Comment on
"The Story of Christmas as Told in the Koran"
From: Shajaratun Muntazirah <[email protected]>
To: The Editor, bangsamoro.com <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, January 16, 2004
Subject: Re: “The Story of Christmas as Told in the Koran”
As-salamu 'alaykum.
We Muslims in the Philippines uphold cross-cultural, inter-faith and civilizational dialogues, but not at the expense of unconsciously promoting some distorted facts about our faith.
While acknowledging the sincerity, efforts and dedication of the brethren-in-faith behind your site, I was surprise-stricken to read the article published in the Women’s Journal, “The Story of Christmas as Told in the Koran” being posted in the bangsamoro.com: <http://www.bangsamoro.com/lit/ss_011004.php>. It is true that any item from outside sources being posted in the site does not necessarily reflect the view of you people behind the site. Yet, the fact that it is posted there is an implied connotation, at least to some visitors, of your sense of thumbs up for the same.
To elaborate on my points, kindly consider the following:
ITEM 1: “The Story of Christmas as Told in the Koran”
Comment:
What we have Muslims is “The Story of the Birth of Christ as Told in the Qur’an”. “Christmas” is defined by the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary as “25 December, the day when Christians celebrate the birth of Christ;” hence, the terms, Christmas box, Christmas cake, Christmas card, Christmas cracker, Christmas, Christmas Eve, Christmas pudding, Christmas stocking, Christmassy, Christmastime, and Christmas tree, among others. The Qur’an neither indicate December 25 as the Christ’s birth nor any day on winter season as indicated by the existence of palm tree with ripe dates, and in the New Testament, the scene of the shepherds and their sheep in the field at the night of the birth and the bright star that guided the three Magian (Persian) kings. As to the ‘pagan’ origin of “Christmas,” I will leave it to the well-meaning Jehovah’s Witnesses, Iglesia ni Christo, and other Christians to elaborate.
The bangsamoro.com should at least make an indication that we prefer the transliteration, “Qur’an” (not “Koran”) for our Holy Book; the same in the case of “Muhammad” (not Mohammed), “Muslim” (not “Moslem”), etc.
ITEM 2: “our Mohammedan or Moslem brothers”
Comment:
For us to be called “Mohammedan” has no basis in the Qur’an and other religious sources. Besides, the Orientalists-coined misnomer gives a wrong impression that the Muslims worship Muhammad, God forbid!
ITEM 3: “the story of the miracle of Christmas… is told dramatically and in visual details in the said book”
Comment:
To say that the Qur’an narrated the Annunciation and Birth of Jesus “dramatically and in visual details” is an exaggeration. A cursory glance at the Qur’an will reveal that its mode of narrating events is not the same with the Bible as it only points out the thematically important points. The story of Joseph (Chapter 12: Yusuf (Joseph)) though the most “detailed” story in the Qur’an, is still no match in detail to that of the Bible version.
ITEM 4: “Joseph and his 12 brothers”
Comment:
The writer does not know that the Bible told us that Joseph as only 11 brothers, and not 12—Benjamin, his younger brother, and his other 10 elder brothers who betrayed and sold him. The Qur’an neither informed us that Joseph has 12 brothers.
To say that Jacob has 12 sons is correct, but not Joseph having 12 brothers (since Joseph is included in the 12 sons of Jacob).
ITEM 5: “the religion (Islam), which now has an estimated following of 500 million…”
Comment:
By saying that Islam has presently only 500 million followers, the author consciously or unconsciously is taking part in a “demographic genocide” campaign against the 1.2 billion-strong Muslims the world over.
ITEM 5: “(Islam) was not ‘founded’ by Mohammed but by Ishmael…”
Comment:
For the writer to claim that Islam is founded by a human being and it was Prophet Isma’il has no basis in the Qur’an and is unacceptable to us Muslims. Islam is not even “founded” by Prophet Muhammad (s).
A study of the Qur’an will show that “Islam” (submission to the will of God) is understood in three levels: (1) “Islam” being the law or system of nature as all creatures from the smallest speck of atoms to the mightiest galaxy in the universe are “submitting” (“Muslim,” one who submits) to the law or system. (2) “Islam” being the religion brought to mankind from Adam to the last people on earth whose essence is belief in the Oneness of God both in Essence and Attributes. (3) “Islam” being the religion propagated by Prophet Muhammad as the perfection of the religion brought to all the preceding prophets from Adam to Jesus (peace be upon them all).
ITEM 6: “…Mohammed’s continuing encounters with Christians and Jews of his time could be the reason why many parts of the ‘Koran’ echo those of the Bible…”
Comment:
This paragraph of the article indirectly endorses the classical Orientalist notion of the Qur’an’s being copied from the Judeo-Christian scriptures—“indirectly” since the author uses the phrase “Some scholars believe that…” to escape from the responsibility of proving the veracity of the claim.
ITEM 7: “The verses of the Koran are called saj’s, written in a rhyming prose style popular among the 7th century Arabian poets and soothsayers.”
Comment:
Assuming that it is not a case of typographical error, I believe that the author fails to know that “verses” of the Qur’an are not called “saj’s” but “aayaat” (singular, “ayah”).
Besides, not all “aayaat” are “written in a rhyming prose style” as the Qur’an is not a Book of Poetry per se. Thus, even the word “verse” is not an exact translation of “ayah” whose literal translation is “sign”.
ITEM 8: “Lo! I seek refuge in the Beneficent One from thee, if thou art God.”
Comment:
Assuming that it is not again a case of typographical error, I may say that the writer is engaged in textual interpolation as done by Bible-thumpers and hot-Gospellers. The Marmaduke’s translation is this: “Lo! I seek refuge in the Beneficent One from thee, if thou art God fearing.” (Qur’an 19:18) Take note that the word “fearing” (the last word) is omitted, and by doing so, the author wants to show to the world that the Archangel, the Spirit of God, is God Himself, thus allegedly the Qur’an endorses the trinity—the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (“If thou art God”)!
ITEM 9: “And she conceived Him, and she withdrew with Him in a far place”; “The next scene shows Mary bringing her Son to her ‘own folks, carrying Him’.”
Comment:
Take note again that the author distorts Marmaduke’s translation by capitalizing the word “him” and “son” when referring to Jesus, thus trying to drive at the point that the Qur’an acknowledges him as the “Son of God”.
ITEM 10: “Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!” “The verse(s) above prove that both the Bible and the Koran agree on one salient point: that Jesus resurrected—that after His death He ‘shall be raised alive’.”
Comment:
This is another specimen of ‘twisted’ truth. The Qur’an never states that Jesus was crucified and died out of it, and after three days he resurrected, as the Christians do believe. “…And the day I (Jesus) shall be raised alive” is referring to the Day of Judgment when all the people—including Jesus—will be resurrected. In emphatically denying the alleged crucifixion of Christ, the Qur’an states: “And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger. They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! Those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.” (Qur’an 3:157).
ITEM 11: “Such was Jesus, son of Mary. (This is) A statement that He should take unto Himself a son. Glory to Him! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! And it is...” “Another important revelation can be gleaned from the phrase, “…that He should take unto Himself a son.”
Comment:
This is another amusing case of concoction and interpolation. The actual passage states: “Such was Jesus, son of Mary: (this is) a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt. It befitteth not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should take unto Himself a son. Glory be to Him! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is” (Qur’an 19:34-35, Marmaduke’s translation). Take note that by blatantly removing the phrase, “…of the truth concerning which they doubt. It befitteth not (the Majesty of) Allah…” the author almost succeeded in turning upside down (180 degrees) the meaning of the passage—from the Qur’an’s outright denial of God having a son to assertion of the same!!
Reminder for the Muslims: “Those who can afford to misquote their own scriptures can most surely do the same to other scriptures, including the Qur’an.”
In conclusion, I do suggest to the editor of bangsamoro.com not to omit the article from the site. Instead, a corresponding comment should be posted with the aim of clarifying the true views of Islam on Jesus the Messiah.
Kudos for all the good works that will certainly earn the pleasure of the Beloved!
“Such was Jesus, son of Mary: (this is) a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt. It befitteth not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should take unto Himself a son. Glory be to Him! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is.”
(Qur’an 19:34-35)
© 1998-2004 Shajaratun Muntazirah
Email: [email protected]
Address: http://www.geocities.com/smuntazirah
