"Ruffled Feathers!!"

My new poem, and art, DID appear in the paper this week as I'd hoped (see Dec. 15th blog)!!  However, something ELSE was in there which interrupted my "Christmas Cheer." 

....and even my annual "Christmas Cardinal" (above) had his feathers ruffled by it.

Let me explain, please.

For some time, though we have virtually NO Muslims in our town, the paper has been carrying full-page articles by a local Muslim "PH.D."  Frankly, I never paid too much attention to these essays before but the one for THIS month, entitled "The Miracle Birth of Jesus Christ," caught my eye and I actually READ most of it.  (You see, I'm teaching on this very subject in my Men's Sunday School class this Sunday, so my interest was piqued.  Also, this man's PREVIOUS entries were all aimed at defining the ISLAMIC position on things.  THIS time, he is trying to REdefine what WE (Christians) believe, and that both interests and concerns me.)

Here's why.

1.)  Yes, his TITLE mentions "Jesus Christ" but in the article, he refers to "Jesus (PBUH)," whatever that means, six different times. Never once does the author refer to Jesus as "Jesus Christ" again, making it obvious his title was a bait-and-switch designed to suck Christians in to reading the piece.

Had it been entitled "The Miracle Birth of Jesus (PBUH)," it would have been obvious immediately that Christians have NO common ground with Muslims.

We may, indeed, become a nation called "Islamerica" one day but there will never, ever be a true blending of Christianity and Islam...."Chrislam," as some try to call it.  Light and darkness will NEVER mix.

2.)  He writes, quote, "Muslims exalt and revere Mary more than the Christians, because the Christians in some of their writings talk about Mary being betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph."  The problems with this are as follows...a.)  Here he is openly declaring some perceived superiority of Islam over Christianity.  Yet would CHRISTIANS be allowed to say OUR religion is better than Islam, in print like this, today?  I doubt it.  Then,  b.) It's not "our writings," it's GOD'S WORD which states Mary was betrothed to Joseph...but regardless,  c.)  In the preceding paragraph, the author had just mocked those who believe (correctly) that Jesus is the son of GOD, now he's taking Christians to task for believing that He is also the son of JOSEPH. Not that we'd WANT to, but will this paper allow CHRISTIANS to write about every perceived inconsistency in ISLAM, at THEIR most important holiday of the year??  

3.) Those things can be attributed to spiritual blindness, yes, but the author flat-out LIED when he wrote, speaking of Mary as being a VIRGIN, "in the American dictionary, a virgin woman is one who didn't marry.  In our terminology, as Muslims, it has nothing to do with marriage; a virgin woman is one who has never been touched by a man."

Merriam-Webster's first definition of "Virgin" is one who has never had sexual intercourse.

So he lied.  And it's a whopper.

Believe it or not, though, my main gripe is not with this Muslim, it's with the PAPER for giving him a platform and allowing him to say things denigrating OUR religion (Christianity) that we would NEVER be able to say, with impunity, about his.  I'm also upset that his bald-faced lie about what the American dictionary says regarding "Virgin" was allowed to see print unchallenged.  Editors are supposed to EDIT, but we all know that most editors are afraid of getting sued by members of certain groups if they try to hold them to the same standard that the REST of us are held to.

I've e-mailed the editor and asked if I can do a column of my own from a CHRISTIAN standpoint, in the interest of equal time.

I don't expect a response, but I hope I am wrong about that.