Did you know that the Malay peninsular already had a church way before North America had anything?

You guys already know about it.

A good case would be the Church of Divine Mercy in Shah Alam. The project started in 1977.......only completed a few years ago. During that time, the government was a super troll.

http://www.divinemercyshahalam.com/history.htm

Some people call this subtle religious persecution. Indeed it is. Placing unnecessary barriers, hurdles, restriction to build a house of worship can be considered as denying one's right to worship.

salah.........Burj Khalifah is the tallest building in the world....


Melaka fell in 1511. In 1521, a church was built. Though no longer in use, it was the first church not just on the peninsular but perhaps in SEA.

St Augustine in Florida was only founded in 1565.

Yes, of course. No need to ask orang asli, read SPM sejarah is enough if you have a critical mind. The malays before Melaka were essentially Hindus or Buddhists, like those in Bali today.

Our sejarah textbooks talked about Angkor Wat, Borobudor and then about majapahit, Srivijaya, Langkasuka, Gangga Negara....all these were Hindu or Buddhist states. However, they do not go beyond informing the reader of the existence of these kingdoms. Sejarah officially starts with Melaka. Have you realised that?

Of course, this is understandable. Anything that has got to do with the Malay identity and Islam is so politicised in Msia, it would be unfathomable to suggest that Malays/Malayan peoples were once Hindus, Buddhists or Animists.

Our historians/books/researchers don't seem to be interested in researching/talking about pre-melaka Malaya.

It's a different story in SG and Indon, from time to time, they have interesting exhibitions on pre-melaka SEA.


Of course.

Close to Masjid Jamek LRT station.

Ok. The oldest Church in Msia is older than the oldest church in North America............

Or non-denom.

The term Protestant is strictly those communions that broke off during the reformation. Despite that, it's better to use the self-prescribed appellation of those communities. Lutherans, Baptist, Methodists etc

This post has been edited by feynman: Mar 2 2013, 01:48 PM

Protestants are Christians. You don't think so?

There are some churches that are not considered Christian by mainstream Christianity despite what they might claim to be. The LDS church and the JW's are some of the examples. I.e. the baptism carried out in these communities are not valid. That is to say if you were a mormon and then you became an anglican, you will need to be baptised. However, if you were a Baptist and you became a catholic later on, your baptism is valid.

Having Jesus Christ featured prominently in one's church doesn't mean it is Christian. The LDS view of Jesus is completely different from the 'mainstream' Christian view.

This post has been edited by feynman: Mar 2 2013, 02:05 PM

Salah on multiple fronts. henry merajuk sebab tak boleh cerai. Dia mau cerai Catherine of Spain to marry Anne Boleyn whom he had her executed later because (whatever version of history that you like) he fell in love with Jane Seymour. Basically Henry was a horny old geezer.

"Protestant' is the term which was probably given by the Catholic church to those who were protesting against catholic teachings. The protesters probably viewed themselves as reformers.

It's the Swiss Reformed Church, not the Swiss Protestant Church. You get it?

There is really only one version of that religion. Just many interpretations.


Deswai Anglicans are known as Catholic Lite. The only thing that changed then was that the 'final authority' was not in Rome but in London. The beliefs were all the same. Now of course things have changed a lot.

No need.

If want to discuss, then go to christianforums.com
This is what you think. You and other people can audit and list out which community is Christian or otherwise. No one can stop you from doing that. Just as the LDS can say that they are Christian, no one can stop them from that. Whether this 'recognition' is extended by one's peers is another matter. This is precisely the situation that we are in now.

Anyone can start a university and say that it is a university, as to whether that 'university' is regarded as a university by other universities/governments/groups is another topic altogether.

Orthodox Christians is Christians.

The history of Christendom is really rich. Unfortunately, not many people care to know about it-which is fine if one doesn't have an interest. This would necessarily mean that one will only have an elementary knowledge of Christendom, frequently punctuated with 'I thought it was like this or like that' scenarios. Just an example, does anybody really know what papal infallibility means? The most common misconception is that whatever the pope says is infallible.....which is of course not true. Can't be blame, even some catholics believe that the pope confesses only to God, which is again wrong, the pope also has a confessor, who is just another priest like him.

No lah. Desway it's called the Church of England, with the sovereign as the head.

It's interesting to see history in action. Many people, especially the aristocrats, renounced catholicism and converted to anglicanism because it was to their interests. Commoners also did that because it was fashionable and it came with perks. That being said, many still practiced the 'old faith' in secret even though they were publicly anglicans.

Now contrast that to the communists in China. In China, no one actually believes in the communist cause anymore, but people still join the party because members can get privileges, like gahmen contracts, preferences treatments for loans or applications etc. You can see this in Msia too, be it on religious or political lines.

I don't think you understand what I'm trying to get across. Let me just give you a concrete example.

A recognises B because in A's beliefs/teachings/understanding/universe/reality, B shares the core beliefs/teachings/understandings/universe/reality of A's. They differ only slightly in very non-core issues.

Then comes C. C has a core that is so different from A and B that when A and B examines C's core, they do no see any semblance to theirs and so do not consider C and part of themselves. C can of course tell A and B that I am just like you(A & B). A and B doesn't have to buy what C is saying right?

Have you done special relativity? Understand the concept of reference frame?

Now something more tangible. A core Christian belief is the belief in the Trinity. The LDS church doesn't believe in the Trinity. So even though the LDS considers itself as Christian. The other churches who believe in the Trinity do not consider the LDS as a Christian church.

If you are a muslim, you probably would find this example easier to understand.

The ahmadis consider themselves muslims, but the sunnis don't. One point of diversion is that. Mainstream muslims believe that Muhammad is the last prophet, that is a tenet in islam, no if's no but's. The ahmadis believe that the founder of their movement is a sub-prophet to Muhammad. You see where we are getting at now?



Temple.

Orang yahudi takda gereja punya.......

Just like this BR1M. Saying this in Chinese,

rice still eat, wine still drink, money still take, election time, vote the opposition.

For the mainlanders, do/say whatever the party demands, then go home and say sorry to God.


Why are there more and more colleges/universities popping up in KL?

If you don't understand, then I guess you could go do your own research on this.

I don't agree with your assessment. Just because a faith features Jesus doesn't make it Christian. Jesus makes an appearance in Islam and the Bahai faith too, are they Christian? The Eschatology, Christology, Theology of Islam, Bahai and Christianity are different and so they are not the same.

Doing a sign of the cross is not a fundamental tenet. All mainstream Christian churches share the bread, they only differ in the significance of it. Catholic, Orthodox, some Anglican, Lutheran and others believe in the physical presence of Jesus in the Host. The rest do not, but still partake communion in every service as a remembrance of His sacrifice. Confessions are not a core tenet of Christianity again. Eating or not eating pork is not a core tenet again. The date for Christmas is not an issue at all, it was a pagan festival but it's no longer a feast of the winter solstice, but a celebration of the birth of Jesus. e celebrate the Agong's birthday on the 6 of June, does it mean all our agong's were born on the 6 of June?

All these churches however believe and agree in one thing....that is there are 3 persons in one God. I am not sure if you have heard of the Nicean Creed, it's a good summary of Christianity. Of course, not all Christians have the same regard for it, some take it as infallible, some take it as authoritative, some take it as less authoritative etc. But they all believe that Jesus was divine, is divine and will always be divine. The LDS and JW's do not.


What's important is one can worship, a the shape of the building is not important. It's nice to have a church with a nicer architecture but it's not important.