The Journal of the International Society for Frontier Missiology

Int’l Journal of Frontier Missiology

What We Carry

91 From the Editor’s Desk Brad Gill Islam and the Counterintuitive Francis 93 Articles 93 Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task Bradford Greer Excavating our missiological presuppositions 103 Joyful Witness: An Excerpt on Muslim-Christian Attachment Evelyne A. Reisacher A startling omission in Muslim witness 108 Article Responses 108 A Response to: “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?” John Azumah and Harley Talman Further sensitivity from Africa’s Muslim-Christian frontier 116 “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?”: A Second Response to Harley Talman Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman Can historical scrutiny shift our prophetic mindset? 138 Book Reviews 138 Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept 139 Living Among the Breakage: Contextual Theology-Making among Ex-Muslim Christians

142 In Others’ Words 142 Evangelicals Debate Refugee Policies A Perspective from Lebanon How to Love Muslims in a Polarized America A Series of Blogs About the Book Insider Jesus Status of the Unreached Millenial Men Missing in US Missions The Contribution of Single Women Financial Tsunami in India 33:3July–September 2016

Islam and the Counterintuitive Francis July–September 2016 Volume 33:3 n 1986 the little town of Assisi, the 12th-13th century hometown of the Editor celebrated St. Francis, was chosen by Pope John Paul II to be the place Brad Gill for prayer with leaders from other world religions. His choice of venue Editor-at-Large I Rory Clark reminded the world that during the violent Crusades at least one man displayed Consulting Editors a counter-cultural approach to Islam. Rick Brown, Darrell Dorr, Gavriel Gefen, Herbert Hoefer, Rebecca Lewis, If you have not heard the story, it goes like this. Between 1212 and 1219, Francis H. L. Richard, Steve Saint, tried three times to make his way to Islamic turf. Shipwreck and disease pre- Copy Editing and Layout vented him twice, but in 1219 he fi nally landed in Damietta (Egypt). Th ere Elizabeth Gill, Marjorie Clark Francis witnessed fi rsthand the horrors of crusading combat as Christian forces Secretary Lois Carey clashed with the forces of al-Malek al-Kamil. Th e future saint sought to con- Publisher vince the armies of Christendom to relinquish their violent approach to Islam. Frontier Mission Fellowship He failed. Francis then asked his commander for permission to walk across the 2016 ISFM Executive Committee Len Barlotti, Larry Caldwell, Dave Datema, demilitarized zone between the opposing armies in order to bring a Christian Darrell Dorr, Brad Gill, Steve Hawthorne, message to Kamil. His request fi nally granted, Francis and his traveling compan- David Lewis, Rebecca Lewis, Greg Parsons ion crossed that frontier. After being roughed up a bit, Francis found himself in Web Site the presence of the Sultan. Legend is mixed as to what actually happened next, www.ijfm.org but it seems the encounter was transparent and extended. Ultimately, we only know that Francis walked back across that zone to the Christian forces and then Editorial Correspondence 1605 E. Elizabeth Street made his way back to Italy, never to speak of the encounter again. Contemporary Pasadena, CA 91104 historical accounts try to interpret what happened between Francis and the (734) 765-0368, [email protected] Sultan that day. In the end, we’re forced to admit that Francis’ approach did not Subscriptions succeed in its original mission—the Crusades continued. Still, we have the sense One year (four issues) $18.00 that a real Christian and a real Muslim met each other that day, and that this Two years (eight issues) $34.00 Three years (twelve issues) $48.00 encounter probably changed them personally. But this type of encounter doesn’t Single copies $5.00, multiple copies $4.00 happen unless one has a diff erent disposition towards Muslims. Payment must be enclosed with orders. Th rough the centuries we’ve derived some benefi t from examining Francis’ fresh Please supply us with current address and change of address when necessary. approach to Islam in the medieval age. Radical, counterintuitive and politically- Send all subscription correspondence to: incorrect, his manner exposed the futility of force in achieving the mission of IJFM God among the Saracens. Th e Franciscan order that emerged in the wake of this PO Box 433303 Palm Coast, FL 32143 story would continue to challenge the crusading spirit. In fact, fresh approaches Tel: (888) 895-5566 (US); (386) 246-0171 to translating the Qur’an and new inter-religious apologetics had already Fax: (626) 398-2263 Email: [email protected] emerged, for the failures of crusading armies had forced a deeper examination of the more common medieval predisposition towards Islam. IJFM (ISSN #2161-3354) was established in 1984 by the International Student Editorial continued on p. 92 Leaders Coalition for Frontier Missions,, an outgrowth of the student-level meeting of The views expressed in IJFM are those of the various authors and not necessarily those Edinburgh ‘80. of the journal’s editors, the International Society for Frontier Missiology or the society’s COPYRIGHT ©2016 International Student Leaders Coalition for Frontier Missions. executive committee. PRINTED in the USA 92 From the Editor’s Desk, Who We Are

Th e articles in this issue are also quite to get a hold of his more complete Evelyne writes with a scalpel, yet with counterintuitive. Th ey examine the treatment of Muhammad at the 2015 sensitivity. Her ability to burrow into presuppositions and attitudes we Fuller Seminary lectureship.1 While he the psyche of our Christian witness to carry in any encounter with Muslims. diverges from the interpretation that Muslims makes one feel as vulnerable We are very grateful that Ayman Muhammad fi ts the bill of the anti- as if one were lying on a surgeon’s table. Ibrahim was willing to extend his Christ in 1 John, he believes Talman’s She, like the other authors in this issue, interaction with Harley Talman on the eff ort to place Muhammad in some forces us to examine what we carry into matter of Muhammad’s prophethood kind of positive prophetic status will relationships with Muslims. (see 116–35). Th is interaction, over be rejected by Muslims as an imperial- In Him, two diff erent IJFM issues, requires ist missionary endeavor. Th e motives patience and is not for those who wish we carry are too easily suspect. to automatically determine whether In his lead article, Bradford Greer Muhammad is a false, fallen or “func- Brad Gill explores our epistemological and tional” prophet. Talman believes that Senior Editor, IJFM theological starting points (93–100). a careful re-examination of Islamic Endnotes textual sources may allow us to place and pushes us to examine our hidden 1 Muhammad on a more nuanced spec- missiological orientation in any “Mission in the Islamic World: Mak- encounter with Islam. Frankly, it’s hard ing Th eological and Missiological Sense of trum of prophetic-type roles, and that Muhammad” in Th e State of Missiology To- this might improve Muslim-Christian to dismantle our bias, to admit to cer- day: Global Innovations in Christian Witness, tain predispositions, but Greer helps ed. Charles Van Engen (Downers Grove, IL: dialogue. Ibrahim disagrees, and InterVarsity Press, 2016), 197–214. displays academic rigor in presenting us understand what we transport into the integrity of a traditional Christian other religious worlds. interpretation of Muhammad as a false Evelyne Reisacher insists that we carry prophet. Th at said, he believes that his more than intellectual baggage; it’s also interpretation can inform an open and a matter of attitude. She makes this clear warm approach to our Muslim friends. in addressing the absence of joy in our Mission scholar John Azumah applies witness to Muslims. Baker Academic an African sensitivity to Muhammad’s has generously allowed us to publish a prophethood in his response to chapter of her new book (103–6), and Talman (108–13). We encourage you we hope you’ll purchase her entire study.

The IJFM is published in the name of the International Student Leaders Coalition for Frontier Missions, a fellowship of younger leaders committed to the purposes of the twin consultations of Edinburgh 1980: The World Consultation on Frontier Missions and the International Student Consultation on Frontier Missions. As an expression of the ongoing concerns of Edinburgh 1980, the IJFM seeks to:

promote intergenerational dialogue between senior and junior mission leaders; cultivate an international fraternity of thought in the development of frontier missiology; highlight the need to maintain, renew, and create mission agencies as vehicles for frontier missions; encourage multidimensional and interdisciplinary studies; foster spiritual devotion as well as intellectual growth; and advocate “A Church for Every People.”

Mission frontiers, like other frontiers, represent boundaries or barriers beyond which we must go yet beyond which we may not be able to see clearly and boundaries which may even be disputed or denied. Their study involves the discovery and evaluation of the unknown or even the reevaluation of the known. But unlike other frontiers, mission frontiers is a subject specifi cally concerned to explore and exposit areas and ideas and insights related to the glorifi cation of God in all the nations (peoples) of the world, “to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God.” (Acts 26:18)

Subscribers and other readers of the IJFM (due to ongoing promotion) come from a wide variety of backgrounds. Mission professors, fi eld mission- aries, young adult mission mobilizers, college librarians, mission executives, and mission researchers all look to the IJFM for the latest thinking in frontier missiology.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology What We Carry Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task

by Bradford Greer

ngaging in frontier missions in a postcolonial world requires us to leave our fi rst-culture and the ordered world we know and cross Ereligio-cultural boundaries into an unknown world. Without realizing it, we unconsciously privilege the ordering of our own world. We then cross religio-cultural boundaries without the tools we need to refl ect upon and chal- lenge that privileged ordering of our world.1 We, therefore, are ill equipped to refl ect constructively upon the ways others order their world. We end up being ethnocentric and colonial in ways that we are often unaware.

Frontier missiology arose as an interdisciplinary academic discipline to help minimize this very real but implicit ethnocentricity and coloniality within frontier mission endeavors. It exposes us to key epistemological, theological, and missiological lenses that shape the way we perceive ourselves and others as we engage in the task of frontier missions (see the chart on the next page). In addition, frontier missiology draws from the rich resources of biblical theology and the social sciences in order to provide us with the tools we need not only to refl ect upon but also to challenge the privileged ways we order our own world. It should also release us to enter, move about, refl ect upon, value, and positively challenge another world that operates under a radically diff er- ent ordering. In this article we will identify and explore how these diff erent lenses shape the thinking and the task of foreign missions.

Nonetheless, as we work through these lenses it will soon become obvious why we cannot eliminate the disagreements that arise among us. Th e issues within frontier missiology touch upon some of our deepest and most cher- ished beliefs, assumptions, and values. Just by reading the current interac- tion between Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman regarding the Prophet of Islam,2 one catches a small glimpse of how this is so. Th ough we will never eliminate disagreement (nor should we even want to), we can hopefully raise Bradford Greer (PhD, Fuller Th eolog- ical Seminary) has been working in our level of awareness and increase our capacity for refl ection and meaningful Islamic contexts for over twenty years. dialogue on these very sensitive and very signifi cant issues.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology 33:3 Fall 2016•93 94 Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task The Starting Point: Theology or In contrast, positivism (fi gure 1, Start- meaning to arise from within each Ideology? ing Point One) asserts that knowledge book of the Bible, looking to the his- is objective, reliable, and trustworthy. torical context to illuminate the text’s Some sectors in the evangelical com- When positivism shapes our view of meaning. It also allows other biblical munity question the value of using theology, it places an undue confi dence texts (intertextuality) to inform the the social sciences to inform frontier on our theological understanding, meaning of any given biblical text. mission engagement. Th eir reticence is assuming it is accurate in description Yet, many evangelicals and missionaries due in part to how they view the start- and can function transculturally as persist in their epistemological positiv- ing point of frontier missiology. Th ey a standard for theologizing in other ism.7 Such positivism creates problems assume that it begins with phenom- contexts. However, all systematic, dog- in the realms of biblical interpretation enology rather than theology. Th is is matic, and creedal theologies arose in and contextualization. People seek con- because it seeks to be as “objective” as given times and spaces. Th us, they are formity to their position rather than possible as it seeks to discover “what 6 culturally bounded. As a result, when allowing the Scriptures to speak to a is” (phenomenology) rather than “what the reticent assert that theology should given context. Grant Osborne high- should be” (ideology). Th e reticent be the starting point for missiology, lights the problem positivism creates in evangelical would rather assert that the they are actually referring to their biblical interpretation. starting place of all missiology should privileged, culturally-bounded theolo- People read Scripture within a read- be theology. gies as their starting point. ing paradigm dominated by the de- In response, frontier missiologists point Positivism provides a wonderfully fi rm nomination of which they are a part. out that philosophers have demonstrated ground for those who stand upon it. They don’t seek truth but conformity that all knowledge is situated in time and However, as an epistemological posi- to their assumed theological position. (Osborne 2006, 467).8 space, and thus, contextual. Knowledge tion, many evangelical scholars recog- is also limited in perspective; and no nize that positivism is not intellectually If allegiances to systematic, dogmatic, knowledge is one hundred percent objec- or phenomenologically sustainable. and confessional theologies already 3 tive. Th e implication for theology is this: cause this problem in biblical inter- Every theologian and every theological Due to this realization, frontier missi- pretation in western cultural contexts, system is situated in time and space. ologists tend to draw from the biblical they surely will cause the problem in 4 Consequently, all theology is contextual. theology movement (fi gure 1, Start- frontier missions. In addition, since each theological sys- ing Point Two) as it provides a valid, tem arises from its own situatedness and evangelical alternative to traditional Such allegiances cause signifi cant sectors perspective, no single theological system systematic, dogmatic, and confessional of the evangelical mission community is one hundred percent comprehensive.5 theologies. Biblical theology allows to pejoratively view contextualization and local theologizing. Th e assumption Figure 1. Framing Two Starting Points in Mission is that there is no need for any further Starting Point Two theologizing because the task of theolo- Starting Point One gizing has been completed.9 Addressing this, Melba Maggay writes: Positivism/Naïve Realism Critical Realism A longtime missionary in India, for instance, has asserted that one can Dualism Integration only proceed from a “dogmatic con- textualization,” which he defi ned as Systematics Biblical Theology “the translation of the unchanging content of the Gospel of the King- Dogmatics/Confessionalism/Foundationalism Contextualization/Local Theologies dom into verbal form meaningful to the peoples in the separate cultures Exclusive Orthodoxy Inclusive Orthodoxy and within their particular existential situation.” The trouble with this defi - nition is that it assumes that the task Ethnocentric Theological Discourse Postcolonial Theological Discourse of contextualization is, at bottom, merely adaptation; it consists mostly Modality Sodality of fi nding “dynamic equivalencies” for propositional truths systematized by High Uncertainty Avoidance Low Uncertainty Avoidance theologies developed in the West and deemed universal . . . this is an unsafe

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Bradford Greer 95

assumption. It is true that there is an unchanging “deposit of the faith,” but hose who assume they are carrying a transcultural this comprises more than propositions. theology are actually exporting their privileged, And while it may be said to be “supra- cultural,” our knowledge and access culturally bounded theology. to it is always culture-bound, and the T theologies that arise out of the historic being the center of the believer’s many diff ering theological persuasions. contingencies of a given context are life, faith, and practice), are essential Initially, this diversity causes friction; always local. (2013, 6—7) for all frontier missiology. Since all however, as these missionaries see the knowledge is situated and contextual, quality of the faith of the others on the People in other cultures ask diff er- frontier missiology acknowledges its fi eld, and as they see the value in cross- ent questions than we do. Th ey need own situatedness—that it arises out of agency cooperation, they move into an answers to their questions, not just the 20th and 21st Century evangelical ecumenical space, a space that relativizes answers we have found for our ques- movement, which is also predomi- theological particulars. Th e result is that tions.10 Contextualization and local nantly western in cultural orientation. these workers return to their evangeli- theologizing allow communities of Frontier missiologists recognize that cal roots, having become bibliocentric, believers to read the Scriptures with their starting point is not neutral Christocentric, crucicentric, and conver- their eyes in relation to their own ex- or comprehensive. Such neutrality sionistic—all for the sake of the gospel. periences. It allows them to articulate and comprehensiveness can never be biblical truth in ways that make sense Yet, this relativization of theological achieved. Missiologists are empow- and bring order to their own complex particularities and denominational ered to discover how the “Truth” of world. Biblical theological methodolo- identities can cause alarm in the mis- God’s Word is unveiled when they gies facilitate people as they read the sionaries’ fi rst-culture faith communi- acknowledge their situatedness and Scriptures in their context to interpret ties. An identity based on specifi c theo- cognitive limitations, adopt a minimal- and apply the Scriptures in appropri- logical or denominational content is ist and yet essential theological core, ate ways. highly valued in fi rst-culture contexts. and refl ect on their own impact upon Evangelical ecumenicalism sounds Alternatively, those who assume they are theology and analysis while engaging deviant. What is not recognized is that carrying out their missiological endeavors in other frontier mission contexts.13 a communal identity based on particu- with a transcultural theology are actually Th at frontier missiology can operate lar theological/denominational content exporting their privileged, culturally from this focused theological position rather than on being “in Christ” is a bounded theology, that is—in missional demonstrates this is not a capitulation luxury of living in a context where faith terms—ethnocentric.11 As a result, their to “postmodern relativism.” in Christ is held by many and can be theology functions more as an ideology Nonetheless, these fundamental expressed freely. It becomes altogether than as a transcultural theology. diff erences in epistemology and in cumbersome when living in areas Th at being said, the claim that frontier approaches to theology, at the out- where mission workers are few and the missiology begins with phenomenol- set of any frontier missiological countries are fairly restrictive. ogy and not theology is unwarranted. endeavor, create a signifi cant degree Th is relativization also leads to a What is overlooked is that evangelical of discomfort for those fi rst-culture reordering of what is considered theology is the very basis and pro- evangelicals and missionaries who “orthodoxy.” In the fi rst-culture faith vides the operational framework for lean toward epistemological positiv- community orthodoxy can be viewed as all evangelical frontier missiology. ism. Even though frontier missiol- a standard that excludes those who don’t Evangelical frontier missiology grows ogy is unashamedly Bible-centered, hold to specifi c content cherished by the out of the evangelical movement’s four Christ-centered, cross-centered, and community. I recently experienced this theological characteristics: biblicism conversionist, such a focused evange- in the USA. Even though my wife and (the Bible is the only authority for lical theology is still not adequate for I have represented Christ in a confl ict- faith and life), crucicentrism (the cross evangelical positivists. ridden zone for over 25 years, we were is central to the faith), conversionism Besides releasing contextualization not able to participate with the other (personal conversion is the mark of and local theologizing, there is another congregants in taking communion. A the true Christian), and mission (the signifi cant benefi t from holding to this note in the bulletin indicated who was gospel is to be proclaimed through more focused evangelical theology. In permitted to partake and who was not; word and deed).12 frontier contexts missionaries often fi nd and we did not share their particular Th ese theological planks, with the themselves working alongside Christ- view of communion. I did not mind addition of Christocentrism (Christ followers from other cultures and from this at all. I understood their reasoning

33:3 Fall 2016 96 Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task

and I was simply glad to worship the 3) crucicentrism, and 4) conversion- Th e truth that all cultures are fallen and Lord with a Bible believing group. In ism. Frontier missiology refrains from stand in need of transformation is used contrast, in frontier mission areas where adding to these but rather adopts a to validate this tendency. As a result, a mission workers are few and denomina- critical realist epistemological perspec- common expectation is that when people tional identities are less likely to surface, tive, acknowledging that all knowl- turn to Christ they should adopt new the lines for orthodoxy tend to be drawn edge, theology included, is situated norms, norms that are Christian.16 Mis- more inclusively. Th e standards for and contextual. From this evangelical sionaries who primarily view their own orthodoxy are set so they can include theological starting point, frontier mis- fi rst-culture through the Christian lens various positions (majority and minor- siology then utilizes the rich resources do not necessarily refl ect analytically on ity) held within the Church universal. of biblical theology and the social sci- the many norms which they have labeled Christian. As a result, this dualistic mind- Exemplifying this tension between ences to advance the kingdom of God set and the labeling of other cultures as inclusive and exclusive approaches to in the unengaged and unreached areas non-Christian open the doors for cultural defi ning orthodoxy, some may recall the of God’s world. coloniality at a number of levels.17 stir John Stott created a few years back when he declared his belief in annihila- Frontier Mission Engagement: In contrast, theologically viewing God tionism. Some felt Stott’s affi rmation of God and Culture as Creator, Preserver, Revealer, and Redeemer opens the door for a diff er- annihilationism indicated that he had Working out from this focused evan- ent approach to understanding fallen, left the evangelical fold. In a 2011 on- gelical theological framework, the fi rst line Christianity Today post Mark Galli human cultures. indicated that J. I. Packer and others Th e Scripture indicates that God not had a similar reaction. Galli wrote that only created the world, but he has [i]n May 1989, Regent College theolo- stayed actively involved in the world gian J. I. Packer attacked the idea [of ever since. It is not as if God created annihilationism] at the Evangelical Af- Where the workers humankind and then distanced himself fi rmations conference held at Trinity from humanity after the fi rst couple Evangelical Divinity School. In the discus- are few, sinned, leaving everyone to their own sion that followed, Reformed Seminary devices. Even after Cain’s murder of his theologian Roger Nicole argued that being theologically brother Abel, the Genesis 4 narrative annihilationism should be respected as a persistent and biblical minority position inclusive is vital. indicates that Cain, his descendants, among historic evangelicals. Nicole’s and even human civilization grew under speech effectively defeated a motion the tacit preserving grace of God. Th is that would have defi ned annihilation- understanding arises from the account ists as outside the evangelical camp. of the two births that begin and end the chapter. With both births Eve acknowl- Th is inclusive approach can create sig- point of contact in frontier mission edges the Lord’s help in the bringing nifi cant levels of tension in some fi rst- engagement is culture. A major point of forth of the children. Th e theological culture faith communities; however, agreement among all is that cultures ex- implication from this is that it is due for those working in frontier contexts ist in a fallen state. “For all have sinned to the Lord’s preserving grace than where the workers are few, being theo- and fallen short of the glory of God” humankind is able to continue. Th e nar- logically inclusive is vital. (Romans 3:23). However, evangelicals rative of the fl ood and the subsequent One of the impacts of this inclusivity is infl uenced by positivism and frontier covenant with Noah and humankind that it enables workers to better refl ect missiologists tend to view culture from appear to confi rm this (Gen. 8:20–9:17). two signifi cantly diff erent lenses. upon and challenge the privileged ways In this light Karl Barth writes: “God they have ordered their world, and how Positivism tends to view life in a dual- fulfi lls his fatherly lordship over the they enter, move about, refl ect upon, istic manner.14 Dualistic terms such as creature by preserving it” (1960, Vol. value, and positively challenge their host non-Christian, pre-Christian and post- 3/3, p. 58). Th is preserving activity is cultures, which operate under radically Christian are used with a signifi cant level why Paul could say in Romans 13:1: diff erent orderings and worldviews. of frequency. If a culture falls into the Let every person be subject to the In summary, frontier missiology is non-, pre-, or post-Christian category, governing authorities; for there is shaped by four fundamental evan- the tendency is to view much if not most no authority except from God, and gelical theological commitments: of the aspects of that culture as defi cient those authorities that exist have been 1) bibliocentrism, 2) Christocentrism, or evil and in need of transformation.15 instituted by God. (NRSV)

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Bradford Greer 97 Paul was working from the premise that rontier mis siologists intentionally avoid God preserves humankind in part by forming and maintaining structures that devaluing other cultures. Th ey seek to discover promote social and communal order. what God is already doing and build upon it. Paul in Acts portrayed this preserving F activity of God in very intimate terms, Moses’ father-in-law is the source of and release a transformation from stating that the Lord is near to each and the advice Moses adopts. Th e narra- within each and every culture, not to every one. In his speech in Athens he tive opens and closes highlighting the obliterate those cultures.21 John’s vision said: “indeed he is not far from each one fact that Jethro is an outsider to the of the nations in Revelation 21:22–26 of us. For ‘In him we live and move and nation (Ex. 18:1, 27).19 Moses’ father- appears to be an affi rmation that eth- have our being’” (Acts 17:27–28 NRSV). in-law is the one who points out that nic groups will retain their identities Th is understanding of God as Preserver what Moses is doing “is not good” (Ex. and cultural peculiarities in eternity. In adds defi nition to our understanding of 18:17), echoing the creation narra- stating this, frontier missiology does God as Revealer. God, being near, is not tive (Fretheim 2010, p. 198), and it is not lose sight of the cultural tension only actively preserving humankind, God Moses’ father-in-law who gives the inherent within the gospel. advice that helps to create structures is also actively working to reveal himself The event of Christ, and Christ’s re- to each and every one. In doctrinal terms that promote justice within the re- newing work, is not indigenous to we refer to this as General Revelation. deemed community. Th at this narrative any culture–not even to supposedly General Revelation, however, is often occurs immediately before the giving Christian cultures. In every case it has perceived as a static act where God of the Law on Mount Sinai, and that to be received as a crosscultural– placed knowledge about himself within Jethro beseeches Moses to look to indeed a countercultural–reality. the very fabric of creation. Th is is certain- God regarding this advice (Ex. 18:23), (Dyrness, 2016) ly one aspect of what God has done (see appears to demonstrate that it is due Rom. 1:20). However, we are also to un- to God’s working in his good creation Conclusion derstand God as continuously working in that there is a degree of wisdom in his First culture attachments create sig- and among people so that they may turn world, wisdom that is good and should nifi cant hindrances for those crossing 20 to him. General revelation is a continual be valued and utilized. religio-cultural boundaries in order to activity (Rom. 1:19 and Ps. 19:1–3). Why Frontier missiology works from this proclaim the gospel in a faithful man- is God doing this? In order that he may theological understanding of God’s ner, especially when the fi rst culture is be ultimately glorifi ed in and through his active involvement within human blended with the Christian faith. Th is Son in those he has made and redeemed cultures as Creator, Preserver, Revealer, blending sacralizes norms and elements (Barth 1960 Vol. 3/3, p. 58). and Redeemer. God’s commitment to of the fi rst culture which have no direct Th us, frontier missiology sees God as and involvement in human cultures connection with the gospel; yet, these actively involved in all human cultures, fi nds its full revelation in the incarna- cultural norms and elements are auto- fallen as they are, working to form tion of Jesus. Th e incarnation is “an af- matically identifi ed as Christian and within them that which can be labeled fi rmation of creation and of God’s deep given a privileged status. Consequently, moral, wise, just, and good. God is do- involvement with it” (Zimmerman a culturally specifi c theological under- ing this because he, as Revealer and Re- 2012, 61). As a result, frontier mis- standing of the gospel and Christian deemer, is not only near to all but works siologists intentionally avoid devaluing praxis is exported, resulting in a frontier to draw those within these cultures to other cultures. Th ey seek to discover missionary endeavor that is ethnocen- himself, prodding them to “seek him so what God is already doing within each tric and colonial in character. All Chris- that they may fi nd him” (Acts 17:28). and every community and build upon tian communities (Western, Southern, Besides the unseen, inner workings of it. Th e reason frontier mission workers Middle Eastern, Western Asian, South the Spirit, God uses that which can be are in these frontier areas is because Asian or East Asian) face this same labeled as moral, wise, just, and good to of God’s active involvement. God has predicament whenever they try to cross create cognitive and aff ective connec- brought them there so that they can religious, cultural, or social barriers. tions to the gospel, enabling people to meaningfully represent Christ, that the Frontier missiology exists to help al- view the gospel as plausible, and thus gospel be meaningfully proclaimed, leviate this problem. It seeks to provide positively respond to it.18 and that communities redeemed by frontier mission workers with tools and centered in Jesus be established. Th e story of Jethro in Exodus 18 ap- that facilitate self-refl ection on how pears to validate this perspective. Th e In summary, the gospel in the view of their fi rst culture has ordered and privi- narrative mentions fi fteen times that frontier missiology is meant to redeem leged their world and impacted their

33:3 Fall 2016 98 Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task theological understandings. Th ese same 2 See article, “Is Muhammad Also be powerless to address the issues of the tools also enable workers to enter, move Among the Prophets?” and responses in global church” (2014, Kindle Locations about, refl ect upon, value, and positive- IJFM 31:4, 169–190; IJFM 32:4, 202–207; 205–207). Hwa Yung concurs and observes: “Western theologies are the products of the ly challenge other cultures that operate and this issue, IJFM 33:3, 116–135. 3 histories, cultures and realities of the West. under a radically diff erent ordering. Jens Zimmerman writes: “Human knowledge is never neutral, dispassionate, Th ey cannot, therefore, adequately address In addition, frontier missiology has a timeless, or without perspective. Instead, it is the existential realities of the rest of the world because these diff er so much from high view of God’s activity in each and always interpretive” (2012, 35, emphasis his). 4 those of the West” (2014, Kindle Locations every culture. Th e incarnation reinforc- Grant Osborne states: “Th e act of interpretation itself is done within a cultural 214–216; see also Wright 2006, 39). es our understanding of the inherent 11 and theological framework” (2006, 467; see In this vein, William Dyrness in value, signifi cance, and freedom of each also Zimmerman 2012, 12). Th is is why his recent book, Insider Jesus (2016), writes: culture. In this light, each and every Shaw and Van Engen conclude: “Th ere is no “To speak of a Christian faith that must be community should have the freedom such thing as pure theology; all theologies contextualized evokes a central question: to read, interpret, and apply the Scrip- are local theologies” (2003, 47). who gets to defi ne the Christian faith?” tures in its own context. Th is freedom 5 See Osborne 2006, 489. Th is perspec- Interestingly, Christ himself pointedly did not describe the missionary calling as com- will enable the Scripture to have the tive coheres well with Paul the Apostle’s municating the Christian faith, or even the immediate relevance to each commu- words: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; good news. He urged his disciples to “go nity that it was designed to have. but then I shall know fully, even as I have therefore and makes disciples of all nations, . . . teaching them to obey everything that At the most fundamental level, the only been fully known” (1 Cor. 13:12 ESV). Paul I have commanded you” (Mt. 28:19–20, thing that is truly transcultural is the Hiebert wrote about the impact of one’s epistemology on mission engagement in his emphasis added). Notice how the focus is Scripture. God’s Word does not change. Anthropological Refl ections on Missiologi- on what is to be done, not what is to be What changes is context. Since each cal Issues (1994, 19–51). For an excellent thought. In evangelical missiology, this context has its own particular needs, introduction to philosophical hermeneutics, has come to include, at a minimum, the problems, and worldview, each com- see Merold Westphal’s Whose Community? translation, teaching and dissemination of munity has to read the Scripture to Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Herme- Scripture wherever missionaries have gone. But typically missionaries have supplied learn how to address those needs and neutics for the Church (2009). 6 something else: their understanding of the problems, and come to know God. Th is With regard to how systematic the- ologies are culturally bounded, see Osborne beliefs that constitute the “Christian faith” diversity in need, problem, and world- 2009, 32. that they have brought with them.” 12 view will cause communities to focus on 7 Scott Moreau states that positivism David Bebbington identifi ed these certain truths over others. With a critical was “the position of evangelicals in the past, four as the characteristics of the evangelical realist epistemology such a diff erence in and many continue to hold to it in some movement (2005, 23). perspective is acceptable because no hu- form” (2012, 79). 13 In this light, Darrell Whiteman man body of knowledge is complete in 8 Evangelicals not only seek conformity states: “We need a theology that affi rms the and of itself. Consequently, applications in doctrine, but also seek conformity in eccle- centrality of Christ in the world while also affi rming the culturally diverse expressions of Scripture can be diverse because each siastical practices. Th is leads to the problem that the body of Christ will necessarily take” community is ordered in diff erent ways. Ralph Winter highlighted between sodalist and modalist church structures (Winter (2006, 67). Frontier missiology is comfortable with 1981, 178–190). In addition, registering high 14 Zimmerman points out that Chris- this diversity because this is the nature in the area of uncertainty avoidance exacer- tians “should be wary of dualistic thinking bates a community’s desire for conformity. because it fundamentally contradicts incar- of intercultural engagement. Frontier Th ose who register high in the area of uncer- national thinking about God and world” missiology can be comfortable with this tainty avoidance have a diminished capacity (2012, 11). because it is confi dent that the Father, to tolerate and embrace ambiguity, diff er- 15 Ida Glasser and Hannah Kay refl ect the Son, and the Spirit is overseeing, ence, and change (with regard to uncertainty this kind of categorization in their recent actively involved, and fulfi lling his cov- avoidance, see Hofstede 2001). book, Th inking Biblically about Islam. enantal purposes in this world. IJFM 9 Th e recent publication of Werner Th ey see Islamic cultures as an appropri- Mischke’s book, Th e Global Gospel, demon- ate category as well as biblical cultures, strates that this assumption is not valid (2015). though they clearly recognize that there is Endnotes 10 Steven Hu addresses this need and an undefi ned overlap of the two. Th ey write: 1 Postcolonial theological discourses writes: “In this globalizing world, where we “Islam is understood and experienced by help us refl ect on how we have privileged have also witnessed the dramatic growth of most Muslims as a whole way of life. So we the ways we order our world. For a brief ex- the Two–Th irds World church, we can- could look at the role of Islam in forming posure to postcolonial theological discourses not aff ord not to consider the multiple the culture of Muslim societies. It lays down see Smith, Lalitha, and Hawk’s Evangelical contexts in which theology begins. If our social codes and can determine all sorts Postcolonial Conversations: Global Awaken- discourse continues to remain in the domain of relationships, such as whom to marry, ings in Th eology and Praxis (2014). of the West, the resultant theology will whose home to live in, which people of the

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Bradford Greer 99 opposite sex to interact with, or employer- 20 It is because of this that frontier Evangelical Postcolonial Conver- employee relations. It also forms the basis missiologists have the freedom to draw sations: Global Awakenings in for aesthetics, governing what kind of art from the social sciences. Th eology and Praxis. Edited by Kay Higuera Smith, Jayachitra and architecture is an appropriate expres- 21 Anthony Taylor describes how the Lalitha, and L. Daniel Hawk. sion of belief in God. Where, then, is the gospel, when framed within a kingdom per- Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity overlap between these cultures and biblical spective, can enter, preserve, and transform a Press. Kindle Edition. cultures that will help us gain a biblical culture from within (2015). Kirk, J. Andrew perspective on the cultural implications of 2006 Mission under Scrutiny: Confront- Islam” (2016, Kindle Locations 388–393)? References ing Contemporary Challenges. I fi nd the category, biblical culture, to be a Barth, Karl Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press. bit anachronistic as well as perplexing. How 1960 Church Dogmatics: Th e Doctrine of Maggay, Melba Padilla would Glasser and Kay defi ne it? Creation. Translated by J. W. Ed- 2013 “Th e Task of Contextualization: 16 David Bosch described this perspec- wards, O. Bussey and H. Knight. Issue in Reading Appropriating, tive in this way: “mission as the transfer of Edited by G. W. Bromiley and and Transmitting the Faith.” In the missionary’s ‘superior’ culture” (1991, 5; T. F. Torrance. Vol. 3/3. Peabody, Th e Gospel in Culture. Edited see also J. Andrew Kirk 2006, 96–97). MA: Hendrickson Publishers. by Melba P. Maggay. Manila, 17 Bosch notes: “Surveying the great Bebbington, David Philippines: OMF Literature 2005 Th e Dominance of Evangelicalism: and Institute for Studies in Asian variety of ways in which Western cultural Th e Age of Spurgeon and Moody. Church and Culture, 5–22. norms were, implicitly or explicitly, imposed Vol. 3. A History of Evangelicalism: Mischke, Werner upon converts in other parts of the world, it People, Movements and Ideas in the 2015 Th e Global Gospel: Achieving Mission- is of some signifi cance to note that both lib- English-Speaking World. Downers al Impact in Our Multicultural World. erals and conservatives shared the assump- Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Scottsdale, AZ: Mission ONE. tion that Christianity was the only basis Bosch, David J. Moreau, A. Scott for a healthy civilization; this was a form of 1991 Transforming Mission: Paradigm 2012 Contextualization in World consensus so fundamental that it operated Shifts in Th eology of Mission. Missions: Mapping and Assess- mainly on an unconscious, presuppositional Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. ing Evangelical Models. Grand level” (1991, 296). Such thinking continues. Dyrness, William A. Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic. As recent examples of this, two separate 2016 Insider Jesus: Th eological Refl ections on Moreland, J. P. organizations conducted Leadership Devel- New Christian Movements. Down- 2010 “Series Preface.” In Authentic opment projects in the same frontier area. ers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Communication: Christian Speech Th e workers conducting the projects were Fretheim, Terence E. Engaging Culture. Muehlhoff , Tim solidly devoted to the Lord; however, the 2010 Exodus. Interpretation: A Bible and Todd Lewis. Christian World- content in these projects elevated western Commentary for Teaching and view Integration Series. Edited by cultural leadership norms (implying that Preaching. Edited by James Lu- Francis Beckwith and J. P. Moreland. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic. these were Christian) over and above the ther Mays, Patrick D. Miller Jr., Paul J. Achtemeier. Louisville, KY: “defective” local norms. Osborne, Grant Westminster John Knox Press. 18 2006 Th e Hermeneutical Spiral: A J. P. Moreland writes: “Individuals Galli, Mark Comprehensive Introduction to will never be able to change their lives if 2011 “Heaven, Hell, and Rob Bell: Biblical Interpretation. Revised they cannot even entertain the beliefs need- Putting the Pastor in Context.” and Expanded Edition. Downers ed to bring about that change. By ‘entertain In Christianity Today. March 2, Grove, IL: IVP Academic. belief ’ we mean to consider the possibility 2011. Accessed March 6, 2011. Priest, Robert that the belief might be true” (2010, 16). It is http://www.christianitytoday. 1994 “Missionary Elenctics: Conscience due to this working of God that local values com/ct/2011/marchweb-only/ and Culture.” In Missiology 22:3 provide a basis for meaningful communica- rob-bell-universalism.html. ( July), 291–316. tion and makes missionary elenctics possible Glaser, Ida and Hannah Kay Smith, Kay Higuera, Jayachitra Lalitha, and (on missionary elenctics, see Robert Priest 2016 Th inking Biblically about Islam: L. Daniel Hawk, eds. 1994; however, Priest appears to take a static Genesis, Transfi guration, Trans- 2014 Evangelical Postcolonial Conver- view of the development of conscience, formation. Carlisle, Cumbria, UK: sations: Global Awakenings in Langham Creative Projects. labeling it a natural faculty). Th eology and Praxis. Downers Hiebert, Paul Grove, IL: IVP Academic. 19 Th omas White points out that 1994 Anthropological Refl ections on Shaw, R. Daniel and Charles E. Van Engen “Jethro is a voice of natural reason or sound Missiological Issues. Grand Rapids, political prudence, a non-Israelite through 2003 Communicating God’s Word in a MI: Baker Books. Complex World: God’s Truth or Ho- whom God works to organize internally the Hofstede, Geert cus Pocus. Lanham, MD: Rowman people of Israel. Th e author of this portion 2001 Culture’s Consequences: Comparing and Littlefi eld Publishers, Inc. of the Torah clearly means to underscore Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Taylor, Anthony that gifts of natural prudential reason, Organizations across Nations. Th ou- 2015 “Th e Kingdom of God: A Bibli- even when they come from outside of the sand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. cal Paradigm for Mission.” In sphere of explicit revelation, are compatible Hu, Stephen Understanding Insider Movements: with revelation” (2016, Kindle Locations 2014 “Th e Importance of Postcolonial Disciples of Jesus within Diverse 3324–3326). Evangelical Conversations.” In Religious Communities. Edited

33:3 Fall 2016 100 Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task

by Harley Talman and John Jay Wright, Christopher J. H. Travis. Pasadena, CA: William 2006 Th e Mission of God: Unlocking the Carey Library, 173–180. Bible’s Grand Narrative. Downers Westphal, Merold Grove, IL: IVP Academic. 2009 Whose Community? Which Inter- Yung, H. pretation?: Philosophical Herme- 2014 Mangoes or Bananas?: Th e Quest neutics for the Church. Grand for an Authentic Asian Christian Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Th eology. 2nd Ed. Oxford, UK: White, Th omas Joseph Regnum Books International. 2016 Exodus. Brazos Th eological Com- Kindle Edition. mentary on the Bible. Edited by Zimmerman, Jens R. R. Reno et al. Grand Rapids, 2012 Incarnational Humanism: A Phi- MI: Baker Publishing Group. losophy of Culture for the Church Kindle Edition. in the World. Downers Grove, IL: Whiteman, Darrel L. IVP Academic, 2012. 2006 “Anthropological Refl ections on Contextualizing Th eology in a Globalizing World.” In Global- izing Th eology: Belief and Practice in an Era of World Christianity. Edited by C. Ott and H. A. Net- land. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 52–69. Winter, Ralph D. 1981 “Th e Two Structures of God’s Re- demptive Mission.” In Perspectives of the World Christian Movement: A Reader. Edited by Ralph D. Winter and Steven C. Haw- thorne. Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library, 178–190.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology

What We Carry Joyful Witness: An Excerpt on Muslim-Christian Attachment

by Evelyne A. Reisacher

Editorial note: Th is is a short excerpt from Evelyn Reisacher’s recent book, Joyful Wit- ness in the Muslim World: Sharing the Gospel in Everyday Encounters, published by Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, www.bakerpublishinggroup.com (Grand Rapids, 2016), pp. 29–35. It is the most recent publication in the series, Mission in Global Community (editors, Scott Sunquist and Amos Yong). Used by permission. Enjoying Muslims hrough the years, I have taught numerous Muslim-awareness semi- nars in churches worldwide. Inevitably, participants would say, “We T would love to connect with Muslims in our neighborhoods but don’t know how.” Given that joy is a primary attachment emotion, I recommend the obvious: fi rst start to enjoy Muslims as human beings, to delight in them; this is how the bond will form, as it did when we fi rst learned to attach to our caregivers as human beings. As joy is necessary in the formation of the bond in early childhood, so it continues to be important in the formation and growth of human bonds throughout life.

Unfortunately, I noticed during these same seminars that participants were primarily motivated to connect with Muslims not by delight but by fear, competition, or urgency of the task. Fortunately, compassion and love are now emerging motives, but joy still rarely appears, and as seldom among full-time missionaries to Muslims as among ordinary church members. If God enjoys Evelyne A. Reisacher (PhD, Fuller his creation, does it not seem awkward that his children fi nd no delight in Th eological Seminary) is associ- ate professor of Islamic studies and those they evangelize? Furthermore, as joy is so important for healthy rela- intercultural relations in the School tions, it is inconceivable that Christians befriend Muslims for the sake of the of Intercultural Studies at Fuller Th eological Seminary in Pasadena, gospel without feeling overwhelming joy toward them. When students share California, where she has taught for their experiences in the Muslim world with me or with their classmates in a fi fteen years. She spent over a decade in leadership in L’Ami, a Paris-based class I’m teaching, I often ask: “What joy did you experience?” I put the same Christian organization, facilitat- question to my readers: can you remember joyful interactions you had with ing relationships between churches and North African immigrants and Muslims? If you cannot, you probably never connected with them. If you can, developing courses, teaching tools, you may agree with Henri Nouwen, who wrote, “True joy is hidden where we and seminars for sharing the gos- pel cross-culturally. She has trained are the same as other people: fragile and mortal. It is the joy of belonging to Christian leaders and church members the human race. It is the joy of being with others as a friend, a companion, a in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. fellow traveler. Th is is the joy of Jesus, who is Emmanuel: God-with-us.”1

International Journal of Frontier Missiology 33:3 Fall 2016•103 104 Joyful Witness: An Excerpt of Muslim-Christian Attachment Exploration often, Christians limit their interactions the smile as an invitation to deeper Joy is an exploration-eliciting emotion. with Muslims to religious spaces. Th ey relations. Once a Muslim refuses the Have you noticed that when tourists forget there are many other ways to gospel, a Christian who has been thus are in a sightseeing mood, they display meet and enjoy others. motivated will probably rupture the unique behaviors? Th eir bodies seem bond, leaving the Muslim even more to be in starting blocks, ready to move Genuine Joy confused about the real reasons Chris- forward, conquer new spaces, and Th ere are two kinds of joy. Th e fi rst is tians engage with Muslims. I assume engage with unfamiliar people. Th e cognitive, basically processed by the that Christians would be as bewildered cameras around their necks signal they left side of the brain. It is often called if they discovered that Muslims became are eager to capture new visual sensa- social joy. Th e other is aff ective and is friends with them only to convert them. tions. Th eir eyes are wide open. Th is processed by the right side of the brain. An experience of social joy does not allows them to marvel at the wonders Only the latter, being spontaneous and always guarantee that people will attach. they discover. Th ey feel enthusiastic, bodily based, fosters human attachment. Genuine, aff ective joy is the rule in full of energy, and harbor a huge smile. Cognitive joy is sometimes used to attachment. Th is spontaneous and au- 5 Neuroscientists would say that they are mask negative emotions with a smile or thentic joy is communicated via the right 2 in a sympathetic drive and high on other playful behaviors for the sake of brain of one person and resonates with dopamine. Words that come to mind civility. Th is faked joy does not have the the right brain of the person to whom are “seeking,” “curiosity,” “exploring,” same infectious eff ect. For attachments joy is being communicated. Right-brain “awe,” “anticipation,” and “amazement.” to build, joy must be spontaneous—like joy is the key to attachment. True joy is When we engage with the Muslim not something you can just reason or world, having a similar attitude will fi gure out. One must experience sponta- help us greatly. In eff ect, interest plays neous joyful emotions originating from a critical role in attachment. According a relational context. During interactions to Schore, “Th e combination of joy and with Muslims, joy may suddenly pop up, interest motivates attachments.” 3 To Joy is an unexpectedly. One cannot say, “Now I connect with Muslims, we must show am going to fi nd Muslims pleasant.” No interest in them and a joyful expecta- exploration-eliciting one can arbitrarily create happiness by tion that we will learn new things from emotion. being together with people from another them. Unfortunately, the tourist analogy culture (unless happiness is cognitively falls short when one realizes that tourists induced for social purposes). One has to often connect better to a place than to its personally be immersed in an unfamiliar inhabitants. Rejoicing over objects and environment and feel the spark of joy places can help us enjoy a culture but will when it happens. No one can predict not automatically cause us to enjoy its a gut feeling. Imagine seeing someone when it will happen. It is the path of people. It is people, therefore, whom we you enjoy and instantaneously feeling discovering how one’s right brain reacts must be interested in and excited about. joy bubble up in you. to the sensory and verbal stimuli in the context of relationship with a Muslim. In order to form secure bonds with Unfortunately, mission practitioners To those who want to feel the joy of the Muslims, we must participate in joyful sometimes approach Muslims with a Muslim world, I can only recommend moments with them. When Chris- fake smile. Th ey use relationship build- going and exploring Muslim societies tians engage with Muslims, “positive ing as a strategy to share the gospel with and being open to the joy that will en- emotions widen the available array of Muslims. Th eir so-called interest in the able them to connect. It may start with a thoughts and actions, thereby facilitat- Muslim world appears more like an single encounter like the one I had with ing fl exibility, exploration, and play. evangelistic marketing technique. When my neighbor when I was a teenager. Th ese behaviors in turn promote social they see Muslims, they mask their nega- bonding.” 4 Yes, joyful play associated tive emotions with a smile and pretend Facial expressions are important means with interest/excitement should become they are happy to see them. Th ey off er to convey emotions. I remember walking an integral part of meeting Muslims. to connect with them only because they on the beach when a teenager came out Some of the best contexts in which to want to witness. I am all for sharing the of the water where he had surfed, beam- experience such feelings are ordinary gospel, and I support civility, but mis- ing with excitement. His face radiated encounters. I naturally connected with understandings may occur if Christians with joy. As he walked past me, my face Muslim classmates at school, at sport, smile at Muslims only to evangelize beamed with joy in return. His joy was at work, or in leisure activities. Too them, because the latter may understand infectious. I believe that at that moment

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Evelyne A. Reisacher 105 I experienced the right-brain-to-right- he cultural display of joy did not matter in brain aff ective resonance that child and caregiver experience when they are this circumstance. Facially communicated joy together and feel nonverbal joy. Th e cul- bypassed words . . . tural display of joy did not matter in this T circumstance. Facially communicated joy the past. But when people try to initiate when Muslims sing along with Pharrell bypassed words, which was convenient connections with Muslims, when all they Williams’ “Happy.” Th ese infectious because this teenager did not speak the hear about Muslims is negative, how will faces of delight, joy, and elation are often same language as I do. Was our relation- healthy relationships ever develop? suppressed by communities waging war ship strong at that point? No! Attach- against each other, since they know all too Th e intergenerational transmission of ment is a long process that involves more well the power such expressions have to negative feelings regarding Muslims also than a one-time aff ective resonance. But connect people with each other. makes it diffi cult for non-Muslims to this fl eeting positive emotion could have form bonds with Muslims. Terror stories become the springboard for subsequent that have been transmitted over genera- moments of joy, which could have shaped Dyadic Joy tions make it almost impossible to estab- Another important aspect of attachment a bond. I wonder how many of these lish healthy bonds, since terror has trau- joy is its capacity to be mutually shared. experiences my readers have had with matic eff ects on human relations. I grew Self-happiness does not create bonds. Muslims. When have our faces beamed up in France during the Algerian War of Playing alone, enjoying a delicious meal with joy in their presence? Can we stop Independence. Most young men the age alone, or even using recreational drugs for a moment to recall these memories? of my brother were drafted. I remember alone—all these experiences eliciting joy Unfortunately, these days, happy faces of conversations I heard as a child referring that raise the level of dopamine may ren- Muslims in the media are in short sup- to Algerians as enemies. I heard people der life more pleasant but do not contrib- ply. How can there be mutual sharing of say, “If you see an Arab, change sidewalks; ute to developing human bonds. Dyadic joy if Muslims only get the role of villain they might kill you.” How do you think joy,7 or joy shared with another human in movies and if only their angry faces this must have shaped my feelings as I being, is what leads to attachment. make newspaper headlines? Recently resonated at an early age with the fear Dyadic joy is mutual. When for my I googled the word “Muslim” and was of an entire country? I was anxious and doctoral research I interviewed North shocked by the number of angry faces distant until I met an Arab Muslim girl, African Christians in French churches, that appeared in the “image” section. with whom I experienced some joy. Th ese I noticed that they were making many Th is is strange, because Muslims can be positive memories allowed me to form eff orts to enjoy French Christians. But as happy as anybody else on this planet. other bonds with Muslims until I was the latter did not always reciprocate. Th is Unfortunately, most people are intro- able to experience the entire attachment is not the best recipe for a lasting bond. duced to Islam through fearful faces. cycle of joy, shame, and a return to joy with Muslims. Th erefore, today, when I Both members of the dyad must feel joy. Sometimes, at the beginning of a lecture speak with anxious people all around the Th erefore, when developing bonds with or a church meeting, I ask Christians world, I ask them, “Can you get a Muslim Muslims, we must identify mutually felt to think of Muslims and choose a facial smiley?”6 Besides the angry and fearful joys. Unfortunately, interfaith relation- expression. I show them a variety of faces of terrorists, there are many other ships are sometimes emotionally imbal- emoticons. Very rarely is the smiley face faces of Muslims who are like you and anced. One person is trying hard to enjoy chosen. Th at is quite unfortunate for re- me, with no desire to harm Christians the other (trying to like her food, appreci- lationship building, because happy faces but instead are eager to develop friend- ate her customs, etc.), but the other is are inviting, but angry or fearful faces ships with them. You can form healthy not. Immigrants who want to integrate lead to shame-based transactions such as bonds with Muslims. I regularly show my often make greater eff orts to connect in we described earlier. How can someone students a visual survey fi lmed in Dhaka, order to be accepted. But this does not build healthy relations with Muslims in Bangladesh, over a week, in which necessarily lead to secure bonds, because a context of fear, anger, and terror when researchers asked random pedestrians a both members of the dyad must try to few people have memories of joyful single question: “Are you happy?” Scores fi nd enjoyment in each other. When a re- encounters with Muslims? Usually rela- of interviewees share about their daily lationship is positive for one person in the tionships start with positive emotional joys and struggles, many with genuine dyad, this does not mean the two have experiences, even if later there might be and spontaneous smiles that are warm become securely attached. I have talked to stress or confl ict. In such cases, repairing and welcoming. As was noted earlier, many cross-cultural workers coming back the relationship will be easier because another video, called the “Happy British from overseas and saying: “We had such of the memory of the joyful times of Muslims,” surprises Christian audiences a great time; we laughed with people; we

33:3 Fall 2016 106 Joyful Witness: An Excerpt of Muslim-Christian Attachment

feel really connected; we have become you it’s diff erent. I have gotten to know diff erent cultures what they do to enjoy friends.” But the words “connected” and you throughout the years.” So much was a relationship, the responses vary widely. “attached” can have diverse meanings her mind fi lled with negative images, Some may say, “Going to a baseball game and do not necessarily mean securely this church member was not consciously together.” Other will say, “Taking a cruise attached. After their comments, I always aware that she liked a person from a together.” And others will say, “Enjoying ask them to tell stories of mutual joy to Muslim background. Once she became a meal together.” Th is poses a problem assess whether they formed an attach- aware of it, this changed everything. She for dyadic encounters. What if the joy ment bond. I then ask if they experienced realized she could develop bonds with that other cultures value is not joy to me? shame and the return to mutual joy. other people from the estranged commu- Am I ever going to experience moments nity. Th is example comports with my be- of shared joy, or pleasurable moments I have noticed that in times of cross- lief that to secure healthier relationships that strengthen the bond? When I meet cultural confl icts, members of one group between Muslims and Christians we a person from another culture and want tend to forget that the opposite group must start at the micro level, and more to develop a bond with her, I often try has the capacity to share joy, laughter, specifi cally with healthy dyadic relation- to fi nd out what she enjoys doing. But and other positive emotional experi- ships between Muslims and Christians. doing what the other person enjoys will ences. Th is is probably why peacemakers not bring a secure bond in the long run. include times of common celebration But interfaith and intercultural aff ec- Finding these cross-cultural or interfaith and play to rebuild broken relationships tive transactions can prove challenging. spaces where both members of the dyad after wars and confl icts. Joy is not meant Anthropological observations highlight can say that they truly enjoy each other to erase all the pain but is a necessary in- that cultures and religions diverge in the is the key to developing healthy bonds. It gredient to repair broken relations. And often takes time. IJFM peacemakers know that every culture has feasts and celebrations that can become spaces for experiencing mutual joy. In cross-cultural Endnotes 1 Henri J. M. Nouwen, Bread for the Th e use of the word “dyadic” in human confl icts, we tend Journey: A Daybook of Wisdom and Faith attachment theory, referring to a relation- (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2006), 38. ship between two people, implies that to forget that the 2 Th e sympathetic branch of the attachment takes place one relationship autonomic nervous system is called the at a time. In childhood, although entire opposite group has the energy-expanding branch. See Allan N. communities can be involved in child capacity to share joy Schore, “Eff ects of a Secure Attachment rearing, children attach to individu- Relationship on Right Brain Develop- ment, Aff ect Regulation, and Infant Mental als who are sensitive to their emotional and laughter. Health,” Infant Mental Health Journal 22, regulatory needs. It is the same with no 1–2 (2001): 7–66. Muslim-Christian relations in adulthood. 3 Allan N. Schore, Aff ect Regulation Have you ever heard people say, “I love ways and contexts in which they display and the Origin of the Self: Th e Neurobiology Muslims,” or “I love the Saudis”? What and experience positive or negative emo- of Emotional Development (Hillside, NJ: does this really mean? Bonding occurs Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999), 97. tion. For example, wedding celebrations with individual people whom you can 4 Disa Sauter, “More Th an Happy: Th e in certain cultures can be perceived as name. Why do I emphasize this? Because Need for Disentangling Positive Emotions,” funerals in others because outsiders don’t I have seen too many people say, “Oh, Current Directions in Psychological Science see the same intensity of joy displayed. 19, no. 1 (2010): 3. I love this culture. I think the people Likewise, it may be improper to scream 5 Th eorists call it a Duchennes smile. are fantastic!” But they have never even and yell when meeting a friend in some 6 I try to encourage people to draw developed one single secure attachment cultures. Anyone observing people Muslim faces with a smile because there with a person from that country or reli- welcoming their loved ones in an airport are many happy Muslims in the world (but gion. Attachment takes place one dyad can see diff erences in the way people media do not often depict “happy Mus- at a time until large networks of relations from various cultures greet one another. lims”). Th us, Christians have to be proactive are formed. A friend of mine, born in a and be able to imagine that a smiley can When the intensity or display of joy Muslim family, reports that a member of also represent a Muslim person. does not match across cultures, relation- 7 her church made derogative comments In social sciences, “dyad” is a techni- ships may rupture. Th ere is no universal about Muslims, saying that she would cal term for a group of two. way to share joy in a relationship. never trust any. My friend replied, “But I was one of them! Why do you then “Objects” of joy may also diff er across cul- trust me?” Th e person replied, “But with tures and religions. If I asked people from

International Journal of Frontier Missiology

108 Article Responses

on the Antichrist to its logical conclusion—if we stretch Article it—billions of individuals who do not accept Jesus as Son of God would suddenly qualify as “antichrists.” Th e Jewish Responses rejection of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God would thus catapult all Jews into the antichrist category even more than all Muslims—since Islam holds a very high view of Jesus and accords him various unique titles and names, as Talman under- A Response to: scores in his paper. To therefore single out Muhammad and Islam as embodying the Antichrist and his world philosophy is “Is Muhammad Also Among pure prejudice. It is important to remind Christians that Jesus occupies the highest possible offi ce in Islam, that of a Prophet. the Prophets?” Having said all that, I think Talman has been rather selective in the choice of voices he cites to support his thesis. Talman by John Azumah quotes Patriarch Timothy’s rather enigmatic statement that Muhammad “walked in the path of the Prophets” but fails to Editor’s Note: Talman’s “Is Muhammad Also Among the highlight the fact that John of Damascus, a contemporary of Prophets?” appeared in IJFM 31:4. John Azumah has Timothy, denounced Muhammad as a false prophet and Islam listened to and interacted with Harley Talman on the subject as the Antichrist. In fact, some would say John’s views on of Muhammad and given a short response here. He has also Islam were more accepted within Eastern Orthodox Christian off ered his own perspective on the role of Muhammad in his circles than those of the Patriarch. Talman is equally selective contribution at the Fuller Seminary lectureship in 2015. It is in the leading contemporary Christian and secular scholars published as “Mission in the Islamic World: Making Th eological he cites as affi rming Muhammad’s prophethood with various and Missiological Sense of Muhammad” in the compendium entitled Th e State of Missiology Today: Global Innovations in qualifi cations. Th e problem with this approach is that one can Christian Witness, ed. Charles Van Engen (Downers Grove, easily come up with a string of equally respected Christian IL: InterVarsity Press, 2016), 197–214. and secular experts who have arrived at opposite and more cautious conclusions. Jacques Jomier and Christian Troll are two leading Christian Islamicists whose inquiry into the topic fi nd Talman’s piece very instructive and illuminating at leads them to more cautious conclusions. several points. I fully agree with and endorse the spirit I of Talman’s approach, which is one of “seeking con- While I fully agree with Talman that “the most widely structive dialogue with Muslims.” I also concur with several accepted version of Muhammad, based upon Islamic tradition, of the points made in the article, including the unreliability is dubious,” I struggle with how such a dismissive, reductionist of traditional Islamic sources and received narratives, the and revisionist approach towards mainstream Islamic sources infl uence of Jewish Christianity and other variant Christian and teaching helps his eff orts to seek “constructive dialogue” teaching on nascent Islam, and the fact that a number of with Muslims. Talman even talks about rejecting parts of the early Christians did not demonize Islam or Muhammad Islamic revelation “that are in error.” It appears to me that in but viewed it as a form of Christianity, albeit an aberrant order to accord Muhammad the status of a prophet of sorts, form. I support Talman’s point that the biblical and theo- Talman has to “Christianize” or “convert” Muhammad into logical basis some Christians have used to question and an anonymous Christian. Mainstream Muslim sources about reject Muhammad’s prophetic claims does not stand up to Muhammad are rejected while marginal Christian sources are serious exegetical scrutiny. Also, as a good Presbyterian, I heavily drawn upon to arrive at his conclusions. In fact, what fully share Talman’s concern about upholding the sover- Talman has done with Muhammad is exactly what Muslims eignty of God—i.e., that God has and does use whomever have done with Jesus. In order for Jesus to be a prophet in and whatever he chooses. Prophecy continues! Islam, he is portrayed in an Islamic garb. Likewise for Talman, in order for Muhammad to qualify as a prophet, he has to be Furthermore, I take issue with those who latch onto the teach- re-created in a Christian image. In eff ect, Talman succeeds in ing in 1 & 2 John to portray Muhammad and Islam as fi tting creating a Muhammad that many Christians will fi nd diffi cult the bill of the Antichrist. I have heard this interpretation to accept, and no Muslim will recognize. both in casual conversation and in sophisticated missiological forums. In fact, I attended a missiological forum in 2014 where My main issue is with Talman’s methodology, which Martin the AntiChrist issue was raised in response to Talman’s presen- Accad alludes to as comparative, apologetic and missiologi- tation. My main point on the AntiChrist argument is that the cal.1 It’s not that a “Christian Muhammad” is entirely without teaching in the Bible was primarily directed at false teachers merit; in fact such a Muhammad could serve a very useful from within the church. In my view, if we take the teaching missiological purpose, as Talman points out in his paper.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology John Azumah and Harley Talman 109 o take Muhammad out of the Islamic milieu or to seek to fi t him into some kind of Christian worldview in order to accord him “some kind of positive prophetic T status” will be rejected as part of the “imperialist missionary endeavor.” If that were his purpose, Talman should be more explicit Th ese tentative answers are all in keeping with the spirit of about that instead of mentioning “seeking a constructive humility Talman calls for. But there is no doubt that many dialogue with Muslims.” Talman’s methodology of assessing Christians will regard these answers as frustratingly vague Muhammad through a Christian lens is the same methodol- and possibly confl icting, while Muslims will reject them all ogy used by polemicists to brand him a false prophet. Th e outright as reductionist and insulting. only diff erence is the conclusions and, one may add, the To take Muhammad out of the Islamic milieu or to seek to fi t ultimate purpose of the assessment. I don’t know exactly what him into some kind of Christian worldview in order to accord Accad means when he talks about studying Islam “scientifi - him “some kind of positive prophetic status” will be rejected cally,” but I share with him the conviction that any “Christian by Muslims as part of the “imperialist missionary endeavor,” theology of Islam” has to engage Islam on its own merits and rightly so. Th inking Muslims will wonder what use there from within its own traditions and mainstream texts. is for anyone to affi rm Muhammad as a prophet and to then Th ere is no question that any serious scholarship of Islam reject the import of his mission. Prophets did not come to should treat the Qur’an and the Hadiths with critical open- make fans. Th ey came to gather followers (companions and ness. However, a truly academic research has to endeavor to disciples), people who would heed their message and change engage the internal logic of Islamic thought: that the human their ways of thinking and life in conformity with prophetic problem is ignorance, not original sin; that God does not reveal teaching. Th inking Muslims don’t need any affi rmation or Himself but his will in the Qur’an as a guide for human- validation of Muhammad’s prophetic role from Christians ity; that the Qur’an is the literal, uncreated, dictated Word just for the sake of it. Th at would amount to Muslims or Speech of God, not inspired; that Muhammad is the last conceding to Christians the role of “fi nal arbiters” in religious vessel of revelation; and that Islam is the fi nal and preferred matters—a role Talman and other Christians of their persua- religion of God. If one is to take the Islamic witness seriously, sion seem to be claiming. All Muslims would reject this as a there are only two possible outcomes. Becoming a Muslim usurpation that is most condescending. (not “muslim”) or opting out of Islam. Whether talking about To be sure, Talman (and those opposed to his position) will the prophetic offi ce of Muhammad or the Sonship of Jesus argue that they are pursuing an internal Christian conversa- Christ—these cannot be merely conferred or rejected ratio- tion aimed at making theological and missiological sense of nally on the basis of propositional statements or texts alone. In Muhammad. It is one thing, however, to make theological the fi nal analysis, Muhammad is not a prophet merely because sense of the other, and another thing to make theological the Qur’an says he is. He is a prophet because a community space for the other. Th e latter could easily end up renouncing, of believers, Muslims, confess him as such. Th ere can be no revising, or downplaying orthodox doctrines on both sides. prophet (or savior) without a body of believers. In other words, A more helpful approach would be to take Islamic texts, tradi- the offi ces of prophet and savior are conferred and validated by tions and claims seriously, debate and evaluate them rigorously the umma in Islam and the church in Christianity. and fairly as is, maintaining the integrity of both traditions as In what is clearly a very thoughtful, well researched and care- far as possible by drawing conclusions that the mainstream on fully considered analysis, Talman off ers no clear answer to both sides can recognize and live with. It is about respecting the question “Is Muhammad also among the Prophets?” His and preserving the internal logic and integrity of both tradi- answers come in the following statements: “we may be able to tions. Daniel Madigan is one who has refl ected on the critical more readily support his being a prophet of the common kind— importance of understanding and respecting the integrity not the canonical kind (like the prophetic and apostolic writers of the truth claims of Islam and Christianity. He empha- of the Holy Bible).” And “we could allow the possibility that sizes that for Muslims, Muhammad is not the Word made Muhammad is a prophet in the biblical sense.” Also, “I believe fl esh but the bearer of the Word (as Mary is for Christians). there is biblical warrant for considering the possibility of some Madigan believes that a fi rm grasp of this will prevent kind of positive prophetic status for Muhammad.” He concludes: Christian responses to Muhammad from making the fun- damental category mistake of assuming that Muhammad “is This paper has provided theological, missiological, and historical being proposed as a replacement [or supplementary] savior.”2 sanction for expanding constricted categories of prophethood to allow Christians to entertain the possibility of Muhammad Understanding and respecting the integrity of the respec- being other than a false prophet. He may be seen as fulfi lling a tive mainstream teachings is vital in any discussion of a prophetic role . . . (all my emphasis). Christian theology of Muhammad and Islam. When I do

33:3 Fall 2016 110 Article Responses ne student said he did not think Muhammad was a false prophet, but rather a fallen prophet. He added that nearly all the biblical prophets had O their own weaknesses! Th is was closer to my own answer to the question. that, I end up with a similar attitude, as did Talman, of humility. After teaching a class in a theological seminary “Is Muhammad Also Among in Ghana on the Muslim view of Muhammad, I posed the question: “What sayst thou of Muhammad?” In response, the Prophets?”: A Response to some students said, “He is defi nitely a false prophet”! But one student responded that he did not think Muhammad John Azumah was a false prophet, but rather a fallen prophet. He added that nearly all the biblical prophets had their own weak- by Harley Talman nesses! Th is was closer to my own answer to the question. very much appreciate Dr. John Azumah’s constructive Better still, rather than trying to fi t Muhammad into a interaction with my article. He is gracious and fair to Christian framework in order to accord him some prophetic highlight our many signifi cant points of agreement (such role, I view and respect him as the Prophet of Islam—a prophet I as the inappropriate application of anti-Christ passages to whose mission transformed a polytheistic society into a Muhammad). However, Azumah also has points of concern monotheistic one; a prophet whose family life, devotional and and disagreement which will be the focus of my remarks. spiritual experiences, and public life (in all their complexities and contradictions in Islamic traditions) have shaped the col- Selectivity of Sources lective memories, identities and the trajectory of the religious Azumah correctly observes that I was selective in the orientations of multitudes over the centuries. To use an anal- choice of scholars that I mentioned. Although I did give ogy, it is like asking me, a Ghanaian, whether Robert Mugabe some indications of this fact,1 I might have stated my aim is a president. My answer will be, of course yes. He is President in doing so more clearly—namely, to demonstrate that my of Zimbabwe! He is not president of Ghana and therefore proposal is not a radical innovation, given the existence not my president. It is in the same vein that I see Muhammad of some respected Christian theologians and scholars of as Prophet of Islam. I take this view for the sake of the over a Islam who argue for some type of positive prophetic role for billion and half Muslims around the world—some of them Muhammad. At the same time, I did make note of some fellow citizens, some neighbors, friends and acquaintances, 2 and some family relations whom I respect and honor— voices to the contrary, including John of Damascus. without accepting or confessing Muhammad as Prophet (of Th us, the sources and fi gures that I selected were designed Islam). In return I expect Muslims to honor and respect Jesus to create space for consideration of my proposal. Because as the Lord and Savior of over two billion Christians in the I have often seen and experienced such strongly negative world, even if they can’t accept and confess him as such. reactions of Christians, I expressed the hope that “for those who cannot accept this, perhaps this study will at least John Azumah, PhD, is an ordained minister of the Presbyterian reduce the level of indignation toward those who diff er 3 Church of Ghana. John did his doctoral work with the University with them.” I am delighted that such a reaction was not of Birmingham, UK, on Islam in Africa and Christian-Muslim refl ected in Azumah’s response. relations. He is currently an associate professor of World Christi- anity and Islam at Columbia Th eological Seminary, USA. Before Contribution to Constructive Dialog that, John Azumah served as lecturer in Islamic and Mission Th e term “dialog” in some circles is still associated with studies and director of the Centre for Islamic Studies at the Lon- the ecumenical eff orts of theological liberals to advance an don School of Th eology in the United Kingdom. He has taught in agenda of universalism. Instead, Azumah and I both seek theological seminaries in India, South Africa, and Ghana and was “constructive dialog” that opens doors of opportunity for a research fellow at the Akrofi -Christaller Institute in Ghana. witness, removes barriers to hearing the gospel, and builds bridges of friendship, respect, and trust that can withstand Endnotes the weight of biblical truth—so that Muslims might experi- 1 Martin Accad’s article in response to Talman in IJFM 31:4 ence salvation off ered by Jesus Christ. Such dialog is not (Winter 2014), 191. confi ned to formal, public symposiums, but encompasses 2 Daniel, S. J. Madigan, “Jesus and Muhammad: Th e Suf- fi ciency of Prophecy,” in Bearing the Word: Prophecy in Biblical and informal encounters as well. However, while Azumah Qur’ānic Perspective, ed. Michael Ipgrave (London: Church House affi rms the value of my methodology for Christian missiol- Publishing, 2005), 90–99. ogy, he views that purpose and enhanced dialog as mutually

International Journal of Frontier Missiology John Azumah and Harley Talman 111 ather than accepting the pejorative view of Muhammad that dominates Christian apologetics, I have examined our tradition in light of the scriptures, R unnoticed voices in history, and alternative per spectives of modern thinkers. exclusive (since my position diff ers so signifi cantly from Would not a Christian who says, “I respect Muhammad as traditional Islamic notions). Th is indicates a lack of clarity having a prophetic role or mission, though I do not con- on my part. So let me emphasize that my article is aimed sider him a prophet the way that you do,” 8 fi nd more favor fi rstly and primarily at Christians to spur us to rethink our with Muslims than one who says, “I respect Muhammad as missiology and theology—as I stated, your prophet, but we do not accept him as a prophet (and This paper has provided theological, missiological, and in fact deem him a false prophet)”? Moreover, whereas the historical sanction for expanding constricted categories of former response does not mislead the Muslim, but rather prophethood to allow Christians to entertain the possibility of leads him to ask for elaboration, the latter is unlikely to be Muhammad being other than a false prophet.4 uttered in dialog.9 Martin Accad correctly observes that the primary value Respecting the Integrity of the Islamic Tradition of my reassessment of Muhammad is to create space for Azumah emphasizes the need to engage Islam on its own Christians to rethink our theology of Muhammad and merits. I appreciate his (and Madigan’s) contention that it Islam—not to off er a compelling apologetic to Muslims.5 is important for us to respect Islamic texts and traditions. For as he emphasizes (and as I affi rmed), the possibili- Certainly, Muslims need to see that we appreciate and ties I explored diff er greatly from typical Islamic views of have understood that which they hold so dear. Admittedly, Muhammad’s prophethood.6 my proposal challenges their tradition and therein lies the Nevertheless, I also envision my proposal as promoting rub—we know that people naturally resist ideas that con- more constructive dialog with Muslims, because it shapes fl ict with their religious traditions. Th e Pharisees of Jesus’ our attitude toward Muhammad, and thus how we view time, for example, were more devoted to their traditions Islam. And as Accad elsewhere states: than to the word of God; but those with ears to hear could consider what Jesus had to say and reassess their beliefs Your view of Islam will affect your attitude to Muslims. Your in light of the word of God. Similarly, the opportunity attitude will, in turn, infl uence your approach to Christian- for more fruitful dialogue that I envision is based upon Muslim interaction, and that approach will affect the ultimate working more internally with the Qur’an against Islamic outcome of your presence as a witness among Muslims.7 tradition in order to reform that tradition. Th us, the understandings of Muhammad and prophet- Th is is not an uncommon or unreasonable posture even for hood that I have set forth should have a positive impact on many Muslims. Numerous Muslims scholars will acknowl- Christian-Muslim dialog by aff ecting our own attitudes as edge the problem of fabricated hadith, and are willing to ambassadors. I am glad that Azumah’s question has given reject those hadith that contradict the Qur’an. Th e dubious me opportunity to clarify this point. nature of the hadith collections (and rejection of Salafi sm) Th e last (and least impactful) contribution of my proposal is has led to growth in the number of “Qur’anists” (Qur’an- in direct dialog. Th ough it would not be readily accepted by only Muslims), signaling the willingness of some to reform Muslims, I do see my alternative perspectives on prophets their religious tradition. (Another voice calling for reform as a potential step forward in discussions with Muslims— of the Islamic tradition are those Muslims who seek to though certainly not resolving our diff erences. Despite dis- interpret the Qur’an and tradition in harmony with the sonance with Muslim beliefs and the necessity of explaining previous holy books which the Qur’an insists it confi rms, unfamiliar concepts, is it not likely to be an improvement instead of interpreting it through later sources).10 over traditional answers to the frequent Muslim query: “We Th erefore, I deem it appropriate, if not always appreciated, accept Christ Jesus as a true prophet, why do you not accept for us to bring to their attention where the Islamic tradition Muhammad as God’s prophet?” seems to contradict the Qur’an. In such cases, “respectful Th e conventional Christian position that “Muhammad is a engagement with the ‘internal logic of Islamic thought’” false prophet” is an aff ront to Muslims, and so for purposes does not necessarily preclude our challenging Islamic of diplomacy or self-preservation, most Christians are teachings. For instance, Azumah notes that Islamic teach- compelled to hide their conviction. But Muslims familiar ing rejects the notion of original sin. But as Woodberry with Christianity have seen our true colors. Hence, there is has shown, Muslims have overlooked Qur’anic verses and reason to hope that my proposal may be viewed by many Islamic voices that align with biblical perspectives on this Muslims as a more conciliatory position on Muhammad. subject.11 Can we not likewise challenge Muslims to attempt

33:3 Fall 2016 112 Article Responses do not off er a clear answer to the question posed in my article’s title . . . . My purpose is to provide perspectives that can facilitate attitudinal change I among Christians that will allow for re-examination of this issue. to harmonize apparent diff erences, given the multitude of since I am only making a plea for Christians to make verses in the Qur’an that command active belief in the prior room for proposals like my own. But my proposed position scriptures and the impossibility of their corruption?12 Of does allow us to accede more honor to Muhammad while course as Christians, we are obliged to make the Bible our remaining faithful to the scriptures. By putting Muhammad fi nal arbiter—as also the Qur’an instructs us to do.13 in a positive category of prophethood, Christians can now One advantage of my proposal that reassesses Muhammad reply that they can accept Muhammad as a prophet in a as prophet is that it allows us to model for Muslims that way that is quite similar to how Muslims accept and honor which we invite them to emulate, namely, our readiness to Jesus as a prophet—they grant him many characteristics question our own religious tradition. Rather than accepting common to our understanding, but there are also funda- the pejorative view of Muhammad that dominates Christian mental diff erences. apologetics, I have re-examined our tradition in light of Azumah’s warnings about Muslim reactions to a “dismissive, the scriptures, unnoticed voices in history, and alternative reductionist and revisionist approach toward mainstream perspectives of modern thinkers, calling for a reform of our Islamic sources” are well taken. But confronting this sensi- tradition. We are merely asking Muslims to do the same tive issue is essential. Decades ago, Guilio Basetti-Sani with regard to their own tradition. For example, hadith asserted that Muslim exegetes must be persuaded to accept accounts of Muhammad performing miracles directly con- the application of principles of scientifi c and literary criti- tradicts the Qur’an which insists he performed no miracles cism (which has already occurred in biblical studies): “Th is is (apart from the Qur’an itself ). Moreover, the Qur’an the fi rst and most urgent condition for entering upon eff ec- insists it brings nothing new, but is a confi rmation of the tive dialogue between Muslim and Christian.”16 Hans Kung Scriptures (not abrogation of them); also the Qur’an (con- likewise declared, trary to Islamic tradition) exalts Jesus above other prophets (including Muhammad). Are these not valid grounds for We shall make no real progress in Christian-Muslim dialogue unless we come to terms on the notion of truth required for encouraging Muslims to re-examine their tradition? the use of historicocritical instruments . . . the distance between Azumah asserts that Muslims would view an attempt to fi t the modern approach to the Bible and the traditional approach Muhammad into a Christian worldview as an “imperialist to the Qur’an is at present enormous. But it is not, I would missionary endeavor.” Th is is certainly a possible outcome, but hope, unalterable and unbridgeable for all time and eternity.17 it is not a necessary one; I believe it very much depends on We bear many wounds from hostile encounters of the our attitude. As Christians, we are compelled to align all that past—unfortunately, apologists and polemicists have not we believe and do with the Bible—including how we view provided fertile ground for new approaches. But God can Muhammad and prophethood—as the Qur’an likewise com- give us dialogue partners of good will and open mind, and 14 mands us to do. We do not thereby imperialistically impose if we are prepared in diff erent ways, the outcomes can be our view upon them, but in contexts of dialog, when Muslims much diff erent. complain against Christian rejection of Muhammad as prophet, we can humbly state positions such as mine as that Lastly, I must disagree with Azumah’s assertion that if we which accords with our understanding of our scriptures. take “the Islamic witness seriously,” then we must either become a Muslim “or opt out of Islam.” As I explained (in Azumah surmises that Muslims will “wonder what use it is my article in IJFM 31:4, 185, fi rst column), this is a false for anyone to affi rm Muhammad as a prophet and reject the dichotomy; there are other options—and especially if we import of his mission.” But this is little diff erent from the move beyond binary categories. Muslim position that accepts Jesus as a prophet, but rejects our understanding of his salvifi c mission. Surely half a loaf is Indeterminate Nature of Muhammad’s Prophetic Role better than none. Moreover, can we not challenge Muslims Azumah correctly observes that I do not off er a clear answer regarding what Muhammad’s mission was? Numerous to the question posed in my article’s title and that this may Qur’anic verses would argue that his mission was not to be frustrating to some Christians. But given that critical abrogate Christianity and discipleship to Christ.15 study of the Qur’an is still in its infancy so that revisionist In addition, contrary to what Azumah implies, I do not see historians have not achieved a consensus, it will be some time that I am claiming to be the fi nal arbiter for Muslims—I before we can agree on a more precise defi nition of the nature am not even claiming to be the fi nal arbiter for Christians, of Muhammad’s prophetic role. My purpose at this point is

International Journal of Frontier Missiology John Azumah and Harley Talman 113 to provide perspectives that can facilitate attitudinal change from a Muslim perspective. So by suggesting that there may be among Christians that will allow for re-examination of this some space in the Christian biblical worldview to consider Muham- issue. Others before me have endeavored to do the same.18 mad as in some ways a prophet, the author is not conceding much at all, and certainly not for the purpose of ‘pleasing’ Muslims. Harley False or Fallen Prophet? Talman’s work and conclusions are indeed more useful for Chris- tians who are trying to make sense of Islam in their desire to reach In closing, Azumah states his preference is to recognize and Muslims with the gospel.” respect Muhammad as “the Prophet of Islam.” However, 7 Martin Accad, “Christian Attitudes Toward Islam and I should like to emphasize that despite his questions and Muslims: A Kerygmatic Approach,” in Evelyne A. Reisacher, ed., concerns, Azumah’s own position seems not far from my Toward Respectful Understanding and Witness among Muslims: own. He seems to reject the “false prophet” characteriza- Essays in Honor of J. Dudley Woodberry (Pasadena: William Carey tion of Muhammad (aligning with the primary thrust Library, 2012), 31. of my article), acknowledging that his student’s view of 8 We can state the Injil commands us to evaluate prophecy Muhammad as a “fallen prophet” is “closer to his own.” To (1 Cor. 14:29) on the basis of the Bible, accepting that which is cor- regard Muhammad as a fallen prophet is to remove him rect and rejecting that which is contrary to it (1 Th es. 5:20–22). 9 from the false prophet category and place him in an alter- At least in Muslim majority countries, they are unlikely to say that they hold Muhammad to be a false prophet. native category of prophet—the very thing I have argued 10 Surah 10:94 among other verses. for. Consequently, despite Azumah’s disagreements and 11 J. Dudley Woodberry, “Diff erent Diagnoses of the Human concerns, in the end it appears that we may be in agreement Condition,” in Muslims and Christians on the Emmaus Road, edited about my major point—the noises he made sound like by J. Dudley Woodberry, 149–160 (Monrovia, CA: MARC, 1989). music to my ears! IJFM 12 Surah 6:34,115; 10:64, 18:27, etc. 13 Surah 5:47 “So let the people of the Injil judge by what Allah has revealed in it. Whoever doesn’t judge by what Allah has Harley Talman has worked with Muslims for over 35 years, in- revealed are unbelievers.” cluding two decades in the Arab world and Africa, during which 14 Surah 5:47 (and also v. 43). he was involved in church planting, theological education, and 15 e.g., Surah 5:48: “for each of you [ Jews, Christians, and humanitarian aid. Talman holds a Th M from Dallas Th eological Muslims] we have made a law and a way” so that you will “compete Seminary and a PhD from Fuller Th eologcial Seminary. He pres- with one another in good deeds.” ently teaches Islamic studies at a graduate school. 16 Th e Qur’an in the Light of Christ, Ron George (ed.), (Win- press, 2000), 96, is a reprint of Guilio Basetti-Sani, Th e Koran in the Light of Christ: A Christian Interpretation of the Sacred Book of Endnotes Islam, translated by W. Russell Carroll (Chicago: Franciscan Herald 1 See Harley Talman, ‘Is Muhammad Also Among the Press, 1977). Prophets?’” IJFM 31:4 [Oct–Dec 2014]: “Th e above examples are 17 Hans Kung: “Muhammad and the Qur’an: Prophecy suffi cient to show that some prominent Christians have recognized and Revelation,” in Christianity and the World Religions: Paths of or affi rmed Muhammad as a prophet, albeit with various meanings Dialogue with Islam, Hinduism,and Buddhism, Hans Kung, Josef of the term,” 184; I acknowledged that regarding the controversial van Ess, Heinrich von Stietencron, and Heinz Bechert, New York: question “Is Muhammad also among the prophets” that “the majority Doubleday, 1986, 35–36. of Christians would answer ‘absolutely not,’ some are more tenta- 18 Basetti-Sani was willing to entertain the possibility of Mu- tive or affi rming,’’ 169–170; also “none of the great Islamicists knew hammad’s prophethood by interpreting the Qur’an through the lens “quite where to land” on this issue” but my hope was that readers of of the Bible in the light of Christ. my article “will appreciate the reasons why this challenge has been so perplexing for so many,” 170; and again in the conclusion I state that “sincere and faithful Christians through the centuries have held vastly disparate viewpoints concerning the prophet of Islam—that may not change greatly,” 185. 2 Talman, 186, footnote 18: “John of Damascus reacted scath- ingly to the Islamization of the civil service in Syria. After the Byzantines lost political dominion to Muslim armies, the polemicist Nicetas of Byzantium [c. 842–912] vented the most vitriolic slurs against them and their prophet that he could concoct.” 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid., 185, emphasis added. 5 Martin Accad, “Towards a Theology of Islam: A Response to Harley Talman’s ‘Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?’” IJFM 31:4 (2014):193. 6 Ibid. Accad states: “Despite Talman’s conciliatory approach to Muhammad and Islam, his conclusions are by no means mainstream

33:3 Fall 2016 UNDERSTANDING INSIDER MOVEMENTS

Understanding Insider Movements Disciples of Jesus within Diverse Religious Communities

ISBN: 978-0-87808-041-0 Harley Talman, John Jay Travis (Editors) WCL | Pages 719 | Paperback 2015 List Price: $39.95

For the fi rst time in history, large numbers of people from the world’s major non-Christian religions are following Jesus as Lord. Surprisingly for many Western Christians, they are choosing to do so within the religious communities of their birth and outside of institutional Christianity. How does this work, and how should we respond to these movements?

This long-awaited anthology brings together some of the best writings on the topic of insider movements. Diverse voices explore this phenomenon from the perspectives of Scripture, history, theology, missiology, and the experience and identity of insider believers. Those who are unfamiliar with the subject will fi nd this book a crucial guide to a complex conversation. Students and instructors of mission will fi nd it useful as a reader and reference volume. Field workers and agencies will discover in these chapters welcome starting points for dialogue and clearer communication.

WilliamWilli CCarey LibLibrary

MISSIONBOOKS.ORG William Carey Library

Engaging Islamic Traditions Challenging Islamic Traditions Wealth, Women, & God Using the Hadith in Christian Ministry Searching Questions about the Hadith How to Flourish Spiritually and to Muslims from a Christian Perspective Economically in Tough Places Bernie Power, Author Bernie Power, Author Miriam Adeney | Sadiri Joy Tira, Authors

The Hadith have long been neglected by The Hadith are Islam’s most influential texts The Arabian Gulf—the wealthiest country in the Christians, yet they may hold the key to after the Qur’an. They outline in detail what world is located here, as is the world’s busiest reaching Muslims with the good news of the Qur’an often leaves unsaid. The Hadith airport. Not many citizens are Christians. Jesus Christ. In this ground-breaking book, are a foundation for Islamic law and theology Not much religious conversion is allowed. Yet the earliest traditions of Islam are assessed and a key to understanding the worldview of through migrant women, some of the most from a biblical perspective. Insights into the Islam and why many Muslims do the things powerless people in the great sweep of human Islamic worldview and potential springboards they do. This book subjects the Hadith to a labor exchanges today, God’s grace is at work. to Christian truth are uncovered along the way. critical analysis from a biblical perspective. In this book you will find: For those contextualizing the gospel to Muslim In a scholarly and respectful way, it exposes • Primary research not available anywhere friends and colleagues, this book seeks for significant inconsistencies within these ancient else, narrated in a highly readable style concord and connection with Muslim thinking, documents and highlights potential problems • Globalization, diasporas, and massive while maintaining a clear commitment to with the Muslim-Christian interface. culture change Jesus Christ and his gospel. • Jesus women—maids, nurses, pastors— experiencing rape, jail, and the opportunity to mentor hundreds • A guide for group Bible study and reflection at the end of each chapter

These Gulf women’s stories, like those in the Bible, teach lessons that apply to us in many countries.

List Price $19.99 • Our Price $15.99 List Price $19.99 • Our Price $15.99 List Price $12.49 • Our Price $9.99

ISBN: 978-0-87808-491-3 ISBN: 978-0-87808-489-0 ISBN: 978-0-87808-623-8 Bernie Power (Author) Bernie Power (Author) Miriam Adeney, Sadiri Joy Tira (Authors) WCL | Pages 298 | Paperback 2016 WCL | Pages 296 | Paperback 2016 WCL | Pages 214 | Paperback 2013

MISSIONBOOKS.ORG | 1-800-MISSION 116 Article Responses

Muhammad’s prophethood,” but he still insists that his “pro- Article posal will fi nd greater favor with Muslims than the common Christian contention that Muhammad was a false prophet.” Responses I fundamentally disagree. Th e proposal off ered by Talman is intentionally misleading to Muslims. He states that he believes that Muhammad is not a “true prophet,” yet suggests con- veying to Muslims that their prophet had “a prophetic role, “Is Muhammad Also Among function or mission.” Muslims do not have a “prophet in some form” category, or a “non-prophetic” prophet. Th ey do not have the Prophets?”: A Second a non-prophet with “a prophetic function,” or a not-a-true- prophet with a “prophetic role of some other order.” Th ese are Response to Harley Talman fanciful categories. Lacking even the biblical concept of proph- ecy as a spiritual gift, Muslims have only prophets, or not. Th ey by Ayman Ibrahim have categories only for prophets and the general popula- tion. If Talman seeks to achieve a “constructive dialogue with Muslims,” it can hardly be done through creating such vague Editor’s Note: Talman’s “Is Muhammad Also Among the categories from outside the Muslim context. His attempts to Prophets?” appeared in IJFM 31:4. Talman and Ibrahim’s fi rst “over”-contextualize brought him far beyond even the Muslim exchange of responses appeared in IJFM 32:4. context itself and what Muslims can comfortably trust. arley Talman is very kind to respond to my fi ve In my investigation of his proposal, I consulted with three critical observations on his position concerning Muslim friends: the Imam in my current city in the States, H the prophethood of Muhammad. I am sincerely the Imam of Chiang Mai mosque in Th ailand, and my dear honored that he considered my response and took the time Egyptian Muslim friend whom I have known since elemen- to off er his constructive feedback. His detailed response to tary school. I asked them all one question, repeating Talman’s my critique refl ects his genuine heart and faithful desire proposal and quoting him: what do you think of a Christian to present a Christ-like attitude. My understanding of saying “I respect Muhammad as having a prophetic role, historical accounts and biblical authority does lead me to function or mission—even though I do not consider him a diverge with him on critical issues. But, I have no desire prophet the way that you do”? Th e answer was unsurprisingly to reduce this exchange to two competing camps. We simple: Are you playing a word game or trying to deceive me? are simply having a fruitful discussion for the purpose of Is he a prophet or not? What are you really trying to prove? mutual edifi cation. Fundamentally, I embrace him as a Th ough I honestly expected this answer, I sincerely attempted brother in Christ. to follow Talman’s suggestion. In addition, I asked a Moroccan Muslim background Christian the same question, and he said, His response did touch every comment I addressed. “Th is would be compromising the Bible and appears to be However, throughout his response he seems to have used a clear lie.” Th us, while these four individuals serve as a very the same methodology he adopted in the initial article, small sample of people, it is telling of how Muslims may react namely, elevating the value of selected secondary studies to Talman’s ambitious proposal. Can we fi nd a Muslim who above crucial primary sources, as well as avoiding inter- would accept that Muhammad had a “prophetic function,” acting with works that oppose his thesis and arguments. rather than being a prophet? Is there a chance of convincing Th ough I demonstrated in my first response how selectivity a Muslim that the Qur’an actually suggests that Muhammad and heavy reliance on secondary studies can be misleading, possessed a “prophetic role of some other order” but he was his response to my article still used that exact approach. not a “true prophet” in some of his teachings? I absolutely Having said that, and with full respect and gratitude, here I fi nd this fanciful, and wonder whether it is a mere semantic off er my critical comments on his response to my critique. attempt to support an argumentum ex silentio or an argument I will demonstrate how his methodology suff ers from an based on poorly derived inference and analogy. In the fi nal over-reliance on cherry-picked secondary works, how his analysis, imagined reasons are hardly persuasive. Th e fact that application brings foreign concepts into the Muslim con- this whole approach is useless should cause us to question the text, how his hermeneutics is severely reductionist, and how value of doing such strenuous “academic” work to craft new even the Qur’an refutes his claims. categories of thought which are unacceptable to Muslims and I will begin by discussing the most important point (which thus not even useful in Christian ministry. comes in his last comment) concerning our witness to In my judgment, the major fl aw of Talman’s approach is Muslims. He admits and agrees that “the possibilities [he] that we place the cart before the horse. Instead of examin- explored diff er greatly from typical Islamic views of ing the Scriptures and paying attention to what the texts

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 117

say on prophets and prophethood, especially after the were to accept Muhammad as a prophet in one of the advent of Jesus our Lord, we reverse the order: we begin by ways posited above, then could we affi rm this to Muslims bringing a topic, suggesting an argument that fi ts our para- without obliging ourselves (in their thinking) to become digm, and then we go digging into the Bible to see what Muslims?” He then goes on to answer in the affi rmative: can be made to support our argument—eisegeting instead “I think that Christ followers could do so and be faithful of exegeting. Th is appears clearly in the diff erence between to biblical authority.” If I am mistaken, then I completely Talman’s interpretation and mine concerning the “test” of apologize, and now move to his stated intention, as in fact 1 John 4:1–3. He did not engage the passage at all in his there appears to be a change in his position between his initial article, and when I brought it up as a crucial passage initial article and his response to my piece. In his response for the topic under study, he simply dismissed it as irrel- to my critical review, he states that “Th e major thrust of evant. He cautions his reader against the signifi cance and [this] article was to move the discussion about the Prophet application of my interpretation, relying (again) on selected of Islam beyond such binary thinking about prophethood.” secondary studies that completely support his argument, But, this “thrust” does not easily harmonize with phrases and dismissing my comment as less than valid. which speak of attributing prophethood to Muhammad “in While I respect his mentioning several studies suggesting the biblical sense,” and calling Christ followers to “affi rm the context of the Epistle of John, these studies are simply this to Muslims.” Th is is confusing, ambiguous, and vague, an attempt to explain what the authors think about the reli- at the very least. Does this suggest that we need to think gious and historical context of the inspired text. However, about Muhammad and his prophethood in general in a they do not invalidate the idea that a theological concept “spectrum” sense? Was he a prophet at some point, and not- borne out of one context may be equally applicable in other a-prophet at another? How on earth would we know, and circumstances. We cannot elevate the context above the text. who should decide the criteria for a so-called prophethood Th e text is clearly concerned with the relationship between “of some other order”? Should we even contemplate a scale the Father and the Son (see also John 5:21–23). Do we of prophethood? Was he divinely inspired in just a specifi c need this text to mention Muhammad by name so that the period? (Th is would lead to a whole diff erent discussion on truths inherent in it can be applied in this case? If the text the inspiration of the Qur’an.) All these rhetorical, dialecti- is really a test against Docetists or against the Cerinthian cal questions point to the ambiguous language of Talman’s heresy, as the secondary studies cited by Talman suggest, proposal with its confusing meanings and defi nitions. does this then instruct us that, by any means, we cannot I argue that for this discussion to move forward, and for apply it and its crystal-clear stance to other cases, particu- others to understand his position completely, we need to be larly concerning the Father-Son relationship? If Talman very clear on defi nitions. In treating the Prophet of Islam, insists that 1 John 4 cannot be applied to Muhammad it is very important to be absolutely clear on our positions, because it can only be applied to Docetists/Cerinthians, as particularities and diff erences essential to each religion then I suppose most of the New Testament is completely cannot be set aside. Th ere needs to be careful and extensive irrelevant because it addresses doctrinal and behavior prob- discussion of what we mean by “prophethood” in this case. lems that have no exact modern parallel. Conversely (and Th is has not been done. In fact, Talman seems to be inten- hypothetically speaking), if the text was indeed prophesying tional about such vagueness and ambiguity, as he writes against Muhammad as the Anti-Christ, may we not still that it “is not necessary for us to conclusively determine apply it to Islam along with its clearly spelled-out warnings the nature of this prophetic role [of Muhammad].” Th is is about the Docetist and Cerinthian heresies? shocking—and theologically and missiologically dangerous. Second, Talman (of course unintentionally) misrepresents What is the point of avoiding clear defi nitions? Are there both his article and specifi c areas in my response. He states any really clear defi nitions? I doubt there are, as he seems that in my response I “allege” that he “attempt[s] to move to avoid stating them. Is the point simply language games Muhammad from the false-prophet to the true-prophet for the sake of peacemaking? Or is it because the Muslims category.” If I am wrong, then what does his calling to might like our discourse more if we use the word “prophet” “allow the possibility that Muhammad is a prophet in about “the Muslim prophet” even though we do not at all the biblical sense” mean? In fact, he states, “If Christians mean what Muslims actually mean by it? Surprisingly, this as Muhammad a prophet at some point, and not-a-prophet at another? How would we know? Who should decide the criteria for a prophet “of W some other order?” . . . His ambitious attempts will fail to convince.

33:3 Fall 2016 118 Article Responses is methodology severely distorts biblical hermeneutics and misinterprets historical accounts. He is patently selective, relies heavily on secondary H works . . . and avoids adequate engagement with counter arguments. treatment reminds me of the questionable doctrine of taqi- community led by Muhammad in his initial article as if it yya (concealment of one’s beliefs) among some Muslims. were a historical fact, here he states that he “would agree that it is debatable.” Nevertheless, he still does not want to Th ird, in response to my rejection of his claim that “during give up on this “ecumenical” notion, as it supports his thesis the fi rst century [of Islam], Christians did not seem to concerning Muhammad’s prophethood. He insists that think of Muhammad as a false prophet,” Talman kindly “although it cannot be proven, given the limited archaeo- admits that my use of the primary source Doctrina Jacobi logical evidence, Donner’s proposal is challenges his thesis. He actually writes that “at fi rst at least consistent glance” this source “would appear to refute [his] statement.” with that evidence.” What evidence? We are not told. How However, he attempts to deal with it in order for his thesis consistent? We are not told either. Th e fact is that even to survive. Unfortunately, he does so by simply citing a Donner himself is uncertain, as he writes: “But for those secondary study that agrees and supports his claim and by [ecumenical] Believers who were inclined to be sticklers on downplaying the importance of the primary source, claim- the question of God’s oneness, the Christian doctrine of ing that my reference is “essentially a footnote.” While this the Trinity must always have been a problem” (213, quoting is both incorrect and inaccurate, one may ask: so what? Q 5:76). Th is demonstrates Talman’s uncertainty of his own What is the problem with a footnote in a primary source? argument. What about the references I quoted from the In scholarly research, as I am sure Talman understands, Qur’an in my previous response to refute his proposal? No a footnote in a primary source is undoubtedly more sig- interaction from Talman. Even my reference to the Syriac nifi cant and important than one in a secondary work. Th e document, the Maronite Chronicle (written in the 660s), reference is not a footnote, and actually refers to the Arab was downplayed and simply dismissed without enough prophet as both false and antichrist (Hoyland 1997, 57). pieces of evidence from primary sources. I would refer the reader here to the earliest Muslim document, the Qur’an. It Th e Doctrina Jacobi is a very important source as it was clearly commands that ahl al-kitāb (“people of the Book,” written in 634, only two years after the traditional Muslim presumably Christians and Jews) are to live in submis- dating of Muhammad’s death (632). Th is is very signifi cant. sion, or humiliation, as they pay the jizya (tax) to Muslims Although the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad (Q 9:29). It accuses ahl al-kitāb of forgetting what was dates his death in 632, other “earlier and more numerous revealed (Q 5:13–14), or of twisting their description of the Jewish, Christian, Samaritan, and even Islamic sources revelation (Q 3:78), or of hiding the truth (Q 5:15). Does indicate that Muhammad survived to lead the conquest of this sound like an ecumenical movement led by a Prophet Palestine, beginning in 634–35” (See Stephen J. Shoemaker, “in the biblical sense”? Th e Death of a Prophet, 1–17, especially 2–3). If we consider the dating of these earlier writings, then Doctrina Jacobi is Furthermore, what about Muhammad’s message as set actually written in the same year of Muhammad’s death, forth in the Qur’an? His message not only does not confi rm which makes this primary source of exceptional impor- the Gospel, it contradicts and distorts it. Th e Qur’an not tance. Th e text of Doctrina Jacobi does not speak only of only claims that Muhammad is predicted by the Torah “the prophet who had appeared among the Saracens,” but (Q 7:157) and by Christ (Q 61:6), but accuses ahl al-kitāb also clarifi es, in the very same sentence, why he is “false” (Christians and Jews) of falsifying their scriptures (Q 2:42, by questioning: “do prophets come with a sword and a war 59; 3:187; 7:162) even to the extent of fabricating divine chariot?” (See Doctrina Jacobi Nuper Baptizati, 5.16.11, scripture as they “distort the scripture with their own hands, 209). While some secondary studies have argued that this then say, ‘Th is is what GOD has revealed’” (Q 2:79). Th e text does not identify Muhammad, one would ask: Was matter would be even worse if we consulted the earliest there a more famous “prophet” than Muhammad during Muslim commentaries on the Qur’an to see how they those days in Arabia? treated Christians and Jews. Fourth, Talman kindly admits that he was unaware of the Fifth, Talman claims that “the negative judgment of critical reviews I suggested of the “proposed ecumeni- Muhammad put forward by [me] is based on a particular cal movement [in early Islam] that fi rst included Jews interpretation of the Qur’an [concerning the incarnation].” and Christians [as argued by Fred Donner].” He appears He then calls us to believe that “the Qur’an can be read to slightly change his position. Although he treated the as affi rming the incarnation of the Word.” Th is is a seri- notion of the ecumenical non-confessional monotheist ous claim that needs adequate treatment. Although I was

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 119

initially “thrilled” to read about this “new” Qur’anic discov- I believe that the Qur’an in various passages grants a very ery, I was quickly disappointed. Talman never engages with signifi cant and unique status to Jesus (see, for instances, Qur’anic verses that are crystal clear such as: Q 3:42; 19:21; 19:34; 3:45; 3:47; 3:45–49; 4:171; 5:110–113). ḥ h, They said, “GOD has begotten a son!” Be He glorifi ed; never! However, Muhammad (as portrayed in the adīt sīra, (Q 2:116) maghāzī, and other literature) identifi es Jesus merely as a prophet. In my fi rst response, this is the point I made which They said, “GOD has begotten a son!” Be He glorifi ed. He was then rejected by Talman in his fi rst response to me. He is the Most Rich. To Him belongs everything in the heavens critiqued my contention that Muhammad regarded “Jesus and everything on earth. You have no proof to support such as merely a prophet,” by referring to the Qur’anic verses, a blasphemy. Are you saying about GOD what you do not although I specifi cally stated “For Muhammad, Jesus was know? (Q 10:68) merely a prophet.” Th is diff ers from the description off ered in The Most High is our only Lord. He never had a mate, nor a some parts of the Qur’an about Jesus. In this sense, however, son. (Q 72:3) we both seem to agree that later Muslim writings depict Jesus Proclaim, “He is the One and only GOD. The Absolute GOD. diff erently, and more negatively. Nonetheless, I cannot sup- Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.” (Q 112:1—3) port his position that the Qur’an “affi rms” the incarnation. All these verses are against any understanding of the incar- He states: “As for the denial that Jesus is the ‘son of God,’ nation of God’s Son. For the Qur’an, it never happened the Qur’an is rejecting the unbiblical notion of God sexu- and it is a severe blasphemy. Again, we are faced with a ally procreating with a human consort.” Th at’s fi ne, though huge, serious, and unsupported claim. It seems that Talman I fundamentally disagree, and ask: How do we know it is a wants the Qur’an to affi rm the incarnation. Unfortunately, rejection of unbiblical sexual notion? Apparently, we have it simply does not. Of course, Talman may treat these to consult extra-Qur’anic materials and post-Qur’anic verses as if they are rejecting Christian heresies rather than writings? Th e absence of Qur’anic evidence is not evidence. mainstream Christianity to support his claims. But to do In truth, the Qur’anic evidence completely refutes Talman’s so, he has to rely on post-Qur’anic writings and has to claims as one can see in the abovementioned four verses intentionally avoid engaging invaluable, detailed studies by which insist that Allah has no son. It should be completely skillful scholars that oppose his views, as I mentioned in my clear that if Surat al-Ikhlāṣ (Q 112) seems to refl ect a previous response. (See Griffi th 2008, 7–9; Reynolds, “On creedal Islamic language focusing on the fact that Allah has the Presentation,” [2014]: 42–54.) no son, we should take it seriously as rejecting mainstream Christianity, rather than simply disallowing distorted Instead of interacting with these crucial Qur’anic verses, pagan-Christianity thought that entails God and sex. Talman takes us on a bit of a distracting journey into Arabic. His Arabic reading is misleading and does not support his How much more do I need to explain to demonstrate the argument on the incarnation. He believes that it is “remark- essential errors in Talman’s argument? I am certain that able” that the Qur’an refers to the Word as “ismuhu” instead his intentions are exceptional. I have no doubt about his of “ismuhā.” However, this is simply irrelevant and can never desire to reach Muslims to Christ, and that is clear in his support that the Qur’an “affi rms” the incarnation of the Son diligent attempts to fi nd new and creative ways to interact of God. In fact, Talman himself states a disclaimer, referring with Muslims. However, in my humble estimation, the in passing to the more accurate reading (thus, I wonder why errors in his analysis and conclusions need sober attention. he added this point based on the Arabic language in the fi rst Th ey elevate the most important fi gure among Muslims, place). Th e suffi x in Q 3:45 refers to the son of Mary not the Muhammad, granting him a biblically and historically Word. Arabic speakers would not expect that the pronoun unsupported status. A subsequent conclusion of authors suffi x used to refer to the son of Mary would be feminine. following his conclusions would be to argue for the divine Th us, this was a bit of an ambitious move on Talman’s part revelation of the Qur’an, at least some parts of it, and per- but led to a dead end. Nevertheless, I agree with Talman that haps call Christians to believe that the Qur’an was actually the title “Word of God” is very signifi cant in referring to eternally kept in a celestial tablet. the uniqueness and supremacy of Jesus. I do not understand, In conclusion, Talman takes on a very sensitive subject and however, how he can see this as an affi rmation of the incarna- insists on its validity despite the obvious biblical, theological, tion especially in light of the four aforementioned verses. historical, and missiological gaps. His pursuit to create a new agree that the title “Word of God” is very signifi cant in referring to the uniqueness and supremacy of Jesus. I do not understand, how ever, how he I can see this as an affi rmation of the incarnation. 33:3 Fall 2016 120 Article Responses alman admits “the possibilities explored diff er greatly from typical Islamic views.” Th is cannot build bridges with Muslims. Muslims may justifi ably T accuse Christians of being subtle—if not deceptive—in their presentations. portrayal of Muhammad will fail to convince any religious Shaykh: a ‘Melkite’ Arabic Text from Sinai and the Doctrines of the adherents of either faith, as he himself admits, “the pos- Trinity and the Incarnation in ‘Arab Orthodox’ Apologetics,” in Th e sibilities explored diff er greatly from typical Islamic views.” Encounter of Eastern Christianity with Early Islam, eds. Grypeou et If the author himself admits so, then it is safe to deduce al. (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2006): 277-309. that the entire framework and conclusions of his arguments Sound ways for Christians to handle the Qur’an: J. S. Bridger, can hardly hold up. Th is cannot build bridges with average Christian Exegesis of the Qur’ān: A Critical Analysis of the Apologetic Muslims, who do not really believe or care much for a histor- Use of the Qur’ān in Select Medieval and Contemporary Arabic ical prophet leading a Jewish-Christian-Muslim movement Texts (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2015). Biblical hermeneutical through a non-binary spectrum of prophethood. Th is will principles—particularly refuting Talman’s views on special revela- tion: G. Osborne, Th e Hermeneutical Spiral : A Comprehensive hurt Christian witness, rather than advancing it, as Muslims Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: IVP may justifi ably accuse Christians of being overly subtle—if Academic, 2007); K. Vanhoozer, ed., First Th eology: God, Scripture, not even deceptive—in their presentations. and Hermeneutics (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002); R. Plummer, 40 Questions about Interpreting the Bible (Grand Rapids, Ayman Ibrahim, PhD, is a Post-Doctoral Candidate (2nd PhD) IL: Kregel Publications, 2010); W. Klein et al, Introduction to of Middle Eastern History, Haifa University, Mount Carmel. Biblical Interpretation, rev. ed. (Nashville, TN: Th omas Nelson, Inc., He is Assistant Professor of Islamic Studies, and the Director of 2004); G. Goldsworthy, Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics: Foundations the Jenkins Center for the Christian Understanding of Islam, Th e and Principles of Evangelical Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, Southern Baptist Th eological Seminary, KY. IL: IVP Press, 2006). Perspective on Christian-Muslim encounter during the early Further Reading Muslim conquests: R. Hoyland, In God’s Path: Th e Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire (New York: Oxford University How the Qur’an attacks mainstream Christianity, rather than Press, 2015); S. Griffi th, “Th e Syriac-Speaking Churches and Christian heresies: Sidney H. Griffi th, “Syriacisms in the ‘Arabic the Muslims in the Medinan era of Muḥammmad and the Four Qur’an’: Who Were ‘Th ose Who Said “Allah is Th ird of Th ree”’ Caliphs,” in Syriac Churches Encountering Islam, ed. D. Winkler according to al-Ma’ida 73?” in A Word Fitly Spoken: Studies in (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2010): 14–46. Medieval Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible and the Qur’an, ed. Meir M. Bar-Asher, et al. (Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 2007), 83–110; S. Th e friendliness of Patriarch Timothy I and his views on Griffi th, “Al-Naṣārā in the Qur’ān: A Hermeneutical Refl ection,” Muhammad and the Qur’an: Griffi th, “Answering the Call of in New Perspectives on the Qur’ān, ed. Reynolds (2011), 301–322; the Minaret: Christian Apologetics in the World of Islam,” in Gabriel Said Reynolds, “On the Presentation of Christianity in the Redefi ning Christian Identity: Cultural Interaction in the Middle Qur’ān and the Many Aspects of Qur’anic Rhetoric,” Al-Bayān: East Since the Rise of Islam, ed. H. L. Murre-Van den Berg, et al. Journal of Qur’ān and Ḥadīth Studies 12 (2014): 42–54. (Leuven: Peeters, 2005), where he concludes: “So we see that even Compelling arguments on whether Christians welcomed Muslims the friendliest of Christian apologists who lived in the world of in early Islam: A. Papaconstantinou, “Between Umma and Islam in the early Islamic period stopped well short of accepting Dhimma: the Christians of the Middle East under the Umayyads,” Muhammad as a prophet, in any canonical sense, and of accept- Annales Islamologiques 42 (2008): 127–156; J. Moorhead, “Th e ing the Qur’an as a book of divine revelation” (124). In addition to Monophysite Response to the Arab Invasions,” Byzantion: Revue Doctrina Jacobi’s translation by Hoyland’s and Penn’s see Doctrina Internationale des Etudes Byzantines 51 (1981): 579–91; S. Griffi th, Jacobi Nuper Baptizati, 5.16.11, edi ted and translated into French ed., Th e Beginnings of Christian Th eology in Arabic: Muslim- by Vincent Déroche, Travaux et Mémoires 11 (1991). Christian encounters in the early Islamic period, Collected Studies Series 746 (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002); S. Griffi th, Th e Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008) particularly chapter 2, and his article “Disputing with Islam in Syriac: Th e Case of the Monk of Bêt Hãlê and a Muslim Emir.” Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies 3, no. 1 (2000); J. van Ginkel, “Th e Perception and Presentation of the Arab Conquest in Syriac Historiography: How Did the Changing Social Position of the Syrian Orthodox Community Infl uence the Account of Th eir Historiographers?’’ in Th e Encounter of Eastern Christianity with Early Islam, Th e History of Christian-Muslim Relations 5. eds. Grypeou et al. (Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2006): 171-184; S. Griffi th, “Answers for the

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 121

binary categories, such as: (a) the only true prophets are Rehabilitating Our Image of those who gave us the books of the Bible as accepted by the Muhammad: A Concluding church; (b) all other prophets are false prophets. Ibrahim and I agree that Muhammad is not a prophet in the Response to Ayman Ibrahim same way that Christians view the prophets of the canonical Scriptures (type “a” above). However, like other theologians by Harley Talman and scholars who have not pursued more nuanced approaches, Ibrahim has diffi culty in allowing other than black and white, y original article, “Is Muhammad Also Among binary categories of prophethood. But my article demon- the Prophets” appeared more than 20 months strates the existence of various types of prophets in the Old ago. Now Ibrahim and I are in a second round of and New Testaments, in church and mission history, and in M religious discourse. My view is not unique, as I cited a number responses to that article in which our focus has been on partic- ular details of my proposal. Th is examination of the trees may of eminent Christian scholars who hold that Muhammad can be regarded as a prophet in various biblical, theological, cause readers to lose sight of the forest, the major thrust of 4 my article that called for a reconsideration of (1) Muhammad or missiological senses of the word. While Ibrahim does not and the Qur’an in Islam, (2) Christian theology of revelation, agree, he has not, in my view, provided any specifi c or con- vincing arguments to undermine my overall argument. Finally, and (3) the biblical criteria for prophethood as a basis for (4) my article dealt with a wide range of issues that supported reconsideration of Muhammad’s prophethood. my thesis, and Ibrahim’s interaction has focused criticism Th e fi rst major issue my original paper raised was the on some of these particular elements. I will now reply to the question of identifying the real Muhammad—who are we points he raises in his second response above. talking about? I off ered several possible views. Th e fi rst is the Muhammad of Islamic tradition (or “Islamic folklore).”1 Is this a constructive contribution to dialogue? Th ough the majority of the world’s Muslims accept this por- Ibrahim insists that it is not. But as Martin Accad trayal of Muhammad, I, along with many others, believe that observed, the fi rst and foremost purpose of my discussion this notion of Muhammad is a legend, a myth that hundreds of Muhammad and prophethood is as a contribution to of millions of mistaken Muslims have accepted as truth. Christian missiology and to a theology of religions. I do not Th ough many Christians regard the Muhammad of Islamic seem to have made this clear enough, though I stated in the tradition as a “false prophet,” I think it more accurate to call conclusion of “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?” this representation a “false Muhammad” because he has no (IJFM 31:4): real historical existence. To be sure, multitudes of Muslims This paper has provided theological, missiological, and historical venerate Muhammad in popular Islam to the point of sanction for expanding constricted categories of prophethood idolatry. But, like other idols, this Muhammad is the product to allow Christians to entertain the possibility of Muhammad of human creation and is “not anything” (1 Cor. 10:19). Due being other than a false prophet. (185, emphasis added) to the scant biographical information in the Qur’an, we can And as I stated in my previous response, this reassessment know very little about the Muhammad of the Qur’an apart should in turn promote more constructive Muslim-Christian from his message. Based upon the non-Islamic historical dialogue, because it shapes our attitude toward Muhammad, documents and evidences that I cite, I believe that the real and thus how we view Islam—just as Accad maintains: historical Muhammad is someone quite diff erent from that of Islamic tradition. He is likely closer to some of the revisionist Your view of Islam will affect your attitude to Muslims. Your historians’ understandings of him.2 While I operate under the attitude will, in turn, infl uence your approach to Christian- assumption that the Qur’an is attributable to Muhammad Muslim interaction, and that approach will affect the ultimate 5 (aside from its editing),3 I believe that many interpretations outcome of your presence as a witness among Muslims. of it developed by later Islamic tradition do not accurately Th us, the understandings of Muhammad and prophet- represent his message. hood that I have set forth should have a positive impact on Christian-Muslim dialogue by aff ecting our own attitudes Among key points in my reconsideration of a theology of as ambassadors. I believe this is an important contribution revelation and prophecy, I explained that the Bible does not of my article toward dialogue. reject the notion of divine revelation and prophecy after the close of the canon of Scripture. Any such revelation must Th ough Martin Accad’s assertion seems self-evident to me, play a supporting role to the Bible, is not necessarily infallible Ibrahim does not agree that the above change of attitude can (and thus must be evaluated by Scripture), nor is it normative positively impact Muslim-Christian dialogue—I leave it to and authoritative for all believers everywhere. I emphasized the reader to judge. In denying any positive value of my pro- that the biblical view of prophecy cannot be confi ned to posal for dialogue, Ibrahim focuses on its lack of acceptability

33:3 Fall 2016 122 Article Responses do not expect that Muslims would accept my proposal as an acceptable formulation of Islamic theology; it’s just more acceptable (or less unacceptable) I to Muslims than the view that he is a false prophet. to Muslims (which he seeks to demonstrate through his query an interaction like this might ensue naturally or could be of three Muslim friends). I admitted that I did not expect that facilitated: Muslims would embrace my proposal as an acceptable formu- Muslim: What do you mean that you “do not con- lation of Islamic theology; I only asserted that it will be more sider him a prophet in the same way” that I do? acceptable (or less unacceptable) to Muslims than the view that he is a false prophet—and this could be a step forward. Christian: I respect Muhammad, but you believe When Muslims raise the issue of our rejection of Muhammad prophets are sinless. I do not. Th e prophets may be as a prophet, we can acknowledge that for centuries (for many the best of mankind but they are still sons of Adam and varied reasons), Christians have regarded him as a false and therefore sinners;9 only Isa the Messiah, the pure prophet. However, many of us no longer think this is a fair or Word of Allah that was cast into Mary’s womb, is accurate view—even though we do not hold the same view of without sin.10 him that Muslims have (as I explain below). Communicating Furthermore, Muslims tell me that Muhammad will a more sympathetic and positive view of Muhammad should intercede for them on the Day of Judgment,11 but no- be a constructive step forward in the world of interfaith dia- where does the Qur’an indicate that Allah has given logue. In America where Muslims are searching for common Muhammad permission to do this. But the Injil says, ground with Christians, there is even more reason to expect “Th ere is one God, and there is one mediator between that my proposal could be viewed as a helpful contribution God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5 toward bridge-building and cooperation. ESV). It is to Isa al-Masih, Jesus the Messiah, that As for Ibrahim’s query of several Muslims, it is not “telling” “all the prophets bear witness that everyone who be- us anything about my assertion. Ibrahim should have given lieves in him receives forgiveness of sins through his his Muslim friends the choice of the two options as I pre- name” (Acts 10:43). sented them and asked: Also, Muhammad is a prophet for Muslims, but that If a Christian were to express to you his position on does not mean he is a prophet in the same way for Muhammad and his prophethood, which of the fol- other people of the Scriptures. Does not God in the lowing do you fi nd more acceptable or less off ensive? Qur’an say “And how can they [the Jews] make you [Muhammad] their judge, when they have the Tawrah, a. I respect Muhammad as having a prophetic role, which contains Allah’s judgment?”12 Th e Qur’an like- function, or mission even though I do not consider wise states, “So let the people of the Injil judge by what him to be a prophet the same way that you do. Allah has revealed in it. Whoever doesn’t judge by what b. I respect Muhammad even though he is a false Allah has revealed are unbelievers” (5:47). Other verses prophet. support this: “Truly believers, the Jews, the Christians, But Ibrahim only asked for their response to the fi rst; it is dif- and Sabeans who believe in Allah and in the last day fi cult to imagine that any Muslim would choose “b.” over “a.” and do righteous deeds have their reward from their Lord, and won’t fear or grieve” (Q 2:62; cf. 5:69). Moreover, Ibrahim clams that position “a” above is “inten- Many, like myself, believe that God can use prophets tionally misleading to Muslims.” Th is baffl es me. By saying from outside the people with whom he has a covenant “I respect Muhammad as a prophet (or having a prophetic in order to direct or correct them.13 We see in the role, prophetic mission, etc.) 6 even though I do not con- Qur’an that Muhammad rebuked and corrected the sider him to be a prophet the same way that you do” am I Jews for rejecting Isa the Messiah.14 I esteem him really misleading people—much less deliberately so?7 On greatly for that. He also warned people of the book the contrary, I believe that such a proposal invites discus- not to “exaggerate” in religion by going beyond what sion and elucidation. (Th at Ibrahim’s three Muslim friends is written in the Scripture.15 did not understand or appreciate my proposal is not at all surprising given that Ibrahim himself does not embrace my Th e Bible instructs me not to reject anything said by proposal, and therefore could not explain it or provide bibli- any kind of prophet, but to evaluate what they pro- cal rationale for it. Furthermore, his assertion that Muslims claim by the Bible, accepting whatever is true and only have two categories—“prophets and the general popu- good, but rejecting anything that is contrary to its lation”—is not accurate [see end note8]). I can envision that teaching (1 Cor. 14:29; 1 Th ess. 5:20–21).

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 123

Unfortunately, most Muslim clerics interpret and course, is the fundamental point of my article which makes teach the Qur’an in ways that contradict some a case for closing down the cultural and theological para- fundamental teachings of the Bible. As a result, most digm that treats prophecy exclusively in binary categories. Christians completely reject the Qur’an. But I believe Instead, I have argued that we should replace it with one that if more Muslims would interpret the Qur’an in that recognizes the variety of kinds and categories that my ways that affi rm biblical teachings (which is what the article “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets” fi nds in Qur’an says its purpose is), then many Christians may the Scriptures, history, theology, and missiology. begin to view Muhammad’s prophetic mission much In place of strict binary categories, we need a more biblically more positively (cf. Basetti-Sani and Wessels). nuanced perspective. I have noted previously that there were In what “biblical sense” could Muhammad be a prophet? biblical prophets who did not write or give us Scripture.19 Surprisingly, Ibrahim says that I misrepresented my own What do we call this distinct offi ce? Moses’ offi ce is dis- article when I took him to task for his alleging that I tinct from other prophets of Israel. Elijah had a “school” of “attempt to move Muhammad from the false-prophet to the prophets that was distinct from the writing prophets. And as true-prophet category.” Unfortunately, there was a failure to the introduction of my article noted, even Saul was “prophet observe what I wrote in my article: for a day.” Balaam served a diff erent offi ce of prophecy than all the prior-mentioned prophets. Paul recognized truth Ultimate greatness in a prophet is a function of his pointing on the lips of pagan poet-prophets (Acts 17:28); Agabus people to Christ. Therefore, we could allow the possibility that Muhammad is a prophet in the biblical sense explained in the erred on some details of his prophecy about Paul’s future in preceding section, and in the Qur’anic mode of being a warner to Jerusalem or at least misinterpreted its application to the 20 his people, without his performance of miracles.”16 (italics added) apostle; and the utterances of NT prophets require sifting. Ibrahim repeatedly quotes from this, lifting out the words Despite these distinctions, Ibrahim does not agree with “in the biblical sense” without including the modifying the implications of my discussion of the character (i.e., the phrase “explained in the preceding section.” Th is is a seri- mixed character) of non-canonical NT prophecy as Spirit- ous misconstrual of my position. It has led some who did inspired, but potentially fallible and in need of “sifting” (as not read my article to think that I regard Muhammad like in 1 Cor. 14:29, 1 Th ess. 5:19–21),21 and of divine revelation the prophets in the biblical canon (which I clearly do not) to those outside the Jewish and Christian stream.22 and has brought unwarranted backlash. Ibrahim gives no Th e issues and perspectives examined in my article should indication that he consulted the preceding section for clari- force us all to re-examine our presuppositions as we discuss fi cation. Th e “preceding section” discussed the inadequacy prophethood of diverse kinds and various senses of the word. of criteria like moral blamelessness, absence of hostility Th ose needing further clarity on my position are invited to with Christians, or the performance of miracles, and instead consult Bill Musk who sees Christians as falling somewhere clarifi ed that “the most important issue is their attitude on a broad spectrum between two extremes.23 With respect 17 toward Christ and the Scriptures.” In other words, I to Muhammad, Musk (like myself ) fi nds himself “in that merely said, “Th erefore, we could allow the possibility that uncomfortable, in-between area,” approving of the position Muhammad is a prophet in the biblical sense” of pointing of the 1984 Conference of European Churches: people [back] to the Scriptures and toward Christ 18 “and in the Qur’anic mode of being a warner to his people, without Christians respect the prophetic tradition of the Old Testament. his performance of miracles.” Neither confi rming Christ It calls people to repentance in the service of the one God. It is nor being a warner to one’s people requires the performance unjust to dismiss Muhammad out of hand as a false prophet. of miracles; hence, there was no change in my position, as Christians may recognize Muhammad as part of the same pro- phetic tradition, and in the past some have done so. We must Ibrahim asserts. I do accept his apology for doubting my nevertheless ensure that our Muslim friends understand the expressed intent. subtle differences between the two perspectives, for Christians 24 Should prophethood be viewed as a continuum? confess that the Word became fl esh and dwelled among us. Ibrahim continues his critique by skeptically asking, “Does Ibrahim repeats his sharp criticisms of what he considers this suggest that we need to think about Muhammad and to be my “ambiguous language.”25 I freely admit to qualify- his prophethood in general in a ‘spectrum’ sense?” Th at, of ing some assertions with terms like “possibility,” for I am his is a serious misconstrual of my position. It has led some to think that I regard Muhammad like the prophets in the biblical canon (which I T clearly do not) and has brought unwarranted backlash. 33:3 Fall 2016 124 Article Responses did apply the criteria of 1 John 4:1–3 to Muhammad—Jesus being “Messiah” and “coming in the fl esh”—and found that both criteria align I with the teaching of the Qur’an. exploring new territory in which additional knowledge is the case and his ground for such a statement is baffl ing prerequisite to higher levels of certainty (not to mention my to me. On the basis of sola scriptura, I used the text of sensitivity to the present anti-Islamic atmosphere in which v. 3 itself (lit. “Jesus Christ is come in the fl esh”) against I write). For example, the conclusion of my initial article Ibrahim’s personal inference about it. I was not “relying on pointed out: . . . selected secondary studies,” but simply backing up my position by listing the main interpretations of leading bibli- A major obstacle is our uncertainty about the actual details of Muhammad’s life due to the great lack of personal infor- cal scholars regarding the doctrinal content of the “test.” mation about him in the Qur’an and the complexities of the Ibrahim argues that the studies I reference “do not dismiss historical sources. Future historical studies may strengthen or the idea that we can learn a theological concept.” I agree weaken the case for Muhammad being regarded as a prophet. completely—we can learn about the deity of Christ and the The outcome of critical scholarship about the Qur’an’s relation- incarnation of the divine Word in John’s epistles, but these ship to the Bible (positive or negative) will also affect thinking. things are learned more inferentially than explicitly. I am Moreover, Ibrahim seems not to appreciate the need for not discounting what has been learned or inferred, but we nuance (as in the above paragraph on the prophetic offi ce). must uphold what God gave us to learn and infer from— He also lambasts my statement that it “is not necessary for the inspired text, being careful to adhere to the Scriptures, us to conclusively determine the nature of this prophetic not inferences. role” (once again cutting off its clarifying context that Ibrahim criticizes my hermeneutics, saying: “We cannot qualifi es it: “if we apply Gamaliel’s wisdom to this ques- elevate the context above the text,” but is this not what he tion” [italics added]). He even goes so far as to associate my himself is doing by insisting on more than the criteria of treatment with dissimulation (taqiyya). the text? Granted, the “text is clearly concerned with the I am not at all opposed to clear defi nitions. However, the relationship between the Father and the Son,” but v. 3 Christian scholars that I cited view the notions of prophet specifi es what that relationship is: “Jesus” is the “Messiah” or the prophetic role somewhat diff erently. Can we not allow whom God sent “in the fl esh” (cf. John 17:3). John is sin- each of them to affi rm a prophetic role for Muhammad gularly focused upon making this the specifi c distinction according to the varied senses which they intend without when it comes to evaluating prophets, and Muhammad (of insisting that only one of them is legitimate? the Qur’an) actually satisfi es this test. Th is allowance has implications for our previous discussion Ibrahim also refers us to John 5:21–23 which speaks of of how a continuum or “spectrum” view of prophethood can the Father’s purpose that all honor the Son as they do the aid Muslim-Christian dialogue. When, like the Conference Father). Th e Qur’an does not contradict this; it may well of European Churches stated above, we “recognize that support it. In Q 3:45 Jesus is “honored” (wajīhan) in this Muhammad is part of the same prophetic tradition,” it world and the next. Th e only other instance of this word allows us to interact with the text of the Qur’an through used this way is in regard to Moses (33:69). But the only the lens of our tradition and make contributions to the person it is applied to in both this world and the hereafter is interpretative community. Th is is an important and legiti- Jesus. Most signifi cantly, it repeatedly occurs as an attribute of God,27 referring to God’s glory/honor and countenance/ mate role for us, since Christians were among the original face. As Moses’ face shone with the glory of God (in this audiences and recipients of the Qur’an’s message—in life, but not in the hereafter), the term infers that Jesus fact, the Qur’an says it is an essential one for the sake of refl ects God’s glory and face—not only in this life, but also Muslims (10:94).26 In addition, allowing for varied senses in the hereafter. of prophethood makes possible a spectrum of contribution. Precisely where a Christian is situated on this spectrum will Th en Ibrahim errs egregiously by asserting that I fail to determine the nature of his contribution and his potential apply the test of 1 John 4:1–3 to Muhammad, because he for infl uencing the Islamic interpretive community. alleges that I limit its application to Docetists or Cerinthians. I am quite puzzled by such logic when in fact I have done Was 1 John 4:1—3 applied to Muhammad? exactly the opposite of what he claims. I examined vari- Ibrahim says that I “simply dismissed . . . as irrelevant” the ous possible understandings of the doctrinal content of the test of 1 John 4:1–3: “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus “test” in I John 4:1–3 and then applied each to Muhammad. Christ has come in the fl esh is from God.” Th is is hardly However, the point is that while scholars diff er over the

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 125

identity of the people in the historical context of 1 John, in ‘a word’ does not refer to a simple word of language, but a each case (Docetists, Cerinthians, or other), these people all person.”30 One of the premier Islamic authorities of today, failed to affi rm 1 John’s criteria of Jesus being “Messiah” and Seyyed Hossein Nasr, acknowledges that Jesus’ identifi cation “coming in the fl esh.” I applied these criteria to Muhammad with the Word of God is “an idea that has clear resonance and found that both criteria align with the teaching of the with the Gospel tradition, where Jesus is identifi ed as the Qur’an. Ibrahim then resorts to building a straw man argu- “Word” of God (see John 1),” but argues that this identifi ca- ment, presented as reductio ad absurdum, suggesting that I tion does not preclude the Muslim emphasis on Jesus’ role would make the entire NT irrelevant because modern situa- as the “bringer of the Gospel, which like the Torah and the tions are not exact parallels. Again, I maintain that all that we Qur’an, represents God’s Word and message to humanity.”31 should insist on is what the text of I John 4:2–3 demands— He explains that this does not necessarily reject the theo- that Jesus is the Christ and he came in the fl esh. logical import ascribed to the title in Christianity: And even if John’s test is stretched to demand affi rmation Some commentators interpret His Word here as the tidings of a fully developed orthodox Christian theology of the Mary received of his miraculous conception in her womb or incarnation, the Qur’an need not be viewed as denying it. as an allusion to the Divine Creative Command Be! by which In contrast to Ibrahim’s dismissal of this possibility, Basetti- Christ was formed in Mary’s womb . . . However, while all cre- Sani contends: ated beings are brought into existence through God’s Word, Christ alone is specifi cally identifi ed as “a Word from God.” For centuries now, there has been a very grave misunder- Some might argue, therefore that Jesus, by virtue of being standing about the two principle Christian mysteries. Hasty identifi ed as God’s Word somehow participates (uniquely) interpretation, without proper and judicious weighing of in the Divine Creative Command, although this is not the the evidence, persuaded Muslim exegetes that the Qur’an traditional Islamic understanding of Jesus’ identifi cation as a condemns the doctrines of the Incarnation and Trinity. Chris- Word from Him (3:45) [emphasis in bold mine].32 tian apologists fell into this same snare. . . . But those texts condemned a “tritheism” that has nothing to do with the for- Furthermore, Q 9:31 points to the deity of Christ (“Th ey mulation of the dogma of the Trinity. The same is true of the have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from Qur’an’s supposed condemnation of the Incarnation.28 God and the Messiah Mary’s son, and they were commanded to serve but One God; there is no god but He; glory be to Th e Qur’an does not undertake to express a formulation Him, above that they associate.” [italics mine])33 Moreover, of these theological doctrines, but that does not mean it the Qur’an asserts that no one but God has the breath of opposes them; the Qur’an respects the Bible and seems life and is able to create (6:2, 38:71–72; 22:5, 73), a preroga- concerned only with censuring excesses (heretical notions). tive that it otherwise attributes only to Jesus (3:49; 5:110). Moreover, contrary to Ibrahim’s assertion, Jesus of the Qur’an is not “merely” a prophet (despite the eff orts of How did Christians initially view Muhammad? Muslim clerics to reduce his status, rather than confi rm the It is unfortunate that what I expressed as a general state- prior Scriptures). For example, 4:171 should be read “the ment (i.e., “during the fi rst century Christians did not Messiah, Jesus son of Mary is certainly [not merely] the seem to think of Muhammad as a false prophet”), Ibrahim messenger of God, his Word, whom he placed in Mary, a understands to be an absolute that can be refuted simply spirit from him.” Th e conjuction innama should be seen as by citing an example to the contrary (i.e., Doctrina Jacobi’s emphatic, not diminishing, for at least two reasons: (1) in its denunciation of an Arab prophet).34 Regrettably, Ibrahim context this verse is proclaiming the exalted status of Jesus takes too literally my comment about the Doctrina Jacobi to Jews who reject his messiahship;29 (2) it is nonsensical to reference being merely a footnote. To say it is a “footnote” say “merely God’s Word.” Jesus is here given exalted distinc- is a fi gurative way of saying it was of extremely minimal tion as “his [God’s] Word” (kalimat), a title the Qur’an importance within the text itself (“a mere cursory rejection gives to no one else in history! of expedience” as I explained). Moreover, while Ibrahim It is important to note that Muhammad affi rms Jesus as argues that Doctrina Jacobi is an extremely important early the Word of God (3:45) and this is almost certainly rooted witness, he seems to regard it as expressing the conclusion in John 1:1. Th ough Ibrahim rejects my inference of the of some thoughtful scholar, rather than as the polemi- signifi cance of ismuhu (the Word’s name), others view it cal anti-Jewish tract that it is. Rejecting the Arab prophet diff erently. Musk argues that the Arabic is “intimating that because prophets do not “come with a sword and a war he Qur’an does not undertake to express a formulation of these theological doctrines, but that does not mean it opposes them; the Qur’an respects the T Bible and seems concerned only with censuring excesses (heretical notions). 33:3 Fall 2016 126 Article Responses f the Qur’an represents Muhammad’s message, it is certainly a prophetic message. Th at these Christians joined his movement indicates that they must have accepted his prophetic message and mission to a signifi cant degree.

I 39 chariot” is hardly a studied theological conclusion from of the “Believers” in the Qur’an. All of this indicates that Scripture. It makes me wonder whether the Christian Arab Christians did not fi nd Muhammad’s message to be writer of the Doctrina Jacobi ever read the Old Testament antithetical to biblical faith or a barrier to their participation or heard the stories of prophets like Moses, Joshua, Samuel, in it. If the Qur’an represents Muhammad’s message, it is David, and Elijah. certainly a prophetic message. Th at these Christians joined his movement indicates that they must have accepted his Th us, the primary point I was trying to make was this: During the fi rst century, Christians did not characteristi- prophetic message and mission to a signifi cant degree. From cally view Muhammad as a false prophet. C. Jonn Block’s what we fi nd of that message in the Qur’an, we might view study concludes that John of Nikiu’s position and Muhammad’s mission as calling the Arabs ( Jews, Christians and pagans) back to the exclusive worship of the God of the casual dismissal of Muhammad’s prophetic status in the their father Abraham, pious living, and preparation for the Doctrina Jacobi . . . seem the only real rejections of the prophet- day of Judgment. hood of Muhammad by Christians, and these two authors seem among our sources the least exposed to the teachings of Ibrahim states that Donner and I are both “uncertain” about Islam, rendering their judgments solely based on the behaviors our argument. Not at all. Neither of us doubts whether of Muslims.35 (italics added) the “Believers” movement included Christians; our only Similarly, Martin Accad affi rms, “there is strong evidence diff erence concerns the kind of Christians. In endnote 29 that Islam was initially viewed by Eastern Christians as of my original article on Muhammad and prophethood I some sort of variant of Christianity.”36 indicated that “Donner thinks the Christians who joined this ‘Believers Movement’ were non-Trinitarian Christians, Was Muhammad’s original movement “ecumenical”? seemingly based on his anti-Trinitarian understanding of Ibrahim introduced critical reviews of Donner that con- certain Qur’anic verses.” I noted that my only diff erence test my contention that the original movement started by with him is that I saw no reason to exclude Trinitarian Muhammad was “ecumenical.” Let me clarify—there are Christians since I am persuaded that the Qur’anic verses two main aspects of this term “ecumenical” that are being in question were not aimed at Trinitarian Christians, but at debated by scholars: (1) Did the movement include Jews followers of tri-theism and other heretical Christian views. and Christians? If so, what kind? (2) Was their primary Th is was confi rmed by John of Phenek whose testimony I self-identity that of a non-confessional monotheist com- cited, “Among them [the Arabs] there are many Christians, munity motivated by an ecumenical religious agenda (as some of whom are from the heretics, others from us.”40 Fred Donner argues)?37 Given the limited archaeological Ibrahim ignores the testimony of this “primary source.” evidence, Donner’s thesis regarding aspect #2 of an ecu- However, what is important to my argument about an menical Arab movement cannot be “proven” (nor disproven); ecumenical movement is aspect #1—that the movement thus I granted that scholars are divided over this point. included Jews and Christians. Th is seems unassailable given Nonetheless, I wrote, “what is important to the main thesis the testimonies of John of Sedreh and John of Phenek. of my article is not what is the major focus of these criti- Even Doctrina Jacobi (which Ibrahim heralds as tremen- cisms, but what is consistent with Hawting’s conclusion.” dously signifi cant) regards the attackers as one group Th en I asserted that Donner’s proposal is at least consistent comprised of Jews and Arabs. Th erefore, the movement had with that evidence: Ibrahim says that I did not specify what to have been inclusive, even if the nature and prominence of evidence—Hawting’s conclusion which was quoted and religious motivations is debated. documented actually is evidence. And I will repeat further evidence that was mentioned: the participation of Christians Th en Ibrahim asks, “What about the references I quoted in the conquests, as John of Sedreh and John of Phenek from the Qur’an in my previous response to refute his testifi ed;38 the minting of coins by Muslim rulers which bore proposal? No interaction from Talman.” Th is assertion Christian symbols; the inscriptions and papyri containing by Ibrahim is unjustifi ed, unfortunate, and unbecom- only the fi rst half of the shahadah (“Th ere is no god but ing. Although Ibrahim referred (in a very general way) to God” with no mention of “Muhammad is the messenger of traditional interpretations of the Qur’an regarding certain God”); the use of terms such as “believers” and “emigrants,” Christian doctrines, he did not quote or give a reference for and the absence of the terms “Muslims,” “Islam,” and any Qur’anic verses in his previous response—not even once. “Qur’an”; as well as (Donner’s analysis of ) the self-identity But my response actually quoted 3:45 with some linguistic

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 127

analysis, cited 4:171 and 4:157, and referenced multiple kind). I think the case of Jewish and Christian participation sources that discuss the Qur’an’s Christology (endnote 7). has been suffi ciently established above; nevertheless, I will respond to the Qur’anic verses that he cites as well. Ibrahim asserts, “Even my reference to the Syriac docu- ment, the Maronite Chronicle . . . was downplayed and Ibrahim cites Q 5:13–14 as accusing them of “forget- simply dismissed without enough pieces of evidence from ting what was revealed.” Why is this a problem? Th e OT primary sources.” I responded to the data Ibrahim provided prophets said the same thing repeatedly. Moreover, 5:13 and cited Penn’s evaluation of this source and his recogni- refers back to 5:12 which affi rms that God made a covenant tion that the Maronite Chronicle may have been written with the people of Israel but warns that “he among you much later—and this would discredit Ibrahim’s point (that who disbelieves after that has gone astray from the straight removal of Christian symbols from coins one generation path.” Th is is no general or categorical rejection of Jews after Muhammad do not support Christian involvement here, but a warning for each individual not to stray from in his movement). But even granting the early date (c. 660 that covenant. 5:14 says the same thing of Christians: God C.E.) for Mu’awiya’s removing the cross from coinage, made a covenant with them, too, but they forgot [to obey] this does not at all indicate that he or early movement was part of it and the result was enmity and hatred among them hostile to Christian symbols or Christianity as Ibrahim (a fair assessment of the hostile relations between various asserts. Ibrahim fails to note that the immediate context of parties in the Christological controversies of that era). Th e the Maronite Chronicle records Mu’awiya’s pious regard for criticism of the people of the book for “hiding the truth” sites associated with Christ’s passion: in v. 15 expresses another aspect of their disobedience.44 Many Arabs assembled in Jerusalem and made Mu’awiya But we should not take this as a categorical condemnation king. He ascended and sat at Golgotha. He prayed there, of all the people of the book. (Note the positive descrip- went to Gethsemane, descended to the tomb of the blessed tion of Christians in this same surah in v. 82). Th e Qur’an Mary, and prayed there.41 condemns Christian hypocrisy and apostasy, just as it also condemns Muslim hypocrisy and apostasy. Why would Mu’awiya sit at Golgotha and pray there if he was hostile to Christianity and the crucifi xion? He was Ibrahim also says that Q 3:78 accuses them of “twisting essentially performing rites common to Christian pilgrims. their description of the revelation.” Actually it says, “Some We should instead interpret the removal of the cross from of them (minhum) distort the book with their tongues.” Th e coins as indication of Mu’awiya’s humility in refusing Qur’an declares that there are both faithful and unfaithful symbols of exalted status; for the chronicler states in the people of the book, as noted three verses prior: sentence which immediately follows, “Mu’awiya also did Some of the people of the book you can entrust with a huge not wear a crown like other kings in the world. He estab- sum, and they will return it to you. If you give others of them a lished his throne in Damascus but did not want to go to dinar, they won’t return it to you unless you remain standing Muhammad’s throne.”42 Th is also better accords with the over them. (3:75). fact, as I previously noted, that other Muslim coins contin- How can this be viewed as a position of general hostility to ued to display Christian symbols for up to a century.43 the people of the book? Is Muhammad’s message in the Qur’an anti-Christian and Ibrahim says Q 9:29 requires Jews and Christians to pay anti-Gospel? the jizya tax, in submission or humiliation to Muslims. Th is Ibrahim also cites several Qur’anic passages as condemning is the “tax that is taken from the free non-Muslim subjects people of the book and he thinks that this refutes the idea of a Muslim government; whereby they ratify the com- that Muhammad’s movement included Jews and Christians. pact that ensures them protection.”45 Th ere is no scholarly Th is issue of inclusivity matters because it directly aff ects consensus about this verse requiring “humiliation.”46 As our view of the prophetic place of Muhammad. If the my original article indicated, readers of the Qur’an must movement that he founded was not anti-Christian, but recognize that verses like this apply to particular situations called all Ishmaelites ( Jewish, Christian and pagan alike) to or people.47 Th is verse does not apply to all people who exclusive devotion to the God of Abraham and the practice were given the book, but only to those who do not believe of righteousness, then we can more easily consider the pos- in God and the Last Day—for the Qur’an maintains that sibility of according him a positive prophetic role (of some many Jews and Christians do believe in God and in the hese Qur’anic verses apply to particular situations or people. Th ere is nothing in them that would prevent pious “people of the book” ( Jews and Christians) T from participating in a Believers movement. 33:3 Fall 2016 128 Article Responses ozens of verses in the Qur’an endorse the contents of the Bible. Th e few that speak negatively are unclear and require careful exmination of their context; they condemn specifi c misbehavior of some Jews, Christians, or their clerics.

D 54 Last Day (3:113-114, 5:82). An example of such a limited Q 2:59 (and a parallel in 7:162 ) says, “Th e wicked substi- application of 9:29 would be the view that “those who don’t tuted a saying told them for another, so we sent a plague follow the religion of truth among those who were given from heaven down on the wicked for their unbelief.” Th is the book” speaks only to the Byzantine empire’s planned refers to the grumbling Israelites during their wandering in aggression at Tabuq.48 the wilderness. Th e Bible agrees with this assessment. Hence, there is nothing in these verses that would prevent Q 3:187 refers back to v. 183 concerning the prophets of pious people of the book from participating in a Believers Baal who combated Elijah.55 Th is is a common problem movement. More importantly, we should recall a parallel and biblical theme found throughout the minor prophets. situation in the gospel of John. Despite the gospel of Q 2:42 refers to God instructing the children of Israel to ful- John’s negative portrayal and denunciation of “the Jews,” fi ll the covenant and believe . . . and “don’t cover truth with the members of Jesus’ movement were Jews. Similarly, my vanity or knowingly hide the truth.” Th is has nothing to do original article stated: with accusing them of textual corruption (taḥrīf). However, In contrast to the imperialistic arrogance and cult of the cross the kind of accusations against Jews and Christians that of the Byzantines, the Qur’an viewed Christians in Arabia (pri- Ibrahim was looking for I addressed in an endnote in my marily Monophysite, Syrian Orthodox, Nestorian, and Assyrian) article (which it seems that Ibrahim overlooked): as those “closest in affection” to Muslims, for their priests and Muhammad’s accusation against the Jews (and Christians?) monks were not proud (Surah 5:82). Thus, the Qur’an does of taḥrīf (“corruption” of the Word of God) did not charge 49 not view Christians with hostility as a matter of principle . . . them with changing the written text of Scripture, but with In addition, Ibrahim faults Muhammad’s message in the concealing the truth (Surah 3:71; 6:92), distorting its meaning Qur’an for claiming that the Bible predicts Muhammad. as they read it aloud (3:78), composing their own texts and However, in 61:6, the reference to a “sent one” (rasul) makes passing them off as Scripture (2:79), and forgetting the cov- enant (5:14, 15). On the contrary, he insists that no one can better sense as referring to Jesus’ foretelling of the Holy “change the words of God” (10:64, 6:34).56 Spirit (the Advocate, Gk., parakletos) being sent from God ( John 14:16–17), as some Muslims will grant.50 Jesus is Th e Qur’an does charge some Christians and Jews with therefore describing the Holy Spirit (not Muhammad) as “corrupting” their scriptures; but this refers to corrupting “Ahmad” (meaning “whose name I praise” or “whose name the meaning (taḥrīf al-ma’na), not corrupting the text itself. is more praised”51). Nowhere in the Qur’an is Muhammad Some leading scholars, both Muslim and Christian, have called by this term. Instead of viewing “Ahmad” as a demonstrated that the notion of textual corruption became descriptor, Muslim tradition seems to have later developed popular four to fi ve centuries after Muhammad, largely due it as an apologetic argument by making this term a name to the impact of Ibn Hazm in the 11th century.57 Dozens for Muhammad.52 of verses in the Qur’an endorse the contents of the Bible. Th e few verses that speak negatively are unclear and require Neither should the “unlettered” (ummi) prophet in Q 7:157 careful examination of their context; they are better under- be understood as a reference to Muhammad. Th is interpre- stood as condemning specifi c incidents of misbehavior of tation appeared much later in the development of “Islam.” some Jews, Christians, or their clerics.58 Th e prophet referred to here is better understood as Christ Jesus who did not receive formal training in the Scriptures Ibrahim asserts that Q 2:79 charges Jews or Christians with from learned men but was taught directly by God.53 “fabricating divine scripture as they ‘distort the scripture with their own hands, then say, “this is what God has Ibrahim also claims that the Qur’an contradicts and dis- revealed.”’” He apparently is quoting a biased translation torts the Gospel. While this is certainly true of Islam as it of the Qur’an. Upon closer examination, we see that the developed much later, this statement does not accurately Arabic text only says, “Woe to those who write the book represent the position of Muhammad in the Qur’an which with their hands, then say ‘Th is is from God’ to purchase respects the Bible (Tawrah, Zabur, and Injil). Th e Qur’an with it a little price.”59 It relates to the preceding verse repeatedly attests to the truth contained in the previous where the ummiyyun (variously translated as unlettered Scriptures. Ibrahim also states that the Qur’an accuses ones, unscriptured, gentiles, or illiterate), who do not know Christians and Jews of falsifying Scripture, citing several the book apart from their own wishful thinking or desires, verses as proof texts with little concern for their context. are just guessing or imagining. What is being written

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 129

are not the Scriptures but what is being peddled as the Testament (son of God, begotten of God) that refers to Scriptures for a small price. Hence, this verse is most likely God’s promise to David. If Ibrahim is arguing that being condemning those Jews who wrote down alleged texts to “son” and “begotten” of God are physical, then we should be sell as amulets and talismans (as is frequently done with deeply concerned about his Christian theology. Qur’anic verses even today) and/or to their selling Tefi llin Th is interpretation that the Qur’an is rejecting divine bio- (phylacteries), the double prayer straps they wear with two logical and adoptive sonship is not novel or unique to me; boxes containing verses from the Torah.60 extensive support in both Muslim and Christian quarters Concerning Ibrahim’s reference to what the earliest Muslim can be found. Al-Ghazali, Islam’s most celebrated philoso- commentaries on the Qur’an say about Christians and Jews, pher and theologian, states the son-father relationship of I believe they are irrelevant to our discussion on whether or Jesus and God in the NT must be viewed as a metaphor, not the original movement included Jews and Christians not as physical/biological which the Qur’an rejects.64 Th e since they were written long after this movement ceased to reason for this rejection is that in classical Arabic the word be inclusive. “son” almost always conveys physical sonship when used in connection with a personal relationship.65 (Christian Does the Qur’an deny that Jesus is the “son of God” in the orthodoxy agrees that NT usage of Father/Son for God/ biblical sense? Jesus is metaphorical, but this in no way disavows their Ibrahim is convinced that the Qur’an’s rejection of Jesus “metaphysical” or “ontological” existence from eternity). as “the son of God” is not a rejection of the blasphemous Even someone like Sam Shamoun, who has no praise for notion that God cohabited with Mary to produce biologi- Muhammad or the Qur’an, after examining the Qur’an cal off spring, but rather a denial of mainstream Christian and leading Muslim commentaries, concludes: “the Qur’an doctrine. He “fundamentally disagree(s)” with me: he asks, nowhere condemns the historic Christian understanding of “How do we know it is a rejection of unbiblical sexual Jesus’ Sonship.”66 notion?” But he then cites 2:116, 10:68, and 72:3 which all And fi nally, just for clarifi cation, I did not say in my previ- use the Arabic “walad ” for son, a word that means “to beget ous response that the Qur’an unmistakably “affi rms” the (by seed)” or “to bear (a child)” (i.e., beget a son biologi- incarnation, but only that it “can be read” that way—mean- cally).61 Moreover, sexual sonship is patently indicated ing it “allows” for such a reading. (I have mentioned various in the internal content of a number of these verses. For inferences to this in this response). instance, he cited 72:3: “He never had a mate (ṣāḥibatan), nor a son”—if God has no mate to procreate with, then nei- Does the Qur’an criticize Christian heresies or Christian ther did he have a son. Likewise, in 6:100–101: “How can orthodoxy? he have a son when he has no consort?” And, in 4:171, the Appealing to Griffi th and Reynolds, Ibrahim rejects my claim that “He is far beyond having a son (walad)” imme- contention (as supported by C. Jonn Block’s research) that diately follows an affi rmation of the Virgin Birth, inferring the Qur’an criticizes Christian heresies, not Christian that physical/sexual begetting is being rejected.62 Other orthodoxy. However, Ibrahim appears unaware of later verses (19:93–94, 39:4, 4:171) reject that God adopted (has interactions by the authorities and sources involved. In a “taken” or “acquired” a son).63 Th ese last verses do not reject work subsequent to that cited by Ibrahim, Griffi th interacts mainstream Christian doctrine, but rather the heresy of with Block’s research and rules out a number of pos- Adoptionism (namely, that Jesus was born as an ordinary sible heresies on the Arabian Peninsula as infl uencing the human, but later became divine when God adopted him). Qur’an.67 He does not criticize this research, but instead Contrary to Ibrahim’s assertion, none of these verses relates acknowledges that it is “somewhat at variance” with his to the orthodox Christian doctrine of incarnation. own theory. Clearly Griffi th does not reject Block’s fi nd- Ibrahim’s charge that I “rely on post-Qur’anic writings” to ings (since in the same footnote he references both Block’s support my contention that the Qur’an condemns Christian research and his own article).68 But regardless, it seems heresies is a bit audacious given that the Qur’anic verses untenable to deny that some verses in the Qur’an are themselves wholly substantiate my position by employing condemning, not Christian orthodoxy, but heresies (e.g., the the words walad, “mate” and “consort.” Th ey are addressing rejection of the deifi cation of Mary in a “trinity” with God something entirely unrelated to the language of the New and Jesus in 5:116). l-Ghazali, Islam’s most celebrated philoso pher and theologian, states the son-father relationship of Jesus and God in the New Testament must be Aviewed as a metaphor, not as physical or biological. 33:3 Fall 2016 130 Article Responses brahim contends that I have elevated Muhammad to a position that has no biblical or historical basis. To the contrary, I have denigrated the legendary status given him by Islamic tradition by relying on earlier evidence.

I 73 Ibrahim cites Reynolds’ “Presentation” which interprets rather than a statement of the unique personality of God.” these Qur’anic verses as attacking orthodox Christianity Th us, it is not a rejection of the Christian doctrine of the based on his theory of “rhetoric.” However, Reynolds does Trinity (which is not specifi cally addressed in the immedi- not engage Block’s more recent historical research which ate or wider context of the Qur’an). Seyyed Hossein Nasr invalidates his theory.69 Neither does Reynolds’ hypoth- confi rms this, affi rming that in Q 4:171 and 5:73 esis account for the dozens of verses that affi rm (rather the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity as three “persons,” or than attack) the previous Scriptures. It makes little sense hypostases, “within” the One God is not explicitly referenced, for the Qur’an to repeatedly and emphatically insist that and the criticism seems directed at those who assert the ex- it confi rms and authenticates the biblical Scriptures and istence of three distinct “gods,” an idea that Christians them- at the same time reject their fundamental teachings (i.e., selves reject.74 as expressed in orthodox Christianity). Furthermore, it has been argued that Qur’anic verses allegedly critical Conclusion of Christian doctrines generally appear when addressing In my initial article and two subsequent interactions with people in Jewish contexts, thereby indicating a correction Ayman Ibrahim, I have off ered a wide-ranging rationale of Jewish distortions and misunderstandings of orthodox for reconsidering some crucial issues: Muhammad and the Christian belief.70 Qur’an in original Islam, a Christian theology of revelation, and a biblical view of prophethood, as the basis for a posi- Along with most Muslim theologians and Christian apolo- tive prophetic role for Muhammad. gists, Ibrahim invokes Q 112 (“Say: ‘He is One, the Eternal. He does not beget and was not begotten, and there is none Ibrahim contends that I have elevated Muhammad to like him’”) as a denial of divine sonship. Seyyed Hossein a position that has no biblical or historical basis. To the Nasr states to the contrary, contrary, I have denigrated the legendary status given him by Islamic tradition by relying on earlier and more reliable Attempts to link this verse to discussions of Christianity are historical evidence than is found in dubious later Muslim thus somewhat tenuous, and it is best understood in relation traditions. I have also given evidence from the earliest to . . . the Quranic critique of the pagan Arab notions of Divine and primary Muslim source, the Qur’an, which repeatedly procreation, as in 37:149-53.71 claims to confi rm the Bible and not to contradict it (and Moreover, thus we should seek to interpret it in ways that do that). Such notions are distinct from the Christian understanding Yes, the result is an understanding of Muhammad that is of Divine sonship in that the meaning of “son” in the phrase elevated well above the “demon-inspired false prophet” view “Son of God” employed in the Christian creed is very different that prevails among Christians today. But I have shown that from the meaning of “son” in the Quran. For Christianity, the such a view has a historical and missiological basis and is term “Son of God” refers to Jesus as the pretemporal, uncre- compatible with Scripture. ated Word of God that is begotten of the Father before time. I maintain that the Bible does not reject the notion of For the pagan Arabs, however, the progeny of God had a distinctly temporal and physical connotation.72 divine revelation and prophecy after the close of the canon of Scripture. But such revelation and prophecy must play Ibrahim supposes Q 112:3 denies a Christian creed, but a confi rming or supplemental role to Scripture; they are we must remember that begottenness language has been not necessarily infallible (and thus must be evaluated by prevalent since the Cappodocian fathers and throughout the Scripture); and they are not normative and authoritative for centuries statements similar to Q 112 have been made by all believers everywhere. I especially emphasized that the great Christian theologians (e.g., John of Damascus, Th omas biblical view of prophecy cannot be confi ned to binary cat- Aquinas, and John Calvin), affi rming that the essence/being egories—contrary to the commonly held that (a) the only of God is one, eternal, unique, and does not reproduce. In true prophets are those who gave us the books of the Bible fact, the exact wording of this surah appears in the Fourth and (b) all other prophets are false prophets. In support of Lateran Council’s affi rmation that the one divine essence my argument, I gave examples of other kinds of prophets— shared by the three hypostases/persons of the Trinity “does both from Scripture as well as from mission history (e.g., not beget, nor is it begotten.” Hence, Louis Massignon, William Harris whom Lamin Sanneh classes as one of the great French scholar of Islam, explained this verse as Africa’s “charismatic prophets”)—and this was not refuted “an affi rmation of the unity of the divine essence (tawḥīd) by Ibrahim.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 131

Partly due to misunderstandings, Ibrahim asserts that I ele- I would suggest that one contributor to our diff erences is vated some secondary studies above crucial primary sources, the paradigmatic lenses through which we view the issues. but my responses have shown otherwise. He introduced a Th erefore, I asked Bradford Greer to write about these number of secondary sources that I have interacted with and lenses through which we approach scripture, history and still sustained my thesis.75 Ibrahim insists that the average the religious phenomena of Islam. (His article, “Approach- Muslim on the street will automatically reject non-binary ing the Frontier Missiological Task,” is found in this issue categories of prophethood, and therefore my proposals are of the IJFM on page 93). But, regardless, it is clear that we not constructive (and even damaging to dialogue). A major are not all going to agree on the nature of Muhammad’s factor in our diff ering perceptions is that the fi rst audience prophethood and the original movement that he founded. in my mind for discussion of these issues would be Muslim Looking at an analogous situation in Scripture, skeptics and scholars and intellectuals, primarily in contexts of inter- critics might consider applying Gamaliel’s wisdom to this faith dialogue which easily provide opportunity to explain question surrounding Muhammad. Gamaliel had some un- the concepts that I have proposed. In contrast, Ibrahim is answered questions in his day; but though unconvinced that focused solely on the ordinary Muslim who he insists will Jesus was the Messiah, he suspended judgment, allowing reject my proposal out of hand and view it as subterfuge. that the purpose and activity of the movement that Jesus Strategically, engaging fi rst with open-minded Muslim reli- started might be of God (Acts 5:34–39).78 gious leaders is ideal; for they can sanction new ideas that From the outset I acknowledged this to be a complex and infl uence the average Muslim on the street. Nevertheless, controversial topic and pleaded for greater tolerance of even Muslims on the street can be engaged in ways that those holding diff ering positions. I had hoped that by the invite honest and frank explanation and elucidation of new time Ibrahim and I reached the conclusion of our dialogue, concepts. (See the sample conversation in the beginning of the added clarity would have signifi cantly narrowed the my response above.) Th e fact is that paradigm shifts take gap between our positions. Perhaps this will be the case for time, eff ort and persistence in the face of entrenched ideas those who read our exchanges. If not, then let us ensure that and opposition (e.g., belief in a fl at earth); nevertheless, our interactions avoid misrepresentation, exaggeration, and progress is possible. alarmism, so that we may endeavor to follow the ancient I fi nd it diffi cult to understand the fear expressed in Ibrahim’s wisdom: In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all conclusion that those who accept my view might subse- things charity. quently “call Christians to believe that the Qur’an was actually eternally kept in a celestial tablet.” Perhaps this is Harley Talman has worked with Muslims for more than 35 years, indicative of a proclivity to binary thinking: either accept including two decades in the Arab world and Africa, during the false prophet view of Muhammad or you will be pulled which he was involved in church planting, theological education, to affi rm the supposedly inane Muslim view of revelation.76 and humanitarian aid. Talman holds a Th M from Dallas Th eo- Moreover, Ibrahim’s “prophecy” that my proposal will “fail logical Seminary and a PhD from Fuller Th eologcial Seminary. to convince any religious adherents of either faith” is a false He presently teaches Islamic studies at a graduate school. one—for some have already given testimony to the contrary (e.g., the doctor who told me, “Your article blew my brains Endnotes out of the back of my head.”). Likewise, the alleged “biblical, 1 Th is description, the Muhammad of “Islamic Folklore,” is theological, historical, and missiological gaps” in my treatment borrowed from Nabeel Jabbour. are not “obvious” to all—Martin Accad considers my work as 2 Moderate revisionists referenced in my original article 77 “belonging to the fi eld of missiology par excellence.” include Fred Donner and Gabriel Said Reynolds; Robert Spencer Despite the diff erences in our views, Ibrahim and I have speaks for radical revisionists. 3 mutual respect and appreciation as scholars, as well as love As Fred Donner observes, “Th ose of us who study Islam’s origins have to admit collectively that we simply do not know for one another as brothers in Christ. Readers, however, may some very basic things about the Qur’an—things so basic that the wonder how evangelical scholars, equally committed to the knowledge of them is usually taken for granted by scholars dealing authority of Scripture and the lordship of Jesus Christ, can with other texts” (“Th e Qur’an in Recent Scholarship: Challenges be so far apart in their understandings. What factors lead to and Desiderata,” in Th e Qur’an in Its Historical Context, edited by such disparate attitudes, interpretations, and assessments? Gabriel Said Reynolds [New York: Routledge, 2008]), 29. he discussion of these issues would be with Muslim scholars and intellectuals, primarily in contexts of inter-faith dialogue which easily T provide opportunity to explain the concepts. 33:3 Fall 2016 132 Article Responses

4 Harley Talman, “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets,” reward and judgment that were so neglected by the Christians who IJFM 31:4: section IV, 182-185. were embroiled in Christological controversies,” Talman, 180. 5 Martin Accad, “Christian Attitudes Toward Islam and 19 Talman, 175. Muslims: A Kerygmatic Approach,” in Evelyne A. Reisacher, ed., 20 Re: Agabus, see D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit (Grand Toward Respectful Understanding and Witness among Muslims: Rapids, MI: Baker, 1987), 97–99. Essays in Honor of J. Dudley Woodberry (Pasadena: William Carey 21 Cf. Talman, section on “Post-Canonical and Present day Library, 2012), 31. Prophecy,” 175. 6 While speaking of Muhammad’s “prophetic role, function or 22 Cf. Talman, section on “Special Revelation Beyond the mission” can be helpful in academia, elsewhere it may be clearer to Jewish-Christian Border,” 175. just to use “prophet” with qualifi cation (e.g. “I respect Muhammad 23 Bill Musk, Kissing Cousins?: Christians and Muslims Face to as a prophet even though I do not consider him to be a prophet the Face (Oxford, U.K. and Grand Rapids, MI: Monarch, 2005): 78–83. same way that you do.”) 24 7 “Witness to God in a Secular Europe,” Conference of Euro- Of course, any fruitful dialogue will be based upon the estab- pean Churches: Geneva (1985), 56, cited in Musk, 80. lishment of relationships of sincerity and trust in which Muslims can 25 Ibrahim’s fi rst response denounces my “speculative terms recognize our good will, sense our conciliatory attitude and respect, such as ‘possibility’ and ‘some kind,’ repeating them over and over” and appreciate our eff orts at fi nding common ground. It will not al- IJFM 32:4, 202. ways be easy to overcome the suspicions and mistrust engendered by 26 a millennium of adversarial culture in Christian-Muslim controversy “So when you are in doubt about what we have revealed to where there is a permanent investment in the other side’s falseness. you, ask those who are reading the book that was before you” (Ref- (Like race car drivers who anticipate their competitors’ “moves” in erence Qur’an, 241). order to jockey for position, religious controversialists construct 27 Q 6:52, 13:22, 18:28, 28:88, 30:38–39, 55:27, 75:22, 76:9, narratives in their minds of the other’s beliefs that are limited to 88:2 & 8, and 92:20. perceived weaknesses and “straw men” who can be excoriated and 28 Guilio Basetti-Sani, Th e Qur’an in the Light of Christ, Ron rejected as representative of the entirety of the competing religion). George, ed. (WinPress, 2000), 129. Reprint of Guilio Basetti-Sani, Th e 8 Muslims may distinguish rasul “messenger” from nabi “prophet,” Koran in the Light of Christ: A Christian Interpretation of the Sacred Book though some have a dual function as messenger-prophet. In Q 3:81 a of Islam (Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald Press, 1977). Basetti-Sani prophet brings scripture and wisdom, whereas a messenger comes to views the Qur’an as rejecting Nestorian and Monophysite Christologies; confi rm the existing scriptures. “Warner” (nadhir) is another qur’anic others might agree that orthodoxy is not being condemned, but diff er function that has overlap with them. It is not diffi cult to explain to a as to which particular Christological view(s) the Qur’an is criticizing. In Muslim that in Christian theology we can use the term “prophet” to contexts where the critiques are addressed to Jews, not Christians, it is also refer to messengers, to warners, to those who are moved by God’s presumably condemning distorted Jewish views of Christian theology. Spirit to make predictions or to give direction or guidance (not neces- 29 Ibid., 162. sarily infallibly), and even to those who proclaim the Scriptures. 30 Musk, 342. 9 “Every son of Adam sins, the best of the sinners are those 31 Seyyed Hossein Nasr, ed. Th e Study Quran: A New Transla- who repent.” Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith no. 2499. tion and Commentary (New York: HarperCollins), 2015, 267. 10 Cf. “Word of God” Q 3:45, “sinless” in 19:19 and in the well 32 Ibid. known hadith: “Th ere is none born among the off spring of Adam but 33 Diacritical marks in the Qur’an are a later development. Satan touches it . . . except Mary and her child” (Sahih Bukhari 4.55.641). In light of the tortuously awkward word order with “apart from 11 Cf. Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, Encyclopedia of Islamic God” coming between “rabbis and monks” and “Messiah, it seems Doctrine, vol. 4: Intercession (Chicago: Kazi Publications, 1998). most probable that an accusative case marker was later inserted 12 Qur’anic quotations unless otherwise noted are from Th e after “Messiah” to avoid his equality of lordship with God so as to Arabic-English Reference Qur’an: Th e First Translation of the Qur’an conform to later Islamic theological position.” into Modern English with References to the Tawrah, Zabur, and Injil 34 Ibrahim is overly generous to himself saying, “Talman [Th e Reference Qur’an Council, July, 2014], subsequently referred kindly admits that my use of the primary source Doctrina Jacobi to as Reference Qur’an. challenges his thesis.” What I actually said was, “At fi rst glance, his 13 Th e position of Tennent, Ledit and Aquinas in the article citation from Doctrina Jacobi would appear to refute my statement. under discussion in Harley Talman, “Is Muhammad Also Among But my assertion conveys the conclusion of C. Jonn Block’s analysis the Prophets?” IJFM 31:4: 183, hereafter referred to as “Talman.” which I encourage readers to consult” (“Response to Ibrahim,” 205). 14 Guilio Basetti-Sani, Th e Qur’an in the Light of Christ, edited Cf. C. Jonn Block, “Expanding the Qur’anic Bridge: Historical and by Ron George (Winpress, 2000, reprint of Th e Koran in the Light of Modern Interpretations of the Qur’an in Christian-Muslim Dia- Christ, trans. W. Russell Carroll, Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald Press, logue with Special Attention Paid to Ecumenical Trends” (PhD dis- 1977), 44, 106, 111, 117, 120, 129, 148, 159, 161, 166 and elsewhere. sertation, University of Exeter, U.K., 2011), subsequently published 15 e.g., Q 4:171. as Th e Qur’an in Christian-Muslim Dialogue: Historical and Modern 16 Talman, 181. Interpretations (New York: Routledge, 2014). 17 Talman, 178. 35 Block, 126. See his discussion for evidence that Christians gener- 18 I showed how, at least from a “centered-set” perspective, ally did not seem to object to Muhammad as prophet in the fi rst century. Muhammad fulfi lled this function which did not require perfor- 36 Martin Accad, “Towards a Th eology of Islam: A Response mance of miracles. Moreover, I noted that Muhammad emphasized to Harley Talman’s ‘Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?’” biblical themes “such as the resurrection, the return of Christ, and (IJFM 31:4): 192.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 133

37 Fred M. Donner, Muhammad and the Believers: At the Ori- 56 Ibid., 189, endnote 105. gins of Islam (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University 57 Abdullah Saeed, “Th e Charge of Distortion of the Jew- Press, 2010). ish and Christian Scriptures,” Th e Muslim World, vol. 93:3–4 (Fall 38 Abdul-Masih Saadi, “Nascent Islam in the Seventh Century 2002): 419–436; and Martin Accad, “Corruption and/or Misinter- Syriac Sources,” in Th e Qur’an in Its Historical Context, edited by pretation of the Bible: Th e Story of the Islamic Usage of Tāhrīf,” Gabriel Said Reynolds (NY: Routledge, 2008), 218–220. Near East School of Th eology Th eological Review 24 (2003): 67–97. 39 Fred M. Donner, “From Believers to Muslims: Confessional We see some contemporary Muslim clerics returning to the early Self-identity in the Early Islamic Community,” Al-Abhath 50–51 Islamic position, e.g., Sheikh Hasan Farhan al Malaki, “Are the (2002–2003): 9–53. Tawrat and Injeel really corrupted?” https://www.facebook.com/ 40 A. Mingana, Sources Syriaques (Leipzip: Harrassowitz, hasanalmaliki/posts/10153365960233001?fref=nf. 1908), 147, as cited in Saadi, 218. 58 Cf. Al-Azhar sheikh Mustafa Rashid, “Th e Quran did not 41 Michael Philip Penn, When Christians First Met Muslims: say the Injil or the Torah has been corrupted,” http://www.ahewar. A Sourcebook of the Earliest Syriac Writings on Islam (Oakland, CA: org/debat/show.art.asp?aid=297504; George, Th e Qur’an in the University of California Press, 2015), 58. Light of Christ, 116–119. 59 42 Ibid. I am indebted to C.D. Johnson for this insight and a Fawaylunun lil-ladhīna yaktubūna al-kitāba bi-‘aydīhim number of valuable editorial suggestions to this article. thumma yaqūlūna hādhā min 9indi Allāhi li-yashtarū bihi thaman- an qalīlan. 43 I quoted Penn: “Alternatively, it may be an anachronism based 60 on the author’s knowledge of ‘Abd al-Malik’s famous coin reform Heribert Busse thinks the reference is to Jews who made and in the 690s. As a result, it remains uncertain whether the Maronite sold Tefi llin, Jewish prayer straps with phylacteries containing Torah Chronicle was written in the mid-seventh century or simply comes passages (Die theologischen Beziehungen des Islam zu Judentum und Chris- from a later author well informed about the 660s,” Talman 172. tentum: Grundlagen des Dialogs im Koran und die gegenwärtige Situation [Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft: Darmstadt, 1988], 49). Some oth- 44 Th e word is not “truth” but “the book”; this is the only verse ers think it may refer to the oral tradition of the Jewish Talmud (Basetti- Ibrahim cites where ahl al-kitāb is actually used. 45 Sani, 118). Among many Muslims there is opposition to profi ting from Edward William Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon (London: the word of God and this attitude may be a concern of this verse as well. Willams & Norgate 1863), Book I, 422. 61 46 My article (p. 174 and endnote 52) noted that the diffi culty Cf. attempts by seven diff erent scholars to decipher its posed by the one passage (2:116–117) in the Qur’an that rejects meaning in part 5 of Ibn Warraq, What the Koran Really Says (Am- Jesus being the ibn of God was resolved by C. Jonn Block (Expand- herst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2002): 319–371. ing the Qur’anic Bridge, 126). 47 Talman, 184. 62 Ibrahim may consider arguments coming from a Christian 48 Cf. for example, Kaleef K. Karim, “Examining Quran 9:29 apologist that the qur’anic rejection of “son of God” is in regard to – Does Islam Sanction Th e Killing Of Christians & Jews?” https:// Jesus being the physical son of God (Memsuah Mansoor, “Th e Son discover-the-truth.com/2014/06/03/examining-quran-929-does- of God in the Bible and the Qur’an,” http://www.answering-islam. islam-sanction-the-killing-of-christians-and-jews/. org/Authors/Memsuah/son_of_god_bq.htm). 49 Talman, 184. 63 Hence also in 4:171 is the Qur’an’s rejection of three (thalatha) 50 Nasr, 1366. gods: God as father, Mary as mother, and Jesus as son. If the orthodox 52 W. Montgomery Watt observes: “It is impossible to prove formulation of the Trinity was being condemned, then the Arabic term that any Muslim child was called Ahmad after the Prophet before for Trinity (thaluth) would have been utilized instead of the number about the year 125 A.H. On the other hand, there are many instanc- “three” (thalatha). Block demonstrates that the Arabic technical term es prior to this date of boys called Muhammad after the Prophet. for Trinity had religious currency in Arabia at the time and would have Th e fact that Ibn Sa‘d thinks it worth including three traditions to been used in this verse if the Trinity was being rejected. the eff ect that the Prophet’s name was Ahmad is an indication that 64 Al Ghazali, al Radd al-Jamīl lī Ilahiyat ‘Īsa bi Şarih al-Injil. this had not always been obvious; there are no similar traditions 65 Abu al-Rayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad al- Bīrūnī, Al- about his name being Muhammad” (“His Name is ‘Ahmad,’” Th e beruni’s India, translated from Arabic by Edward C. Sachau, (Lon- Muslim World 43 no. 2 (April 1953): 110, 113. don: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., 1910), vol. 1, 38, cited in 53 Th e Torah discussion in Luke 4 between young Jesus and the Ungaran, “Son of God in Indonesian Christology: An Analysis of scholars illustrates this as does his teaching that amazed those in the the Doctrine of Christ in the Indonesian Reformed Churches,” In- synagogue (“Where then did this man get all these things?” Mat- ternational Islamic University dissertation, Malaysia, 2012. Rodney thew 13:54, 56). Although I do not favor the spirit and tone of sites Cardoza likewise observes, “In classical Arabic both ibn (son) and such as this, Sam Shamoun and Jochen Katz make a strong case walad (boy or son) were not used fi guratively or metaphorically for for this view from the Qur’an, Bible and revisionist history in “Th e interpersonal relationships. Instead they referred almost exclusively Quran and the Unlettered Prophet: Jesus or Muhammad?” http:// to biological off spring” (“New Paths in Muslim-Christian Dialog,” www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/unlettered_prophet.htm. Th e Muslim World, Vol. 102 [October 2013]:453–454). 54 “Th e wicked among them substituted a diff erent saying for 66 Sam Shamoun, “Th e Quranic Understanding of Historic what they had been told, and we sent a plague upon them from Christian Th eology,” http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/ heaven for their wickedness” (7: 162). shamoun/rebuttals/dirks/islam_christiandoctrine.html. 55 “Allah made a covenant with those who were given the 67 Sidney Griffi th, “‘Syriacisms’ in the Arabic Qur’an: Who book, so that you would show it clearly to people and not hide it, were ‘Th ose who said that Allah is third of three’, according to but they cast it behind their backs and sold it for a small price. How al-Ma’idah 73?,” in A Word Fitly Spoken: Studies in Mediaeval dreadful is what they sell it for” (3: 187). Exegesis of the Hebrew Bible and the Qur’ān, edited by M. M.

33:3 Fall 2016 134 Article Responses

Bar-Asher, B. Chiesa and S. Hopkins, 83–110 (Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 2007); C. Jonn Block, “Philoponian Monophysitism in An Afterword South Arabia at the Advent of Islam with Implications for the Eng- lish Translation of ‘Th alātha’ in Qur’ān 4. 171 and 5. 73.” Journal of by Ayman Ibrahim Islamic Studies (2011): 1–26. 68 Sidney H. Griffi th, Th e Bible in Arabic: Th e Scriptures of the ne of the exceptionally positive results of my ‘People of the Book’ in the Language of Islam (Princeton University e xchange with Harley Talman is that I got to Press. 2013), 28. know him better, as we talked over the phone 69 Reynolds did not interact with Block’s research in any of the O several times and discussed various details of his thesis on sources cited by Ibrahim, probably because the former’s article was in process of review during the interim. Th us, this scholarly source is Muhammad’s prophethood. He is a serious scholar, dili- out of date on this point and not useful for the purpose of rejecting gent researcher, and thoughtful Christian. Another signifi - Block’s support for my position. cant positive outcome is that in our printed exchanges he 70 Basetti-Sani, Th e Qur’an in the Light of Christ, 162–164. was skillfully able to explain and clarify several points of 71 So ask them, does your Lord have daughters while they have his proposal. Readers should grasp the details of his thesis sons? Or did We create the angels female, while they were wit- more accurately to be able to discern whether it is actu- nesses? Behold! It is of their own perversion that they say, “God has ally valid in missiological circles, precisely in bringing the begotten,” while truly they are liars. Has He chosen daughters over Gospel to Muslims. IJFM is to be thanked for graciously sons? (see also 39:2-3; 52:39). off ering its platform for such a sophisticated exchange. 72 Nasr, 1580, references Q 4:171C as condemning this pagan notion. Jesus’ deity is extremely fundamental for Christians, which 73 Basetti-Sani’s quotation of Massignon, Th e Qur’an in the makes it very important for Muslims to understand it, to Light of Christ (Ron George, ed.), 83. discuss it and to ultimately insist on rejecting it if they 74 Ibid., 267. are to remain orthodox Muslims. Similarly, Muhammad’s 75 For example, Ibrahim cites Griffi th as saying, “even the prophethood is a pivotal belief in Islam—if he is not a friendliest of Christian apologists who lived in the early Islamic prophet, Islam collapses. Th is is precisely, in my view, the period stopped well short of accepting Muhammad as prophet, in main reason why Talman’s proposal is very important to any canonical sense and of accepting the Qur’an as a book of divine evaluate with scrutiny. He treats Muhammad’s prophethood revelation.” But where did I ever advocate that Muhammad was as a “non-essential” topic for faith that deserves liberty, a prophet in the “canonical” sense or that the Qu’ran is a book of while I view it as a signifi cantly “essential” topic. He equates “divine revelation” like the Bible? his proposal with the “unanswered questions” of Gamaliel’s 76 If this is his inference, then Ibrahim seems unaware of the fact that ancient Jews actually held this view in regard to the eter- day, although the Church for the last fourteen centuries has nality of the Torah. not generally felt that this question is unanswered. He indi- 77 Martin Accad, “Towards a Th eology of Islam: A Response cates that his thesis is like “a movement” that deserves time to Harley Talman’s ‘Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?’” before judging it with scrutiny, while I view it as very cru- (IJFM 31:4): 193. cial to our day-to-day missiological concerns in connecting 78 As noted previously, theologian Kurt Anders Richardson with Muslims, especially as it raises unneeded ambiguity. recommended applying the Gamaliel test to this issue. It is obvious to those who have been following this exchange that Talman and I disagree on fundamental issues. However, is it possible that he and I can agree on some level? Yes, I believe we can. Talman and I agree that Muhammad is not a true prophet like the prophets of our canonical scriptures. However, while I am willing and completely comfortable to call Muhammad a false-prophet based on biblical and theo- logical measures, Talman is unconvinced and reluctant to use such a term. He believes that there is a possible bibli- cal space to assign Muhammad some kind of prophet- hood, especially if we distinguish between the diff erent Muhammads, such as the one of Muslim tradition and the one of history. Th e crucial issue in my view is that we cannot actually establish a substantial “Muhammad” of history apart from the “Muhammad” of Muslim tradition. Talman disagrees and would be satisfi ed with a minimalist “histori- cal Muhammad” confi ned to his message in the Qur’an.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman 135 n dialoguing with average Muslims, it is hardly convincing to speak about the various Muhammads, the continuum of prophethood, let alone affi rming I the incarnation or the deity of Christ based on the Qur’an. Talman and I agree that binary categories are clearly found My disagreement with Talman centers on methods and throughout the Bible. However, he insists that binary cat- approaches that eventually have missiological consequences. egories do not actually apply when it comes to the issue of It is my conviction that the Gospel is off ensive. We do not prophethood, even after Christ. Th is is one reason that he need to deny or shy away from such a biblical truth. Paul views Muhammad as neither a prophet nor a false-prophet, interacted with both Jewish and pagan cultures. He was proposing that Muhammad fi ts in another category (e.g., not only remarkably relevant to them, but also signifi cantly “charismatic prophet”). By way of disagreement, I view off ensive in his discourse and Gospel preaching. Christians Muhammad as a clear example of a post-Christ false-prophet, should be concerned with creative and eff ective ways to and, in a sense, one of the warned-against anti-Christs in the communicate the uniqueness of the Christian faith and Johannine inspired writings. the supremacy of Christ to adherents of Islam who do not generally care about sophisticated terms or complicated Talman and I agree that we should bring the Gospel to defi nitions. In this exceptionally important mission, we Muslims because Jesus is the only Savior. We agree that do not need to make our faith appealing to Muslims by Muslims need to accept Christ as Lord and Savior, and according any level of prophetic honor or biblical truth to that Christians need to fi nd every possible and creative Muhammad. Th is cannot create a common ground with way to communicate the Gospel to Muslims. However, we Muslims. Nor can it make the Gospel convincing. IJFM disagree on how Muhammad’s prophethood would fi t and should be used in such a Gospel proclamation. He respects Muhammad “as having a prophetic role, function, or mis- sion,” although he does “not consider him to be a prophet the same way [Muslims] do.” On the contrary, I do not need to assign Muhammad any prophetic role in any sense to respect him. In fact, I mainly respect him because Muslims do, and I love them. In respecting Muhammad, Christians are never obliged to assign him any unmerited prophetic roles. It is unnegotiable that Christians should respect Muslims and treat them with esteem and honor. Th is is a part of our identity as followers of Christ. Nonetheless, the matter is diff erent when it comes to Muhammad, especially as we con- sider what the Muslim traditions themselves report about his morality and ethics, and what the Qur’an as Muhammad’s allegedly received revelation affi rms about Jesus’ deity and message. Consider this: I can love and respect Druzes, Buddhists, and Hindus, and fi nd some points of contact that are true in their culture and sacred writings, but in no way am I supposed to support their religious claims. Talman and I disagree that his proposal is relevant for reaching out to Muslims. While I acknowledge Talman’s obvious diligence and absolutely value his painstaking research, I see his proposal as unhelpful in communicat- ing truthfully with Muslims. Of course, his thesis could be quite interesting in some secular circles where researchers are only concerned with manuscripts, texts, and sophisti- cated debates concerning picky rarefi ed, obscure, or abstruse matters. However, in dialoguing with average Muslims, it is hardly convincing to speak about the various Muhammads, the continuum of prophethood, let alone affi rming the incarnation or the deity of Christ based on the Qur’an.

33:3 Fall 2016 WilliamWilliam CareyCarey LibraryLibrary

(%,,!.5ƫ0$/ƫ%*ƫ0$!ƫ.'*!//(%,,!.5ƫ0$/ƫ%*ƫ0$!ƫ.'*!// $!ƫ1((*!//ƫ+"ƫ%)!$!ƫ1((*!//ƫ+"ƫ%)! +ƫ+*0%*1%*#ƫ%05+ƫ+*0%*1%*#ƫ%05 PapersPapers on on Syncretism: Syncretism: 1965–1988 1965–1988 EthnohistoryEthnohistory Selections Selections from from the the TheThe Story Story of of a aMissiologist Missiologist from from Colonial Colonial AlanAlan Tippett, Tippett, Author Author | Doug| Doug Priest, Priest, Editor Editor WritingsWritings of of Alan Alan R. R. Tippett Tippett toto Postcolonial Postcolonial Times Times AlanAlan Tippett, Tippett, Author Author | Doug | Doug Priest, Priest, Editor Editor AlanAlan Tippett, Tippett, Author Author | Doug | Doug Priest, Priest, Editor Editor CharlesCharles Kr Kraft,aft, Editor Editor AlanAlan Tippett’sTippett’s publicationspublications playedplayed a a AlanAlan TippettTippett believedbelieved hishis writingswritings onon significantsignificant role role in inthe the development development of of ethnohistoryethnohistory werewere hishis mostmost originaloriginal AsAs a gifta gift to to his his wife, wife, Edna, Edna, and and their their children children missiology.missiology. TheThe volumesvolumes in in thisthis seriesseries contributioncontribution to to the the discipline discipline of ofmissiology. missiology. onon the the occasion occasion of of their their golden golden wedding wedding augmentaugment his his distinguished distinguished reputation reputation by by TheThe wealth wealth of ofmaterial material in inFullness Fullness of ofTime Time is hisis his anniversary,anniversary, Alan Alan Tippett Tippett completed completed his his bringingbringing to to light light his his many many unpublished unpublished bestbest ethnohistory ethnohistory writing, writing, most most of ofwhich which has has autobiographyautobiography just just months months prior prior to to his his death. death. materialsmaterials and and hard-to-locate hard-to-locate printed printed articles. articles. nevernever been been published. published. Explore Explore the the methods methods ContainingContaining personal personal reflections reflections found found in inno no

TheseThese books—encompassingbooks—encompassing theology,theology, andand models models of ofthis this captivating captivating field field of ofstudy. study. otherother publication, publication, No No Continuing Continuing City City is isthe the anthropology,anthropology, history, history, area area studies, studies, religion, religion, RealizeRealize how how documents, documents, oral oral tradition, tradition, and and insideinside story story of of Tippett’s Tippett’s childhood, childhood, his his later later andand ethnohistory—broaden ethnohistory—broaden the the contours contours of of eveneven artifacts artifacts can can be be used used to to recreate recreate the the missionmission experiences experiences in inthe the South South Pacific, Pacific, thethe discipline. discipline. culturalcultural situation situation of ofa priora prior time. time. Learn Learn about about hishis relationshiprelationship withwith DonaldDonald McGavranMcGavran thethe South South Pacific, Pacific, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Hawaii, Hawaii, and and andand the the founding founding of of the the School School of of World World A Aprimary primary concern concern among among missiologists missiologists is is Australia,Australia, both both in inand and through through time. time. Mission,Mission, and and his his retirement retirement in inAustralia. Australia. howhow to to present present the the gospel gospel in ina away way that that is is culturallyculturally relevant relevant without without adulterating adulterating the the AlanAlan Tippett’s Tippett’s twenty twenty years years of ofmissionary missionary EditorsEditors Charles Charles Kraft Kraft and and Doug Doug Priest Priest both both essentialessential truths truths of of the the message. message. The The ability ability serviceservice in inFiji—preceded Fiji—preceded by by pastoral pastoral ministry ministry knewknew Alan Alan Tippett Tippett personally. personally. Charles Charles Kraft Kraft is is toto appropriately appropriately contextualize contextualize this this message message in inAustralia Australia and and graduate graduate studies studies in inhistory history ProfessorProfessor Emeritus Emeritus of of Anthropology Anthropology at atFuller Fuller is is thethe differencedifference between between establishing establishing andand anthropology—provide anthropology—provide the the rich rich data data base base SeminarySeminary and and was was a acolleague colleague of of Tippett Tippett anan indigenous indigenous Christianity Christianity as as opposed opposed to to thatthat make make him him a aleading leading missiologist missiologist of ofthe the fromfrom 1969 1969 to to 1977. 1977. Doug Doug Priest Priest is isexecutive executive introducingintroducing syncretism. syncretism. In Inthis this compendium compendium twentiethtwentieth century. century. Tippett Tippett served served as as Professor Professor directordirector of of CMF CMF International. International. While While at atFuller Fuller ofof presentations presentations and and papers, papers, the the issue issue of ofAnthropology Anthropology and and Oceanic Oceanic Studies Studies at at Seminary,Seminary, Priest Priest was was a astudent student of of Tippet Tippett as as is isaddressed addressed with with regard regard to to the the idea idea of of FullerFuller Theological Theological Seminary. Seminary. wellwell as as his his assistant. assistant. covenantcovenant relationship relationship with with the the Lord. Lord.

ListList Price Price $18. $18.99ƫđƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫ99ƫđƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫ$15.$15.19 19 ListList Price Price $35. $35.95 95đƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫĸĂĉċ đƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫĸĂĉċ75 75 ListList Price Price $39. $39.99ƫđƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫ99ƫđƫ1.ƫ.% !ƫ$31.$31.99 99

ISBN:ISBN: 978-0-87808-479-1 978-0-87808-479-1 Alan Alan Tippett Tippett (Author), (Author), ISBN:ISBN: 978-0-87808-477-7 978-0-87808-477-7 Alan Alan Tippett Tippett (Author), (Author), ISBN:ISBN: 978-0-87808-478-4 978-0-87808-478-4 Alan Alan Tippett Tippett (Author), (Author), DougDoug Priest Priest (Editor) (Editor) DougDoug Priest Priest (Editor) (Editor) DougDoug Priest Priest (Editor), (Editor), Charles Charles Kraft Kraft (Editor) (Editor) WCLWCL | Pages | Pages 234 234 | Paperback | Paperback 2014 2014 WCLWCL | Pages | Pages 416 416 | Paperback | Paperback 2014 2014 WCLWCL | Pages | Pages 580 580 | Paperback | Paperback 2013 2013

  ċƫƫƫħƫƫƫ   ċƫƫƫħƫƫƫāġĉĀĀġ  āġĉĀĀġ   ORBIS BOOKS by Kwame Bediako

JESUS and the GOSPEL in AFRICA History and Experience Introduction by Hans Visser and Gillian Bediako v THEOLOGY IN AFRICA SERIES v his selection of writings by the late African scholar Kwame T Bediako is the best source for insights into the Christ of pres- ent-day African history and the Jesus of African faith, showing how intimately bound together are the message of Jesus and the strug- gle for democracy. Bediako puts flesh on the idea that Christianity is today “lived in local languages long before it is translated into English and French.” Students and teachers of mission as well as those working in the field will find this an invaluable introduction to understanding Christianity as lived by countless Africans in a high stakes search for liberation and peace.

ISBN 978-1-57075-542-2 paperback 136pp., bibliography, $22.00 CHRISTIANITY IN AFRICA The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion

hristianity’s center of gravity has shifted in the modern C world from the continents of the North to the global South, with Africa playing a significant role in the resurgence of the faith. Here, Kwame Bediako is the first to examine this global transformation from an African perspective, offering a unique and compelling survey of the new role African Christianity is playing today. He examines the intellectual legacy of Edward Wilmot Blyden, the “Black Spokesman” who questioned the suitability of Western Christianity to Africa; discusses the Afrikania Moment of the twentieth century; and explores the prospects of the modern African experience in the future shape of Christianity. Kwame Bediako (1945-2008), a native of Ghana, was trained as a patrologist and historian. He served as rector of the Ak- ISBN 978-1-57075-048-9 paperback rofi-Christaller Institute for Theology, Mission, and Culture in $34.00 284pp., notes, index, Akropong, and was a pioneer in the exploration and advancement of African Christianity.

A WORLD OF BOOKS THAT MATTER 1.800.258.5838 M-F 8-4 ET v Fax Orders: 914.941.7005 138 Book Reviews

“religion.” Th e fi rst is a study of Mani and Manichaeism, which is often seen today as a religion even though ear- lier Christians always categorized it as a Christian heresy. Reviews Th e second study is of Islam as another Christian heresy, particularly as seen in the writings of John of Damascus. Finally, there is the fascinating case of Buddha being treated Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept, by as a Christian saint (as explained in the story of Barlaam Brent Nongbri (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, and Ioasaph). Rather than conceptualizing a “Buddhist 2013, pp. 275 + ix) religion,” Buddha ended up being inducted (with signifi cant alterations) as a Christian saint! —Reviewed by H. L. Richard Chapter fi ve presents an analysis of European develop- ments leading to the modern concept of “religion.” Th e his is an outstanding introduction Reformation played a pivotal role here, along with the T to the development of the concept integral development of nation-states in Reformation and of religion, and how problematic a casual post-Reformation history. Jean Bodin and John Locke are usage of the term can be. Nongbri’s then considered as key fi gures in turning the concept of emphasis is on “ancient religions,” but his “religion” into a private personal aff air separate from the data includes a focus on the development state. Nongbri quotes William T. Cavanaugh’s analysis of of the modern concept of “world religions.” the post-Reformation “wars of religion;” that calling “these Seven succinct chapters drawing on confl icts ‘Wars of Religion’ is an anachronism, for what and documenting insights from many other scholars build was at issue in these wars was the very creation of religion a compelling case against “religion” as a universally valid as a set of privately held beliefs without direct political category. As Nongbri says in his introduction, relevance” (98, quoting from “‘A Fire Strong Enough to Consume the House’: Th e Wars of Religion and the Rise of The idea of religion as a sphere of life separate from politics, economics, and science is a recent development in European the State,” Modern Th eology 11 (1995), p. 398) history, one that has been projected outward in space and Chapter six looks at “New Worlds, New Religions, World backwards in time with the result that religion appears now Religions.” Brief discussions of “religion” in India, South to be a natural and necessary part of our world. This appear- Africa and Japan lead into the development of the concept ance, however, turns out to be a surprisingly thin veneer that of “world religions,” a term that seems to have been used dissipates under close historical scrutiny. The following chap- fi rst in 1864 (125). Nongbri concludes that ters are an attempt to offer such scrutiny. (7) textbooks, departmental websites of universities, and the media After a fi rst chapter discussing modern usage of the term tend to present the model of World Religions as a self-evident religion, Nongbri attacks the use of this term in translations fact: these religions are “simply there,” and classifying them in from ancient texts. Th is amounts to a fascinating and insightful this way is a natural or neutral activity. I have shown, however, analysis of three terms, the Latin religio, the Greek thrēskeia that there is nothing natural or neutral about either the con- and the Arabic dīn. Modern translations of these terms as cept of religion or the framework of World Religions. (129) “religion” are shown to be invalid from their original contexts. Chapter seven returns to ancient religions, and “Th e Modern Th e discussion of “religion” in the Qu’ran should deeply impact Origins of Ancient Religions.” How Greek and Roman data current thought on Islam and insider movements. came to be considered under the category of “religion” and Th e third chapter looks at four ancient developments that the development of the concept of ancient Mesopotamian have been suggested as the origin of the concept of religion. religion are analysed. Th is leads to a discussion in the con- Th ese four are the revolt of the Maccabees, Cicero’s analysis clusion of the consequences of reading our modern ideas of Roman gods, Eusebius’ Christian analysis of true and into other cultures. Nongbri does not argue for ceasing to false beliefs, and early Islam. Nongbri’s conclusion after use the term religion, nor is he opposed to referring to “reli- analyzing these matters is that “introducing ‘religion’ into gion as a second-order, redescriptive concept.” When using these discussions would seem to cause more problems than the term religion he’s concerned we’re aware of what we are it solves, as ancient peoples had diff erent ways of conceptu- doing and that we “avoid giving the impression that religion alizing themselves and others” (64). really was ‘out there’ ‘embedded in’ or ‘diff used in’ the ancient evidence” (158). Chapter four considers “Christians and ‘Others’ in the Pre- Modern Era,” which amounts to three case studies of how Th is was a very easy book to review because the content is so earlier Christians did not employ the modern construct of well organized, so clearly stated, and so concisely summarized.

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Book Reviews 139 he centrality of the topic of religion for modern missiology is obvious, and this text demands a paradigm shift away from “conversion as change of T religion” to what is being called an “insider movement” approach. Although the data on World Religions is only a small part “directed contextualization,” he amplifi es the contextual- of the text, this is the best book I have found for introducing ized, indigenous theology-making of the CMBs themselves. “religion” and “world religions” and should be integrated into He describes this as “organic contextualization,” a process curricula dealing with those topics. Th e centrality of this topic which is inherently done by and from the local church. for modern missiology is obvious, and this text demands a Miller credits the Taiwanese educator-pastor Shoki Coe paradigm shift away from “conversion as change of religion” to with framing contextualization within an ecclesial param- what is being called an “insider movement” approach. Nongbri eter. Herein, indigenous Christians undertake the “double is not pioneering new ideas, but provides an excellent state- wrestle” with “God’s Word” and “God’s world.” ment of the current consensus in the fi eld of religious studies. Th e book’s title, Living among the Breakage, comes from T. S. Eliot. Miller notes that we live in a time of breakage, described by Peter Berger as the “heretical imperative.” Living Among the Breakage: Contextual Theology- Miller explains: Making among Ex-Muslim Christians, by Duane Some people make choices that previously would have been Alexander Miller (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2016, pp. 272) unthinkable—whether that may be the Baptist lady in Oklaho- ma who converts to Buddhism or the Muslim sheikh in Mecca —Reviewed by Fred Farrokh who converts to Christianity. (2) While Christian readers may lament the decision of the Introduction Baptist lady in Oklahoma, missional Christians should not heology may be likened to great overlook the momentous times in which we live: Muslims T rivers such as the Nile and are turning to Christ. Miller has done yeoman’s work in Mississippi, which run their majestic accessing these CMBs and soliciting their perspectives. courses before splintering into their respective deltas. Christian theologians Miller gives particular attention in this study to the concept often focus on the splintering—the of “power,” employing Steven Lukes’ theory of “Th ree distinctives of their respective denomi- Dimensions of Power.” Th is angle may seem odd but by nations. Yet, less attention is given to the streams and the end of the book the reader will consider it germane. tributaries that feed the mighty theological rivers. Th eology-making tends to be an empowering pursuit. CMBs are often persecuted and frequently powerless in the A new stream is fl owing into global Christian theology, face of coercive forces around them, such as governments, through the contribution of a new generation of Christians Sharia legal constrictions, and even family members who of Muslim background (CMBs). Duane Alexander Miller consider them a “pollution” which must be eliminated. notes in general, “Th e study of CMBs is very much unre- searched” (5). In Living among the Breakage: Contextual Miller also includes a robust section on “conversion,” which 1 Th eology-Making and Ex-Muslim Christians, Miller sets IJFM readers will recognize as a controversial topic. out to remedy this defi ciency by considering how CMBs Th e author recognizes that conversion may be a process are developing their own practical theology, even if this may rather than something that happens at a given moment in time; his CMB interviewees clearly indicate they embrace not yet resemble textbook-style systematic theology. the identity of being Christian converts out of Islam. How Miller Sets Up His Book Th is choice by Miller essentially delimits his research to It should be noted this book is based on Miller’s doctoral Muslim-background theology-makers who now identify dissertation. As such, it necessarily includes hypotheses themselves as Christians and part of the global Church. testing and theory formation. Nevertheless, Living among Miller’s Field Research among CMBs the Breakage is highly readable. Miller’s introductory chapters set the stage for his fi eld Miller, an Anglican, begins this fascinating study by research among CMBs in three diff erent contexts—a addressing contextualization, though not from the angle “Muslim-background congregation” in an unnamed Arab that some IJFM readers will likely expect. Instead of country, and two diaspora Iranian congregations, one in the focusing on the often-controversial topic of contextualized UK and one in the USA. Miller has lived in the Middle cross-cultural communication, which Miller describes as East for nearly a decade, and speaks Arabic. Th e author thus

33:3 Fall 2016 140 Book Reviews he CMB theology-making chronicled by Miller demonstrates a depth which eclipses the textual fundamentalism of Sunnism, reaches deeper than the cathartic T messianism of Shi’ism, and soars higher than the spiritual mysticism of Sufi sm. has a contextual familiarity which allows him not only to ones to hell. How do these CMBs back up their position? fi nd the dots but also to connect them.2 He also embedded Th e answers come within this erudite volume. himself in these communities for long enough to observe their worship and take the pulse of their “double-wrestle.” Love and Power In all things, Miller is to be commended for bringing forth Miller’s application of Lukes’ power theory comes into the perspectives of what the reader cannot but help to focus by the end of the book. CMB theology-formation, recognize as real people who face real challenges, even if notes Miller, is “Christo-centric.” Th e material provided by pseudonyms are used. Miller about CMBs is too emotive not to quote from it: In turning away from the Umma and Muhammad and the How CMBs are Expressing their Theology Qur’an, they have turned away from a loveless power they Th ough CMBs are not typically writing theology textbooks, perceived there to Jesus, his Church and the Bible and a de- Miller demonstrates the richness of the new CMB theol- ity whose power is perfected in weakness and whose love is ogy in their poems, songs and worship services. Miller stronger than death. And from this experience of the deity’s also elicits their theological perspectives through personal love-power some have endeavored to build a new identity interviews with laypersons and leaders. Miller by no means from the breakage among which they have lived. (237) suggests that CMB thinking is monolithic. Chapter Five In many ways, the CMB theology-making chronicled by covers CMB theological output as manifested globally in Miller demonstrates a depth which eclipses the textual fun- their devotional poetry, testimonials (“conversion narra- damentalism of Sunnism, reaches deeper than the cathartic tives”), and “wisdom literature” in dealing with real-life messianism of Shi’ism, and soars higher than the spiritual issues of persecution, reconciliation, forgiveness, baptism, mysticism of Sufi sm. and marriage. “Ayya” is a Muslim-background female lay pastor who features prominently in the Arab congregation, CMB theology includes a strain of liberation theology—a indicating that the willingness of CMBs to have women term Miller uses in the book. Yet, it is not the Latin, political in leadership extends far beyond the Islamic paradigm, and liberation theology of decades past, though Islam is undeni- may even surpass that of many Arabic evangelical contexts. ably political. Instead, the liberation is a spiritual one. It is a liberation that includes union with Jesus, the All-Powerful The Content of CMB Theology-Making One who once rendered Himself seemingly powerless. What exactly is the content of CMB theology? Th is is the heart of the book, and it could well result, if Miller so Insider Movements and Ecclesiology chooses, in a new missions primer or a number of missio- Here Miller observes: logical training articles. Suffi ce to say CMB self-theolo- IM is indeed an open debate among American evangelical gizing does not simply mirror global patterns. For instance, “scholars,” but among the CMB’s I met, it is of no interest. Rath- CMB views of atonement emphasize less the penal substi- er there is a clear consensus that belonging to a local church, tutionary aspect of Christ’s work, and more the manifesta- being baptized and, with only possible exceptions when faced tion of God’s love poured out on the Cross. with danger, using the label Christian and rejecting the label Muslim are indeed what God and the Bible require. That is Muhammad and Islam their point of view–theology done by the ex-Muslim Christian. IJFM readers have been exposed to the missiological The centrality of the Church in this theology is not up for de- discussion regarding the prophethood of Muhammad. bate because for them, apparently, the Church is seen as part As Harley Talman queries, “Is Muhammad also among of the Good News of God revealed in his Messiah. (222) the Prophets?”3 While, it is no surprise that the CMBs in Th ese CMBs demonstrate some creative and brave strate- Miller’s study take a negative view of Muhammad and the gies in dealing with community expulsion and persecution, religion he founded, Islam, Miller includes a blunt observa- including the use of safe houses. Ayya even visited the tion: “I do not recall a single instance of any CMB ever tell- Muslim families of CMB women she mentored to try to ing me they had learned anything about ethics or God from rescue and restore these ruptured relationships. Muhammad” (224). Readers who are not from a Muslim background may wonder if this is simply a knee-jerk reac- Identity tion by new believers who feel Islam has not only bound Turkish CMB Ziya Meral has chronicled the plight of his them personally but also consigned all their deceased loved fellow CMBs in No Place to Call Home.4 Th e Arab CMBs

International Journal of Frontier Missiology Book Reviews 141 MBs feel they no longer retain Muslim identity, yet the wider Muslim community refuses to confer upon them Christian identity. Th is results in C a slow, incomplete identity formation which Miller describes as “liminal.” studied by Miller express a similar dilemma. Th ey themselves Endnotes feel they no longer retain Muslim identity, yet the wider 1 See, for example, the entire IJFM, 30:1 ( Jan-March 2013). Muslim community refuses to confer upon them Christian 2 Readers may also benefi t from a recent wider global survey of identity. Th is results in a grindingly slow, yet incomplete, CMBs which Duane Miller co-authored with Patrick Johnstone of Operation World: Patrick Johnstone and Duane A. Miller, “Believers identity formation process which Miller describes as “lim- in Christ from a Muslim Background: A Global Census,” Interdisci- inal.” One Arab lay leader even “wondered if it would take plinary Journal of Research on Religion, vol. 11, article 1 (2015). an entire generation before a new (non-liminal) identity 3 IJFM, 31:4 (Oct–Dec 2014): 169–190. could emerge” (144). Th is daunting timeframe may chal- 4 Meral, Ziya, No Place to Call Home: Experiences of Apostates lenge those who prioritize rapidity in missions. from Islam, Failures of the International Community (New Malden, Surrey, UK: Christian Solidarity Worldwide, 2008). Unfi nished business Th ough he is a leading researcher of this global CMB movement, Miller wisely asks his readers not to overstate or generalize his conclusions. For instance, Miller’s interviews of diaspora Iranian CMBs cause him to conclude that they seek a purifi ed Persian culture based on Christianity and shorn of the Arab Islamizing infl uence. While this may be true to an extent, many such congregations worldwide feature Afghans, Tajiks and other (non-Persian) Iranians worshipping side by side. Furthermore, many ex-Muslim Iranian Christians recognize the shortcomings of their own native culture, which may feature indirect and less than honest communication. An Iranian Christian brother once asked when we are going to take Jesus’ command seriously to simply let our “yes” be “yes” and our “no” be “no.” And Miller’s choice of viewing CMB theology-making through the prism of power theory is a valid avenue, but it is not the only appropriate prism of study. While more research is needed, Miller has made an excellent contribution in this new fi eld. Concluding Thoughts: Duane Miller has entered the world of ex-Muslim Christians. It is not a simple world, but a complex one of trauma and breakage, trial and triumph. Th rough his research, Miller must be commended for not only iden- tifying the key issues facing CMBs, but probing the very pain and open shame that sets the backdrop against which CMB life is painted. Indeed, Miller has painted a picture of CMBs who share with Jesus both the fellowship of His suff erings and the irrepressible power of His resurrection. For those willing to invest the time to read a book that is somewhat academic, Miller’s Living among the Breakage will be well worth the while. For those teaching seminary or training classes on ministry to Muslims, adding this book to the “Required Reading” list will be a wise choice. IJFM

33:3 Fall 2016 142 In Others’ Words “Adding another 600 hundred million unevangelized by 2050” and “Why is the unfinished task not getting finished when…?” In Others’ Words Millennial Men Missing in US Missions The number of young men joining the Catholic priesthood Editor’s Note: In this department, we highlight resources outside has fallen precipitously and some within the Catholic world of the IJFM: other journals, print resources, DVDs, web sites, blogs, videos, etc. Standard disclaimers on content apply. Due to the are wondering if the requirement of celibacy is at fault. (See length of many web addresses, we sometimes give just the title of the Erasmus “Why the Priesthood is in Crisis” in The Economist resource, the main web address, or a suggested search phrase. Finally, Jan 22, 2017.) Yet in US Protestant missions, the number of please note that this July–September 2016 issue is partly composed young men going into missions work has also dropped with of material created later in 2016 and early 2017. We apologize in no concurrent celibacy requirement. This gap has left thou- advance for any inconvenience caused by such anachronisms. sands of young women missionaries facing an unwanted life of celibacy. For 2015 statistics see justinlong.org/singles-vs- Evangelicals Debate Refugee Policies couples.php. In December of 2016, John Piper asked “Why For an excellent article about worldwide repercussions to the Are Women More Eager Missionaries?” travel ban’s prioritization of persecuted religious minorities, see This brings us to the question: Is there something more pro- “Should America’s Refugee Policy Put Persecuted Christians found that is happening to young men? In 2013, we mentioned First?” (Christianity Today Jan 31, 2017). In it you will find the 2007 book Boys Adrift in which Leonard Sax contends that thoughtful responses from four Christian leaders from several a full one third of men aged 22-35 are living at home and are organizations including Open Doors and World Relief. more interested in playing video games five hours a day than in A Perspective from Lebanon working or getting married. Have we in the missions world faced Lebanese Christians have seen the population of their tiny up to this loss of one third of a generation of young men? Is country of four million grow by over 1/3 in just six years there something we can do to bring them back into a life of pur- due to an influx of refugees from Iraq and Syria. Martin pose? (see “In Others’ Words” column in the IJFM issue 30:4). Accad says this about their response: The Contribution of Single Women Numerous churches in Lebanon . . . have flung their doors open to This is not to downplay the historic and tremendous contribu- refugees and demonstrated compassion to levels unseen before. tion that single women missionaries have made. See Dana Rob- Refugees, regardless of their religious backgrounds, have been erts’ excellent 2014 historical summary of Protestant women in flocking into church buildings, where they have found love, compas- sion, and community. No institution can understand and practice mission: /New-World-Outlook-Magazine/New-World-Out- the compassion of God demonstrated in Jesus like the church can. look-Archives/2014/March-April/0306womeninmission. Nor is it to overlook the unique opportunities single people can take To read the rest of his blog, google “A Wake-up Call for advantage of. Here is an optimistic blog from the pen of a single People of Faith in the Twenty-First Century.” Southern Baptist young woman missionary written late 2016: How to Love Muslims in a Polarized America “The Missions Force is Incomplete without Single People.” Financial Tsunami in India For a wonderful article giving ordinary Christians sugges- tions of how to not only love Muslims, but how to invite In late November, 2016, the prime minister of India, in an ef- fearful friends and neighbors into relationships with Mus- fort to rein in the black market and collect taxes on undeclared lims, see Shane Bennett’s latest in Mission Catalyst “Can earnings, abruptly canceled the two highest value rupee notes, Normal People Love Jesus, Muslims, and America—at the the 500 and 1000 notes (or 86.5% of all cash in circulation), Same Time?” http://missionscatalyst.net/. according to “India’s Currency Reform Was Botched in A Series of Blogs About the Book Insider Jesus Execution” (see The Economist Dec 3, 2016). To make mat- ters worse, the government had not printed nearly enough Warrick Farah in Circumpolar has begun a series of blog re- notes to replace them. ATMs promptly ran out of cash, banks views of the new book Insider Jesus by William Dyrness, pro- were mobbed, and millions of the poor lost their meager life fessor of Theology and Culture at Fuller Theological Seminary savings. People were only given until the end of the year to ex- Farah’s latest three blogs deal with the first three chapters of change their bank notes (worth $7.30 and $14.60 respectively) Dyrness’ book and include extensive quotes as well as some but all told over 22 billion notes were affected. Informed of Farah’s own thoughts. He invites readers to read the book sources place the government’s capacity for printing new along with him: http://muslimministry.blogspot.com/. banknotes at only 3 billion per month which means a huge Status of the Unreached number of notes could not be redeemed by the deadline. All Justin Long has a gold mine of resources at justinlong.org, this in a land where four fifths of the wage earners are paid in including two posts that take a look at numbers that matter: cash and 98% of all consumer transactions are in cash. IJFM International Journal of FrontierZ Missiology IJFM & Perspectives 143

& Related Perspectives Lesson and Section Whether you’re a Perspectives instructor, student, or coordinator, you can continue to explore issues raised in the course reader and study guide in greater depth in IJFM. For ease of reference, each IJFM article in the table below is tied thematically to one or more of the 15 Perspectives lessons, divideded iintonto fofourur sectisections:on Biblical (B), Historical (H), Cultural (C) and Strategic (S). DiDisclaimer:scs laimer: The table below showshowss where the content of a given article might fi t; it does not implyiimmplp y endorsementenndorsement of a particular articlea by the editors of the Perspectives materials. For sake of space,space, the tabletable only includes lessonsless related to the articles in a given IJFM issue. To learn more aboutabout thethee PerspectivesPerspectives course, includingi a list of classes, visit www.perspectives.org.

Articles in IJFM 33:3 Lesson 5: Unleashing the Gospel (B) Lesson 6: The Expansion of the World Christian Movement (H) Lesson 7: Eras of Mission History (H) Lesson 10: How Shall They Hear? (C) Lesson 14: Pioneer Church Planting (S)

Starting Points: Approaching the Frontier Missiological Task Bradford Greer XX (pp. 93–100)

Joyful Witness: An Excerpt on Muslim-Christian Attachment Evelyne A. Reisacher XXX (pp. 103–6)

A Response to “Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?” John Azumah and XX Harley Talman (pp. 108–13)

“Is Muhammad Also Among the Prophets?”: A Second Response to Harley Talman XX Ayman Ibrahim and Harley Talman (pp. 116–35)

Global Prayerwww.globalprayerdigest.org JOIN 100,000 August 2015 • Frontier Ventures • 34:8 Digest PEOPLE PRAYING DAILY FOR BREAKTHROUGH VARANASI AMONG UNREACHED CASTE, POLITICS, AND RELIGION IN INDIA’S KEY PILGRIMAGE SITE PEOPLE GROUPS.

9 Voting Along Caste Lines 11 Varanasi’s Jains Go All Out to Liberate Their Souls globalprayerdigest.org 12 Varanasi Has Deep Roots in Buddhism 20 If They Won’t Attend Class, Teach Them on a Boat! 31 India Gospel Outreach Work in Varanasi Still Bearing Fruit [email protected] $12/year within the United States

33:3 Fall 2016