Book Review of Islam and Christianity on the Edge: Talking Points in Christian-Muslim Relations into the 21st Century Eds. John Azumah & Peter Riddell by Adam Dodds Senior Pastor of Elim Church in Dunedin, New Zealand http://www.elimdunedin.com/adam-dodds 1 The goal of Islam and Christianity on the Edge: Talking Points in Christian-Muslim Relations into the 21st Century edited by John Azumah and Peter Riddell (Brunswick East, Australia: Acorn Press, 2013) is to present Christian authors offering varied viewpoints on foundational Christian-Islamic themes, Islam and the West, and issues pertaining to Christian-Muslim relations. This work directly discusses contentious subjects including holy war in Christianity and Islam, a comparison of early textual history of the Bible and the Qur’an, Islamophobia and Westophobia, and conversion and apostasy. It particularly highlights the dangers of miscommunication between followers of Christianity and Islam. Islam and Christianity on the Edge is an edited work, comprising predominantly of a series of occasional papers presented over a ten year period, and presupposes deep and abiding differences between Islam and Christianity and their adherents. While the theological differences between the faiths are well known to students of this subject, this book shows that the differences are yet more extensive. Christian thought in the West, and Christian thought in the global south that has been influenced by the West, operates in what Caroline Cox and John Marks (in chapter 6) call the ‘academic mode’. This comprises a shared search for truth, applying the rules of logic and scientific inference, an open discussion of alternatives, openness to refute currently held beliefs and practices, and a commitment to test hypotheses with all available relevant evidence. (83-84) Academies are relatively autonomous, free from political, moral and religious pressure, and this freedom is prized as necessary for the pursuit of truth. This ‘academic mode’, originating in Europe, arises from the unique blend of Judeo- Christian heritage with Greco-Roman thought; it is both Christian and cultural. Cox and Marks contrast this with Islam and Marxism – principal examples of ideological societies, which “exhibit a direct, close and continuous interaction between politics, religion, and all social and 2 educational activities.” (87) In ideological societies what is deemed to be true is derived from an ideology that is not open to question. Evidence and arguments that appear to be contrary to the official ideology are suppressed and academic freedom is resisted. Cox and Marks’ account is both revealing and disturbing, but is it possible to so generalise about “traditional Islam” (87) with its 1400 year history encompassing diverse cultures and approximately 1.5 billion adherents today, even if we acknowledge that traditional Islam advocates a religious-political synthesis1? What of Muslim reformers? And has Christianity never fallen prey to the ideological mode, especially but not only in the church-state alliance of the Christendom era? Cox and Marks’ important argument would benefit from further substantiation and more careful qualification. To the degree that Christians and Muslims are shaped by the academic mode and ideological mode respectively, they will have profound differences in mind-set and worldview. For example, in the academic mode censorship is a vice, in the ideological mode it is a virtue.2 Cox and Marks cite instances of where the two modes of thought overlap, and thus clash. Though not specifically mentioned, this raises the question of a serious conflict of interest concerning the funding, from Islamic-majority countries, of professorships and centres for Islamic studies in Western universities including Oxford, Cambridge, SOAS, Durham and Edinburgh in the UK, and Harvard and Georgetown in the US.3 Such universities are embodiments of the academic mode whereas these professors and centres of study are governed by people operating within the ideological mode. Is it ethical for Western universities to receive such funding if 1 As argued by Bernard Lewis, Islam and the West (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 135-6. 2 A recent example of the ideological mode enforcing censorship in Malaysia is reported in “Sabah bans Hizbut Tahrir, Shiah, Ahmadiyya… also liberalism, pluralism”, Malay Mail Online, 8 August 2017. http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/sabah-bans-hizbut-tahrir-shiah- ahmadiyya-also-liberalism-pluralism#Q1vheig2hAAWmMPP.97. 3 Peter Riddell, “The Call to Islam: Diverse Methods and Varied Reponses”, Stuttgarter Theologische Themen Vol IV (2009), 42-44. 3 complete academic freedom cannot be guaranteed? To the degree that Christian and Islamic scholars represent these two modes of thought, their dialogue is conducted not only with different goal posts but on different playing fields. Cox and Marks suggest lessons from Western- Marxist dialogue could be a source of assistance in mutual Christian- Muslim understanding. The following chapter (chapter 7) examines this tension vis-à-vis human rights. Barrister Charlotte Thorneycroft contends that comparing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) with Sharia finds three areas of incompatibility: the principle of equality, freedom of religion, and the prohibition of slavery. For the UDHR equality of people is absolute and without qualification. For Sharia, in the words of Ann Elizabeth Mayer (quoted on page 103), “Islam treats as equal all those who should be so treated”. Among the diverse schools of Islamic thought this typically does not include women, non-Muslims, or slaves. Thus she concludes there is an “irreconcilable divide between the UDHR and traditional interpretations of Islamic law.” (111) Thorneycroft laments “there is a failure in much of the Muslim world to acknowledge that there is a fundamental conflict between traditional Islamic law and international human rights standards such as the UDHR.” (110) The lack of acknowledgement of such incompatibilities appears to be also present in the West.4 Peter Cotterell (in chapter 15) highlights one specific aspect of human rights: the right for a Muslim to change his/her faith. Surveying the Qur’an, the doctrine of abrogation, the hadith, Islamic jurisprudence, Ibn 4 For example, the advice of the British Law Society given for solicitors to draw up sharia-compliant wills that are discriminatory [“Islamic Law is Adopted by British Legal Chiefs”, The Telegraph, 22 March 2014. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10716844/Islamic-law-is-adopted-by-British- legal-chiefs.html], and the argument by the former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams for the partial adoption of sharia law in the UK [“Sharia Law in UK is ‘unavoidable’”, BBC News, 7 February 2008 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7232661.stm]. Note also Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali’s criticism of any official recognition or adoption of sharia law into British law [http://michaelnazirali.com/articles/app/archive/07- 2016/title/in-response-to-the-government-s-independent-review-into-sharia-law, 4 July 2016]. 4 Ishaq’s sira, and recent history, he concludes “Islam’s apostasy laws are in clear breach of the UDHR: Muslims do not have freedom to change their religion.” (231) This fact, combined with the missionary nature of Christian faith,5 generates numerous challenges. John Azumah examines one such challenge on the subject of Islam and contextualisation (chapter 1). He surveys six levels of contextualisation and focuses on ‘Insider Movements’ (IM), that is, “popular movements [of Muslims] to Christ that bypass formal and explicit expression of the Christian religion”. (9) Such insiders are encouraged to remain within the Muslim community and retain their socio-religious identity as Muslims, while being Jesus- followers. Azumah raises the question of whether insider movements are an appropriate contextualisation or veer towards illegitimate syncretism. He asks “Is the IM a new way of Muslims coming to faith in Christ or localised manifestations of Islamic spirituality?” (22) A further challenge to Christian-Muslim communication is the danger of generalisation. Is a suicide bomber, motivated by claiming obedience to Islam, a true representative of Islam? More fundamentally, what is ‘true Islam’? Peter Riddell in chapter 5 surveys different perspectives on true Islam, showing the falsity of treating Muslims as a monolithic block. Instead, he concludes, “there is a titanic struggle taking place between moderates and radicals for the hearts and minds of the Muslim masses in the middle.” (78) The diversity within the house of Islam has a parallel in the Christian Church. In chapter 12 Riddell discusses different ways in which the World Council of Churches, the Roman Catholic Church, and the World Evangelical Alliance interact with Muslim modernisers, Muslim traditionalists, and radical Islamists. In all the forms of Christian-Muslim engagement reviewed Riddell concludes that there are four principal 5 See Adam Dodds, “The Centrality of the Church’s Missionary Nature: Theological Reflections and Practical Implications”, Missiology: An International Review Vol. XL No. 4 (October 2012: 393-407), where I argue for the inherently missionary nature of Christian faith. 5 goals: the importance of mutual understanding, understanding God, witnessing, and cooperation in relevant areas. The most famous recent example of Christian-Muslim dialogue, ‘A Common Word’ (chapter 16), is itself, argues Gordon Nickel, an instance of da’wa.