Greg Sinclair

Dear Salaam,

You are right that God is sovereign and he advances his kingdom. A recent book, A Wind in the House of Islam makes the point that God is bringing Muslims to Christ whether in historic or insider paradigms. I think it is also important to recognize that Calvin’s views of Muslims (whom he referred to as Turks) were in the context of the Ottoman threat to Europe. Calvin had no opportunities to live and interact with Muslims as we do today.

It is maybe good to note that hyper-Muslim friendly translations have been pretty well repudiated by the recent report of the World Evangelical Alliance. I think this issue is behind us – I hope so. Where Muslims choose to remain inside Islam I think it is often the choice of the Muslim himself or herself in his or her context to decide what is best. Often over time it becomes more possible and desirable to leave Islam (however I recognize there are more extreme views on this). Certainly there will always be “the offense of the Gospel” but where possible I don’t see a problem with reducing barriers, especially if they are cultural and not theological.

I understand your concerns in this area but worry you adding to the severe polarization of ideas that we live with in ministry among Muslims by raising these issues in this way.

Blessings.

I have good memories of my oral comp - it was challenging but also supportive. I would respond that the government has a responsibility to use violence according to Romans 13 to protect civil society and in the case of ISIS religious minorities and other populations. But I think the sermon of the mount applies more individually as we relate to Muslims in our daily lives. We need to respond in love rather than in fear and suspicion. This may involve turning the other cheek and for sure walking the extra mile. I think that the church can respond in this way as well to increasing numbers of Muslims in our communities. So I can support the states right to use violence and at the same time respond in love to my neighbor. Having said that, I am concerned with the increasing loss of individual freedom in western societies in the name of protecting us from terrorism and the many incursions in the middle east in the name of foreign policy (not just by the USA and Canada but by other western nations since colonial days). We can support just war theory if we acknowledge our poor track record in restraining ourselves from violent intervention - which only seems to lead to more extremism and instability in the middle east. Libya is a good example where western nations intervened to remove a dictator but had no long term plan to provide a functioning democratic and civil society.

Hi Joshua,

I agree one hundred percent that the mission field is all around us and that we are to invite people into the kingdom - and live in a winsome way that draws them in. That is what Salaam Project is all about. But CR World Missions has survived for 125 years because people were also willing to give of their hard earned income and many have heard the Gospel because of it. So I would say yes, reach out to your neighbor locally, but if you feel called to support your missionaries through prayer and finances - go for it. Thanks for blogging.

Greg

Thank you Salaam for your comments and I especially liked your comment about the power of love overcoming the love of power. The problem that ISIS is presenting to the world is a serious one, and I noticed in the news that even the Pope has changed track and allowed for limited military engagement to protect religious minorities in Iraq. He did say that they should be stopped although he did not want to use the word bombed. He also (rightly I think) urged more of a UN response rather than a unilateral US response. The protection of religious minorities is a clear need in this case (Christian and other). But I hesitate to promote the use of force further than necessary - especially as other factors play into the stability of Iraq - sunni - shia conflict for example. It is not always easy to separate the spiritual from the political in the Middle East. To quote Dr. Shenk, Muhammad rode into Mecca with an army of 10,000 soldiers. Jesus road into Jerusalem on a donkey surrounded by children. It seems that our default position should be to seek peace, encourage Muslims to speak out against violence as a doctrine of jihad, find peace building opportunities for dialogue (perhaps around the minority view that violent passages of the Quran are limited to the time of Muhammad). In general help Muslims find peace. I think the Saudi ruling class is just as alarmed by ISIS as a threat to their state as is the West, so perhaps this opens up new opportunities to rethink Wahabi teaching.

Hello Salaam,

While I don't disagree that humans seem to swing on the pendulum, I think moving away from Christian Zionism to Christian Palestinianism is positive - if only as a corrective to a theological error. The fact is that Israel has forfeited the covenant as a nation - the hope of individual Jews is found in Jesus Christ. The hope of individual Palestinians is found in Jesus Christ. Therefore we no longer have a theological reason to prop up Israel. Yes Israel has every right to exist as a nation and to protect itself. But as Christians we are also concerned about the plight of the oppressed, the poor, the prisoner, and the Palestinians are prisoners in Gaza. So I don't think it is anti-semitic to hold Israel accountable for their actions in Gaza. I support some pendulum swinging - but as with all things - not too far.

Thank you for the comments. The chapter in Tennant's book is very good. The point about Luke 8 is well raised. God uses all kinds of approaches and in this case a very open approach worked well in this context. Within Israel Jesus often asked people to keep quiet until the time came for him to be fully revealed. I think giving believers the freedom to follow the Spirit's leading as to how open they are about their new faith is what is important. One book I recommend in this regard is "A Wind in the House of Islam," by David Garrison.

Thanks for the comments - it is good to see this Muslim ministry forum in use. I hope it will foster more good discussions. I appreciate the cautions and understand clearly the anti-Christian polemical nature of the Quran. Salvation is not found there. However I do find that my own understanding of Christian theology has been enhanced through reading the Quran. So to respond to Salaam, I am not thinking of it as a entre but rather appreciating the beauty of our theology (specifically the Trinity). This could be used in an apologetic way as well. To illustrate in another way, if the eternal word of Allah is the Quran, and the Quran exists eternally, than is Allah truly one - or is he two? In Christianity the eternal word of God - Jesus - exists eternally and because we have a trinitarian understanding of God, we can accept this fact. So I have a better appreciation of my own faith in the end.

Thanks for your question Kim. I had not thought about the implications of the Shahada. The question of Muhammad is a good one. He did not point people to the God of the Christians, although he was more sympathetic in his Meccan suras. In fact, I believe he saw himself as a prophet to the Jews and Christians as well as the Muslims at that stage. It was only later in Medina that this seems to have changed. What we can say is that Muhammad was a reformer who sought to convert his people from polytheism to monotheism. All monotheists, including Christians, should appreciate this. So I maintain that we worship the same God, however, we fundamentally understand him in different ways. Certainly Muhammad did. In terms of how we relate to Muslims, I would speak of Muhammad as a God seeker and a reformer in his culture. We don't encourage conversation by speaking ill of him. But pointing people to Jesus, the ultimate reformer is our goal.