The Lausanne Global Conversation is on the World Wide Open Network
Autor: Joseph Cumming
Datum: 18.10.2010
Category: Welt-Glaubensgruppen
Anmerkung der Redaktion: Dieser Vorabbericht zu Kapstadt 2010 wurde von Joseph Cumming geschrieben und stellt eine Übersicht dar zum Thema „Islam“, welches bei der Multiplexsitzung diskutiert wird. Stellungnahmen zu diesem Bericht durch die Lausanner globalen Gespräche werden an den Autor und andere Personen weitergeleitet und sollen dabei helfen, die endgültige Präsentation beim Kongress festzulegen.
Kann jemand ein Muslim sein UND gleichzeitig ein Nachfolger Jesu? Ist dies ein Widerspruch in sich? Wie sollten bibelgläubige Christen dies evaluieren?
Mein bester Freund entschied 1979, dass er sich nicht länger als „Christ” sah, sondern als „messianischer Jude”. John stammte aus einer säkularen jüdischen Familie und war praktizierender Hindu, bevor er Jesus kennen lernte. Anschließend war er drei Jahre lang aktiv eingebunden in eine bibelgläubige christliche Gemeinde. Doch nun spürte John, er solle sich wieder mit seinen jüdischen Wurzeln verbinden, einer messianischen Synagoge beitreten, koscher leben und seine Kinder jüdisch erziehen. Er sah keinen Widerspruch darin, Jesus als Messias nachzufolgen und sich – ethnisch und religiös - als jüdisch zu bezeichnen.
Wie die meisten Christen in den 1970er Jahren reagierte ich skeptisch und zitierte biblische Texte, von denen ich annahm, sie lehnten Kashrut (die Speisegesetze) ab, weil sie unserer Freiheit in Christus widersprechen. Nach und nach verstand ich, dass diese Texte auch anders verstanden werden konnten und fing an, die Rechtmäßigkeit der aufstrebenden messianischen Bewegung zu respektieren. Doch nicht früh genug, denn ich verletzte meinen Freund durch meine Ablehnung seines Versuchs, seine Identität als jüdischer Nachfolger Jesu zu erforschen.
Ein Grobteil der jüdischen Gemeinschaft zeigte ebenfalls eine negative Reaktion. Die meisten von ihnen sahen das messianische Judentum einfach als eine neue Verpackung der Jahrhunderte alten christlichen Bemühungen, die Juden zu bekehren, und damit die jüdische Identität zu zerstören. Für sie waren messianische Juden keine Juden. Seit kurzer Zeit haben jedoch jüdische Leiter und Gelehrte vorsichtig angedeutet, dass messianische Juden, die zuverlässig die Thora und halakha befolgen, sich konstruktiv im Leben der jüdischen Gemeinschaft einsetzen und ihren Kindern jüdische Traditionen weitergeben, sich zwar im Irrtum befinden, aber doch als Juden anerkannt werden müssen.
Unter den Muslimen begann 1980 eine ähnliche Bewegung. Es gab Muslime, die Jesus als ihren Herrn und göttlichen Erlöser annahmen, die glaubten, dass Jesus für ihre Sünden gestorben und auferstanden war aber darauf beharrten, dass sie dies nicht zu Ex-Muslimen oder Bekehrte zur christlichen Religion mache. Sie wollten innerhalb ihrer muslimischen Gemeinschaft bleiben und in diesem Kontext Jesus ehren.
In den muslimischen und christlichen Gemeinschaften sind die Reaktionen unterschiedlich. Auf der muslimischen Seite werden einige von ihnen aufgrund ihres Glaubens verfolgt, während andere in ihren Gemeinschaften zurückhaltend akzeptiert werden. Auf der christlichen Seite werden sie von den Verteidigern als „messianische Muslime“ gesehen, die wir akzeptieren sollten, genauso wie wir messianische Juden als authentische Jünger Jesu akzeptieren. Kritiker hingegen argumentieren, dass der Islam und das Judentum verschiedenartig sind und dass die muslimische Identität nicht mit dem biblischen Glauben versöhnt werden kann.
Als Nabil (1) eine lebensverändernde Begegnung mit Jesus hatte, blieb er innerhalb der muslimischen Gemeinschaft und nahm an den muslimischen Gebeten teil. Als seine Familie und Freunde von seiner Liebe zu Jesus erfuhren, folgten einige seinem Beispiel, andere wiederum versuchten, ihn tatsächlich umzubringen. Nachdem er für seinen Glauben im Gefängnis war, traf er die Entscheidung, sich nicht länger als Muslim zu sehen. Er sah den Islam als ein System, das für seine Verfolgung verantwortlich war. Heute betrachtet sich Nabil als Christ. Doch einige, die ihm im Glauben folgten, sehen sich nach wie vor als Muslime.
Ibrahim war ein respektierter Gelehrter des Koran, ein Hafiz. Als er sich entschied, Jesus nachzufolgen, prüfte er eingehend die Verse des Korans, die allgemein so verstanden werden, dass sie die Dreieinigkeit verleugnen, Jesus als Sohn Gottes abstreiten, Jesu Sühnetod ablehnen und die Wahrheit der Bibel verneinen. Er kam zum Ergebnis, dass jeder dieser Verse alternative Interpretationen offen ließ, und er deshalb Jesus auch als Moslem nachfolgen könne. Schon bald teilten Mitglieder seiner Familie und Gemeinschaft seinen Glauben an Jesus als Herrn und Erlöser. Auch Ibrahim war wegen seines Glaubens im Gefängnis, doch anders als Nabil wollte Ibrahim weiterhin Jesus als Muslim nachfolgen. Trotzdem sehen sich manche von denen, die er zu Jesus führte, nicht mehr als Muslime. Ibrahim und Nabil sind Freunde und respektieren sich beide als Brüder, obwohl sie bezüglich ihrer Identität anderer Meinung sind.
Christen aus anderen Kulturkreisen reagieren unterschiedlich, wenn sie Gläubige wie Nabil und Ibrahim treffen. Phil Parshall und John Travis haben zusammen mehr als 60 Jahre unter Muslimen gearbeitet, und sie widersprechen sich mit allem Respekt. In verschiedenen missiologischen Journalen publizierten sie Artikelserien, in denen sie ihre unterschiedlichen Ansichten erklärten. Das hatte zur Folge, dass auch viele andere sich dazu äußerten.
Die technische Bezeichnung dafür ist „C4-C5-Debatte“, basierend auf einer Skala von Travis, die verschiedene christuszentrierte Communitys („C“) beschreibt, anhand derer an Jesus Gläubige mit muslimischem Hintergrund (MHGs) beschrieben werden und die Art, wie sie ihre Identität verstehen.
C1 –MHGs in Gemeinden sind radikal verschieden von ihrer eigenen Kultur, und auch die Anbetung findet nicht in ihrer Muttersprache statt.
C2 – Wie C1, doch die Anbetung findet in der Muttersprache der MHGs statt.
C3 – MHGs in kulturell einheimischen christlichen Gemeinden, die kulturelle Formen vermeiden, die als „islamisch“ gelten.
C4 – MHGs in kulturell einheimischen Gemeinden, die biblisch erlaubte „islamische“ Formen beibehalten (z.B. sich beim Gebet niederzuwerfen), diese aber auf biblische Weise anwenden. Sie nennen sich vielleicht nicht „Christen“ (also nicht „Nachfolger Jesu“), aber sehen sich nicht als Muslime.
C5 – Muslime, die Jesus als Herrn und Erlöser in gleichgesinnten gläubigen Versammlungen innerhalb der muslimischen Gemeinschaft nachfolgen, sich aber weiterhin kulturell und offiziell als Muslime bezeichnen.
C6 – Geheime Gläubige im Untergrund.
Die heftigsten Unstimmigkeiten finden zwischen den Verfechtern von C4 und C5 statt. Um dies den Lesern verständlich zu machen, möchte ich Bedenken erwähnen, die von den C1 - C4-Verfechtern genannt wurden, die sich Sorgen um die C5 machten. Danach werde ich die Antworten der C5-Verteidiger zusammenfassen. Diese Bedenken und Antworten setze ich in Anführungszeichen um zu betonen, dass sie nicht unbedingt meine Ansichten sind, sondern die von anderen. Anschließend werde ich meine eigenen Kommentare abgeben.
C4-Bedenken: „Die Bibel (z.B. 1. Könige 18,21; 2. Könige 17,27-41) verurteilt den Synkretismus. Beides sein zu wollen, Muslim und Nachfolger Christi, ist synkretistisch.“
C5-Antwort: „Dies ist nicht der Synkretismus, den die Bibel verurteilt. C5-Gläubige leben unter der Autorität der Bibel (z.B. 1. Kor. 9,19-23; Apg. 16,1-3; 21,20-40) und lehnen alles ab, was der Bibel widerspricht.“
Bemerkung: Beide Seiten dieser Diskussion haben die Bibel ernsthaft auf exegetische Weise untersucht nach Belegen, die ihre Ansichten unterstützen. Es ist nicht möglich, einer dieser beiden Seiten Recht zu geben. Leser können Artikel in den Journalen EMQ und IJFM nachlesen, in denen diese biblischen Themen fortgesetzt werden.
C4 -Bedenken: „Islam und Judentum sind verschieden: man kann „messianischen Islam” nicht mit messianischem Judentum vergleichen. Die hebräischen Schriften werden von den Christen als inspiriert anerkannt, der Koran ist es aber nicht. In der Moschee wird islamische Theologie gepredigt, die die biblischen Wahrheiten ausdrücklich leugnet.”
C5-Antwort: „Islam und Judentum sind unterschiedlich, doch beide sind monotheistisch. Neben dem Koran werden die Thora und das Neue Testament als Schrift vom Islam anerkannt. Für den rabbinischen Judaismus sind nicht nur die hebräischen Schriften (Tanakh), sondern auch der Talmud maßgebend, der – wie der Koran – Aussagen enthält, die nicht alle mit dem Neuen Testament vereinbar sind. Die traditionelle Liturgie der Synagoge scheint ebenfalls die Lehre des Neuen Testaments abzulehnen, doch können beide Liturgien neu interpretiert werden und die Teilnahme am Gebet bedeutet nicht unbedingt, dass jedes Wort der Liturgie bestätigt wird.
Bemerkung: Der Begriff „messianischer Islam” ist nicht hilfreich. Jesus als Messias stellt für die Juden einen Wendepunkt dar, wohingegen die Muslime Jesus als Messias anerkennen, aber andere Einwände gegen den christlichen Glauben an Jesus erheben. Die meisten Muslime glauben, dass der biblische Text korrumpiert wurde, doch es gibt einige muslimische Gelehrte, die dem nicht zustimmen. C5-Gläubige bestätigen die Bibel als das Wort Gottes. Heilige Texte müssen genauestens untersucht werden und es muss geprüft werden, ob vorgeschlagene Interpretationen legitim und ehrlich sind.
C4-Bedenken: „Das Vorgehen von C5 ist hinterlistig. Wie würde es Ihnen gefallen, wenn Muslime in Ihrer Gemeinde auftauchen und sagen würden, sie seien Christen, um dann zu versuchen, Ihre Leute zum Islam zu bekehren?“
C5-Antwort: „Wenn C5-Gläubige transparent sind und dazu stehen, wer sie sind und was sie glauben, ist dies nicht hinterlistig. C5-Gläubige sehen sich selbst als echte Muslime, nicht als ‚Christen, die vorgeben, Muslime zu sein.’”
Bemerkung: Zur Erinnerung: Travis’ Skala beschreibt, wie Gläubige, die als Muslime geboren und erzogen wurden, ihre Identität sehen und nicht, wie interkulturelle christliche Mitarbeiter sich selbst sehen.
C4-Bedenken: „Die muslimische Community wird keine Muslime in ihren Reihen tolerieren, die gegen die Regeln verstoßen,.“
C5-Antwort: „Es ist zu früh, um darauf eine sichere Antwort zu geben.”
Bemerkung: Die muslimische Gemeinschaft kann für sich selbst sprechen. Als ich darüber mit muslimischen Leitern sprach, war ihr Hauptanliegen, dass diese Menschen weiterhin die moralischen und rituellen Vorschriften praktizieren, mit denen sich die muslimische Community identifiziert.
C4-Bedenken: „Wer sich ‚Muslim’ nennt, bestätigt Mohammed als wahren Propheten Gottes. Dies ist nicht mit der Bibel vereinbar.“
C5 -Antwort: „Tatsächlich hat der Ausdruck ‚Muslim’ unterschiedliche Bedeutungen für unterschiedliche Muslime. C5-Gläubige haben verschiedene Ansichten über Mohammed, unter anderem: 1. Jemand kann kulturell gesehen ein Muslim sein, ohne jedoch Mohammed theologisch zu bestätigen. 2. Mohammed war ein Prophet, aber nicht immer unfehlbar (vgl. 1. Thes. 5,20-21 und Kajaphas in Joh. 11,51). 3. Mohammed war ein Prophet für die Araber, aber nicht für andere Menschen. 4. Mohammed war ein wahrer Prophet, dessen Worte aber falsch ausgelegt wurden. 5. Diese Frage ist so oder so unwichtig.”
Bemerkung: Für die große Mehrheit der Muslime ist das Prophetentum Mohammeds für die muslimische Identität wichtig und unverhandelbar. Doch das Wort „Muslim” (wörtliche Bedeutung auf arabisch: „Gott unterstellt sein”) hat je nach Kontext unterschiedliche Bedeutungen. Im Koran werden die ersten Jünger Jesu „Muslime” genannt (Koran 3,52). Die Bezeichnungen „Muslim” oder „Christ” beziehen sich in manchen Gesellschaften eher auf die Ethnizität als auf religiöse Zugehörigkeit.
C4 -Bedenken: „C5-MHGs bleiben bei ihrer muslimischen Identität, um der Verfolgung für das Kreuz Jesu Christi zu entgehen.“
C5-Antwort: „Diese Beurteilung der Motive ist unfair. Es ist eine Frage der religiös-kulturellen Identität, nicht des Kreuzes Christi – und dies wird von C5-Gläubigen bestätigt.“
Bemerkung: Wenn C5-Gläubige versuchen, der Verfolgung zu entgehen, so funktioniert dies nicht. Viele wurden unnachgiebig verfolgt, sitzen im Gefängnis und werden für ihre Überzeugungen schwer bestraft.
C4-Bedenken: „Was ist mit der Gemeinde? Sehen sich C5-Gläubige als Teil des Leibes Christi?“
C5-Antwort: „C5-Gläubige bilden Gemeinschaften, die auf Christus ausgerichtet sind. Sie lesen die Bibel, beten, feiern die Taufe und das Abendmahl. Sie sind ekklesiai (Herausgerufene) im Sinne des Neuen Testaments, obwohl sie vielleicht ein anderes Bild einer Gemeinde abgeben als das von den Christen gewohnte.“
Bemerkung: Es hilft lokalen Gemeinschaften, heilig und apostolisch zu sein, wenn sie die Bibel lesen und ihr gehorsam sind. Doch die Bibel ruft auch dazu auf, die Einheit und Universalität des weltweiten Leibes Christi anzuerkennen. Manche C5-Gemeinschaften und solche, die Partnerschaften mit ihnen eingehen, sehen Nicht-MHG-Gemeinden sehr negativ oder haben gestörte Beziehungen zu ihnen. Andere C5-Gemeinschaften haben eine gute Einstellung gegenüber der weiteren Gemeinde.
C4-Bedenken: „Ich hörte, einige C5-Gruppen gehen die Christologie sehr nachlässig an. Das finde ich besorgniserregend.“
C5-Antwort: „Einige C5-Gläubige haben eine verschwommene Christologie, aber das haben andere Christen auch. Wichtig ist, in welche Richtung sich C5-Gläubige bewegen: auf Jesus Christus zu. Sie beten in seinem Namen, beten ihn als ihren Herrn an und erfahren sein übernatürliches Wirken in ihrem Leben. Mit jedem Tag wird ihre Christologie besser.“
Bemerkung: Das kann man für neue Gläubige gelten lassen. Doch wenn diese Bewegung wächst und ihre Leiter an Erfahrung zunehmen, muss erwartet werden, dass sie gesunde Christologie verstehen und sie auf eine Weise weitergeben, die von ihrer Herde verstanden wird. Ein Maß an Sensibilität gegenüber der Bewegung ist richtig, jedoch nur, wenn das klare Ziel dieser Bewegung vorgegeben ist, nämlich Jesus Christus, nicht nur als Erretter und Lamm, das unsere Sünden auf sich genommen hat, sondern auch als das ewige, unerschaffene Logos, als Gott, der sich im Fleisch manifestiert hat.
Einige Gedanken bezüglich Identität: C5-Gläubige wie Ibrahim fordern die Anschauungen heraus, was es bedeutet, „Muslim“ oder „Christ“ zu sein. Wir alle haben mehr als nur eine Identität. Z.B. nehmen die meisten amerikanischen Christen an, dass jemand ein patriotischer Amerikaner und ein treuer Christ sein kann, obwohl sie vielleicht nicht damit einig gehen, was ihre Regierung oder Mitbürger tun. Gläubige wie Ibrahim möchten beides sein: authentische Muslime und treue Jünger Jesu. Sie wollen kritisch untersuchen, was ihre Mitmuslime tun und lehren im Hinblick auf die Lehre Jesu, manchmal zustimmend, manchmal neu interpretierend, manchmal widersprechend. Verlangen solche Meinungsverschiedenheiten von amerikanischen Gläubigen, ihre amerikanische Identität aufzugeben oder von C5-Gläubigen, ihre muslimische Identität zu verleugnen? Wie können sie auf die beste Art und Weise „kritisch loyal“ gegenüber ihrer Geburtsgemeinschaft und ihrem Familienerbe sein und respektvoll kritisieren, was unbiblisch ist, und gleichzeitig Gottes Gebot halten, „seinen Vater und seine Mutter zu ehren“?
Seit der Wesleyanischen Erweckung und der Grossen Erweckung des 18. Jahrhunderts haben Evangelikale darauf bestanden, dass es für Gott nicht das Wichtigste ist, ob sich jemand als Christ bezeichnet, sondern ob jemand eine lebensverändernde Beziehung zu Jesus Christus hat. 1742 wurde David Brainerd von der Yale-Universität verwiesen wegen seiner Bemerkung, dass ein bestimmtes Fakultätsmitglied (ein loyaler „Christ“) „nicht mehr Gnade hat als dieser Stuhl“, weil er keine persönliche Beziehung zu Jesus hatte.
Kann man daraus den Schluss ziehen, dass es vollkommen unwichtig ist, ob sich Gläubige „Christen” nennen? Bei messianischen Juden akzeptieren die meisten Evangelikalen, dass die Bezeichnung „Christ” nicht wesentlich ist. Gilt dies auch für C5-Gläubige oder ist der Islam zu grundlegend unterschiedlich? Falls das letztere der Fall ist, welche spezifischen Unterschiede zwischen Juden und Muslimen sind es dann, die uns veranlassen, das eine zu akzeptieren und das andere abzulehnen?
Lassen Sie mich schließen mit einer Herzensbitte. In den letzten Monaten wurde diese Debatte immer erbitterter geführt. Gläubige mit muslimischem Hintergrund, wie Nabil und Ibrahim, können kaum persönlich an solchen Diskussionen teilnehmen. Würden Sie das tun, wäre die Gefahr für weitere Verfolgung groß und würde über das Leiden hinausgehen, das sie bereits erfahren haben. Stattdessen debattieren Christen mit nichtmuslimischen Hintergrund über ihre Köpfe hinweg, und machen zuerst Ibrahim und dann Nabil schlecht. Doch Nabil und Ibrahim respektieren sich als Brüder und können in Liebe unterschiedlicher Meinung sein.
Weil ich mich daran erinnere, wie ich meinen jüdischen Freund 1979 verletzte, möchte ich sehr zurückhaltend sein, andere Brüder zurückzuweisen, die bereits Ablehnung und Gefängnis für Jesus durchlitten haben. Jesus sagte: „Wer zu mir kommt, den werde ich nicht hinausstoßen.”
So wie Nabil und Ibrahim ihre Position verstehen, die sie im universellen Leib Christi haben, so müssen sie auf den Rat der anderen rund um die Welt hören. Und wenn wir unsere Position im selben Leib verstehen, müssen wir ihr fundamentales menschliches Recht respektieren, unter der Autorität der Bibel zu klären, wie sie ihre Identität als Nachfolger Christi ausdrücken wollen. Es ist ihr Leben, das auf dem Spiel steht. Wenn sie sich gegenseitig respektieren können, nachdem sie für Jesus im Gefängnis waren, dann können auch wir sie mit Respekt behandeln.
© The Lausanne Movement
Deutsch Translation by: LGC_Translation
Erklärung zu mehrsprachigen Funktionen | Schlage vor, Übersetzung zu bearbeiten
Stichwörter: Muslim, Nachfolger Jesu, messianischer Jude, Identität, Islam, Koran, C4, C5, MHG, Synkretismus, Mohammed, Christologie
Ansichten: 29529
Kommentare: 54
Empfehlungen: 3
Nutzungsbedingungen | Datenschutzerklärung | Die Lausanner globalen Gespräche wird betrieben durch World Wide Open | Was ist World Wide Open?
Gespräch Kommentar übermitteln
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
Just as American Christians have to determine their own position with regards to other issues, they are the only ones who know their own hearts, except for God. Thus, it is not up to us to pass judgment. Instead, we need to pray and allow the Holy Spirit to work in their lives. Ultimately, we have to consider how these Muslim Christians came to know Christ. Was it through welcome and invited Christian missionaries who were openly allowed to proselytize? I doubt it. Could it have been through dreams and visions? If so, then it has to be attributed to the Holy Spirit as the worker of such a miracle. Thus, we must allow Him to continue His work. Was it through other Muslim Christians? Then in addition to the previous question, we have to consider how their faith was allowed to grow. Others deserve the same opportunity.
21.10.2012
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
The underlying issue of this article is what is healthier spiritually for believers, what causes them to live the best Christian lifestyle. This topic is also true for any Christian, not just MBBs. Is it healthy for MBBs to be followers of Christ but yet masquerade as a Muslim? The same is true for patriotic Americans. Can an American Christian have both an identity in Christ and an American identity? The best answer for this issue can be found in Scripture. John 5:22-23 states, “The Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Anyone who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him;” this passage implies that honoring Christ is one of the only principles that matter most in life. As long as a Messianic Jew, MBBs, or American Christians can live a lifestyle that honors the Son, then the Father will be pleased.
08.10.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Haley_GWU:
This paper caused me to reflect on how I view Messianic Jews versus "Messianic Muslims". I like the way Joseph Cumming, the author, brought his own past experience with a Messianic Jew into the paper and how he hurt that friendship with his hostility to a Jewish follower of Christ. Cumming’s experience is wisdom for us all. Although it may be hard to digest, the Muslim who believes in Christ may have more impact within the Muslim community by honoring Jesus within that context.
04.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
I agree that experience is a good thing; it tempers us and makes us who we are.
But are you not bothered that he uses the phrase "Messianic Muslim" without biblical support, let along rational or experiential reasons.
To just fling the phrase around like it really means something is to argue in a circle, assuming to be true what you hope to prove.
04.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Sbowling,
I completely agree. It is hard, as an American Christian, to imagine that hiding your faith in Christ can do more than being an open follower. I believe they can do more work alive than they can do in prision or dead. I would be interested to hear more personal stories about how they convert other Muslims with this tactic. For example it would be interesting to see how they use their life in hiding to attract Muslims to make the life change.
05.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
Jeff_Morton,
I would agree with you that Biblical proof for Muslim Background Believers would be helpful information. I do not know how you would make a biblical case for living a life in hiding. However, I do not know how effective they would be if they were under constant persecution. We need believers living in these communities sharing Truth.
05.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Haley_GWU:
You say, “It is hard, as an American Christian, to imagine that hiding your faith in Christ can do more than being an open follower. I believe they can do more work alive than they can do in prision or dead.” Then you contradict Jesus Christ who said, “Beware of men, for they will deliver you over to courts and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear witness before them and the Gentiles. When they deliver you over, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake.”
I speak from experience. We bear a better testimony for Jesus Christ when we suffer for His sake. Even in death our testimonies are effective especially if we were killed on account of our faith.
Jesus continued, “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows. So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.”
I am a Christian from Muslim background and familiar with “this tactic.” By the way, this idea is not what MBBs invented to survive persecution but what western scholars/missionaries crafted and now promote.
05.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ husseinwario:
Husselnwario,
From you comment, does that mean you disagree with the idea of MBB’s. Is the entire concept wrong in your opinion? If so, what should the Muslim Background Believers do? Would you even call a MBB a believer because they are hiding their identity in Christ?
05.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ husseinwario:
It is great to have someone who is or was in the thick of it here on the forum to talk to! Thank you for taking part. The New Testament has examples of both people who hid their faith and worked covertly for Christ and people who practiced openly and suffered for their faith in Christ. Neither is more right than the other as long as they are practicing the actually faith that Jesus laid out for us in His life and death. If they are trying to be both at the same time and in that act denying Christ on one hand and embracing Christ with the other then they are in error and will be held accountable in judgement. But if they are holding true to the values of Christ and turning form the aspects of Islam that go against Christ’s teachings then I don’t see why there is a problem with them working ’behind enemy lines’ as it were.
28.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ TomTharpGW:
For the sake of discussion, what are the examples of those who hid their faith in the Bible? Before you answer with the example or two I’m thinking of, ask these questions:
1. How much information about these believers are we given so that we can effectively gauge whether or not the Bible approves or disapproves? Remember, any argument from silence can be twisted to say exactly the opposite.
2. How is the biblical example of secret believers relevant to the insider movements in which so-called Messianic Muslims who do not hide their faith?
The proponents of insider movements--all Western missionaries--to a person tell us insiders do not hide their faith. They are simply reshaping the expression of their faith, now faith in Jesus, within an Islamic mold.
28.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
After further review I find that you are right. The New Testament verses which show people concealing their faith always has them with a more implied secrecy than an explicit secrecy. And soon after their situation is described they reveal themselves and preach in public and are able to convert many. The main verse that I have heard people use to say that it is ok to hide your faith is John 7 where Jesus refuses to go to the festival because he isn’t welcome there. But He goes anyway and then speaks and makes the people believe Him.
Even the traditional Old Testament book Esther which is held up as a guide on how to conduct hidden christianity fails. When Esther conceals her Jewish heritage from the king so she won’t be out of favor it eventually results in her breaking the law to further the kingdom and so could also be used to show how we are meant to go out and witness publicly. I’m making a few logic jumps here.
To answer at least your second question the biblical example is that people shouldn’t be hiding their faith in plain sight but revealing their faith and then either standing their ground against enemies or running afterwards as Jesus did in Luke 4 when he left (albeit he didn’t run so much as melted away quietly) or when the church scattered in Acts 8. The Messianic Muslims should make a stand on their faith that Christ really is all the things that He said he is and not hide their beliefs.
I had always thought that Christians in countries where people were ready to kill someone for being a Christian had to hide their faith and meet in secret. Then continue on as normal. If you were confronted you couldn’t lie but you didn’t have to speak out. In fact this is the model of behavior put forth by the Left Behind book series when the Christians are living persecuted lives. They hide in plain sight. The Bible really doesn’t propose that. It speaks more along the lines of broadcasting your faith and trying to win your enemies over and dealing with the consequences afterwards.
28.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
I have a hard time understanding the issue here. The only red flags I see are the ones where people are trying to reconcile verses of the Quran with the Bible and having to make a mish-mash of the 2. Is the issue that there are Muslims who want to keep practicing the same regimen as before (praying 5 times, etc.)? Or is it their insistence on continuing to go to Mosque? If they are converting, walking into the street and shouting that they have become Christian would they have as great an impact for the kingdom as if they remained in secret and quietly talked other Muslim’s into becoming followers of Christ?
28.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ TomTharpGW:
The issue is neither of the two that you mentioned; they are symptoms. It is hard to boil down the discussion into one or two matters. That’s not only hard, but dangerous if we don’t take our time and think through the issues.
So with that said, here is a list of some of the crucial questions we need to ask ourselves vis-a-vis the IM:
What does the Bible say about insider movements? Is our defintion of them more anthropologically oriented or biblically grounded?
What does the Bible say about other religions? What is a biblical theology of religions?
What is the nature of islam? Neutral? Good? Bad? Demonic? Mixture?
What influence do we allow for the social sciences in our understanding of the Bible, Islam, discipleship, and the church?
What is the church?
What is the kingdom of God; and what is it’s relationship to the church?
What does the Bible say about conversion, identity, a whole host of important issues that play into IM?
28.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
Muslim Followers of
Jesus by Joseph Cumming was a great article to read. The question asked at the beginning: “Can one be a Muslim and a follower of
Jesus?” This aroused my curiosity about
certain followers of Islam. I have
always been under the impression that all Muslim denied the Lordship of Christ,
but on the contrary, many Muslims who trust Jesus as Lord and Savior, believed
Jesus died for their sins and rose again.
These Muslims are referred to as”MBB’s – Muslim Background Believers or
as Dr. Casino calls them “Chrislams.”
But I have
discovered that many of these “MBB’s” have been persecuted for their beliefs,
and some have been accepted within their communities. I still think that Muslims as a whole are
still misunderstood in America and perhaps throughout the world. Those of us who make up the Christian
community should be thankful and accepting to anyone who wants to be a part of
God’s kingdom through Christ Jesus.
Also, if we
who say that we are Christians would be more committed and dedicated to Christ,
like many of our Muslim brothers and sisters are to “Allah”, our influence
would be greatly felt in our homes, communities, schools and especially in our
churches. If we could get Christian
believers to discipline themselves to pray like our Muslim counter-parts what a
difference it could make throughout the entire world.
This
article stated: “that scripture condemns
syncretism,” (1Kings 18: 21; 2 Kings 17: 27-41). Syncretism means the reconciliation or union
of conflicting beliefs. But this is not
the syncretism scripture condemns. Both
sides have worked hard in trying to unravel scripture which they believe
supports their view.
But
actually, the word “Muslim” means different things to different Muslims, and I
dare say, that the word “Christian” also means something entirely different to
other Christians. In some societies
“Muslim” and “Christian” refer more to ethnicity then to religious
beliefs. Ethnicity is relating to
community of physical and mental traits in races, or designating groups of
races of mankind discriminated on the basis of common customs and characters.
I must
agree with what Cummings said on pages 4-5:
“Ever since the Wesleyan revival and Great Awakening of the 18th
Century, evangelicals have insisted that what matters most to God is not one’s
identity as “being a Christians”, but rather whether one has a life
transforming relationship with Jesus Christ.”
Amen!
I
personally think, that God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit is for all who would avail
themselves to the monotheistic Trinitarian God.
Who is ready to receive and accept anyone with his great love and
mercy. The God we serve is not only the
one true God, but he is also a multifaceted God who is able to meet needs of
all people. And I believe through Jesus’
death on the cross has made this possible, which was/is his intent.
Again, we
must let all believers from all cultures, countries, and communities respect
their fundamental human right to sort this question out, under the authority of
the Bible.
20.09.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Robert_Setzer:
Robert,
You make a very interesting point, Christians can learn from Muslims. Like you said, if we as Christians were to adapt such a deep devotion to God, our churches would be changed dramatically. The only hesitation is that I would not want Christians to so works-based focused, like most Muslims. Very good argument Robert.
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Robert_Setzer:
Robert, Also interesting is how the Holy Spirit is working through dreams.
15.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
Haley, The fruit Paul speaks of in Galatians 5:22-23 is "universal" in the sense it is the same Holy Spirit. My hope is that the evidence of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the Muslim believers causes an intense interest in where and how does the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control come from and how can others obtain such a life.
11.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
All of the hoping and wondering and wishing is hypothetical. We will never know the growth of a Muslim who follows Jesus for at least two reasons.
First, they are Muslims! They are not part of the visible Church, but the ummah. They are not self-identified as Christians, but Muslims.
Second, the missionaries who wrongly advocate such things as the insider movements keep outsiders away from insiders. We are not allowed to study the movements, let alone observe. So whatever we know about them is what the advocates tell us. Go read the advocates of IM, Higgins, Lewis, Brown, Travis, Woodberry, Harlan, et al, and see how many times they mention anonymous research, made up locations and make believe names for spokesmen for the IM. This is evidence that the advocates do no want us to verify what they "know."
This is why we can never know what evidence of belief, what fruits of the Spirit, or what glory to glory is occuring in their lives. Afterall, they are Muslims and they are hidden deliberately from us.
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Sbowling,
The fruits of the Spirit are a great way to measure the effectiveness of MBB’s in their community. Since this population is so hidden, I wonder if they get to experience any type of Christian worship? It is hard to fathom that a Christian can truly grow in hiding.
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
Jeff_Morton,
I had no idea this faith movement was so secret. Do you know what measurement these IM’s use to determine when a Muslim becomes and believer?
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Haley_GWU:
The only measurement ever provided, not counting the 1998 Phil Parshall report which actually shows the problems of the IM, is the word of the Western missionaries who advocate for the IM. Again, no objective parties are allowed near insider movements, especially Bangladesh where the most egregious affronteries have occured (in terms of obfuscation and deflection from the truth)
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
Jeff,
So should we advocate for better results and accountability in the area of MBBs? If we are claiming this population as believers, we need strict standards for discipleship.
12.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Jeff, do you beleve that there will ever be a day that their voices will be heard?
13.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Jeff,
To add to Sbowlings question, do you think there will ever be a day we count MBB’s as part of our Christian family? Do you consider them Christians now? I am hoping that by bringing awareness to the issue, there will be more accountability in the way we assess MBBs.
14.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Yes. And that day will be when the church of the west stops supporting missionaries who advocate insider movements.
14.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Haley_GWU:
An MBB is not the same as an insider. A Muslim background believer is a Christian who is part of the visible body of Christ. An insider is not part of the visible church; furthermore, he is considered a Muslim by his community. An insider cannot be a Muslim background believer by the insider movements’ own definition.
You may want to go to www.i2ministries.org and get hold of our new book, Chrislam: How Missionaries are Propating an Islamized Gospel. It’s not an easy read, but well worth the time to understand the problems inherent to IM.
14.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
When you speak of the west supporting missionaries who advocate insider movements could you be more specific? I would like to know if innocently many are supporting such movements not understanding what they are supporting.
14.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
As I suggested to Haley, you should go to www.i2ministries.org and purchase Chrislam: How Missionaries are Promoting an Islamized Gospel. In this book we document from their own publications how missionaries such as Kevin Higgins, Rebecca Lewis, Jay Muller, Mark Harlan, John Ridgway, Stuart Caldwell, Dudley Woodberry, Jamie Winship and many others are advocating that Messianic Muslims, Musilm followers of Jesus, and other such nomenclature, remain within Islam for various reasons.
14.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
I also would like to read more of the stories of Muslim believers. It would be interesting to know if others in their family or community could recognize "fruit" produced by these believers that is unexplainable to the unbelievers.
10.11.2011
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ sbowling:
Sbowling,
That would be a very interesting idea to research. In order to be a follower of Christ one must bear fruit. I wonder what bearing fruit would look like to a MBB?
11.11.2011
Niger
I’ve been reading about the work of church historian Andrew Walls. His work underlines the ways that the gospel has transformed from within the different cultures that it has entered. I’ll let this article speak for itself. It is taken from the website mentioned at the end.
"Evangelicals believe in the conversion of individuals, but Walls began to see that conversion refers also to nations and communities. Did not the Great Commission command the discipling of the nations? "Conversion to Christ does not isolate the convert from his or her community," Walls says. "It begins the conversion of that community. … [D]iscipling is a long process—it takes generations. Christian proclamation is for the children and grandchildren of the people who hear it."
Walls began to think that this kind of Christian conversion is necessary in every place and time, and that Christian history is the story of how faith moves from one culture to another, translating and retranslating the gospel along the way. (From this view, most of what passes for church history is merely a single European chapter in a much larger book.)"
. . . "Not only that, but Walls’s study of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians suggested that each culture adds new riches to an understanding of Christ, so that "the whole measure of the fullness of Christ" (Eph. 4:13) becomes possible only when bringing all of our different communities together. Each culture asks different questions of the gospel, and as new answers to those questions are unearthed, they enrich our understanding of the greatness of Christ. The second-century church asked philosophical questions that would never have occurred to Jews in Jerusalem. One result was the fourth-century Nicene Creed. Africa asks questions about witchcraft that children of the Enlightenment can’t answer. Perhaps a new understanding of Jesus’ victory over evil is in the works.
All this is to say that the gospel never stands outside our lives; it must enter human culture and be translated into the local language. It is not static or impersonal, because it is always in the process of being more fully discovered. Mission is not so much a matter of contextualizing the gospel as learning its truth through an entirely new way of life and thought."
Google’s cache of http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/february/34.87.html. By Tim Stafford. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 14 Oct 2010 05:47:20 GMT.
30.10.2010
Russland
One of the things I find interesting (and concerning) in this debate is that some people are effectively valuing form above meaning.
From the evangelical side the comments have come forth that the "outward appearance" of being a Muslism is undesirable. In reality this is saying "we will give them our tick of approval when they look like us as western Christians."
Alternatively, certain Muslim leaders have said that so long as these C5 believers continue to look like Muslims and observe customs that is acceptable.
Can we not see that there are people in both religions that simply want the form of their religion maintained, and despite their protests if challenged meaning is actually less important to them than form?
Jesus said that the Father is seeking worshippers who worship in Spirit and in Truth. We need to let go of our discomfort that we can not accept people if they don’t look the same as us.
We can not be forcing our western models (which are mostly broken anyway) on to other cultures.
26.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Pashlik:
I am happy to see the concern over form and meaning, but I respectfully believe you have the argument wrong. Here’s why.
At the root of IM’s premise is the notion of form and meaning. For instance, in Islam the form of salat must be performed according to certain criteria. Its meaning is determined by Islam – not by outsiders. So the meaning of salat is that it symbolizes man’s need to worship and find connection to the divine. Let me reiterate: this form and meaning are determined by the religion itself, not by anthropologists.
The real question is this: can the forms of Islam be separated from their meanings. Charles Kraft, the anthropologist whose premises stand as the foundation for much of IM, believes in Islam there are forms that can be filled with new meanings. It is from this point the IM is launched into deep waters of contextualization.
I believe it is wrong-headed to believe this is true. Consider salat again. The form of salat is the meaning; meaning is the form. The two are inseparable. In the case of Islam, Kraft’s principle mentioned earlier, cannot be applied indiscriminately as if slathering butter on a piece of bread. That is, the missionary cannot simply take an Islamic form, determine its meaning, then perform surgery to remove the Islamic meaning, replacing it with a new Christianized meaning. Islam’s forms do not allow the replacement of its DNA to create something new. This creates something that is not Islam! How do I know the forms are inseparable?
Muslims themselves say this. Shahzad Bashir states “the body is the fundamental ground on and through which a person constructs one’s identity as a Muslim.” (“Body” in Key Themes for the Study of Islam, Jamal J. Elias, ed. (Oxford: Oneworld, 2010), p. 80.) The implication here is that salah, a ritual that fully engages bodily movement, is involved in defining Muslim self-perception. Even more to the point is the thought of Indonesian Muslim scholar Nurcholish Madjid: “when performed with devotion and attention and accompanied by the tranquility of every member of the body, [salah] is a perfect declaration of faith.”(“Worship as an Institution of Faith” in Windows on the House of Islam, John Renard, ed., (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), pp. 72-73).
What I am arguing is that Islam’s forms and meanings are so innately linked, that is to perform salah is to be Muslim, to change one or the other is to change the whole. So, if the missionary attempts to keep the Islamic form while changing it’s meaning, the hybrid, like the mule, is sterile. It is a Western idea to separate form from meaning; I respectfully suggest you have it wrong.
26.10.2010
Russland
@ Jeff_Morton:
Hmmm, I believe it was Jesus (not a Western missiological theoretician come practitian) who separated form from meaning.
"We Samaritans worship at Mt Gerazim. You Jews worship in Jerusalem."
Jesus replied "the form is not important, the meaning is, the Father wants worshippers who worship in Spirit and Truth."
I don’t presume to understand the depths of this argument. It saddens me to hear that some people were shut out from a private lunch on the matter. This is also pride.
The new believers have the Holy Spirit. I trust the Spirit and the believers in said country (of which I am quite sure I am aware of) are actually capable of figuring this out. We need to show them more grace and patience. We can not presume to bully them into a result which we believe to be best, which ever the outcome.
Give it some time. This movement will undoubtedly grow so large that the exterior shell of Islam will crumble. At that point the lithmus test is open communion with one another. If this proceeds then we have no problem. If not, well then that is another story.
Patience and Grace.
27.10.2010
Niger
@ Jeff_Morton:
Hi Jeff,
I have to strongly disagree with your statment that form equals meaning. Certainly they are linked, but one person will pray in a certain way because he realizes that he is in the presence of God in a special way. The person right next to him in the service does and says the exact same thing, but believes that he is gaining some special force over the spirit world because he is praying in the correct way. In fact, this is the meaning of syncretism, taking the forms of Christianity and continuing to have pagan thoughts about them. Would Jesus have told his disiples how to pray if he knew that people would one day use His words as a charm? Of Course! He knew people would misuse the form of prayer that he gave, but he gave it anyway because it would help those who were true believers.
Regarding Salat, we should look a little further back, to the Old Testament ideas about worship. Similar to the Arabic ideas that you mentioned in your other comments, the Hebrew idea also involves a complete response of the body. For the Hebrew, worship (shachac) meant bending the knee and bowing down! You can see this in the equivalent Greek word proskyneo and the English word prostrate from the same root. (See http://www.xenos.org/essays/worship.htm for more information.) So obviously, Islam is syncristic in that it took a Hebrew/Christian act and assigned a new meaing to it: that you will receive baraka if you prostrate yourself in just the right way.
So I ask the question again, "If true Christian practice is hijacked by those who are in error and teaching a lie, and that true practice is missunderstood and assigned a false meaning that is against the truth, must the true believer stop his correct practice simply because there are others who practice wrongly?" Obviously we would have nothing left and would be condemned to have orthodox ideas that could never be demonstrated by actual practice.
A practical example would be the disagreement behind the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. Do you stop doing it because some do it wrongly or for the wrong reasons?
I hope you’ll think about it.
Aboutalib
proskyneo
29.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
I have found it enlightening - and a bit disheartening - to read the comments about what is happening in Muslim ministry around the globe.
Some of the comments want the conversation to move away from the West and into the realm of where the insider movements are happening. This is naive! Why?
First, IM began because of the western missionaries. It is a western phenomenon supported by western money although practiced mostly in non-western environments. It is ripe with western values (e.g., individualism, a pluralistic view of religion, and a theology of "nice"); these values are not necessarily biblical, but they are the driving force behind the IM.
Second, the conversation must involve both the western and non-wester practitioners and detractors (positively called the Historicals) because it is a problem of academia, missionary practice, denominational and mission leadership, and church praxis in the United States. In other words, the IM is not simply a localized phenomenon, but a global problem that requires a global conversation, which must by definition, include all concerned parties.
Third, some are calling for the Christians from a Muslim Background (CMB) to thrash it out among themselves. Again, this is naive and short-sighted. There are many CMBs who view IM with grave suspicion and mistrust. They see it as a western strategy rather than a biblical methodology. And where will their voice be heard? In the Muslim countries from which they’ve come? Hardly! Their voice must be heard but it can only be heard in the west and it is, therefore, necessary to let them speak. And because the IM is western-originated, other westerners who find it problematic also have the right - no, we have the duty to speak out and express what we believe to be the errors of IM.
Jeff Morton
25.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
I appreciate your insights. The insider movement is an idea born of the West, nurtured and fostered in the West and propagated by westerners. The Muslim background believer or Christian of Muslim background has no voice in this discussion. I am one of them and I speak from experience. We cannot work it out amongst ourselves because it is being pushed on us. Here is an evidence from the just concluded Lausanne III that shows one of the leading scholars whose institution promotes this movement having a "private lunch" to discuss the insider movement. An MBB, a delegate at the congress, who opposes this movement was not allowed to engage proponents of this movement.
26.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
@ Jeff_Morton:
Jeff,
Excellent comments! Point #2 about the necessity of global engagement on this issue is crucial.
RichardK
26.10.2010
Russland
I find it really exciting that the gospel is taking root in cultures in such ways that we western evangelicals have zero control over it. As these movements come to maturity they will turn around and seriously challenge us to authentic (Christianity) Jesus following, exposing many of our hypocrisies.
How many of us evangelicals who have problems with this debate also have problems accepting fellow Catholic and Orthodox believers?
We had better be careful to take the plan out of our own eye first before accusing our Messianic Muslim family members of getting it wrong.
It is stories like this that excite me that the Lord is still moving in real ways on our planet.
I really appreciated this article, and especially the plea to let Ibrahim and Nabil work it out for themselves. Evangelical pride has no place in the debate.
25.10.2010
Kanada
As to whether a Muslim can be a follower of Jesus - the correct answer of course is Yes and No.
On the one hand,ever since the forth century AD the universal Church has dogmaticly embedded GrecoRoman/Western thought and concepts in its Scriptural interpretations upon much of the global body of Christ
On the other hand we have the practice of ’syncretism’ - the attempt to merge certain former cultural beliefs and practices with personal faith in Messiah Jesus (Yeshua).
Who is right and who is wrong? Perhaps both are right.. or perhaps neither are Scripturally right in God’s eyes.
In my opinion, we should allow for - and enjoy - a diversity of expressions of faith in the Messiah/Saviour - provided that no particular cultural expression is directly contrary to the plain teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Lastly, this determination should be made by leading brethren within the cultural setting - who would do well to then take into account the wisdom and advice of leading brethren in the larger body of Christ.
24.10.2010
Frankreich
Anyody coming to Geneva for this gathering soon? If so contact us as we live by Geneva.
Kelly and Michele mcaresources@gmail.com
International Muslim-Christian Consultation "Transforming Communities"
01.11.10 - 04.11.11
Geneva, Switzerland
Muslim and Christian leaders as well as scholars and interfaith practitioners will gather in Geneva, Switzerland for the international consultation "Transforming Communities: Christians and Muslims Building a Common Future".
The consultation is being jointly planned, funded and convened by the World Council of Churches (WCC) and several Muslim organizations.
The participants will address three key issues in the present context of Muslim-Christian relations:
• Beyond Majority and Minority
• From Conflict to Compassionate Justice: Building Ecologies of Peace
• Learning to overcome; formulating educational tools to resolve issues
The consultation is expected to identify and address issues of common concern and provide guidance to enable cooperation between Muslims and Christians at all levels, including faith-inspired approaches for joint Christian-Muslim action.
WCC work on Inter-religious dialogue and cooperation
22.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
This is a compelling article, especially for those of us in the West who struggle with John 14:6 "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." Some thoughts and questions came to mind as I read the article.
We have to understand the dynamics of other cultures, and their worldviews. Faith and culture in Muslim beliefs are one, not separate like in the US. Also, individualism is a foreign concept; community is the only identity. The struggle is contextualization of the Gospel.
What type of exegetical work was completed by those discussing the "C" communities and appropriate biblical texts? Historical, social, narratival, linguistical, etc? The type of exegetical work determines the interpretation, and so does the person.
Which biblical truths contradict with Islam? This is too generic of a statement. A separate comparison would have been appropriate.
What does it mean to the MBBs to follow Jesus? As some have said, we need to hear what they think.
Ultimately, we must allow the Holy Spirit to do the work through the Scriptures, even in the midst of ambiguity, and realize that as Christians we differ in interpretation of biblical texts and the meaning of Christian identity. As Matthew 12:30 states, "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters." The opposite of this verse is true as well. Those who are for Christ will be evident.
21.10.2010
Frankreich
Hi Joseph and all, Apologies for the garbled text in my comment yesterday with resources in Arabic. I’ll just send the link to the site that has many articles to help encourage and support Arabic-speaking workers. Kelly
http://sites.google.com/site/arabicmembercare/
21.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
I believe the people who have the right to speak the most about this issue are those whose lives are on the line. It is your faith that is in the crucible of persecutuion...not mine as I sit in my safe "western" office. Peace and prayers to my brothers and sisters in prison.
20.10.2010
Frankreich
http://sites.google.com/site/arabicmembercare/
Arabic Member Care Projects
Resources for Arabic-Speaking Workers
Section One: Biblical Perspectives
*****
ستفاناس
نموذج من العهد الجديد للعناية بالمرسلين خارج البلاد
+++.pdf
Stephanas: A New Testament Example of Member Care
Stephanas.pdf
*****
دافيد هجيت
جويس هجيت
+++.pdf
Jesus Christ: The Heart of Member Care
Heart of Member Care.pdf
*****
الفرح والتضحية في الرب
بقلم: أجيت فرناندو
+++.pdf
Joy and Sacrifice in the Lord
Joy and Sacrifce.pdf
20.10.2010
Kenia
We are very good to create new approaches, but we are not careful to hear our MBBs and ask them what is better and what they would like. Some times we force them to be what we would like. The time for our western Christians to hear them and workers among Muslim is hear. I appreciated the Hussein contribution…
20.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
A few random and not fully developed thoughts:
Historical concern: It is not helpful to ask, “To which is Islam closer: Judaism or Paganism?” The usual answer is “Judaism” because it is monotheistic. This framing of the question is too abstract and divorced from the historical realities of development. The reality of the Jesus of history as revealed in the canonical gospels is that he is the fulfillment of the promises given to Israel. Given this then it is to be expected that there is continuity with the Jewish scriptures and thought patterns. There is also development and, even discontinuity, as Jesus’ fulfillment brings about changes (e.g., Paul’s argument about Jesus and torah in Galatians). Jesus is the final revelatory word. Islam does not stand in a corresponding relationship to Jesus as did Jesus to the Old Testament revelation given to and through Israel. It may be helpful to conceptualize Islam as a “Christian heresy.” There were elements taken from Christianity (as Muhammad had been exposed to them) but then radically re-worked into an alternate framework that was ultimately antithetical to the radical Jesus-centered approach of the New Testament.
New Perspective on Paul: It is always dangerous to attempt to address one controversial issue with the resources drawn from another controversial arena--but here goes! The broad theological program known as the New Perspective on Paul may have some resources to help in the current debate over Muslim contextualization. In particular, I think of the work of N. T. Wright. He argues that Paul has taken the fundamental elements of the Jewish worldview of his time and re-worked the entire theological program around Jesus Christ. He mentions the broad categories of monotheism, election, and eschatology. All of these fundamental Jewish themes are modified by Paul as he re-thinks each area with Christ Jesus at the center (see Wright’s Paul: In Fresh Perspective Fortress, 2005). Two crucial things to be learned and built upon. First, this theological re-working done by Paul ought to be taken as normative and authoritative for the church. His epistles and the theology contained in them must be taken as the word of God and heeded by C-5 believers. Second, Paul’s methodology may show us the way forward in matters of contextualization here. Paul shows us that any would-be contextualizers must be radically Christ centered--even to the point of confrontation and critique. Again, N. T. Wright’s thoughts here about Paul’s confrontation with paganism and his “critique from within” of Judaism is instructive.
Individualism: When I read of C-5 believers “reinterpreting” the Islamic teaching and scripture so as to accommodate their faith in Christ I have to wonder if a Western individualism as taken hold. Faith traditions are corporate and historical realities. For someone to come along and say, “But when I say ‘X’ in my mind I’m really thinking ‘X minus this and addition that.’” this seems to elevate the individual mind to the place of determining reality. Ironically, this is a uniquely Western concept of the individual and the power of the individual’s mind. Eastern and, in particular, Middle Eastern ways of thinking are much more community oriented.
So much more to say but space constraints are in play here.
19.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
I wonder whether many of us in the Western world adequately understand the impact of persecution upon the MBB’s.
In the early history of Christianity in North Africa, there was the Donatist Controversy. One of the core issue was whether people who gave up the Scriptures to be burnt in the time of persecution (at that time, it was a kin to denying one’s loyalty to Christ) can be accepted within the Christian community to exercise spiritual leadership.
It so happened that back then, only the wealthy could afford to own a hand-copied Scripture along with much land and homes which could be confiscated under the Roman persecution, while the poor had neither any copies of Scripture nor much possessions which could be taken away by the authorities.
And when the persecution ended, the children of the poor peasants (the Donatists) claimed that the Sacraments performed by ministers who had been sponsored by the wealthy benefactors, who gave up copies of Scripture to be burned by the persecuting authorities, were invalid since those ministers have compromised their faith and betrayed the Lord in the time of persecution.
St. Augustine lived thru this time. Guess where he stood in this theological controversy? He sided against the Donatists (the purists) and claimed that the Sacraments were valid NOT due to the worthiness of the ministers, but due to the authority of Christ who instituted those sacraments. And historically, the Western church has accepted the argument St. Augustine made in this debate.
My point is this: the persecution brought different responses from different people throughout history of the church. And we must extend understanding for MBB’s who are living within their communities where there is a real danger of severe persecution, including honor-killings. If their culture becomes more democratic or tolerant, it will be easier for MBB’s to become C-4, declaring themselves as "Christians". But in many muslim cultures (traditional & conservative), few MBB’s will be brave enough to declare themselves to be "Christians."
Especially today, when militant Islamists portray many of the military conflicts around the world and wars as Christian Crusaders invading the Muslim lands, MBB’s will face huge risks if they identify themselves as “Christians”, rather then as “Muslim follower of Jesus”.
I believe we in the West should be careful not to denounce the C-5 MBB’s. They live facing much persecution, while we in the West live in freedom. And the doctrinal confusion about the uniqueness of Christ is rampant among the Christians in the West, not to mention compromises with sin.
19.10.2010
Niger
@ Tacoma_SamLee:
Avoiding persecution is not the only motivation for contextualization or remaining an insider. For many, there is a real desire that the gospel will enter their own group and transform it. Avoiding or delaying the rise of barriers to the gospel can enable the MBB to shine light where it is most needed.
19.10.2010
Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika
If I could make comments to the C4-5/Insiders Movements arguments it would all boil down to two areas of conversation.
First, what is our theology of religions. If it is optimistic in the sense that there is something in Islam that can be used by the Lord to bring people to Himself, this is evidence of an IM position. On the other hand, if one’s theology is more pessimistic, recognition that all religions are false and that Islam, especially since it teaches explicitly against the Trinity, divinity of Jesus, the atoning death, his resurrection and his own self-understanding, is the least likely candidate through which God might work - then one is in the Historical Approach "camp."
Since I believe our theology shapes our methodology, the more optimistic our theology, the more pragmatic we tend to get. Pragmatism is not a biblical value; it is a western value. The more pessimistic our theology the less we rely on pragmatism - not to say we aren’t practical - but our methodology is not success oriented (pragmatism), but tends to look for examples in the life of Jesus and the Apostles.
It is my humble opinion the debate between the IM and Historical approach comes down to these the intersection of these two major premises. I am not trying to be reductionistic, rather looking for clarity.
I wish my IM brothers had a more "biblical" view of Islam: that is, one that is less optimistic about this religion of darkness.
18.10.2010
Niger
@ Jeff_Morton:
Hi Jeff,
You have some excellent thoughts about being faithful to God’s truth. As someone who has worked among Muslims for over 20 years, I would like to make two comments:
1. Islam is a satanic religion in the sense that it is a masterpiece of the Father of Lies. You mentioned the main points of falsehood. Yet the most deceptive lie always contains enough of the truth to take its victim off guard.
2. Islam, not surprisingly then, borrows many of its religious forms and ideas from Christian and Hebraic sources.
So the question the MBB needs to answer as he (or she) seeks to apply the changeless truths of God to his own culture is, "To what extent has Islam (or other sins and lies for that matter) spoiled that culture and what is still good?" Are biblical forms now to be rejected because Islam has reinterpreted and twisted them? Or should they be reinvested with their original meaning? (Westerners should think of the transformation of Christmas and Easter in their own cultures - from pagan roots to Christian meaning, and more recently back to secular/pagan interpretations by society as a whole.)
An additional question the MBB must answer has to do with community. What ties of community can a new follower of Christ maintain with those who don’t (yet) believe and who continue pagan practice? The New Testament chronicles the 1st century Jewish believers as they struggled with the same question.
These are not easy questions. The MBB must balance a desire that the truth will enter and transform his culture with the need to remain faithful to that truth, himself. Passages such as 1 Cor. 5:6-10, 9:19-23, 10:19-33 and Acts 11:1-18 might serve to guide.
19.10.2010
Sie müssen eingeloggt sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben. Wenn Sie kein Konto haben, können Sie gleich hier ein Konto anlegen (es ist kostenlos und leicht zu bedienen!).