The W-Spectrum

Here is a pdf download of the W-Spectrum on one page:

Please refer to the EMQ October 2015 article The W-Spectrum: Worker Paradigms in Muslim Contexts for more information (subscription required).

See also:

• Blog post: Introducing “The W-Spectrum: Worker Paradigms in Muslim Contexts” (EMQ 2015)
• Missio Nexus Webinar: The W-Spectrum: Exploring Paradigms of Ministry in Islamic Contexts

Understanding IMs now on Kindle

Understanding Insider Movements: Disciples of Jesus within Diverse Religious Communities

See also:

• My Response to the Gospel Coalition’s Review of “Understanding Insider Movements”
• Michael Pocock | Review of Understanding Insider Movements

The W-Spectrum Webinar Thursday March 10

Just a reminder about the webinar on Thursday:

On March 10th 2pm EST we’ll be doing a webinar with Missio Nexus on The W-Spectrum. See info below.

http://missionexus.org/the-w-spectrum/:

March 10, 2016     2:00pm to 3:15pm Eastern time

Warrick Farah • Missiologist • International Teams

Kyle Meeker • Pastor of Discipleship • Northview Community Church

Anyone involved in missions today knows that evangelical workers have numerous and sometimes conflicting approaches to Muslim ministry. The W-Spectrum (EMQ October 2015) describes four of these approaches which correlate with the workers’ view of “Islam” (note: The W paradigms do not correlate with the C Spectrum). In order to evaluate this framework, the W-Spectrum was tested via an online survey by more than two hundred workers around the world.  By presenting the research analysis in this webinar, we will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the W-Spectrum and explore various paradigms of ministry among Muslims.

Register

Michael Pocock | Review of Understanding Insider Movements

Michael Pocock reviews UIM in the new issue of IJFM. Here is the conclusion:

By the end of the book the reader will admit that insider movements involve many thousands who are discovering and being dramatically changed by Jesus, yet who have been misunderstood by many across the global church today. Let’s remember that Jonathan Edwards, who was a great preacher and exponent of the Great Awakening in America, had his detractors. In spite of the transformation in the religious landscape of the colonies, Edwards, Whitfield and the Wesleys had skeptics who questioned the validity or genuineness of their movement. Edwards had to explain and defend this awakening in two famous publications, A Treatise on Religious Affections and The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God. He was still addressing this concern in his commencement address at Yale University, Sept. 10, 1741. In these works, Edwards showed that a genuine movement of God will manifest many surprising things which in themselves do not discredit the movement. If they are not of God, they will pass away. But he warned his readers and listeners not to commit the unpardonable sin of attributing this work of the Spirit to the Devil. He asked if it is not pride, or the lack of spiritual vitality, that causes the critics to assail this movement. In the same vein, any of us who are quick to criticize these emerging insider movements, or these Jesus followers in such different contexts, would do well to think on Edward’s words. And I commend this book to you in the same spirit.

Missio Nexus Webinar | The W-Spectrum: Exploring Paradigms of Ministry in Islamic Contexts

On March 10th 2pm EST I’ll be doing a webinar with Missio Nexus on The W-Spectrum. See info below.

http://missionexus.org/the-w-spectrum/:

March 10, 2016     2:00pm to 3:15pm Eastern time
Warrick Farah • Missiologist • International Teams

Anyone involved in missions today knows that evangelical workers have numerous and sometimes conflicting approaches to Muslim ministry. The W-Spectrum (EMQ October 2015) describes four of these approaches which correlate with the workers’ view of “Islam” (note: The W paradigms do not correlate with the C Spectrum). In order to evaluate this framework, the W-Spectrum was tested via an online survey by more than two hundred workers around the world.  By presenting the research analysis in this webinar, we will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the W-Spectrum and explore various paradigms of ministry among Muslims.

Register

The “Same God?” Debate in Full Force after the Wheaton Controversy

EMS just put out an occasional bulletin- Wheaton and the Controversy Over Whether Muslims and Christians Worship the Same God (HT: CIU blog). The intro article by Robert Priest is excellent, “I’ve also been struck by the idea that many American evangelical missionaries and missiologists, and perhaps the Apostle Paul himself, would be in danger of dismissal if they taught at Wheaton College, since many of us arguably have been guilty of the very thing Wheaton College is sanctioning…” #burn

After scanning through the articles, I still want to insist that this is (mostly) an irrelevant issue, as I have said before here: Allah of Islam and the Father of the Biblical Lord Jesus. No one knows God soteriologically apart from Christ. Perhaps we might be more united (and fruitful) if we framed the question around this issue.

There is also an upcoming debate between Volf & Qureshi — Do Muslims & Christians Worship the Same God? on January 19. If you tune in, I would love to hear some of your thoughts in the comments section below.

Encountering the World of Islam (2nd ed) now on Kindle

Encountering the World of Islam:

Discover God's Heart for Muslims: Investigate Islam through this positive and hopeful 640-page book. Encountering the World of Islam explores the Muslim world and God's plan for Muslims. Read from a collection of writings about the life of Muhammad, the history of Islamic civilization, Islamic beliefs, Muslims today, and the everyday lives of Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia. Gain insight from 80 different practitioners into diverse Muslim cultures and worldviews as well as Christian outreach toward Muslims, our response to Islam, and prayer for the Muslim world. This book is used as the textbook for the Encountering the World of Islam course.

www.trueislam.com?

www.trueislam.com tackles extremism (HT: MA). While I think we should promote initiatives that work for peace in our world, I do find it ironic that these are Ahmadis who, by many Muslims, are not considered true Muslims.

Matthew Stone recently had a very interesting post about the ellusive “true Islam” debate Are Liberals and Conservatives Asking the Wrong Question about Islam and ISIS? Here is part of what he said:

So the two questions before us seem to be:

1. Does ISIS represent the true violent nature of Islam?
2. Is ISIS an aberration of the true peaceful Islam?

Actually I am being overly optimistic. Today the two sides rarely pose these two questions because to do so would assume that the issue is actually open for consideration. Those groups closed the discussion long ago and now unquestioningly declare their view as though it were fact.

I think a better approach would be to revive asking questions without assuming the answer is known, but focusing on asking helpful questions for which an answer is logically possible without simply reflecting bias, prejudice, hate, or hidden agenda. I have a question I recommend being posed to Muslims and non-Muslims alike, a question that avoids the fruitless chasing after the elusive true Islam. The question is, “Is this the Islam you want?”

Consider a hypothetical responder to that question. If the person answers “yes,” then that individual is either the enemy of peace loving citizens of the world, or ideologically aligned with the enemy. Decisions then have to be made about the pragmatic and legal/ethical steps we should take to address an enemy producing ideology. If the individual is a Christian, those decisions should reflect the values of Christ.

If the person answers, “no,” whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim, then the subsequent question is, “Then what are you going to do about this?” What are you going to do about this given the realities of your life and without denying life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the innocent Muslim or non-Muslim?

I wish it were as easy as just posing the question and waiting for the answer…

Read the whole thing.

My Response to the Gospel Coalition’s Review of “Understanding Insider Movements”

In case you missed it, Understanding Insider Movements (William Carey 2015) was released a few months ago. For better or worse, now the term “IM” is guaranteed to stick around for a while.

Ayman Ibrahim posted a review of UIM at The Gospel Coalition blog and I responded to him in the comments. I really hope we can move beyond the political nature of the IM discussion and at least not describe it as a monolithic entity as I felt the review did (plus the review described an extreme end of the spectrum which I also felt was inaccurate and unfair). My comment ended being a bit of a book review itself. In any case, I hope not to be drawn into a fruitless blog debate about the merits of IM. :–)

UIM is an important and impressive book. By my count, about 75% of it was previously published. But the sheer volume of the book (64 articles + appendix) is a testimony to the fact that evangelical missiology has made some positive steps forward in the last couple decades. You don’t have agree with everything in UIM (I don’t) to benefit from it. But you can read more of my thoughts here.

CT Book of the Year for Missions/Global Church

From Christianity Today’s 2015 book awards:

Christian. Muslim. Friend. Twelve Paths to Real Relationship

David W. Shenk (Herald Press)

"At a time when relations between Christians and Muslims are more complex than ever, Shenk has given us a wonderfully thoughtful account of how to build real relationships. Without giving formulas or reducing Muslims to a single type, Shenk draws on his vast experience in many parts of the world to provide an encouraging way forward for anyone seeking to share the hope of the gospel with their Muslim neighbors." —Brian Howell, professor of anthropology, Wheaton College

Jayson Georges | 9 Must-Knows for Muslim Ministry

From http://honorshame.com/9-must-knows-for-muslim-ministry:

This “Field Guide” (at www.ZwemerCenter.com) explains 9 must-knows for ministry in honor-shame societies, especially Muslim contexts.

1. Muslims live (and die) for honor.
2. Guilt and shame are two different cultural/moral systems.
3. Shame is not just an Arab or Asian characteristic.
4. The Bible is an honor-shame book.
5. God cares about the honor of Muslims more than they do.
6. The Bible speaks about sin in terms of shame and dishonor.
7. Shame is a major reason Muslims reject Christ.
8. Evangelism should include relational and communal language.
9. Sharing a meal is a great ministry strategy.

The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary

Here is an interesting story on CNN: Could this Quran curb extremism? about the new book, The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary. From Amazon:

An accessible and accurate translation of the Quran that offers a rigorous analysis of its theological, metaphysical, historical, and geographical teachings and backgrounds, and includes extensive study notes, special introductions by experts in the field, and is edited by a top modern Islamic scholar, respected in both the West and the Islamic world.

Drawn from a wide range of traditional Islamic commentaries, including Sunni and Shia sources, and from legal, theological, and mystical texts, The Study Quran conveys the enduring spiritual power of the Quran and offers a thorough scholarly understanding of this holy text.

Beautifully packaged with a rich, attractive two-color layout, this magnificent volume includes essays by 15 contributors, maps, useful notes and annotations in an easy-to-read two-column format, a timeline of historical events, and helpful indices. With The Study Quran, both scholars and lay readers can explore the deeper spiritual meaning of the Quran, examine the grammar of difficult sections, and explore legal and ritual teachings, ethics, theology, sacred history, and the importance of various passages in Muslim life.

With an introduction by its general editor, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, here is a nearly 2,000-page, continuous discussion of the entire Quran that provides a comprehensive picture of how this sacred work has been read by Muslims for over 1,400 years.

Deepening Our Understanding of Honor/Shame

Because we Evangelicals are so stepped in a guilt/innocence paradigm it is hard for many to accept addressing honor/shame as an authentic part of the gospel.  It is not difficult for us to see honor/shame as an important cultural framework, but if that is all it is, then we view it as supplementary to the gospel rather than a fundamental part of redemption. 

This is unfortunately where much of the literature on honor/shame leave the reader. I’m sure this is not intentional, nevertheless, the honor/shame paradigm often comes across as a descriptor of culture rather than an intrinsic part of the gospel. 

This is where Roland Muller’s book “The Messenger, the Message & the Community” stands out. The book’s first edition came out almost 10 years ago (2006), which was before honor/shame became a major missiological topic, therefore I fear many people have missed this important volume. Although there is much to like in Muller’s work, in particular I was fascinated by the strong, coherent argument he makes that shame is a fundamental part of sin, therefore the restoration of honor is an essential part of of in Christ.

 

It seems to me the core of our Evangelical misunderstanding about honor/shame is that we think of guilt as man’s objective state before God, but shame as only a subjective feeling before  man. So I found it particularly helpful that Muller grounds his argument in the garden of Eden:

“… unfortunately many Christians and some Christian theology stop at guilt, or rather, get so wrapped up with ‘guilt-based theology’ that they fail to notice the other results of sin… When Adam and Eve realized they had sinned, they immediately hid themselves (v. 8).  Adam and Eve were ashamed. Shame had come upon Adam and Eve, but their shame was not for them alone. Shame, like guilt, passed upon all of mankind from that point on. As a result, man is not only guilty from this point on, but man is also in a position of shame before God” (pp 141-142).

Since what happened in the garden forms a backdrop to the narrative of sin that is almost universally accepted, grounding shame there establishes it alongside guilt as a fundamental part of sin’s impact on the human race. Just like guilt, shame haunted man even when he stood before an audience of One, thus it is an objective part of his standing before God.

For this reason and others, Muller’s book is must reading for those trying to fully integrate the honor/shame paradigm into their missiology.

Steve Smith | 4 Stages of a Movement

Here is a brief and helpful article from Steve Smith at Mission Frontiers: 4 Stages of a Movement. For me, it quickly helps explain some of the major tensions/issues that arise when a Kingdom movement breaks out in an unreached people group (UPG) who are near-culture to a institutional church. Well meaning institutional church leaders often use their own paradigms of training for equipping emerging leaders in the movement phase (stage 2) which may actually threaten the movement.

Unfortunately, these same emerging leaders often quickly try to mimic an institutional church which is inappropriate and unsustainable at that time. Similarly, new believers in UPGs who have been taken out of their contexts for short-term training often feel they need to aim for the institutional church far too soon.

In all honesty, “we have to ask whether it is fair to expect a movement to survive only as a movement. Either the movement disintegrates or it becomes an institution, this is simply a sociological law. Every religious group that started out as a movement and managed to survive, did so because it was gradually institutionalized” (Bosch 1991, 52). Yet I believe this truism is partially why we need to continually reimagine afresh what the church looks like in each generation of every people and place. For instance, as is our reality today, the sheer numbers of Muslim refugees who are coming to faith in many places where an institutional church exists should compel the church to rethink her very nature as the body of Christ. (There are other issues (or cans of worms) like the “homogeneous unit principle” to discuss as well – but more on that later.)

Here are some highlights the the article:

Throughout history, most movements have gone through four phases or stages (and sometimes back again through grass-roots movements) [unreached – movement – formalizing – institutional]. Failure to understand these can create unreal expectations that are inappropriate for a given stage of a movement…

[Stage 3 – Formalizing] The result is that normal disciples can be intimidated from doing the work of the ministry. They do not have the abilities or specialized training/credentials of the professional leaders. Therefore, the concept of the priesthood of the believer (in terms of “every member a minister”) wanes. A smaller percentage of disciples continues in ministering to others. No one intends for this to occur, and many pastors will do their best in stages three and four to build up their church members as ministers and leaders, but the “clergy/laity” divide becomes more profound…

[Stage Four – Institutional] The upshot is that the concept of priesthood of the believer wanes drastically. Believers bring their lost friends to church rather then lead them to faith themselves…

[Stage Four Workers in Stage One] The early church does not appear to have entered this final stage until the Fourth Century A.D. Most movements progress through these stages. The difficulty comes when we lack this historical perspective and try to make sense of movements at earlier stages. What happens when a missionary leaves a stage four church and tries to do evangelism and church planting in stage one? Inadvertently he tries to plant stage four disciples and churches because that is all he knows…

[Stage Two Workers in Stage Four] What happens with believers from stage one or two who visit leaders and churches in stage four? A not-uncommon consequence is death of the movement phase and immediately entering the formalizing and institutional phase.

[Stage Four Leaders Watching a Stage Two Movement] When our whole frame of reference is stage four, it is easy to criticize what we see in stage two. We can easily label the house churches as “not real churches.” Or, we can require that leaders meet certain credentialing requirements before they can perform the ordinances. Or, as we feel compassion for pastors that are bi-vocational, we may dedicate money to fund them full-time, thereby creating a benchmark that is no longer reproducible. In all, we can kill a movement when we implement extra-biblical requirements that are a yoke too heavy into these early stages…

The challenge is to keep a movement at the movement stage as long as possible and to not let the formalizing impede the progress of the kingdom. But when it does begin to slow down, going back to simple biblical processes and methods of earlier stages can spark a new movement.

Read the whole thing.

Towards a Missiology of Disciple Making Movements

In very recent church history, church planting movements or disciple making movements (DMMs) have been observed in several different contexts which are characterized by rapid reproduction within a social network (usually in collectivist societies) of groups of seekers or new believers who study the Bible together and seek to obey its teachings.

In one sense, the DMM “strategy” is not actually a prescriptive methodology but a descriptive account of such movements. Yet books such as Contagious Disciple Making portray DMM as indeed a well-defined methodology. This is because the method of DMM has been reverse-engineered from the phenomenon itself. 

All new religious/social movements have a mechanism that drives their propagation into society, and DMMs are no exception. According to my friend Christopher Johnson, all DMMs have in common 1) a standard, transferrable liturgy for each meeting, 2) a specific set of easily reproducible Bible lessons, and 3) accountability for evangelism (others would also add extraordinary prayer to this as well). DMMs are not an organic or spontaneous movement of reproducing house churches (HT: NVH). They are a highly organized movement with a clear mechanism (DBS and immediate accountability) for multiplication and diffusion into a social network.

I would therefor argue that the DMM methodology is not biblical per se, but neither is it unbiblical. It is a synthesized strategy that explains why and how new Jesus movements are spreading today (especially in collective cultures). I don’t find examples of the DMM strategy in Scripture, and yet I don’t see anything in Scripture that would contradict the approach, generally speaking.

However, it does seems to me that the DMM strategy needs to be embraced fully- it is not something that one can choose certain elements from and discard others (like inductive Bible study).  Like a car engine, if one piece of the mechanism fails then the vehicle may break down.

Both those who are pro-DMM and those who are cautious of the approach would do well to recognize the nature of DMMs. If there is wisdom in the method then it deserves our serious attention! But at the same time, it doesn’t need to be presented as the biblical approach for engaging lostness.

C-Spectrum After 15 Years and the W-Spectrum EMQ Podcast

From EMQ #002:

Oct 22, 2015

Keith Peters interviews John Jay Travis on "C1-C6 Spectrum after 15 Years"; Warrick Farah and Kyle Meeker on "W-Spectrum: Worker Paradigms in Muslim Contexts". Both articles were published in the October 2015 issue of EMQ.

Read more at http://emqonline.libsyn.com/2015/10#6qWVZvOi5keQKz1A.99

• Download this Episode
• 35 minutes

Introducing “The W-Spectrum: Worker Paradigms in Muslim Contexts” (EMQ 2015)

On behalf of Dr. Kyle Meeker, it’s my pleasure to introduce The W-Spectrum: Worker Paradigms in Muslim Contexts which is on the cover of the new issue of EMQ (Oct 2015). The article is appropriately paired with Travis’ reflections on 15 years of the C-Spectrum. As you may know, the C-Spectrum is probably the most popular article in the 50+ year history of EMQ.

The idea for the W-Spectrum began in 2006 while I was living among an unreached Muslim people group and interacting extensively with other workers who had an incredibly wide variety of approaches to reaching Muslims. One night I started to write an article I titled “Stuck at C3” which was basically my own reflections as to why some workers were unable (IMO) to get to C4. I created a table to compare the differences between C3 and C4 from the viewpoint of the worker, not the Christ centered community. (Note: a “worker” is any follower of Jesus who has an intentional witness among unbelievers.) However, at a conference a few months later, I shared this idea with some colleagues. One of them, my boss at the time, told me that the C-Spectrum was never meant to describe worker views or practices, only to describe indigenous fellowships. This prevented me from writing an article I would have deeply regretted!

With this insight, I then went and expanded my categories, renamed them from C3 to W3, etc., and reworked the table based on how I would observe workers in diverse contexts explain the reason for their approaches. This process took several years of informal research and listening on my part.

I initially toyed with the idea of having 6 paradigms, but I felt it too was complicated, and then 5 paradigms, but I was nervous people would commit the “middle ground” fallacy and thus be uncritically drawn to the moderate approach. Thus, I ended up at 4 worker paradigms, the W1-4 Spectrum (which do NOT correlate with the C-Spectrum):

1. Triumph Model- “Christianity triumphs over Islam”
2. Replacement Model- “Christianity replaces Islam”
3. Transformation Model- ““Biblical faith transforms Muslims”
4. Completion Model- “Biblical faith completes Muslims”

While the W-Spectrum was still in draft form, I told Dr. Meeker about it. We are actually cousins (biologically speaking!) and I owe him a whole lot more credit than just for giving me chicken pox when I was five years old. Kyle is basically better than me than everything except fantasy football and ping-pong. He was further able to fine tune the W Spectrum and offer many invaluable improvements.

That being said, while this is all good and nice, the W-Spectrum was still just an unscientific guess at this point in 2011: it needed validation. Meeker then took this on as a missiological project to test as part of his doctoral thesis (“Meeker, Kyle. 2014. Worker Praxis in Muslim Contexts: Discovering and Assessing Paradigms in Kingdom Witness, Talbot School of Theology, Biola.) Basically, we wanted to disprove the W-Spectrum as a tool for helping a worker discover their paradigm of witness among Muslims. Over 200 people responded to an online survey.  But when Dr. Meeker evaluated the data using quantitative statistical analysis, we found that the opposite was true. Hence the birth of the W-Spectrum. (Even if it was “disproved” though, it still would have been interesting to see why.)

Last summer we condensed Dr. Meeker’s dissertation into this EMQ article. I’m glad it took so long and that we had so much input from other workers and missiologists during the process. As you read the article, you’ll notice that we spend more time discussing the nature, usefulness, and limitations of the W-Spectrum than we do actually explaining the paradigms within the W-Spectrum itself. This is partly because we are so concerned of the potential it has to be misused, as was/is often the case with the C-Spectrum. EMQ also has a very low 3,000 word limit.

As a side note for full disclosure- that is a picture of me on the cover. The man next to me was one of the first Muslims that I ever had the privilege to walk with on his journey to following Jesus. My teammate took the picture when we attended a wedding in his village. I rarely dressed like that and only for special ceremonies/occasions (like every other local would), but sometimes also when someone would come to my house to study the Bible.

In any case, the final result of this 9 year process is the W-Spectrum. Scott Moreau says in the editorial of this issue of EMQ:

While the C-Spectrum describes the fellowships that Travis observed (and continues to observe) in Muslim settings, no one has proposed a parallel spectrum of the roles that missionaries take on in Muslim settings. Warrick Farah and Kyle Meeker propose a W-Spectrum to explore this facet.

Read the entire W-Spectrum article. (Subscription required. I’m checking with EMQ regarding what exactly I can share on this blog from the article.)

It is my hope and prayer that the W-Spectrum and the model within The Complexity of Insiderness (which is very different than the C Spectrum) will help advance our missiological discussions into the nature of ministry among Muslims.

Dualsider

Not insider, not outsider, but dualsider.

I.e. someone who is both an insider and outsider, or someone who is neither inside nor outside, but dualside.

Predicting the next missiological buzzword. Remember, you heard it here first. ;-)

The Haram Halal Fallacy

There are certain paradigms of witness to Muslims that treat Islam as an evil, monolithic entity that corrupts everything it touches. Therefore, in this view, when talking about evangelism/discipleship, we should have nothing to do with “Islam.”

The tendency to binary thinking is related to a modern worldview and a naïve realism epistemology. This black and white paradigm also understands theology of religions to mean that Christianity is against Islam and will eventually triumph. There can be no mixing between the Christianity and anything else.

This is fallacious and lazy thinking. See this post by Daniels: Black and White - - or not?. We could easily expose this fallacy by discussing the incarnation and the nature of biblical revelation, but I want to make one quick point… Ironically, this model of missiology also mirrors conservative Islamic law, where everything is either haram or halal. It has a lot to do with with how mainstream Muslims view the world today!

(HT:C&P)

See also The Essentialist Fallacy.

Introducing “The Complexity of Insiderness” (IJFM 2015)

An exciting new issue of IJFM was just released themed “Debating Insiderness” and with it the article “The Complexity of Insiderness.”

I want to point out a couple of features of the article:

• It is a response to Farrokh and Abu Jazz’s articles in the issue (but also to missiology in general). Both have different understandings of the nature of insiderness. While I think Abu Jazz has a more sensible/realistic/healthy approach, both are still treating the issue in way that I feel is too basic. Thus, I’m advocating to at least recognize the complexity of insiderness. Yet it is actually more complex than I have described!
• I also wrote the article as an introduction to the phenomenon of insiderness, so that someone with a basic understanding of the issues could quickly see what is happening in the world of mission today.
• One could think of the model as an I-Scale (Insiderness) à la the C-Scale, but I would prefer that not be the case.
• I also don’t intend for anyone to say, “This is as far as we contextualize…” and then to refer to one of the expressions listed in this model as a kind of limit, because that would be betray the idea I tried to explain in the conclusion: “Since every context is different, we cannot assess all insiders with broad strokes nor evaluate all insiderness with the same criteria. What we say in hermeneutics also applies in missiology: “context is king.””
• I tried to be as descriptive and neutral as possible, and then to put the “meat” in the footnotes. I think there are some good ideas in the footnotes. But still, I have been too brief and much more can be said. I’m looking forward to your feedback.

Read the whole thing: The Complexity of Insiderness (2015 IJFM 32:2)

Effective Discipling in Muslim Communities, Don Little

From Amazon, Effective Discipling in Muslim Communities: Scripture, History and Seasoned Practices:

Muslims who come to Christ face momentous spiritual, psychological and social obstacles that drive many to abandon their faith. Often conversion and discipleship are framed by individualistic Western models that do not acknowledge the communal cultural forces that constrain and shape new believers. Effective discipleship requires a more relational, holistic process of Christian identity development and spiritual formation in community. In this comprehensive resource, missiologist Don Little engages the toughest theoretical and practical challenges involved in discipling believers from Muslim backgrounds. He draws on New Testament principles, historical practices and interviews with seasoned disciplers ministering in a dozen countries across the Muslim world. Addressed here are key challenges that believers from Muslim backgrounds face, from suffering and persecution to spiritual warfare and oppression. Also included are implications for the role of disciplers in church planting among Muslims.

In an email, author Don Little wrote:

As far as I am aware this is the first (and only) book on discipling believers from Muslim backgrounds (BMBs) that is more than simply one person sharing his or her experience.

Buy the book here. Kindle version to be released in a few weeks.

The Essentialist Fallacy

The essentialist fallacy is committed when an evaluation is made of an “insider” or MBB on the basis of some supposed “real Islam” and not on the basis of how the specific believer relates to the particular context, including his or her local Muslim community. Neither insider proponents nor traditionalists are immune to the essentialist fallacy.

Examples of this fallacy abound in evangelical missiology. I would be interested to see readers of Circumpolar point to some in the comments below.

Muhammad the Spurned Lover

One does not read very far in the Qur'an before it becomes obvious that Muhammad was in some ways a spurned lover. Not that any women turned him away, rather that he longed to be part of the people of God-- but they would not have him.

Mohammad came close enough to Jews and Christians to be attracted to their God. He wanted them to accept him into their story, into their knowing the one true God, but he wanted it on his terms.

In the early Medina years he was not so much about building a community as he was about trying to join one. But again, he only wanted to join if he there was room for him along side the great historical personages of their faith. Of course, we all know that in the end neither the Jews nor Christians allowed him that place, so he made his own.

This desire to share a spiritual inheritance is a major, yet unresolved, motif in Mohammad's narrative. It is unresolved because exactly how Islam relates to its predecessors still hangs like a whiff of smoke in the air, noticeable, but just barely.  It also carries missiological significance.

Our presentation of the Gospel to Muslims must touch this deep nerve. One that offers them a place among the people of the true and living God - but not on their terms, not on our terms - on God's terms.

It seems to me that history is rhyming. Once again globalization is bringing many Muslims close enough to us to see our God. Many them are already wanting to share that narrative, and many more will in the coming years. The looming question to us is, "Will we act like "gatekeepers" who control the door, or like fellow beggars who have found crumbs and want to share?" 

Identity Formation in the NT

Here are some books I want to work through. Does anyone know of attempts to integrate these theological studies with the issues we are facing in missiology?

 

Would you dare to love ISIS?

"Would you dare to love ISIS?"

That is the name of the video below, a deeply Christian response to the hate and evil pouring out of Muslim extremists in the Middle East:

There are a number of reasons to take 4 minutes to watch the video, but thinking missiologically I can think of 3 in particular: 

• Does Jesus' victory over death truly shape our mission praxis? 
• What does it mean to "love our enemies" within the current atmosphere of Muslim/Christian conflict?
• Where does martyrdom fit into our missiology?  

I'll leave it to you to wrestle with these, I know I still am.