EMQ » July–September 2020 » Volume 56 Issue 3
By Paul T. Martindale
Over the centuries Christians have developed a number of communication models in their attempts to present the gospel to the Muslim person. Four phases of encounters seem apparent in history. In the first period from 633 to 1140 most attempts were motivated to defend Christianity and respond to specific Muslim theological objections. The second phase from 1140 to 1800 consisted of sporadic attempts to reach Muslims characterized by more accurate views of Islam. The third phase, from 1800 to 1910, could be described as the age of polemic. Finally, from 1910 to the present we have witnessed numerous approaches and communication models attempting to provide positive presentations of the gospel with varying degrees of contextualization as well as dialogue models and theories of intercultural and interreligious communication. An important recent emphasis has been the recognition that there are many different Islamic contexts, cultures, peoples, and types of Islam all needing their own specialized approaches.[1]
Historical Approaches to Engagement
In our efforts to tailor presentations of the gospel to the many kinds of Muslims there has been a tendency to overlook the significance of Islam’s core theology leading to a failure to adequately expose and engage the system of suppression of biblical truth.[2] While traveling to a meeting on a plane some years back I was astounded that the talkative passenger next to me did not say another word to me the rest of the flight after I replied to his question, “What do you do?” My answer was “I am a missionary.” Despite the previous forty-five minutes of active conversation for the remainder of the flight he did not say another word to me. Some weeks later when a passenger on another flight asked me what I did I responded, “I am a cross-cultural ministry consultant to churches for immigrant communities.” The response to that answer was resoundingly positive and the conversation continued.
Over the years I have sometimes wondered whether my contextualized witness was too reluctant to engage the issues with Muslims in a clear and compelling way. Two years ago when meeting a Muslim for the first time he also asked me what I did. I could have responded “seminary professor” or “minister” or “cross-cultural ministry consultant.” Instead I found myself saying to him, “I suppose that what I do essentially is to draw back the veil of misunderstanding and false teaching in Islam from a Muslim’s mind so that he can see and understand the truth of the Bible for the first time.” Much to my surprise he was so intrigued by this candor that I spent the next two hours answering his questions about Islam and Christianity. I am not proposing that this become a new standard model of approach to Muslims but I will contend that engaging the core theological misunderstandings found in the Qur’an is an important part of our witness with thinking Muslims. Since Muslims view Christianity through the lens of the Qur’an and Hadith, the embedded theology and ideology of Islam must be engaged so that the Muslim has an opportunity to see a clear, accurate and compelling gospel message. This process is analogous to cleaning off the accumulated layers of dust and dirt from a person’s glasses so that he/she can see clearly. My study of Islam and interactions with Muslims over thirty-six years has led to the conclusion that there is a system of suppression of biblical truth as well as a systemic rebellion against God embedded within the core theology and ideology of Islam that needs to be unmasked for the Muslim to see and understand clearly.
Almost all of the early apologetic works in the first nine centuries focused upon responding to Muslim theological objections and misunderstandings. Most of these used the discourse or debate methods. There are many great examples of Christians during this period who engaged with the theology of Islam such as John of Damascus, Nicholas of Cusa, and Raymond Lull. Later in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries polemic became the default approach with works attacking Islam with the assumption that one must bring down the edifice of Islam before being able to rebuild a Christian one upon its ruins.[3] By 1910 the polemic method was largely abandoned as offensive to Muslims and ineffective in leading Muslims to Christ. The positive presentation of Christ began to take shape without being constrained to answer Islam’s theological objections.
Modern Approaches
I would like to describe here a few of the approaches from the modern era. Sarah Hosmon, MD was a medical missionary to Arabia for forty-five years during the first half of the twentieth century. During the early 1950s she sought to change the Muslim’s conception of Son of God along a neglected two hundred miles of coast in Oman. She had noted how the Muslims would immediately object whenever Jesus was described using the term ‘Jesus Christ Son of God.’ She sought a way to use the scriptures to remove this misunderstanding in the Muslim’s mind. Her method is published in a little booklet entitled, Presenting Jesus Christ The Son of God to Muslims.[4]
One day she was reading the first three chapters of the Gospel of Luke and came across the phrase, “Adam, which was the son of God.”[5] It occurred to her while reading those words that Adam had no father and therefore was a special act of creation and that likewise, Jesus, was also the Son of God by special act of creation. At her medical station in Oman there were patients from up and down the Batina coast. She reported that after explaining to Muslims that Jesus was a special act of creation eventually there were no more objections when the phrase ‘Jesus Christ Son of God’ was used. By engaging the Islamic doctrine of the incarnation Hosmon succeeded in changing Muslim’s minds and eliminated this theological objection. It should be noted however, that a Muslim would also need to understand that the second person of the Trinity eternally pre-existed this special act of creation in order to have an orthodox view of the incarnation.
In 2001 Christine Schirrmacher, PhD in Islamic Studies, published the book The Islamic View of Major Christian Teachings.[6] This was an excellent attempt to help Christians understand their theological beliefs through the Islamic theological grid. She describes Islam’s doctrines in an accurate and fair way so that both Muslims and Christians can see the distinctions between Islamic and Christian doctrines despite using some of the same terms such as sin, human nature, revelation, and salvation. The comparison of doctrines in this way helps Christians better communicate the gospel with Muslims in ways that the Muslim person will accurately understand. Without being polemical this approach describes and clarifies the overlaps and discontinuities between Islam and Christianity and leads to the conclusion that both religions do not lead to the same place nor do they have the same origins.
In their book published in 1997, A Muslim and a Christian in Dialogue, Kateregga and Shenk demonstrate honesty, tolerance, and courtesy while presenting their respective views without compromise. According to the Chief Kadhi of Kenya, “each in his own faith has stated exactly what his religion stands for without compromise … without attempting to make the reader believe in the rightness of one faith over the other.”[7] Some might object that this approach does not go far enough apologetically to persuasion and that Christianity should not be presented as an equally valid religious system. Others might object when Shenk writes that “Christians and Muslims worship the same God.”[8]
Kateregga and Shenk model true dialogue between a Muslim and a Christian. Each is able to present his positive message without becoming mired in the constraints of answering objections. Each is able to articulate its message knowing that readers from both religions are the intended audience. Each is able to clarify and respond to the other’s presentation. Some would say that this positive dialogue is not apologetics. However, it certainly seems to be a valid and constructive avenue of theological engagement.
One can hardly argue with the number of printings that this book has had and the world-wide audience it has enjoyed being printed in a number of languages. No one approach can accomplish everything. This book, as well as Shenk’s other works, have given a positive and comprehensive exposure of Christian doctrines to many Muslim readers. One could say that a solid foundation has been laid upon which other approaches can now take further. Concerning the objection of stopping short of persuasion, sometimes the context determines the limits of the engagement. Taking the opportunity to engage to some extent is certainly a far better option than not engaging because we feel the ground rules are too limiting. In any case, we can only begin to imagine the hundreds of Muslims that we may meet in heaven because they began by reading A Muslim and a Christian in Dialogue.
After Maurice Bucaille published his supposedly scientific book in 1979, The Bible, The Quran and Science, Dr. Bill Campbell decided to write a book in response to the numerous medical, scientific, and historical errors that Bucaille’s book was perpetuating. Campbell’s book expresses respect for Dr. Bucaille but clearly confronts its pseudoscience with accurate facts about the origins and transmission of the Qur’an and the Bible, embryology, and the prophethood of Jesus and Mohammed. Rather than remain silent and allow Bucaille’s book to go unanswered Bill Campbell spent many months doing careful research including trips to the Vatican to obtain photocopies of early codices of the New Testament. By responding to textual, historical, medical, and scientific issues Campbell was engaging with Islam’s worldview and ideology as well as the specific false arguments in Bucaille’s book. Sadly, most Muslim countries would not allow Campbell’s book to circulate freely but hundreds of copies were covertly distributed inside Muslim lands.[9]
In 1993 Arab World Ministry’s Islamicist Sam Schlorff wrote that a contextualized apologetic was needed that presents the Christian faith in relation to Muslim Ideology. Christian witness needed to get beyond just comparison of doctrines. He distinguished this approach from the polemic attacks used in the past against the prophethood of Mohammed, its scripture, its ethics, or its institutions all of which failed to challenge its ideology or win the Muslim. Schlorff’s call was to sensitively but firmly unmask the rebellion against God inherent in the theology and ideology of Islam. For some twenty years Schlorff taught students this approach in the Summer Institute on Islam program along with David Shenk, Harvey Conn, and others.
Islam’s religious aspects are embedded within an ideology, culture, community, and complete way of life. I would contend that all of these aspects are constructed upon a foundation—the core theology of Islam as is found in the scriptures of Islam. This theological core never goes away regardless of temporary reform and liberalization movements that occur in Islamic societies from time to time. Eventually this theological core pulls any liberalization movement back to the center of Islamic orthodoxy forcing it to revert back to type. At a previous consultation when I moderated a panel discussion on Radical Islam I asked the five former radical Muslim panelists this question; “If the prophet Mohammed came back and saw the different versions of Islam in the world today which one would he say is closest to what he intended?” All five panelists responded with the one word answer, “ISIS.”
Ideology is a term used to describe systems of ideas and ideals that form the body of doctrines, values, and beliefs and which guide individuals and societies. It is embedded in their worldview. The foundation of the Islamic ideology is the core theology as found in the Qur’an, Hadiths, and the example of the first century community at Medina. Despite the importance of the Islamic society’s ideology most modern Christian approaches to Muslims have failed to adequately engage with the ideological core of Islam.
In the 1940s George Harris, missionary to Muslims in China, recognized that Islam’s ideology needed to be confronted, not just its theology or doctrines. Harris identified seven aspects of Islam’s ideology:[10]
1. That Islam as a religious system has superseded Christianity.
2. That the age or dispensation of Mohammed has succeeded the previous dispensations.
3. That the Qur’an, God’s final revelation, has superseded all preceding scriptures.
4. That Mohammed, as Seal of all the Prophets, has superseded Christ.
5. That the Islamic interpretation of God is the correct one.
6. That the Islamic view of sin is the correct one.
7. That the Islamic record of the Crucifixion is the true one.
Harris developed detailed answers to the issues raised by Islam and advised against controversy on sensitive issues. All of his strategies for answering Muslims sought to avoid offense and to make a presentation directed to the Muslim’s heart. Harris studied Islam carefully in order to refute its ideological constructs hoping that Muslims would follow Christ as the result of intellectual reasoning. He was careful to understand Islam accurately and he advised Christians to avoid overstatement and careless or incorrect deductions.
Three Tasks of Engagement Today
In light of Islam’s challenge, Christians faced three tasks regarding Islam over the centuries. The first was to formulate an apologetic defense of the Christian faith in the specific areas under attack by the Qur’an and Islamic doctrine. This apologetic defense was seen as necessary for strengthening the faith of Christians. Experience has shown that certain kinds of apologetic defense are not necessarily the best polemic or way to engage Muslims.
The second task was to develop an appropriate and irenic apologetic that can engage and communicate to Muslims. Numerous efforts to contextualize the message for Muslims were undertaken in order to make the gospel understandable.[11] Many of our current approaches are examples of doctrinal comparison.[12]
The third task facing us today is to convince and persuade Muslims leading them to a positive response to the gospel. A number of factors undermine and push against this such as postmodernism, a culture of toleration and political correctness. The emphasis on peace in inter-religious engagement often leads towards a partial presentation of the gospel as we seek to avoid aspects that we think may be offensive to the Muslim. We need to recover the biblical boldness of the Apostle Paul who taught that an essential component of witness was to also persuade. If we truly believe in the authority of the Old and New Testaments then we will see that clear and contextualized proclamation is not the only component of witness. We, as God’s ambassadors, have been sent out into the whole world to call people to account with the Word of God. This is what the word proclaim encompasses.
Conclusion
We must begin by making a theological assessment of Islam and its doctrines. Islam’s ideology and religion are under judgment from God as counterfeit systems set up in rebellion against God. If we care about the Muslim person we must address him/her as a covenant creature willfully following a fallen system that is under God’s judgment. We are to warn, we are to persuade, and we are to proclaim that all people are accountable to the One True Creator God. When we have done that, we will have gone from merely presenting to proclaiming.
Dr. Paul Martindale is ranked adjunct professor of Islamic Studies and Cross-Cultural ministry at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He is the director of the Summer Institute on Islam and served for 36 years as a missionary with Arab World Ministries and Pioneers.
Notes
[1] Evelyne A. Reisacher, ed., Dynamics of Muslim Worlds (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2017).
[2] Samuel P. Schlorff, “Muslim Ideology and Christian Apologetics,” Missiology 21, no. 2 (April 1993): 173–185. Schlorff, Samuel, “The Translational Model of Mission in Resistant Muslim Society: A Critique and an Alternative,” Missiology 28, no. 3 (July 2000): 305–328.
[3] Samuel Zwemer, The Disintegration of Islam (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1916), 10.
[4] Sarah L Hosmon, Presenting Jesus Christ the Son of God to Moslems, (Kanpur, India: India Bible Christian Council, 1956).
[5] Hosmon, Presenting Jesus Christ, 3. “The son of Adam, the son of God.” Luke 3:38 (English Standard Version, 2011).
[6] Christine Schirrmacher, The Islamic View of Major Christian Teachings (Hamburg: RVB International, 2001).
[7] Badru D. Katterenga and David W. Shenk, A Muslim and A Christian in Dialogue, (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1997), 9.
[8] Kateregga and Shenk, Dialogue, 34.
[9] William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible in the Light of History and Science (Middle East Resources Inc., 1993).
[10] George Harris, How to Lead Moslems to Christ (China Inland Mission, 1946).
[11] Mark Beaumont, Christology in Dialogue with Muslims. A Critical Analysis of Christian Presentations of Christ for Muslims from the Ninth and Twentieth Centuries, (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2011).
[12] Paul T. Martindale, “The Superiority of Grace in Missions: A Comparison of Grace and Works in Christianity and Islam,” in Reformation Celebration: The Significance of Scripture, Grace, Faith, and Christ, eds. Gordon L. Isaac and Echkard J. Schnabel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2018), 129–139.
EMQ, Volume 56, Issue 3. Copyright © 2020 by Missio Nexus. All rights reserved. Not to be reproduced or copied in any form without written permission from Missio Nexus. Email: EMQ@MissioNexus.org.
