Sunday, September 27, 2009

The Praying Life

The Praying Life: "
Bob Thune reviews Paul Miller’s The Praying Life and includes a number of excellent quotes from the book
  • Learning to pray doesn’t offer us a less busy life; it offers us a less busy heart.
  • If you are not praying, then you are quietly confident that time, money, and talent are all you need in life.
  • Less mature Christians have little need to pray… there is no complexity to their worlds because the answers are simple.
  • Cynicism is the air we breathe, and it is suffocating our hearts. Our only hope is to follow Jesus as he leads us out of cynicism.
  • The persistent widow and the friend at midnight get access, not because they are strong but because they are desperate. Learned desperation is at the heart of a praying life.
  • I do not understand prayer. Prayer is deeply personal and deeply mysterious. Adults try to figure out causation. Little children don’t. They just ask.
  • Everything you do is connected to who you are as a person and, in turn, creates the person you are becoming. Everything you do affects those you love. All of life is covenant.
  • We think spiritual things – if done right – should just ‘flow.’ But if you have a disability, nothing flows, especially in the beginning.
  • There is a tendency among Christians to get excited about ‘listening to God’ as if they are discovering a hidden way of communicating with God that will revolutionize their prayer lives… This subtly elevates an experience with God instead of God himself. Without realizing it, we can look at the windshield instead of through it.

    How would you love someone without prayer? People are far too complicated; the world is far too evil; and my own heart is too off center to be able to love adequately without praying.
"

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Jim Belcher’s “Third Way” for the Church

I read this book last week and highly recommend it. I couldn't put it down. Below is a review of the book from Kingdom People.

Many of the issues related to church planting in the postmodern West are interestingly echoed in the Muslim world: the contextualization of biblical faith, how the gospel impacts worldview, and the nature of the church. 

As Belcher looks for a "Third Way" between Traditional and Emerging, I feel in many ways that I am also looking for a third way between Rejectionist and Insider.

Jim Belcher’s “Third Way” for the Church: "



Just when you thought the Emerging versus Traditional conversation had arrived at the point where everyone was safely nestled in their own camps and set in their ways, a Presbyterian pastor comes on the scene and challenges our tacit approval of evangelical fragmentation.

In Deep Church: A Third Way Beyond Emerging and Traditional (IVP, 2009), Jim Belcher proposes a ”third way” between Emerging and Traditional. Deep Church is for evangelicals who resonate with much of the Emerging Church’s critique of contemporary evangelicalism, and yet have misgivings about some of the proposed solutions of Emerging advocates. Using the term “deep church” from a 1952 letter written by C.S. Lewis, Jim proposes a way forward that focuses on the strengths of Traditional and Emerging churches.

The book is as much narrative as theological analysis. Jim tells the story of his early involvement in the Emerging conversation. As he evaluates the Emerging critique, he visits actual churches. Far from being an armchair critic, Jim sets out to witness what the Emerging Church is like “on the ground.”

Relying on Ed Stetzer’s division of the Emerging Church into Relevants, Reconstructionists and Revisionists, Jim then considers the validity of Emerging concerns regarding contemporary evangelicalism. In a parenthetical statement near the beginning of the book, he sets the tone of discussion by saying, ”I believe that even when I disagree with others, I can still learn from them.” (36)

The central thrust of Deep Church is a call for unity around the central tenets of the faith. Jim seeks to ground our unity in the central confessions of ancient Christianity:
“We are not ashamed of our tradition; we embrace it and practice it. But at the same time we desire and promote the broader unity of the church.” (65)
Jim’s view has postmodern sensibility, and yet he steps back from fully embracing postmodern philosophy. He critiques Emerging leaders for “jumping on the postmodern bandwagon too quickly.” He sees problems with the idea that the community’s relational hermeneutic should be the final criterion for judging right from wrong. He writes:
“Apart from revelation, there is nothing to hold a particular tradition, community or history accountable. There is no prophetic voice.” (83)
Jim also evaluates the Emerging emphasis on bringing people into relationship with the church before they actually believe. In the Emerging mindset, belonging precedes believing – even on mission trips! Jim carefully considers the Traditional church’s criticism of this idea. In the end, he advocates a nuanced view that portrays the church’s proclamation of the gospel as a well. The well attracts people closer to conversion. But at some point, Jim believes there must be an inside-outside boundary.

The chapter on the “deep gospel” is important. He agrees with Emerging leaders that the traditional understanding of the gospel has been reduced to individual salvation. But Jim ably exposes the reductionism in the Emerging view as well:
“Brian McLaren’s view of the kingdom, which is supposed to be so liberating, tends toward legalism. Without God’s atoning grace, the message of the kingdom sounds like law. and this is, I believe, why so many of my college friends dropped out of Christianity. They could not pull it off.” (119)
Regarding worship, Jim points us back to the ancient church:
“Only the living tradition of the fourth and fifth centuries, passed on through the ages… can help us contextualize the gospel in our worship without it becoming syncretistic or ossified over time.” (134)
Regarding preaching, Jim refuses to pit biblical narrative against systematic theology. He writes:
“The pastors at Redeemer preach sermons rooted in the Bible – both the drama of salvation from each of the Testaments and the wonderful doctrines of Christianity.” (139)
Deep Church is one of the best books to “emerge” about the Emerging Church. I found myself nodding my head in agreement with most of Jim’s critique and proposed solutions. And yet, I have a few misgivings of my own.

First, as a Baptist, I disagree with the idea of setting such a “low bar for membership.” Jim’s church does not require members to subscribe to anything that is outside the bounds of Nicene Christianity:
“Let me provide an example. To become a member of Redeemer Church you must be a Nicene Christian, committed to ‘living as becomes a follower of Christ’ and be willing to submit to the community. What about views on baptism? The Lord’s Supper? Politics? The end times? The anti-Christ? Although important and although we hold views on each of them, holding different views on these topics will not keep you from the Well of Redeemer and belonging to our church.” (158)
I agree that some of the above examples should not be a hindrance to membership. But setting the bar this low appears very invidualistic.

If some in the congregation believe in believer’s baptism by immersion and others believe in baptizing infants, what will take place?

If some believe that women can and should be elders or pastors and others disagree, what will happen?

If some believe in speaking in tongues during worship and others do not, how will that be handled?

My question is this: Is it possible to have a high bar for local church membership (meaning, ask for a certain level of doctrinal unity on some secondary issues) and yet still demonstrate significant appreciation for other churches and denominations that disagree? I think so. I share a certain level of unity with Jim around the central tenets of the gospel and I agree with his “centered-set hermeneutic.”

Regarding fellowship, I can cooperate with Jim as a Nicene Christian. Regarding local church membership, I belong to a Baptist church, which involves an additional level of unity on other issues. Can I still be a Nicene Christian and a convictional Baptist? Can I still be an advocate of “deep church” and have high bars for local church membership? I think so.

On another note, I wonder what the reasons are for Jim’s emphasis on the fourth and fifth centuries. Jim advocates a return to our roots, to the pre-pragmatic era of Christianity. I am glad to see the emphasis on our heritage.

But even as Jim admits “there is not a golden time to return to” (136), it appears that the fourth and fifth centuries serve as a quasi-Golden Age for the book. If we are going back so far, why stop at the fourth century? Why not return to the first?

I like the Robert Webber-influenced “Ancient-Future” emphasis in this book, but I wish that Jim would have made a case for why it is appropriate that we return to the 400’s. Why not return to the 16th century? Or the 900’s? It appears to me that our post-Christian society is becoming more and more like the world before Constantine. I need more reasons for accepting that the Christendom era Jim describes is the most relevant to our day and age.

Overall, Deep Church is a must-read for any pastor or church planter. Jim offers a proposal filled with gentle hope. If you have felt like you are caught in the crossfire between the Emerging and Traditional camps, you will enjoy insights of Jim Belcher and his hope-filled proposal for a united, stronger evangelicalism."

Free book of stories of the Islamic Prophets

Free book of stories of the Islamic Prophets: "Hey guys, here 228 pages: a free book that can be downloaded, on the lives of the Islamic prophets. This helps you understand how Islam views its prophets, and how it views history in general. PBUY. DOWNLOAD HERE.
More info on this book HERE. "

The Demeanor of Humility vs Actual Humility

The Demeanor of Humility vs Actual Humility: "

Ken Sande:


Many leaders conceal a proud attitude under a demeanor of humility, which is not the same as actual humility. One of the many evidences of actual humility is the inclination to “consider others better than yourself,” which results in valuing their thoughts and interests as highly as your own (Phil. 2:3-4). A closely related evidence of humility is to sincerely welcome critique and correction, no matter who brings the “observation” (Prov. 13:10, 17:10). Therefore, wise leaders regularly meditate and pray about the “pride and humility” passages in Scripture (see Prov. 11:2, 19:20; Isa. 66:3; 1 Pet. 5:5-6), asking God to help them put off self-confidence, pride, and every hint of arrogance, and to put on a humility that genuinely welcomes questions, suggestions, criticism, and anything else that might aid us in the process of presenting ourselves before God as empty vessels, so that we might be utterly dependent on and fulfilled in him, which is the essence of true humility.


From Approachability: The Passport to Real Ministry and Leadership.

"

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Gospel Clothing Part II


This quote is awesome because it explains the key to both Islam and contextualization at the same time:

When the church had lost track of an important element in the saving work of Jesus Christ, and was teaching that believers are justified not by faith but by being sanctified, as a result it became very easy for the church to revert to an old covenant lifestyle. Uneasiness about justification by grace alone produced a flowering of asceticism, reflecting an unconscious need for a list of clean and unclean activities and a rebirth of Phariseeism.

Thus, those who are not secure in Christ cast about for spiritual life preservers with which to support their confidence. And in their frantic search they not only cling to the shreds of ability and righteousness they find in themselves, but they fix upon their race, membership in a party, familiar social and ecclesiastic patterns, and their culture as means of self-recommendation. The culture is put on as if it were armor against self-doubt. But it becomes a mental straight-jacked which cleaves to the flesh and can never be removed except through comprehensive faith in the saving work of Christ. Once you understand the gospel, once faith is exercised, a Christian is free to be enculturated- to wear his culture like a comfortable suit of clothes. He can shift to other cultural clothing temporarily if he wishes to do so as Paul suggests in 1 Corinthians 9 and he is released to admire and appreciate the differing expressions of Christ shining through other cultures.

-Richard Lovelace, quoted in Tim Keller's talk on Contextualization in 2004, starting at 53:00

The gospel is the key to contextualization. (And to Islam.)

Related: Gospel Clothing (Part I)

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Larson's Top 5 Books on Islam

Warren Larson, director of the Zwemer Center for Muslim Studies, Columbia International University, recommends his top 5 books on Islam. Here they are without the pictures:

The Unseen Face Of Islam: Sharing the Gospel with Ordinary Muslims at Street Level By Bill Musk
This, Musk's best book on Islam, uncovers the practical issues most Muslims face—spirits, blessings, curses, saints, amulets, charms, love potions, and lots of fear.

Glad News! God Loves You, My Muslim Friend By Samy Tanagho
Helps readers to understand the religion by urging them to engage in personal conversations with its practitioners.

The Crescent Through The Eyes Of The Cross: Insights from an Arab Christian By Nabeel Jabbour
A helpful reflection on Islam's religious and cultural contexts, understanding the Muslim worldview, and the relationship between East and West.

Muslims, Christians And Jesus: Gaining Understanding and Building Relationships By Carl Medearis
Not a scholarly work and one that contains several errors about Islam, it nonetheless superbly demonstrates how Christians can and must lovingly interact with Muslims.

A Worldview Approach to Ministry Among Muslim Women By Cynthia Strong And Meg Page
Combines the ministry insights of women scholars and fieldworkers serving Muslim women, and explores Muslim-Christian differences and how Christian women can interact with Muslim women.

Imagination and Story in Evangelism

From an interview of Todd Hunter in CT's September 2009 issue:

You write about the evangelistic importance of shaping the imagination. What does that mean?

The average person doesn't live out of data and propositions. They live out of their imaginations. When I almost moved to Washington State to play rookie league baseball, what animated me was my dream of playing in the major leagues. I knew the facts of baseball. I knew the rules. I knew the history and the great players. But what fueled me was my imagination.

Stories create imagination, and imagination creates possibility.

This is where Eugene Peterson's work about the power of story to shape imagination has been so helpful. He says that if you genuinely think Christianity is a story about going to heaven when you die, it is no accident that fostering discipleship is like pulling teeth. I'm trying to get people to switch stories to reshape their imaginations. If we recast the gospel as something that gives us life, not just a secure death, then discipleship and mission become normative because they become more intuitive.

How do people move to the bigger good-life and secure-death story?

In our story, heaven is not the goal; it's the destination. We're going to reign with God forever in the renewed heaven and renewed earth. That's our destination. But the goal of Christianity is spiritual transformation into Christlikeness.

If my dream of playing baseball had come true, I wouldn't have called my dad and said, "I'm going to New York." No, I would have said, "I got drafted by the Yankees." New York is not the goal. It's simply the destination.

When people are on a journey of discovery, at what point do you think, The Spirit of God is now leading me to pose the question that gets them to cross the line?

In much of post-World War II evangelicalism, we asked people to cross a finish line. So it went: apologetics, apologetics, apologetics, then, okay, you get it now, you need to make a decision, and you get to go to heaven when you die. What I'd prefer to see is apologetics, enculturation, saying the prayers, and then you come to a line, but it's a starting line: Are you ready to become a follower of Jesus? Can you now see the big intention of God for the earth and what he was doing through Christ and Pentecost and creating the people of God? Are you willing to join that family and take up that family's cause through following Jesus?

Sunday, August 30, 2009

The Essence of Ramadan (and Islam)

Why do Muslims fast, especially during Ramadan? Or why do they observe any of the five pillars for that matter? This Muslim writes concerning the purpose of Ramadan:
Ramadan is the holy month of the year in which Moslems fast every day from dawn to dusk. This month is very special for the Moslems. It is the month the Quran was inspired to Mohammad and it is also called God’s feast. In this month a person who fasts empties and purifies himself, and then waits for God to walk into his heart. A person, who fasts, by eating less food and taking more care of his behaviour, tries to empty his body and cleanse his heart of impurities. He is supposed to resist his sensual desires and focus on his moral side: eating, drinking, smoking and having sex is forbidden from down to dusk.
Of course, those who have health problems, children, and old people are excused. It is very much like a rider training his horse. One who fasts tries to train the horse of his body with his soul. Still these are not the only things a faster should decline: he should not lie, talk behind anyone's back, or hurt anyone for then his fast will be useless. In all, since no unclean place can be expected to be entered by someone honoured, no unclean body and heart is expected to be surrounded by God.
Even many of those who do not avoid eating and drinking do not miss the praying part, especially at dawn and dusk. If praying on other days of the year is like walking toward God, in this month it is like running toward him. At dawn when the routine life has not started yet, and most people are still in their homes, there is a special calmness on the earth which makes praying deeper and more touchable for those who fast.

And at dusk when it is time to break the fast and start the normal life again, praying is like getting one step closer to purity. Life becomes more enjoyable by then! Praying is like opening your heart and inviting God into it. When he walks in he may bring gifts with him: gifts of honour, confidence, peace, patience, courage, satisfaction, safety, and most of all faith and love. 
After all, fasting is like cleansing inside and opening hearts, waiting for God to enter. This is what makes Ramadan so special to Moslems. However, it is not the only chance for God to reach someone’s heart. God's love is unconditional and any one who is loved by him becomes gifted, no matter what time or month of the year it is or what religion he has! (Emphasis mine.)
There is much here about fasting I joyfully agree with.  But what about the motivation for fasting- how is someone made acceptable to God in Islam?  It is by fasting.  Purifying yourself so that God will accept you is the essence of Ramadan.
 
"In the NT, our purity is a result of God's activity for us, not our activity for God" (HT: KM).  Muslims are accepted by God in Islam because they do good works.  We do good works because in Christ we are accepted by God.
"... our great God and Savior Jesus Christ who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works" (Titus 2:13-14).
"After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb. 1:3).
 
"And the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin" (1 Jn. 1:7).

Friday, July 31, 2009

St. Francis Mag Aug 2009: Insider Movement and Common Ground


Below are two articles from the August 2009 edition of St. Francis On-Line Magazine. This issue focuses wholly on the discussion about the concepts of the Insider Movement (IM).

I am aware of Jay Smith's confrontational approach to Muslim ministry and have heard him lecture before, so I could easily guess his take on IM. But I was surprised find how fair and rational he was in his assessment of the Common Ground (CG) conference in Atlanta January 2009 (I have several friends who were there too). I don't agree with everything he says, but Jay makes several profound points concerning the extremist elements of CG. I myself am going to CG in a couple months and am looking forward it after hearing so much about it.

An Assessment of the Insider Movement Principle Paradigms
Jay Smith, known for his discussions with Muslims in Hyde Park (London) went to Common Ground (Atlanta 2009). He discusses the terminology that is used by proponents of the theology of the Insider Movement. Download the article (32 pages)

The conclusion of Adbul Asad's (an acquaintance) article is a great summary of "Syncretistic C5" and "Appropriate C5" contextualization. I was privileged to read this article in 2008. His mediating position argues that C5 is good only as a transitional form of church and that IM is potentially dangerous. I really like that two page chart in his conclusion!

Rethinking the Insider Movement Debate: Global Historical Insights Toward an Appropriate Transition
Abdul Asad explains the meaning of the C1-C6 Spectrum. He uses examples from Africa and Indonesia to show that Insider Movements should be lauded, but only if they move converts to what is called 'C3' or 'C4'. Download this article (27 pages)

There are several other articles that I only skimmed. The majority of the articles are very, very critical of IM and CG. Here is the complete set of all ten articles in one pdf file. Download St Francis Magazine 5:4 (August 2009) (166 pages)

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Gospel Clothing

"We have to divest our gospel of the cultural clothing in which we have received it and sometimes even of the precise cultural garb in which Scripture presents it. We also have to reclothe it in cultural terms appropriate to the people to whom we proclaim it."
-John Stott, The Message of Thessalonians, pg. 181

I take this to mean that we must be familiar (experts?) with at least three cultures:
1. the cultural background of the Bible
2. the cultural context we minister in
3. and our own culture.

It reminds me also of the quote I heard from D.A. Carson: "No truth which human beings may articulate can ever be articulated in a culture-transcending way—but that does not mean that the truth thus articulated does not transcend culture."

Friday, July 24, 2009

Gospel Astonishment

"There is no commitment we will make as church planters of greater importance than living close to Jesus.  For church planting can become an idol factory; a prostitution ring; a cruel taskmaster; a breeding ground for addictions… we need church planters who will love Jesus with abandon, and who cultivate a lifestyle of growing in His grace and knowledge.  Until you know yourself to be slow of heart to believe the gospel, you will never cultivate a burning heart for the gospel.  Churches planted with the DNA of the gospel will be led by those who live a life of gospel astonishment."

Scotty Smith, here on pg. 15

Muslim Demographic Video

I'm not sure I like the video I'm posting below.  It is sensationalistic, mistakes Christendom for biblical faith, and seems to imply that secularism is better than Islam.  But it makes a very interesting point about the future influence of Islam.  I have heard about it from a couple different sources now.  I did not check the stats but I assume they are correct.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Islam, ESV Study Bible Articles

Here is a brief overview of Islam from the ESV Study Bible:

"Islam, the second largest religion in the world after Christianity, is found not only in the Middle East but throughout Asia, Africa, Europe, and North America. (See also The Bible and Islam.) Although historically discussion of Islam begins with Muhammad (c. a.d. 570–632), Muslims insist that Islam is God's eternal religion for all humankind and that Muhammad was simply the last and greatest in a long line of prophets. Born in Mecca, an important trading center in the Arabian peninsula, Muhammad was an orphan by age six and was reared by his grandfather and uncle. At age 25 Muhammad married a wealthy widow named Khadija, and he became engaged in various business ventures.

The Arabs of Mecca were largely animists and polytheists, although there were Jewish and Christian influences in the area. Living in Mecca, Muhammad was troubled by the polytheism and superstition all around him. Around the year 610 he began to have experiences that he took to be revelations from Allah, the one true God. Convinced that he had been called to be a "Messenger of God," Muhammad continued to receive revelations supposedly dictated by the angel Gabriel over a 20-year period. The revelations were memorized by Muhammad's followers and were eventually written and codified in the Qur'an, which is understood to be the Word of God. Muhammad regarded himself as being in continuity with prophets of the OT and Jesus. He claimed to be restoring the original revelation of God that Jews and Christians had corrupted.

But Muhammad met stiff resistance to his message in Mecca, and in 622 he and his followers moved to Medina (in western Saudi Arabia). Under Muhammad's leadership, Medina was transformed into an Islamic theocracy, and the social and religious patterns of Medina are regarded as an ideal for Islamic societies. In 630 Muhammad returned to Mecca, captured it, and began transforming the city. Then suddenly, in 632, at about 62 years of age, Muhammad died.

Questions about the legitimate successors to Muhammad resulted in the two major divisions within Islam. Sunni Islam, comprising roughly 85 percent of Muslims today, recognized caliphs (Islamic leaders) not necessarily related to Muhammad as his legitimate successors. Shi'a Islam, comprising 10 to 15 percent of Muslims, insisted that legitimate successors must descend directly from Muhammad and that Ali (Muhammad's son-in-law, who was martyred) and his sons were the rightful heirs to leadership.

Both branches of Islam embrace a strict monotheism. Islam calls for acknowledgment of the incomparable greatness of Allah and submission to his sovereign will in all of life. Allah is the eternal creator who sovereignly rules over nature and the affairs of humankind.

The religious, intellectual, and social life of devout Muslims is structured around the "Five Pillars": (1) the Shahada, or "witness" of the basic creed of Islam ("I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is the prophet of Allah"); (2) prayer; (3) fasting; (4) almsgiving; and (5) the pilgrimage to Mecca.

Islam teaches that the present world will one day be destroyed by Allah and that all humankind, past and present, will then be raised to face divine judgment. Human beings have a weakness of will and a tendency toward sin. Although humans are tempted by Iblis (the devil), it is within their power to resist and remain faithful to the will of Allah. In the judgment, each person's deeds will be impartially weighed in the balance. Salvation is strictly on the basis of submission to Allah and faithful adherence to the teachings of Islam. Some will be admitted to Paradise, others consigned to Hell.

Jesus is mentioned frequently in the Qur'an. He is called the Messiah, Son of Mary, Messenger, Prophet, Servant, Word, and Spirit of God. Jesus is portrayed as a great miracle worker and one of the greatest of the prophets. The virgin conception of Jesus is affirmed in the Qur'an.

But the Qur'an omits Jesus' teachings as contained in the Gospels and provides no narrative description of his ministry. The Qur'an depicts Jesus as explicitly disclaiming deity (5:109–119) and includes numerous denunciations of what seem to have been views that were common in Muhammad's lifetime regarding the Christian doctrines of the incarnation and the Trinity (cf. 4:171; 5:17; 9:30–31). Although a great prophet of God, Jesus is said to have been in no sense divine. Particularly offensive is the Christian title "Son of God," which is understood by Muslims as referring to physical generation. "Never has Allah begotten a son, nor is there any other god besides Him" (23:93). Muhammad seems to have thought of the Trinity as consisting of the Father, the Virgin Mary, and their child, Jesus.

Traditionally, most Muslims have believed that Jesus was not crucified. Surah 4:155–159 denies that Jesus was in fact killed on the cross. A widely accepted interpretation of this text has been that the Jews tried to kill Jesus but were unable to do so, and that God rescued him and carried him away to a safe place in the heavens. Islam denies the need for a Savior and the substitutionary atonement. The Qur'an states that "no soul shall bear another's burden and that each man shall be judged by his own labors" (53:38). Salvation is by works. "On that day no soul shall suffer the least injustice. You shall be rewarded according only to your deeds" (36:54)."

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Is "Folk Islam" the Correct Terminology?


From the Summer 2009 edition of the Zwemer Journal for Muslim Studies, pgs. 15-16:

"Beware of worn-out interpretive stereotypes, such as "folk Islam." Christians in Muslim lands are in the habit of using the term "folk Islam" for any belief or practice that varies from Islamic doctrine, often termed "normative Islam" or "orthodox Islam." Folk Islam has become a catchall term used for practices such as divination, jinn cults, healing and exorcism, pilgrimages to holy places, and hanging a blue bead to protect against the evil eye.

When you view the lives of ordinary Muslims as folksy, deviant, or inconsistent with "normative Islam," you attribute a kind of ontological status to the Islam of Qur'an and Sunna. Do really want to be perceived by the people as having imbibed the Islam of the 'ulamā [scholars], who tend to belittle the ignorant ways of their people? Why should you join them in such judgments? Neither as Christians nor as ethnographers is it our business to decide what the true Islam is.

In your church do you sit on pews? Do you pass an offering plate during worship? Do you bury the dead in a casket? Do you think of "winning them one by one" as divinely ordained? Does one form of worship or singing bless you more than others? The scriptural basis for such beliefs and preferences is doubtful; therefore, if we were to apply to ourselves the same standard often applied to Muslims, many of us would be labeled "folk Christians." Ask yourself how such a label feels before applying it to Muslims.

It is best to avoid the term Folk Islam and speak instead of the "Muslim culture and life ways" of a specific people, time and place. If you are interested in the spirits Muslims believe in, then "the spiritual world of Arab Muslims in Cairo" is a good rubric.

Anthropologists now see the framework of "great tradition" and "little tradition" which was once used to distinguish between "orthodox" and "folk" Islam as an impediment to good ethnographic interpretation. There is a problem also with the assumption that the spirit beliefs of Muslims are survivals of a native "animistic" or "tribal" culture. Sometimes this kind of indigenization of Islam in local forms is demonstrable, but one must be careful, because historical evidence for Islam's assimilation of local spiritual practices may be lacking. What is more, comparative evidence may suggest that Muslims in geographically diverse places share the same or similar ideas and practices, in which case it is unlikely that the source is local animism. ("Animism" may not always the best word either; "spirit beliefs" is more generic and safer.)

Along with anthropologists, Christians should be careful about this kind of religious profiling. We follow Jesus, who loved and honored simple people. He listened carefully to the beliefs of the Samaritans (never calling them "folk Jews") but was often at odds with the theologically adept Pharisees (the 'ulamā of the Jews). Christianity shares at least one conviction with anthropology, that it is unwise to take sides with the powerful, when doing so would preclude trusting relationships with the people."

Monday, June 15, 2009

Top Ten Team Pitfalls, Sinclair


From Appendix 5 of the book a Vision of the Possible; Pioneer Church Planting in Teams by Dan Sinclair:

Top Ten Team Pitfalls

From my observations, it seems that these strategic issues can make a huge difference in the long run to the team's viability and impact. This is a summary of principles found elsewhere in the book. At the very least, this list of pitfalls can make for a lively team discussion!

10. Not being very clear regarding the people group and location the Lord is calling the team to work amongst.

9. Workers absorbed in high-hours jobs, even when not fully necessary.

8. Male workers trying to do everything out of their home, rather than basing ministry from an office or something. It is very common for team leaders to say they've learned this lesson about 3-year mark.

7. Allowing team misunderstandings or team leader / team member differences to fester and go on too long.

6. The team leader not building the team well. Recruiting anything with a pulse, rather than co-workers with a level of proven gifts and maturity.

5. The team leader not responding well to oversight; undervaluing the role of accountability and coaching.

4. Weak commitment to personal and corporate prayer about the work, with expectancy.

3. Not really understanding or being convinced about church planting.

2. Excess time in non-church-planting activities, such as team meetings & team activities, meetings with other workers, correspondence with folks back home, email, etc. [Of course some time spent in these areas is vital. But it can be overdone.] Getting into all forms of field activity other than language learning, evangelism and discipling. Spending too much time in front of computer screens.

1. The team leader being weak, passive, insecure or non-directive in his leadership role—usually due to insecurity and fear of rejection. Not being clear with team members concerning expectations. People begin to operate as a group of "independent contractors" rather than as a team. Team leaders must learn to stay graciously firm about team standards. Likewise there can be insufficient accountability and direction individually of team members' ministries. Weak accountability can lead to permanently weak patterns. Finally, related to this, the team leader can sometimes fail to keep people motivated, eager and expectant about their tasks and goals.

Group Discussion:

Hand out this list to everyone on the team. Take 20 minutes for each person to mark each item as to: a) whether or not they agree this is important; and b) rate it 1-to-5 (with 5 being highest) as how much of a problem it currently is to the team. Then discuss as a group.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Twelve Proofs that Mohammed is a True Prophet

A short article on the prophethood of Mohammed by Shaykh `Abdul Rahman `Abdul Khaliq (head of the Heritage Revival Committee in Kuwait):

"My brothers and sisters everywhere! With this essay, I am not singling out the adherents of Islam - to which I ascribe - but rather I am writing this essay to every man and woman throughout the whole world.

I ask Allah that He facilitates (tat) this essay reaches every ear, falls under the sight of every eye, and is understood by every heart...

Muhammad the son of `Abdullah is Allah's Prophet and the Final Messenger Sent by Allah to the Inhabitants of Earth.

My brothers and sisters everywhere! You should know that the Messenger, Muhammad the son of `Abdullah (may Allah's blessings and peace be upon him) is Allah's Messenger in reality and truth. The evidences that show his veracity are abundant. None but an infidel, who out of arrogance alone, could deny these signs."

These are listed in the article as proofs that Mohammed is a true prophet:

1. The fact that Mohammed was illiterate
2. The prophecies of the Qur'an
3. The literary eloquence of the Qur'an
4. The perfect life of Mohammed
5. The extreme love Muslims have for Mohammed
6. The worldwide influence of Mohammed to this day (the most influential person who ever lived)
7. The way all Muslims everywhere seek to live like Mohammed
8. The uniqueness of Mohammed
9. The fact that people from every ethnic group and social status follow Mohammed today despite persecution
10. The beauty and majesty of the Qur'anic description of Allah and the perfection of Islam
11. The good manners of Mohammed
12. The fact that the law and creed of Islam defies imitation

Read the whole article.

Is it a fair question to ask, "Do Muslims worship Mohammed?" Of course most do not, and it would be blasphemous in Islam to do so, but the affections many Muslims have of Mohammed seems very close to idolatry.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Jesus, Pharisees, and Muslims

We all know the importance of ceremonial cleanliness and purification in Islam. For instance, if you touch something haraam you have to wash yourself in a specific way seven times. I have even heard of a ceremonial cleansing prescribed for Muslims if you pass gas while praying. I am not trying to make Islam seem corny; being physically and spiritually clean/pure/spotless is at the heart of Islamic faith, with many rules and regulations to govern what it means to be clean before God.

Much of Islam parallels 1st century Phariseeism. I find it interesting that Jesus and his disciples ceased (or never did in the first place) ceremonial washings before eating (Matt. 15:2; Mark 7:2; Luke 11:38) given how important it was to Pharisees. So when I saw the book Learning Evangelism from Jesus I was excited to see in the Table of Contents a couple chapters about how Jesus dealt with Pharisees called, Revealing the Pharisee's Heart, and Religious and Moral Traditionalists: The Problem of Rules and Traditions. Here are some quotes from those chapters:

"Those who think they are well have no need of a physician. Those who believe themselves to be righteous will never listen to Jesus' offer of mercy to sinners. Such people need to be persuaded that they are sick, that they are sinners."

"In Luke 18, Jesus is speaking to some who were "confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else" (Luke 18:9, NIV). As he does on so many similar occasions, Jesus tells a story, this time about two men at the temple… Luke 18:10-13… The story teaches us about three basic characteristics of a Pharisee." 1. Pride, 2. A Critical Spirit, and 3. Lack of Mercy.

"How does Jesus respond to all this seemingly well-intentioned effort to be zealous for God?" [See Mark 7]

"He begins by quoting the prophet Isaiah and accusing them of hypocrisy… An external focus readily decays into hypocrisy, for the outer appearance of spirituality can quickly replace the much more demanding inner devotion of the heart." [Mark 7:6]

"Jesus accuses them of raising human rules to the status of God's law… The apostle Paul teaches in his letter to the Colossians that, despite their appearance of wisdom, such rules for Christian living have no value in restraining the indulgence of the sinful nature (Col. 2:23)." [Mark 7:7]

"Whenever we add our rules to God's law, no matter what the original motivation, the effect will be to replace God's commandments with human rules." [Mark 7:8]

"He says in effect, "The teaching of the Pharisees and the scribes is absolutely worthless in helping you walk in God's ways."" [Mark 7:14-23]

"The words of Jesus to the crowd were so shocking and so radically different from anything they had ever heard before that the disciples did not understand this "parable."" [Mark 7:17]

"Jesus denounces the traditions and spiritual disciplines of the Pharisees and teachers of the law far more strongly that we might expect."

"If we try to make worship obligatory, we will produce either spiritual arrogance or superficial observance and a resistant heart."

"We also need to think about Jesus' evangelistic intent in this discussion of the problem with the rules and traditions of the Pharisees and scribes… Jesus is hard on them because their pride in their knowledge of the laws and their commitment to keep them is an obstacle to faith. His passionate denunciation has the purpose of humbling them."

"When we read in the book of Acts that a great number of the Pharisees eventually came to faith, we know that the Lord's severe words bore their fruit in time; for he did at last gather many of those reluctant and obstinate people to himself."

"The problem we face is this: "When could it ever be appropriate for us to speak to people with the severity of Jesus?" This is a very difficult question to answer, for unlike him, each one of us has a Pharisee in our own heart… Is our denunciation of these obstacles to the gospel motivated by a passion for truth and by compassion for the Pharisees?"

"We must sit at Jesus' feet and recognize that legalism is an implacable enemy of the gospel of grace."

"Attacking legalism is necessary to bring about the salvation of the legalists themselves by humbling them before the Lord, before his truth, and before his grace. Attacking legalism is also necessary in setting people free from the rules that the legalists impose upon them. We are to proclaim liberty: "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Gal. 5:1). This proclamation of liberty from legalism is one of the great friends of true proclamation of the gospel, both to the church and to the world."

Friday, June 5, 2009

Church Planting or Development? Word and Deed in Biblical Balance

What is the gospel? Is it a verbal message of salvation? Is it a cup of clean water? Both? Is it wrong to dichotomize between the physical and the spiritual? What about the temporal and the eternal? In our obedience to the "great commission" should we focus on church planting or development?

For a while I have struggled with the balance of words and deeds as they relate to new covenant ministry. Then I read this quote and it put it all together for me:

Many people who say that evangelism and the Word are more important than mercy and deed base this on a belief that the "spiritual" (ministry of the word) is more important than the "physical" (ministry of deed). It is common to speak of "the priority of the spiritual," but is that a biblical idea? God created both the material and the immaterial halves of reality (Gen. 2:4-7). Both the material and immaterial came under the disorder and decay of sin (Gen. 3:14-19). Moreover, God plans to redeem both our spirits (Heb. 12:23) and our bodies (1 Cor. 15)-both the material and the immaterial. How, then, can we speak about the "physical" as being less important than the "spiritual"? Does God give one priority over the other?...

Having said this, we must nonetheless recognize that, from one perspective, the ministry of the word is the most radical ministry. What do we mean by that? "Radical" often is used to mean "extremist," but that is not the fundamental meaning of the word. The radix is "the root"; to be radical means to go to the root of a thing. We said in an earlier chapter that our alienation from God, our condition of being in a state of "condemnation" (Rom. 8:1-2), is the root from which all our miseries flow. Psychological brokenness, social injustice, and even physical disintegration are due to and flow out of our warfare with God. Thus, the more radical ministry to the condition of man is to proclaim the word of faith (Rom. 10:8-13). There is no more fundamental means to cut the root of sin and death than with the verbal message of the gospel.

Tim Keller, Ministries of Mercy, p. 114

Humankind's greatest problem is a "spiritual" one; separation from God. All other problems stem from our evil rebellion against him. So if our greatest problem is spiritual, then the solution is in kind. Thus, the gospel is a not a cup of clean water, but a cosmic reality of the person and work of Jesus who reconciles humankind with God through his death and resurrection. Carson says this:

Pundits have often noted that many in the Western world have become single-issue people. The church is not immune from such influences. The result is that many Christians assume the gospel (often, regrettably, some form of the 'simple gospel') but are passionate about something on the relative periphery: abortion, poverty, forms of worship, cultural decay, ecology, overpopulation, pornography, family breakdown, and much more. By labeling these complex subjects 'relatively peripheral' I open myself to attack from as many quarters as there are subjects on the list. For example, some of those whose every thought is shaded green will not be convinced that the ecological problems we face are peripheral to human survival. But I remain quite unrepentant. From a biblical-theological perspective, these challenges, as serious as they are, are reflections of the still deeper problem—our odious alienation from God. If we tackle these problems without tackling what is central, we are merely playing around with symptoms. This is no excuse for Christians not to get involved in these and many other issues. But it is to insist that where we get involved in such issues, many of which are explicitly laid upon us in scripture, we do so from the centre out, ie beginning with full-orbed gospel proclamation and witness and passion, and then, while acknowledging that no one can do everything, doing our 'significant something' to address the wretched entailments of sin in our world. The good news of Jesus Christ will never allow us to be smug and other-worldly in the face of suffering and evil. But what does it profit us to save the world from smog and damn our own souls? There are lots of ways of getting rid of pornography. For instance, one does not find much smut in Saudi Arabia. But one doesn't find much of the gospel there, either.

The point is that in all our efforts to address painful and complex societal problems, we must do so from the centre, out of a profound passion for the gospel. This is for us both a creedal necessity and a strategic choice. It is a creedal necessity because this gospel alone prepares men and women for eternity, for meeting our Maker—and all problems are relativized in the contemplation of the cross, the final judgment, and eternity. It is a strategic choice because we are persuaded that the gospel, comprehensively preached in the power of the Spirit, will do more to transform men and women, not least their attitudes, than anything else in the world.

D.A. Carson, For Such a Time as This: Perspectives on Evangelicalism, Past, Present and Future, p. 83

I think the fog over what constitutes the "gospel" can be cleared up by distinguishing between the "gospel" and the "effects" of the gospel. When we have been redeemed and are in a relationship with God, then this good news works itself out in all areas of our life holistically. The gospel changes more than hearts because it changes hearts first. But we do a deep disservice to people when we collapse evangelism and social good to the same level. Yes we should "do good to all people" (Gal. 6:10) and "be zealous for good works" (Titus 2:14) and "devote ourselves to good works so as to help cases of urgent need" (Titus 3:14). But we should not forget what makes that all possible to begin with (2 Cor. 5:11ff).

One illustration a friend shared with me recently is the relationship between faith and works. Of course faith without works is dead (James 2:14-26). But the precedence is not with works, it is with faith. Genuine faith makes good works possible: the purpose for which we are saved (Eph. 2:10). There is a lot of overlap between church planting and development, but they are not the same. Properly planted churches will have a heart for development, but if not, they are "dead."

What all people fundamentally need is the gospel, and what the developing world fundamentally lacks is not development, but indigenous churches. Meeting the development needs of the world is a job only the Spirit-empowered local church can manage in my opinion. So in our zeal for development we must contend that church planting is the biblical and strategic indispensable focus for the good of people, and ultimately, for discipling nations.


Related:

The Gospel Coalition Video Panel Discussion "Gospel Centered Mercy Ministry vs. The Social Gospel" (12 minutes)

"What do missionaries do?" by Michael Griffiths

The Resurgence And: Words and Deeds

Monday, June 1, 2009

Curses

From Sam Storms at Enjoying God Ministries on Doors to Demonization:

One of the problems in discussing curses is the failure of most people to define precisely what is meant by the term. Although curses were most often verbalized, biblical curses have little if anything to do with modern profanity. To curse is to call down or a send forth, from a supernatural source, calamity, trouble, chronic harm, or some other form of adversity upon another person or object. It is to speak evil of another person (hence, malediction or imprecation) with a view to inflicting injury (both physical and spiritual).

The Anchor Bible Dictionary says, "to curse is to predict, wish, pray for, or cause trouble or disaster on a person or thing" (I:1218).

Another problem in discussing curses is the misapplication of certain biblical texts. For example, appeal is often made to Gal. 3:13 ("Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree'"). The problem is that this text and the OT passages on which it is based all refer to divine judgment, not demonic attack. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 27-28 are devoted to articulating the grounds on which God will "curse" a person as well as "bless" him/her. Clearly, to be the recipient of a "curse" in this context means you come under divine judgment. God sends calamity or disaster or punishment in one form or another because of disobedience. Likewise, to be the recipient of a "blessing" is to experience his favor, his bounty, prosperity and the like. When Jesus is said to have redeemed us from the curse by becoming a curse for us, the meaning is that he has suffered, in our place, the righteous wrath of God which we justly deserved. Therefore, Christians are no longer subject or vulnerable to a "curse" in that sense of the term.

In Joshua 6:26 and 9:23 a curse is pronounced by Joshua on both Jericho and Gibeon. But again, in both cases this appears to be a calling down of divine judgment, not demonic harm. In 1 Sam. 17:43 we see that pagan people in ancient times (in this case, Goliath) believed that curses (calamity) were the work of their gods. Spoken curses were thought to possess a power that derived from whatever deity they served. A curse was thought to trigger the release of malevolent spiritual energy toward the person or the object being cursed. See also 2 Samuel 16:5-12.

The question remains: Does the Bible speak about demonic curses? Do we read in Scripture of anyone invoking or calling down or sending forth a demonic being to bring pain and problems, harassment and harm, to another person? This would appear to be what the Moabite king Balak asked Balaam to do regarding Israel. God himself forbids Balaam from cursing Israel: "you shall not curse the people; for they are blessed" (Num. 22:12). Although no mention is made of demonic spirits being involved, it is reasonable to think that they would have been the instrument of bringing calamity on Israel had Balaam carried through with this task. As far as I can tell, there is no NT example of a demonic curse, although there are numerous NT instances of a curse as an expression of divine judgment for sin.

Proverbs 26:2 is especially instructive, if we could only figure out what it means! It reads: "Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, so a curse without cause does not alight" (NASB). Or again, "Like a fluttering sparrow or a darting swallow, an undeserved curse does not come to rest" (NIV). This seems to suggest that a curse is not effectual in itself. If it is undeserved, its impact is undermined. What would be the implications of this? At minimum, it would seem that a curse is, in itself, incapable of leading to demonization apart from the moral complicity of the person involved.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

...when necessary, use words?

Mark Galli at Christianty Today talks about the famous quote from Francis of Assisi who is said to have said, "Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words." Galli mentions two problems with the quote:
1. Francis of Assisi did not say it, and
2. It is not biblical.

"Preach the gospel; use words if necessary" goes hand in hand with a postmodern assumption that words are finally empty of meaning. It subtly denigrates the high value that the prophets and Jesus and Paul put on preaching. Of course we want our actions to match our words as much as possible. But the gospel is a message, news about an event and a person upon which the history of the planet turns. As blogger Justin Taylor recently put it, the Good News can no more be communicated by deeds than can the nightly news.

Many have noted how Francis modeled his life on Jesus. But it wasn't just about the life of poverty, but also the life of preaching. We have no instance of Jesus performing a miracle and not speaking a word of comfort or challenge afterwards.

Paul articulated succinctly what Francis and Jesus felt in their souls: "How are they to call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?" (Rom. 10:14).

To be sure, words used cheaply, thoughtlessly are worse than no words at all. As Westmont College professor Marilyn McEntyre says in an essay in the upcoming August issue of Christianity Today, "In an environment permeated with large-scale, well-funded deceptions, the business of telling the truth, and caring for the words we need for that purpose, is more challenging than ever before."

That being said, a better saying (which you can attribute to anyone you like) is this: Preach the gospel—use actions when necessary; use words always.


HT: Khalid bin Malek

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Retooling the Gospel for a Muslim, J.D. Greear

The below are selections copied from J.D. Greear in a chapter for his forthcoming book called Breaking the Islamic Code: Explaining the Gospel to Muslims:

“Three key words define Western presentations of the Gospel. The first is formula. Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws, variations of which have been popular among Western Christian missionaries for years, outline four propositions about God. Each of these propositions, offered like premises in a syllogism, compose a “formula” for salvation.

The second word is forgiveness. The “formula” denotes man’s primary problem as guilt, and thus proscribes forgiveness as man’s primary need. The third word is death, for this the mean’s by which forgiveness is given. Jesus paid a debt He did not owe because we owed a debt we could not pay.

This is an accurate and faithful reading of the Gospel. However, such a presentation is often met by Muslims with stiff resistance on all three accounts. The very idea that God is bound by or behaves according to “laws” or according to a formula is offensive. The logic of penal substitution that our forgiveness requires is also confusing, as Muslims reject that God requires something in order to forgive, or that Christ’s work now obligates God to forgive us. Finally, Muslims have difficulty seeing God as a victim who died in weakness.

For these reasons, approaches like the “four spiritual laws” have not proven to be the most effective way of sharing the Gospel with Muslims. Our Gospel presentation might be more effective if built around the words “cleansing,” “victory,” and “story.”

1. Cleansing

One of the most unusual things for Westerners living among Muslims is the Muslim’s focus on ceremonial cleanness. Many Muslim rituals center around the need for purification. There are a number of substances which are considered najis (filthy), and if a Muslim comes into contact with one of these he must cleanse himself. The list of these substances is numerous, and includes pus, blood, dogs, pigs, profuse sweat, menstrual cycles, and dung. Explicit instructions regulate daily activities so as to ensure that the Muslim remains free of impurity.

Cleansing from najis is called wudu. The details of wudu make up a sizable portion of any Islamic theology text, and are a common theme in the hadith.

For many Muslims, the wudu has an inner, spiritual connotation as well. Sufis talk repeatedly about “the wudu of the soul.” They depict forgiveness in terms of cleansing and describe the final state of the believer in Paradise as “shining from the final washing of wudu.” Even Sunni Muslims, who emphasize God’s lofty transcendence over His creation, believe that the greatest reward of heaven will be to stand face-to-face with Allah. In that presence, they believe, they must stand perfectly clean.

A pertinent problem for the Muslim, then, is how to achieve an inner purification sufficient to stand before Allah. The standard Muslim response when I asked about this was “doing repentance” and “performance of the prayers and fast.” Yet, that raises the question of how it is consistent to say that purification from najis (physical impurities) requires a vigorous washing process, while purification from inner impurities requires only repentance.

Jesus explained that what defiles a man is not something he contacts in the outside world, but something that comes from within his heart (Matt 15:18–20). If the physical defilement of dogs, swine, or excrement must be cleansed by sand and water, then to be cleansed from spiritual defilement such as blasphemy, hypocrisy, or adultery, much more must be required!

The Gospel teaches that the blood of Jesus is the cleansing agent able to remove the contaminants and corruption that separates men from God. The blood of the cross is wudu for the heart, able to cleanse it from najis and defilement. It releases the offender from the vestiges of the haram, and brings the believer face to face with God.

The Story of Diana:

Once I asked an Islamic friend to explain to me why she washed as she did. She explained it was to remove all the najis with which she had come into contact throughout the day. I asked her what she though was the most “najis” thing of all. Her answer, without hesitation, was “pork.” She explained that contact with pork required a vigorous, seven-fold scrubbing. I asked her if there was anything that might be filthier to God than pork. After a while, she said she supposed idolatry was the filthiest thing of all to God. I asked where idolatry took place. She said, “the heart.” I asked, “So, you cleanse the body vigorously, but how do you cleanse your heart?” She said, “We just repent of our sin, and that cleanses us.” I objected, “You can’t just repent of touching the pork, you must also wash. How is repentance able to cleanse the heart of idolatry but not the hands of pork, seeing that idolatry is filthier than pork?” She thought for a moment and then said, “That is a great question. I don’t know.” I continued, “Every time you talk to God you do so with a filthy heart. It’s kind of like your imam (religious leader) came over to eat at your house. You had cleaned up everything in the house to honor his coming. When it came time to serve dinner, you brought out the head of the pig. This is what you are doing when you pray.” My friend seemed to understand. I explained to her that we Christians believe that the blood of Jesus is the cleansing for the soul. Later on, through this understanding (as well as some other factors), she put her faith in Christ.

2. Victory

Muslims and Christians agree that each man will one day die, and that apart from God nothing has the power to live. God demonstrated that He alone is sufficiently powerful to overcome death, and He did so in the resurrection of Christ. As the Koran states, only Allah possesses the power of resurrection (22:5–6).

Christ’s work should therefore be presented as victory. The humiliation of the cross was part of the victory of the resurrection. In Christ’s death God destroyed the enemies of life and His purposes for His creation, purposes which were restored to men in the resurrection. Resurrection was the goal of Christ’s work, and thus the essence of salvation (Rom 7:24–25; Gal 2:20).

Unfortunately, the resurrection often plays little to no role in Western presentations of salvation. Western theologians often speak of the resurrection as if its primary purpose was simply to prove that Christ’s work on the cross to pay for sins had been successful! The resurrection is often added as an historical footnote, not a mighty act integral to accomplishing salvation.

The resurrection declares that God is the Victor, the sole possessor of life and conqueror of the grave. Presenting salvation in this way broadens the appeal of the gospel to Muslims, as it bases its appeal on something other than a justice system which Muslims are explicitly taught to reject.

3. Story

There is no substitute for getting a Muslim to read and study the Bible on their own. The Bible story itself is much more compelling that logical syllogisms that “prove” Jesus had to be the Savior. Why? First, Muslims do not accept that any condition could require God to do certain things be done in order to secure salvation. Merely presenting “better” rational arguments for why God acted as He did are not likely to change the Muslim reaction: God doesn’t belong in a syllogism. Furthermore, the Koran has armed Muslims with dogmatic propositions that bypass rational argumentation. “Storying” the Bible preaches the Gospel to Muslims while avoiding those obstacles.

Building a witness around these three elements, cleansing, victory, and story, will put the Gospel into a more intelligible form for Muslims. A missionary employing this approach need not think that he is abandoning the orthodox principles of the Gospel in doing so, as this approach has rich biblical and historical support. It may be different from how Western missionaries are accustomed to thinking about the Gospel, but preaching the Gospel in a manner the receiving audience can understand has been part of faithful biblical mission since the Apostles’ first missionary journeys.”

Read the whole thing (6 pages).

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

What Muslims believe about Allah

  1. He is the one God, Who has no partner.
  2. Nothing is like Him.
  3. He is the Creator, not created, nor a part of His creation.
  4. He is All-Powerful, absolutely Just.
  5. There is no other entity in the entire universe worthy of worship besides Him.
  6. He is First, Last, and Everlasting; He was when nothing was, and will be when nothing else remains.
  7. He is the All-Knowing, and All-Merciful,the Supreme, the Sovereign.
  8. It is only He Who is capable of granting life to anything.
  9. He sent His Messengers (peace be upon them) to guide all of mankind. He sent Muhammad (pbuh) as the last Prophet and Messenger for all mankind.
  10. His book is the Holy Qur'an, the only authentic revealed book in the world that has been kept without change.
  11. Allah knows what is in our hearts.

These are some of the basic guidelines Muslims follow in their knowledge of God:

  1. Eliminate any anthropomorphism (human qualities) from their conception of Allah. His attributes are not like human attributes, despite similar labels or appellations.
  2. Have unwavering faith in exactly what Allah and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) described Allah to be, no more, no less.
  3. Eradicate any hope or desire of learning or knowing the modality of His names and attributes. Belief totally in all the names and attributes of Allah; one cannot believe in some and disbelieve the others.
  4. One cannot accept the names of Allah without their associated attributes, i.e. one cannot say He is Al-Hayy - 'The Living' and then say that He is without life.
  5. Similarity in names (or meanings) does not imply similarity in what is being described (referents). As a robotics arm differs from a human arm, so the "hand" of Allah is nothing like a human hand, His speech is nothing like human speech, etc.
  6. Certain words are ambiguous or vague in their meanings, and thus may be susceptible to misinterpretation. Only those meanings that are in accordance with what is specified by Allah and His Prophet (pbuh) are acceptable.
Source: IslamWay.com
HT: John Stringer

Hard and Soft Skills for Leaders

From LeadersSummit.Org:

"If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, you will tend to treat every problem as if it were a nail." Maslow

It's important for leaders to have multiple "tools" in their "toolbox." If you have a limited and incomplete set of leadership skills, your leadership will always be lacking.

HARD SKILLS (what a leader does)

  • Vision - A leader must have vision (a picture of the future that produces passion).
  • Team Building - A leader inspires and influences followers and chooses and works through a team.
  • Change Agent - A leader must be willing and able to negotiate major change within the organization.
  • Execution - A leader is ultimately responsible for and involved in getting the right things done.
  • Communication - A leader is responsible for communication throughout the organization.
  • Inspire - A leader knows that, “leaders lead by pulling rather than by pushing; by inspiring rather than by ordering”. (Bennis and Nanus)
SOFT SKILLS (who a leader is)

  • L3 (life-long-learning) - A leader must continually grow and develop as a person and lead from the over-flow of a vibrant life.
  • Authenticity - Every person is unique on the "inside." An effective leader knows himself and lives an authentic life.
  • Emotional Intelligence - A leader is aware of and knows how to properly respond to the emotional world.
  • Character - A leader must excel in character (ethics and morality) and possess key character traits that are essential for leadership.
  • People skills - A leader must possess the attitudes and abilities to relate to people in a productive and wholesome manner.
  • Social Intelligence - A leader understands, “the accumulated wisdom that comes from constantly observing and learning what works and what doesn’t in human situations”. (Albrecht)

HT: Khalid Bin Malek

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Al Jazerra: US troops urged to share faith in Afghanistan 4 May 2009

US soldiers in Afghanistan have been filmed with local language Bibles and urged to be "witnesses for Jesus" despite anti-"proselytising" rules.



Update: CNN reports that the US Military confiscated and burned the Bibles in response.