Will the Real Muslim Please Stand Up?
Toay there is a polarization as to the nature of Islam: Some say Islam is violent; others insist it is peaceful. The truth lies somewhere in between those two statements. CAIR’s agenda (Council of American Islamic Relations) is to convince us of the latter, and they use the Qur’an to support their argument: “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2:256); and, “… nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, ‘We are Christians’” (5:82).
The problem is CAIR overlooks verses that are not that warm and fuzzy: “Fighting is prescribed upon you …“(2:216). “Fight those who believe not in Allah, nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (9:29). One Muslim scholar, Tawfik Hamid, says: “Don’t Gloss over the Violent Texts” (The Wall Street Journal).
Moreover, certain Muslim theologians have appealed to the “Doctrine of Abrogation” and say the “Sword Verse” (9:5) abrogates other peaceful verses because it is chronologically later, that is, from the Medina period. In Milestones, ideologue of militant Islam in Egypt, Sayyid Qutb forcefully argues for jihad from the Qur’an (4:74-76; 8:38-40; 9:29-32). These passages alone, he states, suffice to justify the universal and permanent dimensions of Jihad (pp. 53-76). See The Encyclopedia of Islam (2nd edition) for a detailed explanation of this doctrine. But other Islamic scholars throw out the whole idea of abrogation suggesting the eternal message of Islam was revealed in the earlier Mecca period. See for example, The Second Message of Islam by Mahmoud Taha.
When Muslims themselves cannot see eye to eye as to the nature of Islam how can we be so sure? In 1953 a consultation of expert Pakistani theologians could not even agree on what it means to be a Muslim. Neither could they define the essence of Islam nor the constitution of an Islamic State (The Report of Inquiry Constituted under Punjab Act II of 1954 to Enquire into the Punjab Disturbance of 1953, Lahore, Pakistan: Government Printing Press, 1954, 205).
We must therefore be careful not to box ourselves into a corner by insisting that the closer a Muslim gets to Islam the more violent he or she becomes. Some Muslims read the Qur’an, pray five times a day, and offer to give you the shirt off their back. We need to be aware of stories like the following: During the Boxer Rebellion in AD 1900, Muslims rescued a well-known missionary family from the Boxers. Giving up his only pair of shoes to Jonathan Goforth, an elderly Muslim said this: “We are Mohammedans and this is what God would want us to do.”
Perhaps we should let both Muslims stand up and concentrate on how we can reach them for Christ. Such an approach means we let Muslims be the teacher while we are the learner. We allow Muslims to tell us what they believe rather than assuming we know because we listen to select news media. We ask Muslims what Muhammad means to them and look for felt needs so that we can present the Gospel with love and understanding.
Yes, but, the http://www.religionofpeace.com web site shows 16,088 deadly Islamic terror attacks since 9/11, world wide.
It seems the “violent verses Muslims” are running the show, including the use of taqiyya inside the USA for now, with 1209 known mosques, 75% of which are said to be promoting a Sharia takeover of the USA.
What “real world” actions are recommended, in addition to supporting missionaries?
For about 40 years i have said not to feed the poor man’s way of war/terror. Most take the covert route or outright war. My position is that we speak loud and often about our position and that position matches our actions overseas. The position is one of conflict resolution, support for clearly defined values, and concerted help from a United Nations. Prevention and isolation of terror is then shared and mostly diffused. One must look at not just extremism but our projection of decadence and thus meet understandings between our way and the other ways.
It depends on one’s perspective. It’s true that currently violent acts of Muslims dominate “our” news. But what about the full history of Muslims over the last 1500 years and the entire scope of Muslims throughout the world? How well do we undertand Muslims all over place? About 100 years ago, Samuel Zwemer said: “If the Churches of Christendom are to reach the Moslem world with the Gospel, they must know of it and know it …” During that same era, at the Cairo conference, missionary leaders felt the Church was called to a deeper study of the problem, as well as to a more thorough preparation of its missionaries and a bolder faith in God, in order to solve it … ” It seems to me that in the West we are only thinking about how Islam affects us; we’re not thinking globally; we’re not thinking cross-culturally and we’re certianly not thinking of what most Muslims are like. We’re not looking at Muslims as individuals. All we see is the bad things they’re doing. The church today is not that serious about getting to the root of the problem iand reaching Muslims for the Gospel. I hate to say this, but in one way what Muslims are doing is good for us, because it should force us to think of the Muslim problem. The “problem” is not terrorism. The problem is sin and the Muslim need of Christ.
I agree with most of Warren Larson’s article, especially that we don’t assume we know what a Muslim believes. If we do assume we know what they believe, we should know that we are full of pride, and we won’t be of much use to the Lord in reaching Muslims with the Gospel.
In response to Bob, the previous comment, the vast majority of Muslims are not fundamentalists, so they are not advocating violence as a means to further their religion. Sure most Muslims want their religion to be the dominant religion, don’t Christians want the same for Christianity? Just because the news of terrorism headlines the news, that doesn’t mean they run the show. Were you expecting some headlines of “peace attacks” by Muslims? Some “real world” actions I’d recommend is that we insist on full discloser of the funding of all mosques, and in view of potential funding from terrorists and threat to our nation, I’d support zero tolerance to anything less than full discloser.
I agree that we should “allow Muslims to tell us what they believe rather than assuming we know because we listen to select news media.”
Along with this, Christians need to think about Islam and Muslims in terms of “common grace.” Almost 70 years ago the theologian John Murray wrote, “How is it that men who are not savingly renewed by the Spirit of God nevertheless exhibit so many qualities, gifts and accomplishments that promote the preservation, temporal happiness, cultural progress, social and economic improvement of themselves and of others? How is it that races and peoples that have been apparently untouched by the redemptive and regenerative influences of the gospel contribute so much to what we call human civilisation?”
Murray’s answer: Common Grace. God’s common grace extends to all people, including Muslims.
Murray reminds us that God not only restrains evil but He also “endows men with gifts, talents, and aptitudes; He stimulates them with interest and purpose to the practice of virtues, the pursuance of worthy tasks, and the cultivation of arts and sciences that occupy the time, activity and energy of men and that make for the benefit and civilisation of the human race. He ordains institutions for the protection and promotion of right, the preservation of liberty, the advance of knowledge and the improvement of physical and moral conditions.” (“Common Grace”; Westminster Theological Journal; 5:1, November 1942; available at http://www.rosetree.com/ccog/comgr/f_comgr.html).
Aaron, great comment! Appreciated hearing the idea of “common grace.” Thanks
[…] on September 21, 2010 at 3:13 pm | ReplyBob Heltman […]