Christian Apologetics to Islam
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS TO ISLAM (page left blank intentionally) SEPTEMBER 11th AND THE MANDATE OF THE CHURCH We have all been deeply impacted by the horror of the evil attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11th. Our hearts were filled with grief and sadness as we saw the carnage caused by people intent on inflicting maximum destruction. Like everybody else, we have been grappling with how to make sense of this tragedy. We long for justice and an uprooting of evil, but we are also painfully aware of how many of our innocent friends in the Iran Region could suffer and possibly lose their lives. President Bush has said that ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ to fight terrorism will now be the main task of his administration. Tony Blair has made ‘rooting out the cancer of terrorism’ the priority of his foreign policy. Other world leaders have said they will stand shoulder to shoulder with America in this fight. But what should the response of the Church be? How should the events of 11 September 2001 challenge the Church of Jesus Christ? As Christians involved in missions to Muslims, we believe the Church needs to have a clear response to the tragedy. Just as politicians are rising up to the challenge of rooting out terrorism and protecting democracy, so too the Church should rise up to love Muslims by preaching Christ to them and campaigning for their religious freedom. Make no mistake, how Christians respond at this time will decide the future and nature of mission to the Muslim world in our generation. Love Muslims By Preaching Christ As the world watches the political events unfold in all their complexity, the Church must not forget that the ultimate answer to evil in all societies is Christ. As it is rightly the task of politicians to lead their nations in responding to the atrocity, so it is our responsibility to preach Christ. However because of fear, unbelief and a lack of love, the Church has rarely preached Christ to Muslims, as it should have done. Instead Christians have largely either ignored or appeased the Muslim world. After the September 11th attack it is surely time for a massive shift in mission thinking. Christ- centred preaching to Muslims must come to the top of the Church’s agenda. Campaign for Religious Freedom in Muslim Countries In the aftermath of the attack it is right to be concerned that Muslims in Western countries are not attacked. But it is also right for Christians to be reminded that there is no freedom to preach Christ to Muslims, right across the Islamic world. Stretching from West Africa to the Far East there are over one billion Muslims living in 34 countries. In the vast majority of these countries – there is no religious freedom. There is no freedom to proclaim Christ, no freedom for Muslims to convert, no freedom for Christians from a Muslim background to assemble together or be trained for ministry. In many Muslim countries there is no freedom to even print Bibles or build churches. And in all Muslim countries the law of apostasy, that demands death for anyone converting from Islam, is either tolerated or actively sponsored. Over one billion people are not allowed to hear the Gospel. This is the greatest violation of human rights in our time – yet there is little passion to see things change. Twenty years ago thousands of Christians campaigned for religious freedom in the former Communist countries. It was considered an outrage that they could not hear the Gospel. But when it comes to the Muslim world it seems as if our attitude is different and most Christians accept the status quo. As politicians commit themselves to ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’, surely it is time for the Church to campaign for true religious freedom in Muslim countries. In the coming months it is clear there are going to be dramatic diplomatic changes. The call to the church is to seize this historic opportunity and campaign for religious freedom in Muslim countries. This means that religious freedom must have priority in all the diplomacy that elected officials conduct with Muslims countries. Let politicians urge Muslim leaders who denounce the attack on the USA to commit themselves to religious freedom, so Christians can preach Christ in the streets of Tehran and Riyadh, just as Muslims can preach Islam in the streets of London and New York. In Closing We were deeply impressed by the bravery and commitment of the rescue services in response to the tragedy. While others were escaping to safety, they ran to the danger zone to save lives. Our prayer is that the church will be obedient to her mandate, and do all she can to boldly proclaim the Lord Jesus Christ as the only Saviour to the Muslim world. For Information about Islam and communicating the gospel to Muslims, see www.answering-islam.org DARE WE CONFRONT?! (A CALL FOR A NEW PARADIGM IN MUSLIM EVANGELISM) by: Jay Smith It was not a day unlike any other at Speaker’s Corner, in Hyde Park. I had been up speaking on my ladder concerning the prophet Muhammad for about fifteen minutes, when suddenly an irate Muslim, also named Muhammad, standing directly in front of my ladder, began to shake it while yelling profanities, until I was thrown off. I got back on and continued my talk, when Muhammad once again repeated his yelling, and grabbing the ladder threw me off once again. It was time for the police to intervene, which they did, enabling me to finish my speech to the crowd gathered. Upon descending from my ladder I was approached by Muhammad, still seething with anger, yelling at me to please stop casting aspersions on his prophet. It was at this point that an Irish atheist, a fellow who often sided with the Muslims, came up to us and asked why we bothered to talk to each other since he had witnessed Muhammad’s rather violent reaction to my speech a few minutes earlier. Without any hesitation, Muhammad put his arm around my shoulder, turned to face the Irishman, and in his thick Arab accent responded: ‘Mr. Smith believes in God...I believe in God...you don’t. Mr. Smith believes in the prophets...I believe in the prophets...you don’t. Mr. Smith believes in paradise...I believe in paradise...you don’t. Mr. Smith is my brother, and you are not, so leave us alone!’ I have thought often of that incident, and wondered whether that scenario represented something we in the West have missed in our exchanges with Islam. Here was a Muslim, who, though angered to the point of violence at my talk, could yet put his arm around me and defend our relationship to someone else who, though he had always been polite, had never bothered to confront a Muslim head-on. Why was I Muhammad’s brother and not the polite Irishman? Could it be that my confrontational approach had a greater impact on my eastern friend than the more irenical overtures preferred by missionaries in the West today? Or was this merely an aberration, the response of one man, at a particular place and time, which would possibly never be repeated? The answer, of course is never either/or, so why not both/and? CRITIQUING CONFRONTATION In the UK there is a broad consensus which believes it is wrong and perhaps dangerous to confront people of other faiths, particularly those who are from Islam. Getting up on a ladder and challenging groups of Muslims openly at Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park, or taking on invitations to oppose Muslim apologists in highly publicised debates on the authority of the Qur'an, some say, is not only much too aggressive but detrimental to the gospel, since it does not honour God or call people to faith in Jesus Christ. The fear is that rather then engender substantive communication these confrontational methods merely set one side against the other, with each trying to publicly humiliate the other, which leads to building even higher the walls of difference already existing between the two communities. A more profitable avenue, it is said, is that of dialogue, defined by some as ‘an exercise where two opposing parties come together and discuss their differences in an atmosphere of cordiality and mutual understanding’. Most people, I am sure, would agree with this premise, as confrontation between faiths is admittedly controversial, and not entirely immune from error. How then should we answer the above accusations? DEFINING DIALOGUE It might be helpful to begin by redefining the concept ‘dialogue’. In the Acts of the Apostles Paul used the word ‘dialogue’ a number of times, and exemplified it in his own methodology. He first went to the Jews, entering the Synagogues, where he participated in ‘Dialegomai’, which when translated means ‘to think different things, ponder, and then dispute’ (taken from Peter May’s Dialogue in Evangelism, Grove Books Ltd., Bramcote, Nottingham, 1990). Paul’s premise for dialoguing, therefore, was not as many liberal Christians seek to do, an exercise whereby one learns from others in order to ‘meet Christ in the other person’, or where we ‘learn from others in order to attain a fuller grasp of truth’ (John Hick’s Truth and Dialogue). Paul used dialogue as a two-way flow of ideas. Acts 17:2- 3, 17-18 shows us that he sought to prove what he said, marshalling arguments to support his case, providing evidence, and thereby engaging in argument, due to his convinced preaching (Goldsmith’s Islam & Christian Witness, pg.120).