MAHOMMEDANS AND THE KORAN

THE REV. DR. WHITE'S LECTURE.

(To the Editor of the Singleton Argus)

       SIR,—An immense quantity of what I must take leave to call the sheerest nonsense has lately been talked in Singleton about the Turks in connection with the Eastern Question. The first of the two lectures delivered upon that question, by the Rev. Dr. White was full of research, and contained precisely the facts which were most required for forming a fair and intelligent view of the subject; and I, as one of your numerous readers, feel indebted to the worthy doctor for the pains and ability which were then brought to bear by him. The second lecture is, however, principally a tirade against Russia and Mr. Gladstone, and a rather absurd glorification of Turkey and the Turks. We are told that the Turks are a "NOBLE PEOPLE ;" that they are "suffering under the undeserved frown of Europe ;" that "Turkey is now one of the Constitutional Governments of Europe, and, that the Sultan is a Constitutional Sovereign" ; and so on, and so on. So much in love is the lecturer with his dear Turks that he considers them "superhuman specimens of humanity," and, in an outburst of fervour, informs us that he'd rather be a "dog and bay the Crescent"— whatever that may mean—"than a Russian Christian."
All this is new, if it is not true; and novelty is so attractive in the eyes of our lecturer that he also gives us an entirely new view of the Koran, which is the Turkish Bible, or Pentateuch. The Koran, we are told, "respects all the relations and duties of life," and is the moving spring in the conduct of an "honest, honourable, virtuous, and noble race," whose high character is formed by its influence. "The provisions of the Koran are on the whole wise and salutary." "Slavery, so far as the Turks themselves are concerned, is unknown." "Islam places women on a level with man, so far as duty and responsibility and liability to reward and punishment hereafter are concerned." Finally, the Koran will compare "most favourably with any scheme of legislation, ancient or modern, of mere human composition." That is to say, we might take it for choice before the Pandects of Justinian, Blackstone's Commentaries, the Code Napoleon, or British Statute Law.
It seems to me high time that matters should be put in a different point of view. The interests of accuracy demand it, and, what is of more importance, the interests of Christian truth—for there was a time ; when the chances were almost equally balanced as to whether Europe should be Mahommedan or Christian. Some people reading the views propounded above might really suppose that it mattered very little which way the scale turned—to me, at least, they appear decidedly latitudinarian. The point of the question, however, is this: Are Dr. White's views borne out by facts ? He has unquestionably made certain discoveries. Some four years ago, various tin mines, gold-bearing reefs, and goldfields were discovered within easy reach of Singleton. Are these Turkish researches like those of the prospectors of the abovenamed reefs and mines—mere moonshine?
We will speak first of the "noble," "virtuous," "honorable," "courteous," "humane" nation of the Turks ; and I will confine myself to the present century, during which they have, according to our lecturer, made such an advance in everything that ennobles a nation. In 1821 some thousands of Marmelukes were massacred in Cairo, and only one escaped with his life, having leaped his horse over the parapet of the city wall. In 1821 the Greek Patriarch was put to death at Constantinople, in the course of it virulent persecution of the Christians. One would imagine that the events in connection with the struggle for independence in Greece would be almost in Dr. White's recollection. But if he has forgotten, surely he has read of the bombardment of Scio, its capture, and the perpetration there of the most horrible massacre recorded in modern history. On the 11th April, 1822, four thousand inhabitants of that town and island were massacred in cold blood by the Turkish troops. This is, indeed, "superhuman humanity." In 1826 the new Mahommedan army was organised under Sultan Mahmoud, who was the representative of new, versus old Turkey. Its organisation was signalised by the suppression and massacre of the Janissaries, the old Turkish infantry. Will Dr. White state how that religious fury which seized upon the Turks in Palestine, resulted in a general massacre of the Syrian Christians, as recently as the year 1860, harmonises with his view of Turkish gentlemen? More than three thousand Christians were massacred in this outbreak of fanaticism, which led to the occupation of Syria by French soldiers, nominally as auxiliaries. To get rid of these inconvenient friends, 150 Turks were executed, and 11,000 Mohommedans pressed into the military service of the Porte as a punishment. The Bishop of Sydney spoke the other day, in a letter from Damascus, of the number of orphans that are still under the care of the good teachers of the Protestant schools in Damascus, made orphans by this cruel rising. In Candia, Egypt, Greece, Montenegro, Servia, it is always the same story of cruelty and oppression.
The above-mentioned facts are historically recorded, and I beg to oppose them as facts to Dr. White's somewhat vague generalities.
The question of the Koran as a different one, and is hardly fitted, for discussion in the columns of a newspaper. But anyone who takes Sale's Koran and peruses it carefully, will find, especially in the notes appended by Sale, evidence of the deep Moral Degradation that the Koran allows—the deepest degradation in short that is known to human natures. Gibbons' remarks on the Koran have always been supposed to embody all that can be said upon the subject, and, they are certainly very far removed from the Singleton view of it. "Each revelation," says that author, " is suited to the emergencies of Mahomet's policy or passion, and all contradiction is removed by the saving maxim that any text of Scripture is abrogated or modified by any subsequent passage." Again, " The European infidel will peruse with impatience the endless incoherent rhapsody of fable, precept, and declamation which seldom excites a sentiment or an idea, at some times crawls in the dust and is sometimes lost in the clouds." As I am precluded from dwelling upon the immoralities of the Koran, I may mention some of its absurdities. Mahomet journeyed to Heaven upon the beast Borak. A lapwing gave Solomon an account of the City of Saha, and carried a letter from him to the Queen. The Queen of the Valley of Ants made a speech to them (the Ants) on the approach of Solomon's army. A fine woman's skin is compared to an Ostrich egg. A devil got possession of Solomon's signet ring and reigned some days in his form. There are revelations to Mahomet in re Zaniab, his foster son's wife, and Mary a Coptic slave. The Moon split asunder at his voice, and went seven times round the Caaba. Mary of Nazareth in confounded with Mary, or Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron. Zacharias, father of John Baptist, with Zechariah the prophet. Mostly the Koran is a production of Talmudical tales, or fables of the Apocryphal gospels. What is good in it comes from the Bible, and what is not worth hearing or reading is either derived from the above sources or is Mahomet's own invention. Revenge in the Koran is enjoined, and strict retaliation. Unbelievers are to be slaves or captives. Not Mahometans, it is true—they are the Lords of the Earth. Wife-beating is enjoined,—and the injunction is freely advantage of by the gentle Turks. Women are kept under restraint and in ignorance, and yet are by Dr. White to be placed on a level with man in the other world. If Dr. White reads the chapter No. 55 of the Koran, he will see that they are not so placed ; for without entering into details the Mahommedan Paradise must be a very unsatisfactory Paradise for a Mahommedan's wife. Whatever they may be in Paradise, women are on earth no better than slaves, as any reader of Eastern histories knows, unless historians speak falsely. The Koran is so corrupt and corrupting a book that I cannot descend to particulars. The whole truth of the matter is that Mahommed was something like Balaam—a man who knew what was right and did what was wrong. Add to Balaam a dash of of Brigham Young, and to the Talmudical Tales a touch of the Book of Mormon, all fused and worked up together by the intellect of a false prophet, and the enthusiasm of a man who means to establish a new religion ; and you have the true key to Mahommed and the Koran. Such truths as would serve him he accepted, and such fictions as he required he invented. The sword to a Turk is the key to Heaven. This world and the next are made for the Moslem ; Christians are dogs and infidels, and are to be treated accordingly. Everything is at the bidding of the grossest passions of the true believer. No Turk yet ever spared man in his fury or women in his lust. Such is the noble and virtuous race whom our lecturer delights to honour, and such are the children of the Koran.
CREDAT JUDÆUS.


The Singleton Argus and Upper Hunter General Advocate 1877,http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article77256392