中文原文：
（2007年5月31日 蘋果日報）
反耶經就是反權威
投訴耶經到底是義助《中大學生報》的圍魏救趙手段，抑或是向標準含糊的影視處和淫審處派難題？甚至是如某些徒所言，是反基（反對基督）者的預謀攻擊？
作為發起人之一，我認為大家儘管隨便聯想。反正，無論動機如何，只要你曾細心讀過令人戰慄的《聖經》網站，當可知投訴耶經並非含血噴人或偽造證據。
當然，我不是說這個申訴必須成立，而大家最終是否贊同我們的申訴亦不甚重要；更重要的是，我們的公職人員、官員甚至社會各界，如何看待我們這一個投訴？從各人的反應了解到一些事實，進而思考香港社會的現況。
用輕蔑來解決挑戰
明顯地，投訴耶經令審定《中大學生報》的人陷入雙重標準的困局。論不雅，耶經比《中大學生報》不遑多讓，而論傳播之廣，耶經在會的推廣下，任何人包括幼兒均可接觸耶經，我們只有主日學，卻從不會有「周日兒童紅樓夢/金瓶梅班」，《中大學生報》的傳播範圍相較下是瞠乎其後。
影視處和淫審處如何處理反映他們的心態？無論是淫審處委員，影視處副處長甚至王永平局長均用相當單薄的理由否定我們的投訴，中間竟無回應雙重標準問題。對他們而言，耶經毫無問題，也似乎是常識或真理。帶這種先入為主之見，他們完全沒有試圖獨立地判斷我們的投訴，王永平更以惡作劇來定性我們的投訴。面對一個雙重標準的困局，他們以至部份衛道之士（如蔡志森之流）選擇視而不見，也許正因他們對自己，或他們所相信的權威充滿信心！
「惡作劇」、「無知」、「國際笑柄」，帶無可質疑的權威，他們用輕蔑解決了挑戰。
輕蔑是相當方便的工具，甚至不必花工夫想出像樣的理由，更不必花心思分析邏輯，先一招「我們符合道德」，下一招「你們惡作劇無知國際笑柄」，易如反掌，一切危機自動消失。在他們身上，我們可以看見權力者的高傲；這種高傲源自對耶文化的信心，而這種自信則源自耶社群自殖民地時代起，長期控制社會大量資源。此一客觀事實，層層環扣，造成了一種不深思，迷信權威的風氣。
誠然，社會風氣的形成必有複雜原因，不能簡化判定。毫無疑問，在香港，基督教會力量過於強大，在歷史因素影響下，社會高層被大量徒把持，政策則難免有所傾斜，加上基督主張因信稱義，不鼓勵懷疑，移植至中國的基督並無西方自蒙運動以來的反省宗傳統，反而吸收了中華文化中的父權思想，演變成今天的狀況。
權威只會造成僵化
有趣的是，基督教憑優秀行銷包裝手段，其影響力甚至深入非信徒，我相信那群指投訴耶經可笑的人士並非全是徒，但長期耳濡目染，早已無力更改觀點。各界傳媒在描述我等投訴人士時，也冠以反基二字，其中遣詞用語，竟頗似左報描述反共分子！基督教是何時也變成「必然正確」？其潛移默化之力，可見一斑。
社會的發展自有原因，基督有今天的勢力亦不算是過錯。投訴耶經與其說是要打擊基督教，倒不如說是要在權威的高牆上小開缺口，讓有意者可以邁步前行。權威只造成僵化，天主在中世紀時的無上權威，最後只導致無數獄悲劇，也妨礙了社會的進步；儒家受獨尊儒術所累，也從樸素的學問變成中國進步的枷鎖；馬克思主義意在解放無產階級，最後卻成為暴政溫床。自以為是的所謂真理，為害往往最深。
今日香港，的確有不少人視耶經為必然真理，例如影音使團最近便曾表示：「《聖經》不僅是宗教的重要文獻，也是上帝的說話，是信仰與道德的最高權威。同時，內中所記載任何有關科學與歷史的記述，都是正確無誤的。」他們也曾製作連其他基督徒也嗤之以鼻的方舟電影，類此的絕對真理自信，只會導致掩飾事實，信念越深，行為往往越無恥，一眾道德信徒刻意無視淫審雙重標準，正是這種無恥的清晰寫照。
應立法反宗教歧視
若說我們是「反基」，這種狂妄便是我們要反的。一個宗可以自視為真理，但不可對非信徒有同等要求，我們的投訴正正表明︰即使有人認定耶經是道德的權威，對不起，我們不吃這一套，也別以為這可掩飾道德審判雙重標準的事實；即使社會對此事如何冷漠、麻木，耶經的白紙黑字和《中大學生報》的可笑判決，都說明了事實，權力者的高傲，只反映他們的腦袋已如化石。
投訴耶經，不代表我們有凌駕所有基督徒的智慧，然而這與我們投訴的合理性無關，即使基督徒中多賢達之士，但作為社會一分子，我們仍有義務反抗不當的權威。
要平衡這種權威的力量，推動反宗歧視立法是治本之法，此事表面和投訴耶經事件關係不大。事實上，立法反宗歧視卻是打擊獨斷宗的利器，因為這有助打破社會上宗脈絡造成的壟斷，和帶來的利益，長遠而言，可以弱化宗權力。當然，對充斥教徒的政府而言無異於與虎謀皮。但千里之行，始於足下，各位受夠權威嘴臉的朋友共勉之。
讀者 L K Yeung
--8<-----------------------------
(譯者是我）
英文翻譯：
（The original article is in Chinese and appears in the May 31, 2007 issue of Apple Daily.）
Anti-Bible means anti-authority
Is the complaint against the Bible an act to rescue the CUHK student newspaper (CUSP) or a challenge against the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority (TELA) and the Obscene Articles Tribunal (OAT) for their ambiguous standards? Or is it an attack by the "anti-Christ" as stated by some Christians?
As one of the organizers of the campaign, I believe that people can associate all they want. Regardless of the motive of the campaign, if you have read "The Terrifying Bible" website in details, you would know that the accusation against the Bible is neither false nor based on fabricated evidence.
Of course, I am not saying that the complaint must hold true or others must agree with us. The more important issue is how government officials and the society view the complaint. Some thought about the society can be drawn from the reactions of people.
Challenges responded with scorn
Obviously, complaining the Bible forces those who judge CUSP into a dilemma. In terms of obscenity, the Bible is on par with CUSP. In terms of distribution, the Bible is accessible by everyone including children. We have Bible study on Sundays but not the equivalent for Dream of the Red Chamber or Jinpingmei (Chinese novels). On the other hand, the CUSP is much less distributed.
How are the TELA and the OAT reflecting their mentalities? Officials of the OAT, the deputy director of the TELA and even Joseph Wong Wing-ping (Secretary for Commerce, Industry and Technology) have dismissed our complaint with weak reasons. They have even avoided the issue of double-standard. Preoccupied with the opinion that there is nothing wrong with the Bible, they have not tried to analyze our complaint. Wong even called our complaint a "prank". Facing a dilemma created by double-standard, they and some "morale defenders" (such as Mr. Tsai from the Society for Truth and Light) refuses to acknowledge the issue. Perhaps they are over-confident with themselves or the authority they believe in.
They have chosen to downplay challenges with phrases such as "prank", "ignorant" and "laughable by the world".
Scorn is a convenient tool that replaces convincing reasons or logical reasoning. By saying "we act according to the moral standard" or "you are making fool of yourselves", they dismiss crisis with no effort. From them, we can see the egotism of those in charge. Since the colonial era, the Christian church has controlled significant resource in the society. This fact has helped building an atmosphere of blind appeal to authority.
Granted, causes of the atmosphere in a society should not be oversimplified. However, without doubt, the force of the Christian church is too strong in Hong Kong. Historically, many of the prominent people in the society are Christians, and the government loses its neutrality. Moreover, Christianity advocates salvation by faith alone and discourages having doubt. Separation of church and state receives little attention while the thought of fatherhood dominates. These have created the situation we have today.
Authority would cause deadlock
Interestingly, using marketing tactics, Christianity is able to affect even non-believers. I believe that not everyone who calls the complaint against Bible a joke are Christians. However, the situation is hard to change. The media calls those who complain against the Bible "anti-Christ". The wording is similar to that used by anti-communist leftist newspapers. How is the Christian church always right? This show its power to affect the society.
The church is not wrong in having the force it has. The complaint against Bible is not to criticize Christianity, but to crack a hole on the wall of authority, let those who are willing move forward. Authority only leads to deadlock. The Catholic church holds unquestionable authority in the Middle Age. This created numerous tragedy and prevented the society from improving, just like the Confucian school of thought was once used to prevent improvement within the ancient China. Marxism was meant to liberate people but was used as a tool for tyranny. The opinionated "Truth" tends to do the most harm.
Indeed, in Hong Kong nowadays, many view the Bible as the Truth. For example, The Media Evangelism Limited stated recently, "the Bible is not only an important religious literature, but also the word of God. It is the highest authority on religion and morale. Also, any narration in it regarding Science or historical events must be completely correct. They have even created movies about Ark of Noah that even some Christians look down upon. Such over-confidence in the "Truth" and oneself tends to cover the facts. The stronger their faith, the more baldfaced they are, and that is reflected in the ignorance of the double-standard of some Christians.
Legislation against religion-based discrimination needed
We have to criticize the over-confidence (of some people) that judges others as "anti-Christ". A religion can believe that it holds the Truth, but it shouldn't require non-believers to conform to it. Our complaint not only shows that we disagree with those who thinks that the Bible is the authority of morale, but also shows that the fact (of double-standard judgement being practised) cannot be hidden. Even if the society is not concerned about this incident, the Bible's content and the laughable judgement against CUSP still show the hardness of the mind of some.
Complaining the Bible does not mean we are more knowledgeable than Christians, but this is irrelevant to the merit of the complaint. Even if there are many knowledgeable Christians, we still have the duty to oppose the unreasonable authority.
To counter the force of such authority, the solution is to support legislation of laws against discrimination based on religion. On the surface, the legislation would not be relevant to this incident. However, such legislation would be effective in stopping the dominance of a religion by weakening its influence and therefore its power. It seems not doable as the government is full of Christians. However, all big changes have their starting points. Let's share this word of encouragement with those who have had enough with the authority.
By L K Yeung |
2007/5/31 22:29
| 
2008/10/24 23:56
| 