One week talking with Muslims from Syria and Jordan.
In an upcoming issue of CT, I'll be profiling Doug Johnston, founder of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy. ICRD works in some of the toughest areas where identity-based conflict is most intractable--Kashmir, Sudan, and now in Syria. To get a sense of what ICRD does, I attended a weeklong Christian/Muslim reconciliation dialog in Cyprus. Christian leaders from around the U.S. and Muslims from Syria and Jordan participated.
I was struck by how difficult this work is. Building trust across cultures and between groups opposed to one another takes time, patience, and lots of effort. While the American Christians and Middle Eastern Muslims differed in many ways--and remain so, even in this setting--we could always say we loved each other as people, even if we opposed each other’s governmental policies. In ICRD's work in Kashmir, however, where Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims are ever on the brink of war, such platitudes don't work. Despite the many frustrations we encountered in Cyprus, there are infinitely more obstacles to peace in other places around the globe.
Yet, ICRD has had success. In Sudan, Johnston and others brokered an agreement between Christians and Muslims. (Listen to Johnston talk about it on Speaking of Faith.) Johnston told me his goal in Sudan was to see what kind of rights a Muslim government operating under Shari'ah law could provide for Christians. While the situation in Sudan between Christians and Muslims is by no means solved, ICRD has achieved significant progress.
What will come of ICRD's efforts in Syria remains to be seen, but I left our meeting with a changed attitude toward Muslims and Islam. First, extremists--those who use violence to push a specific interpretation of Islam--are more dangerous to Muslims than to Americans. The threat they pose has strengthened undemocratic regimes in the Middle East (sometimes supported by the U.S.) who are eager to exploit the opportunity to increase their hold over citizens. Extremists pose a more immediate threat to Muslims who disagree with them. Moderate Muslims are the extremists’ first targets.
Second, American Christians who demonize Islam or Muslims make it impossible to love our neighbors, love our enemies, or pray for those who persecute us. Calling Muslims "Islamofascists" or Islam "evil and wicked" is harmful, both to the vast majority of Muslims for whom those terms don't apply and to Christians who are obligated to understand, respect, and ultimately love our religious neighbors.
Christians must have a balanced view toward Israel. Without compromising on the nation's right to exist or its right to defend itself, we must also be critical of any way in which Israel has not been a good neighbor in the region--violating human rights, refusing to abide by U.N. resolutions, or oppressing the Palestinian people.
There is much in Islam that Christians can agree with. Muslims see themselves as worshiping the same God as Christians. They see Jesus as a prophet--though their notion of who Jesus is differs significantly from Christians'. They pray much as Christians do. They believe that Mohammed simply brought to Arabs the message of the one God--as opposed to paganism. Christians are seen as spiritual brothers. It was a Christian monk, according to Islam, who identified Mohammed as a prophet, and a Christian king protected the early Muslim community from attack.
However, there are also significant differences, which cannot be overlooked. Muslims, while honoring Jesus, also refuse to see him as Christians do--as the fully human, fully divine Son of God.
The Muslim idea of forgiveness is also very different than the forgiveness that Jesus taught. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, he said. And while hanging on the cross, Jesus said, "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." Christians understand forgiveness as something that an offended party offers regardless of whether the offender sees the wrong he has done or even corrects his behavior. For Muslims, forgiveness only happens once restitution has been made.
Christians can be thankful that God sent Jesus to die for our sins "while we were yet sinners," and before we could make restitution for our offense against him.
It was striking to see how counter-cultural the Christian idea of forgiveness really is. And it is sobering to think of how difficult peacemaking can be when two sides can't forgive until their grievances are addressed.
Posted by Rob Moll on November 1, 2007 8:59AM
Comments
This is an excellent post. Faithful Christians should not shy from articulating the fundamental flaws of Islam and Islamic fundamentalism, but we should do so with humility and accuracy. Too much fear mongering will do no good to our cause and only further alienate Muslims from the truth of Christ. Christ has not given us a spirit of fear, thus we should not resort to fearmongering as a response to enemies (both real and perceived enemies).
Similarly we should view the Palestinian/Israeli conflict objectively and fairly (remembering that many of the Palestinians are our Christian brothers and sisters). Terrorism ought to be denounced, but we can not turn a blind eye to Israeli policy that perpetuates violence (heavy handed policing, assisinations, and the carpet bombing of Beirut simply further set back the cause of peace).
Posted by: Matt K at November 1, 2007
Biblical Christianity does not compromise with Islam. Biblical Christians will never compromise truth.
Posted by: Clifford I at November 1, 2007
I think Jesus would have equated Muslims with the Pharisees, both trying to keep "The Law" to earn eternal life. Both negate His great gift of sacrificial love. I, a recipient of that love, am called on to share it with both; I can do no other, to use Martin Luther's words. Again, only through His power and indwelling Spirit.
Posted by: Patsy S. at November 2, 2007
Why do all these articles on multi - faith co-operation only focus on the present world. Surely as Christians we fix our eyes on Jesus not only for this world but for the next.
At the recent funeral of your Ex-President the reader read the words "I am the way the truth and the light" and stopped , was it because others may be offended by the rest of the verse "No man comes to the father but by me" ?
When looking at other people we must see all people of other faiths and none as facing a lost eternity because that is what Christ teaches us. To do other is to claim to know more than our God.
Does this mean we do not respect our neighbour or decry his faith in other than Christ , of course not. Were we not in the same position as he is until we came to know Christ ? May Christ not be calling our neighbour likewise to a personal relationship with him before his journey on this Earth is done. Is someone who is living a "good" life and believes in other than Christ not to be grieved for as Christ himself wept over Jerusalem.
We must pray for our neighbour , live a holy life and remember the Bible is not for hitting other people on the head with , it is for reading over and over and with the help of the Holy Spirit learning more of our wonderful God and what he has done not only in the World throughout history but for us personally.
What would the World be like if Christians prayed more and opened their mouths less ?
Posted by: Fred , Aberdeenshire , Scotland at November 2, 2007
Religion is a matter of faith, of things believed but not seen or provable. In religious-based dialogues, I think this precept should be the starting point of dialogue, not the comparative analyses of texts. As Christians, we are called to grace and forgiveness and to sharing, as in exchanging, understandings. Personally, I am mystified by evangelism, since I accept that none of our human understandings is perfect. Each of us in this world is endowed with unique gifts. We grow by working together, not fighting each other. To rely on religion as a basis for the meritocratic claims to land, water, air and resources that sustain us is a misuse of religion and a generator of wars. I welcome dialogues that allow us to understand our own hearts and reach for the grace that is within each of our reservoirs of pride. I welcome dailogues that allow us to genuinely listen to all agendas, including our own, and to devise laws that help us towards equitable sharing during our alloted time on earth. I look forward to the CT article.
Posted by: Carole Kraemer at November 3, 2007
To borrow from the adage, love the sinner, hate the sin:
We must love Muslims, but have no obligation to love Islam as a system. When Islam is ready to treat others as equals, allow Muslims to convert to Christianity etc., then I will be impressed.
Posted by: anthony at November 3, 2007
"Christians are seen [by Muslims] as spiritual brothers."
How so? If Christians are just as lost as Buddhists and atheists, how are we brothers to adherents of the true faith? This seems like a doctrinal impossibility to me.
Also, I'm interested in learning how ICRD (or similar) Christians reconcile Matthew 10:34-39 with their mission to make peace. Is the passage seen as a command to refuse peace, or simply a statement of fact that peace will be difficult/impossible? If it's a command, how are you obedient? If peace is impossible, why do you try? If peace is only difficult, how has Christ not failed? Please understand that I'm not promoting literal war; I simply don't comprehend this position.
Posted by: Jesdisciple (Chris) at November 5, 2007
I am ministering among Muslims. Although Muslims disagree on how they interpret what is written in the Qur'an, forgiveness is never an option. They are ALWAYS in search of enough good works to balance the sins. God never wipes their sins away. There is the sense that they will have to pay for their sins after this life and then be taken to heaven. For them to believe that God can simply forgive sins on the basis of Christ's death in our place, which means the payment was made and appropriated by faith, is anathema. Since they don't understand Christ's offer of forgiveness to them, they don't have the power to forgive others. They just patiently wait for revenge. Peace will only come to them when they know the Prince of Peace, and believe their sins are forgiven on the basis of the cross.
Only God the Holy Spirit can open their eyes as they experience the love of Christ in practical ways when a Christian takes the time to share that love. WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY THEY THINK, AND LOVE THEM IN PRACTICAL WAYS EVEN AS WE BRING THE TRUTH TO BEAR ON THEIR MISUNDERSTANDINGS OF CHRIST AND HIS MISSION. LET'S NOT ARGUE ABOUT DOCTRINE. LET'S GET OUT THERE WHERE THEY ARE AND LOVE THEM TO CHRIST. God has brought them here, and we as the American Church will answer to the Lord for either trying to reach them or just arguing among ourselves.
Posted by: Claudia Williams at November 6, 2007
"Let's not argue about doctrine?" First of all, don't confuse arguing with reasoning. It is the prophetic truth of Scripture that proves its divine origin. As God said in the O.T., "come, let us reason together" (Isaiah 1:18). Allah and Jehovah are not the same God; therefore, Christians have no common doctrinal ground with Muslims whatsoever.
The original article stated, "there is much in Islam that Christians can agree with." Really?
The Qu'ran states, in fact, that "Allah has no son." Clearly, YHWH has a son, Christ Jesus. The Qu'ran states "slay (murder) the Jews wherever you find them;" and also "make war on the infidels who dwell around you;" and "Fight against such as those whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." Many more could be cited; but by contrast, God's word to the N.T. church: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." A Muslim true to his gospel is a true enemy to the Gospel of God.
Furthermore, it is only by using "sound doctrine" that one may hear and receive the true Gospel of God! The religious leaders of Jesus' day "were astonished at his doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority, and not as the scribes" (Mark 1:22); "Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me" (John 7:16); "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself" (John 7:17). "The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine" (John 18:19); "And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers" (Acts 2:42).
Notice here it is doctrine that saves: "Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord" (Acts 13:12); "And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?" (Acts 17:19); "But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you" (Romans 6:17);
It is right doctrine that keep out false teaching: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them" (Romans 16:17). Clearly, doctrine matters to God, and correct doctrine is essential for salvation. Christians are commanded to reject all that is contrary; no matter how uncomfortable the truth may be to some, God's gospel is "non-negotiable."
Posted by: Mark D at November 8, 2007
In your article you claim it was a Christian monk who recognized Mohammed as a prophet. Please stop repeating this falsehood. This priest was a Nestorian. You need to do your homework on Nestorius. He was a heretic who denied the virgin birth, atoning sacrifice, divinity, resurrection and bodily aacension of Christ. He was properly condemned by the Church and booted out. Unfortunately, where he landed in Saudi Arabia, the Christians there had a "lets all get along attitude" and never educated the people in the area about the false teaching of Nestorius. This is why 200 years later there were still Nestorian "churches" and priests. ** Mohammed was taught for 15 years by this heresy in an Ebionite church before "receiving his vision" in a cave. What was the essence of his "vision" basically a regurigation of what he had been taught in "church" for 15 years. I sure hope you do not want Christians to agree with this heresy of Nestorious, Ebionitism or it's militant offshoot- Islam.
Posted by: Jim at November 9, 2007
Post a comment