人」呼聲指我們要回應人對福音的呼求，但問題是：為何馬其頓人呼聲就等於對福音的呼求呢？查實，這個馬其頓人只說，「請過來幫助我」，但保羅卻以傳福音來理解他的呼求。換句話說，保羅是否因對福音某一種理解，以致他對「馬其頓人」呼聲錯誤理解？當然，我也不能否定保羅的正確，因為我沒有經歷他的異象。
雖然這異象是這個馬其頓人與保羅的事，但這異象已成為基督徒對周遭人的責任之典範。因此，我們有需要對這異象有進一步思考。第一，這個馬其頓人是否可以成為一個典範，讓我們留意其他人的呼求？若可以的話，甚麼人向我們呼求呢？第二，保羅是在異象中聽見這個馬其頓人呼求。我們是否需要訓練，以致能聽見？第三，保羅以傳福音來回應這個馬其頓人的呼求。我們如何回應不同人的呼求呢？或許，更基本的問題是：基督的福音是否只關乎救人靈魂？（全文）
一些自我反省的问题！
从一个部落格中，读到以下这些自我反省的问题，是当年John Wesley要求小组组员一同内省的问题。
2. Am I honest in all my acts and words, or do I exaggerate?
3. Do I confidentially pass onto another what was told me in confidence?
4. Am I a slave to dress, friends, work, or habits?
5. Am I self-conscious, self-pitying, or self-justifying?
6. Did the Bible live in me today?
7. Do I give it time to speak to me everyday?
8. Am I enjoying prayer?
9. When did I last speak to someone about my faith?
10. Do I pray about the money I spend?
11. Do I get to bed on time and get up on time?
12. Do I disobey God in anything?
13. Do I insist upon doing something about which my conscience is uneasy?
14. Am I defeated in any part of my life?
15. Am I jealous, impure, critical, irritable, touchy or distrustful?
16. How do I spend my spare time?
17. Am I proud?
18. Do I thank God that I am not as other people, especially as the Pharisee who despised the publican?
19. Is there anyone whom I fear, dislike, disown, criticize, hold resentment toward or disregard? If so, what am I going to do about it?
20. Do I grumble and complain constantly?
21. Is Christ real to me?
1. Am I consciously or unconsciously creating the impression that I am better than I am? In other words, am I a hypocrite?
2. Am I honest in all my acts and words, or do I exaggerate?
3. Do I confidentially pass onto another what was told me in confidence?
4. Am I a slave to dress, friends, work, or habits?
5. Am I self-conscious, self-pitying, or self-justifying?
6. Did the Bible live in me today?
7. Do I give it time to speak to me everyday?
8. Am I enjoying prayer?
9. When did I last speak to someone about my faith?
10. Do I pray about the money I spend?
11. Do I get to bed on time and get up on time?
12. Do I disobey God in anything?
13. Do I insist upon doing something about which my conscience is uneasy?
14. Am I defeated in any part of my life?
15. Am I jealous, impure, critical, irritable, touchy or distrustful?
16. How do I spend my spare time?
17. Am I proud?
18. Do I thank God that I am not as other people, especially as the Pharisee who despised the publican?
19. Is there anyone whom I fear, dislike, disown, criticize, hold resentment toward or disregard? If so, what am I going to do about it?
20. Do I grumble and complain constantly?
21. Is Christ real to me?
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
醒一醒，因为我们不是活在迪斯尼乐园！
801，我们再次见证这里不是迪斯尼乐园，宪法赋予公民的权利已经被侵蚀得体无完肤。
昨天，与一个仍旧活在迪斯尼梦境中的朋友聊起这件事。他完全被主流媒体的报道说服，认为走上街头的人民需要负起一切的责任，包括导致首都大塞车、警方暴力、受伤、经济活动暂停等等。他还说，政府已经改变了，已经越来越好了。
我真想把他从童话般的梦境摇醒！走上街头的人民需要负上全责？他们应该被逮捕、被殴打、被提控？为什么不是另外一个局面呢？为何不能批准游行？就批准他们两个小时，警方封路，让他们在路上和平的表达自己的感受，可能小贩还可以沿途卖反对内安法令的帽子、饮用水、雨伞等，这不是很美的画面吗？为什么一定要发射数百枚催泪弹、几万吨的水炮，动员数千警力呢？人民的诉求是有理的，是应该被尊重。
从308前的数场大示威，到801，都是有理由、民主、和平的表达立场之方式，若这不是马来西亚的文化，或许警棍、催泪弹、水炮等将是我们的文化吧！可怕的是，这“文化”越来越不受到检讨与约束！
求主怜悯！
Monday, August 3, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
嫌犯被殴打之短片
今天下午，接到一位朋友的来电，说网络上流传赵明福被殴打的短片，叫我在短片未被拿下前去观看。随后，也受到至少3个朋友的sms，告知同样的事情。
回到神学院后，看过了短片，并不是明福，但这对方是谁，是否有太大的分别呢？若这件事的确发生在执法单位中，这需要被揭发，这些人需要被提控。人民对执法单位已经完全失去了信心。
“立即表现”的纳吉，你说，该如何办呢？
Saturday, August 1, 2009
到底是谁暴力？
警方之前说，废除内安法令大游行会引起混乱及社会不安，我之前不明白，和平的群众，只是为了要提交备忘录，怎么会引起社会混乱及不安呢？除非有人歧途挑衅吧！
今天下午，我知道警方的“顾虑”不是没有理由的。或许这样说吧，谁是挑衅者呢？警方本身！他们本来就有意图制造社会混乱与不安！是谁拿着木棍上街呢？是谁推撞他人呢？是谁把别人压在地上呢？是谁用水炮喷射群众呢？是谁发射催泪弹呢？是谁导致大塞车呢？
反对内安法令！谴责警察暴力！
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)