An Insurgency of Terror

The Crisis Facing Christians in Nigeria

Baroness Caroline Cox, House of Lords
November 2016

Villages destroyed in Northern Nigeria

Following the abduction of more than 200 schoolgirls from Chibok town in 2014, the rise of Islamist terrorism in northern Nigeria has rightly drawn international condemnation. Yet some of the deadliest outbreaks remain unreported.

Thousands of Christians have died in communal attacks led by the Islamic State-aligned Boko Haram. Fulani militants have forced vulnerable rural communities to abandon their homes. And the imposition of Islamic law in several northern states has exacerbated deep-rooted religious divisions, causing thousands of Christians to flee.

We visited Nigeria to draw attention to such atrocities. Our conclusions – found on page 14 – are based on testimonies of children orphaned, villages destroyed, families killed and churches burned. While this short report is unable to reveal the full extent of their suffering, we hope it will provide at least some opportunity for redress.

Background

Strategic land grabbing and the permanent displacement of Christian communities

Ethnic and religious animosity has fuelled conflicts in Nigeria for decades. The existence of northern radical Islamist sects, for example, has been a source of considerable tension since the country gained independence in 1960. However, recent outbreaks by Boko Haram and Fulani herdsmen suggest a worrying trend: their military capability and ideological fervour is increasing.

The Anglican Bishop of Bauchi, Musa Mwin Tula, represents many of the worst affected areas. He explained: “The conflict between herdsmen and farmers has existed for a long time. But the menace in recent times has jumped from a worrisome itch in the north to a cancerous disease, spreading throughout the country, claiming lives and threatening to spiral into a monster.”

As recently as 14 November 2016, 41 Christians were killed by militants in Kauru, Kaduna state. As with other similar attacks, the village was remote and vulnerable. Herdsmen used sophisticated weaponry, forcing families to flee their homes and farmland.

Fulani militants killed 41 villagers in Kauru – 14 November 2016

Speaking after the assault, the MP for Kauru told us: “There is one attack after another. It has gone beyond rustling cattle. Land has been taken. Communities are forced to abandon their homes. It is violent expansionism.”

The Stefanos Foundation, which supports displaced persons in Nigeria, calculated 399 Boko Haram and Fulani attacks in 2015/16, resulting in 7,588 deaths.[1]

Fulani militants killed 41 villagers in Kauru on 14 November 2016.

Testimonies

Ropp district, Plateau State

Four farming villages in the Ropp district, Plateau State, were attacked on 18-19 May 2015: Lo-Biring, Jong, Rabuk and Zim. Armed militants killed 21 people.

Some of the villagers are seeking to rebuild their homes

We spoke with a handful of families who have chosen to return, either to bury their dead or  rebuild  their  homes. Ropp is now surrounded by Fulani herdsmen and protected by two military personnel. Just minutes after we left, the villages were ambushed, though thankfully no one was shot.

Describing the attack in 2015, one local pastor said: “People were just sitting and the enemies came. They started cutting them.”

Another said: “They were trained terrorists with guns. They killed those who couldn’t run – the aged, the children and the blind. A pastor was the first casualty. They surrounded him. They killed him and then they rejoiced, shouting ‘Allahu Akhbar’ and ‘we have got a hero’.”

The ruins of a church, now surrounded by Fulani herdsmen and their cattle

Churches and homes have been reduced to rubble and the vast majority of the community has been displaced. For many, it is simply too dangerous to return.

As the pastor explained: “They say this is their land now. But it isn’t. It is ours. Even last August they fired shots to stop us coming here. We can’t come here without security.”

Safe Haven for IDPs, Western Jos

With the Fulani herdsmen holding on to territory rather than retreating after an attack, and Boko Haram fighting to overthrow the Government to create an Islamic state, thousands of Christians have been displaced. Many are now living in Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps.

We visited a camp in Western Jos, Plateau State, currently home to 165 children and 30 adults. It is run by Tabitha Evangel Ministries (TEM) International Mission and Partners, established in 2002 to provide shelter for orphans, the homeless  and  ex-Muslim converts.

Bebra, aged 12

“We were sleeping when the Boko Haram came. They surrounded my house and smashed the door. My brother pleaded with them: ‘If it is money you want, I will give it to you’. But they forced him to lie down and insisted on seeing my father. I watched as they shot my father and brother and sliced the back of their necks. They also went to the pastor’s house, shooting his wife in the leg and his daughter in the hand. They shot the pastor and cut off his head. Then they went to the neighbour’s house, broke his leg and shot him as he tried to escape. Boko Haram returned to my house, opened all the doors, and then they left. I don’t think anyone lives in my village now.”

Children at the IDP camp

Children at the IDP Camp

Rachel, aged 15

“My parents died when I was small. My brother, Abdul, was sick and taken to Lagos to live with my grandmother, while I stayed in Biu. When Boko Haram entered our state, they tried to fix bombs to people but they were intercepted. Then they came to burn our houses and churches.  They tried to burn my church but it only burned the carpet. I saw them take off people’s heads and place them on their back. We ran and hid in the soldiers’ barracks. My auntie was killed.”

Patience, aged 13

“My father was in the military, among the army fighting Boko Haram in Biu, Borno State. Meanwhile my mother was invited to join a secret cult, which she resisted, but sadly died of natural causes. Boko Haram attacked our three villages: Dambuwa, Gwoza and Dabro. They burned our homes. Once they had killed people, they would chop off their heads and place it on their chest.”

Juliet, 15

“My mother was sick but my father didn’t have enough money to repair his car and take her to hospital. He eventually went east to get help, but on his way back, the car caught fire and he died. With my mother still very sick, the Fulani herdsmen came. They killed four people and burned the whole village (called Supp, in Plateau State under Riyom). I ran away and moved in with my auntie. There were 1000 people in the village. No one lives there now. People are too scared to return. They are scared of the Fulani people.”

Goodness, David and Abednego bear scars from the attacks

Goodness, David and Abednego bear scars from the attacks

Christiana, aged 10

“My father died in an accident and my mother died giving birth to my younger brother. So we went to my grandmother’s house in Wuba, Borno State – the only Christian home in the village. Boko Haram attacked our house and demanded to see dad. We explained he was dead so they asked: ‘Who is taking care of you?’ My older brother then called my grandfather to come. They shot my grandfather in the stomach and he didn’t die. Then they shot him in the head and he died. They broke down the door and entered, ransacked the house and left.”

Elisha, aged 16

“Boko Haram came to my locality in Borno state and declared that everyone must accept the Islamic faith. My mum and dad submitted but I refused, so I left my family home and moved to another locality. Boko Haram came again, shooting at people, trapping them inside, visiting one building at a time. I escaped through the backyard and ran to another house, hiding under a bed amongst clothes for 24 hours. The gunmen were singling out young boys, so I disguised myself as a girl. As I escaped, I saw one body where the head had been cut by a machete and the brain removed.

“After three days without food and drink, I sought refuge in a Muslim woman’s home. But when we encountered Boko Haram again, they tried to force me to convert, at one stage pointing a gun to my head. Thankfully, God intervened.”

Omar, aged 15

“I remember people in my neighbourhood who would go out and kill at night. They were members of Boko Haram. One of them once asked my sister to go out with him. When my older brother tried to protect her, he was stabbed to death. She was later kidnapped and forced to accept Islam.

“That same night we heard the sound of gunshots. My family knew it was time to run and, although my mother stayed behind, knowing that Boko Haram were searching for men, my father left for another locality. When he encountered Boko Haram, they butchered him.”

Goodness (9), David (6) and Abednego (14)

“The Fulani came to our village at night. The dogs were barking. There were torches on our house. Our mother and father were outside. They shot our father in the legs. They shot him again in the head. Our mother was screaming: ‘He is dead! He is dead!’ She ran to another house with our little brother. The Fulani came into our room and started cutting us. They shot David in the tummy and he fell down. They thought we were dead. Neighbours found us and took us to the hospital. Our mother was safe. She brought us here.”

Richard, aged 15

“It was 2011. I can’t remember the month. Our family was eating one night, my father, my mother and three children. My father went outside to use the toilet and he didn’t come back. He was attacked by Fulani.  They cut off his hand.  He was killed.”

The political landscape

Sharia Bill

Sharia courts exist in many parts of Nigeria. They currently have jurisdiction over a range of personal matters, including marriage, the custody of children and inheritance. In these cases, the parties to a dispute must be Muslims and must have requested that the court hears the case in accordance with Islamic personal law.

Any Muslim who opposes a judgment can appeal to their state’s Sharia Court of Appeal within three months. The case can then be taken to the (secular) Federal Court of Appeal[2] and if deemed necessary, to the Supreme Court.

However, a new Bill has been introduced to increase the jurisdiction of the Sharia Court of Appeal.[3] If it passes, such forums will be able to rule on criminal matters.

The Bill has completed its First Reading – a brief formality

–  in the House of Representatives.  As a constitutional

matter, it has moved straight to Committee Stage, which includes consultation with the Nigerian people. Recommendations from the Constitutional Review Committee will then be presented to the House, where a debate and vote will take place.

In order for the Bill to be enacted, it must pass with a two- thirds majority in both Houses, and with 24/36 state support. While we understand it is unlikely to succeed on this occasion, by creating publicity around the issue, it may affect legislation indirectly.

The Grazing Reserve Commission

A separate Bill has been introduced to curb violent clashes between herdsmen and farmers.[4] If passed, it would create a National Grazing Reserve Commission with the power to establish at least one cattle reserve in each state.

However, it has been widely criticised for undermining the farmers whose land will be taken. The Stefanos Foundation said: “The Bill protects herdsmen over farmers. Land owners will not be able to sue except without permission from the Attorney General. In essence, the government are authenticating aggressive land grabbing and enforcing abandonment, particularly where the Commission is given powers to take land anywhere it deems fit. It is not practical, nor fair”.

Conclusions

Accountability

The Nigerian administration should be commended for taking steps to counter the Boko Haram insurgency. However, it remains clear that the national and cross- border military deployment – supported by the Civilian Joint Task Force, mercenaries, local hunters and vigilantes

– has not been able to eradicate the group.

Even where advancements have succeeded in recapturing villages, there are serious concerns that Boko Haram militants have not been contained, and have simply dispersed.

It may therefore be necessary for an independent body to verify the true impact of Government efforts, including a thorough assessment of the scattering of militants.

Rehabilitation

The insurgency is estimated to have affected about 5 million people, including more than 2.2 million Nigerians who are internally displaced. Adequate arrangements must be made for their security and rehabilitation.

Last month, 21 of the Chibok schoolgirls kidnapped in 2014 by Boko Haram were freed. We understand that they are now in care of the Murtala Muhammed Foundation, which has reportedly attempted to interview the parents of each of the girls. However, we know of one father who has been unable to get access to his daughter. Although she has been freed by Boko Haram, he does not know where she is.

Reconciliation

We visited two reconciliation projects: a Christian school in Bauchi, attended by 250 students, 80% of whom are Muslim; and a crafts group in Plateau, attended by 30-40 Muslim and  Christian women.

Reconciliation project in Plateau with local Muslims and Christians

Such initiatives may seem unsubstantial, but in a context of terror and division, they provide local communities with practical incentives to develop skills and build friendships.

Although the UK Government has contributed £39 million to Nigeria’s Stability and Reconciliation Programme, we heard that central funds do not always reach local Christian projects. There is a risk that vulnerable communities are relying too heavily on individual volunteers and churches.

Religious freedom

The provision for freedom of worship and association is enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

However, the Nigerian Government has been accused of only occasionally investigating or prosecuting those responsible for abusing religious freedom. One MP told us: “Even if the authorities find those who hack children, they will be released the very next day.” We heard many reports of state and local governments discriminating against members of the Christian community.

What is more, there are concerns that intervention agencies, such as the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) are failing to recognise Christian majority IDP camps.

Media

Islamist terrorism in Nigeria is an emergency that is  woefully underreported. The BBC Hausa service has been heavily criticised for promulgating a biased narrative. And western media consistently dismisses pre-planned, religiously-motivated attacks as ‘ethnic riots’, ‘an indigenous problem’, or ‘tribal clashes’. Such reporting may be more palatable, but it fails to characterise the crisis in its entirety.

---

1 This figure does not include the most recent attacks. Boko Haram are currently understood to be targeting the northeast region: Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Taraba, Gombe and Bauchi. While militant Fulani herdsmen target the middle belt region: Jos, Benue, Nasarawa, Kaduna, Niger, FCT Abuja and Kogi.

2 The subject of the appeal must fall within the jurisdiction originally conferred on it by the constitution, i.e. matters relating to Islamic personal law where all the parties to the dispute are Muslims.

3 A Bill for an Act to alter Section 262 and 277 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 to increase the jurisdiction of the Sharia Court of Appeal of the Federal Capital Territory and Sharia Court of Appeal of the state by including criminal matters and Hudud and Qisas and for other related matters.

4 The National Grazing Reserve (Establishment) Bill 2016

The Social Attraction of Islam and a Christian Response

Apologetic Paper (Jay Smith) – May 1995

---

Contents

1. Introduction

2. An attraction to Islam: its social laws

3. A Christian response

   1. Social Laws

   2. Priesthood

   3. Women’s Issues

   4. Peace

   5. Law

4. Conclusion

---

A: Introduction

Let me ask you a rather astonishing question. If you had the option to become a Muslim, what would be the reason you would point to for your decision? Or to put it another way, is there anything within Islam which you would find attractive? For most Christians, this question is rather disturbing, but for the sake of argument, try to think of any areas that you might consider which could possibly induce you to become a Muslim? Meanwhile let me continue with my introduction.

In this paper I would like to discuss the attraction of Islam within a social context. You may ask why this area is particularly important? Its importance lies not so much in its applicability as an area of apologetics, for there doesn’t seem to be any specific area of contention here. Yet it is important, because it is this area which most of those who have converted to Islam point to as their primary reason for converting.

Now we can return to the question with which I opened this paper. Had I asked you to make a list of those areas which might induce you to become a Muslim, you too would have probably put this criteria near the top of the list.

Let’s be more specific.

---

B: An attraction to Islam: its social laws

You may doubt why Islam’s Social Laws are the primary reason for converting to Islam. Yet, during my research in the U.S., amongst converts to Islam, most of those whom I talked to had good, solid arguments for why they felt it should be the highest motivation for converting.

A number of the individuals felt that Islamic Social laws are comprehensive, that they are a complete guide to life, and consequently, that they brought about orderly living. They pointed to the fact that people need boundaries by which to live by, especially in Western societies which emphasize catering to special interest groups, while leaving out the needs of the majority. Islam, they felt was the only religion which was giving them these boundaries to live by.

In contrast, quite a few respondents pointed out that Christianity was just not powerful enough to change the evils of modern-day life. In my research in the U.S., the majority of those who expressed this idea were African-American, all of whom lived in inner-city areas of some of the largest urban centers in America. They saw first-hand the anarchy going on all around them, and they justifiably felt that Islam was the only religion which could stand up to the deprivation and violence, as well as the rampant racism found in America today.

A number of those with whom I talked had come into contact with Islam in prison, where they had been reformed by “Muslim brothers” who came weekly for the Jumma prayers and Qur’anic classes. Now that they were “on the outside,” they believed that the disciplined lifestyle, espoused by Islamic law, was the sole reason which kept them from going “back in.” They were appreciative of the local masjids role in driving out drug dealers from their inner-city neighborhoods, and the ongoing campaigns to keep children off the streets and out of gangs.

Another attraction was Islam’s lack of a priesthood. Islam has no medial agents. One will not find a “pope” or even a set of cardinals within Islam. As a result, the believer, they felt, is not dependent on someone else for his relationship to God, and therefore, can go directly to Allah.

A further attraction for new converts was that of Islamic education for young children, “while they were still impressionable.” It was the Muslim schools, they felt, which would reform society and instil just and orderly sets of values upon the next generation.

While doing my research I personally visited four Muslim schools; two Sister Clara Muhammad Schools in Philadelphia and in Washington D.C., and two Qur’anic schools in Baltimore, at the Al Rahman Masjid and the Masjid Ul-Haqq. While the schools seemed to be small and ill-equipped, the children appeared to be well-disciplined and happy. And, not surprisingly, the schools had become the center for other Islamic activities in their local areas.

According to imam Yusuf Saleem, from Washington D.C., though the students did not excel academically, nor perform any better than they had at the public schools, the problems of discipline, crime, and sexual abuse were almost non-existent in these Muslim schools; and that was their greatest attraction.

I made a particular note, that among the respondents to my questionnaire, there were three women who felt that Islam gave them, as women, added fulfilment, for instance, permitting them to own property, while at the same time offering them the best protection from an outside hostile world. While this may surprise some of us, the perception by most Muslims with whom I talked was that, “We take care of our women better than do the Christians.”

David Lamb, the Los Angeles reporter, who wrote the bestselling book The Africans, while living and travelling for four years in Africa echoes this point. He states that one of the best comparisons between a Christian and Muslim country in Africa was the safety of the streets within the larger cities. He felt that he would never let his wife walk alone at night, and sometimes even during the day in most of the larger African Christian cities. Yet, he had no fear of permitting his wife to wander freely within any of the larger African Muslim cities.

Judy and I, during our 5 years in Senegal, a country of 7 million, of which 92% of the population claimed to be Muslim, don’t recall of ever having to fear for the safety of our women. Not once were they ever “cat-called,” and in the entire time there, we remember hearing of only one rape in our town of 350,000 individuals. On this point alone, Islam has proved to far excel Christianity with its care and discipline towards women.

So how do we respond to these views and findings as Christians?

---

C: A Christian Response

From this discussion it seems that Islam has been, is, and probably will be making a dynamic impact on the world. Many people are coming into contact with Islam for the first time, and are finding that there is something appealing for them. But does Islam really answer all it claims? Is it as attractive as converts seem to testify?

It is imperative that we take this area of attraction, and discuss it from the perspective of a Christian. I realize that Islam is making an impact in the West today. It is claimed that there are 20,000 English converts to Islam at the moment, and that this number is increasing daily by 3-5 converts (note: most of these are western women who marry Muslim men and are required to register their marriage in the local mosque, at which time they are then considered, by Muslims, to have converted to Islam).

I am sure that this impact will continue. But I think converts to Islam are appraising Islam incorrectly, or even, at times, dishonestly. There are, I feel, errors of perception, as well as errors in interpretation. These errors I would like to address in this paper. There are also misconceptions of Christianity’s position which must be redressed. And finally, many of these categories are those which, I feel, Christianity has a stronger claim to, than does Islam.

C1: Social Laws

As Christians living in a Western country, we have to accept and admit that the perception by many here is that Islam meets the social needs of people better than does Christianity. The fact that this category was chosen by converts as, “the primary reason to convert today,” speaks to the success evidenced by Western Islam, particularly within the African-American community in the U.S., as well as the Afro-Caribbean community in England, who have benefited by some of Islam’s social programs.

The picture in the greater Muslim world is quite different, however. Consider some of the most current statistics compiled by Michael Kidron and Ronald Segal in The New State Of the World Atlas, printed in 1991:

According to their research; worldwide, there are 19 countries which will never be able to provide adequate food for their populations. 15 out of the 19 are Muslim countries, and include Afghanistan, UAE, Oman, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Western Sahara, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, Niger, Mauritania, and Bangla Desh (Kidron 1991:28-29). Of the 12 countries with the lowest record of life-expectancy (under 45 years), 7 are Muslim countries (Kidron 1991:40-41).

Probably more revealing is the “Quality of Life Index” compiled by Frank Kaleb Jansen, of Target Earth in 1989. This index measures mortality rate, male life expectancy and female illiteracy. When one tabulates the countries of the world within this index, one finds that 12 of the lowest 20 countries rated in the world are Muslim, while 32 of the top 40 rated countries world- wide are those which are traditionally considered as Christian countries (Jansen 1989:90-91).

Yet that is only half the picture. When one adds further criteria to this index, such as: education standards, health status, women’s status, defense allotments, economic and demographic factors, as well as political stability and participation, it is interesting to find that out of the top 40 countries listed, 39 are Christian in background, while all of the 23 Muslim countries included fall well below this level, with 5 of the worst 10 countries on the list Muslim countries (Jansen 1989:92-93).

Kidron concurs with these findings in his analysis on the quality of life, finding that whereas all of the Northern countries (made up of all European countries except Portugal and Romania, and including North American, Israel, Japan and Australia) fall into the highest category for the Quality of Life Index (9 and above), not one of the 32 Muslim countries made it into this category. In fact, the majority of them placed within the medium to very low categories. The lowest rated in the world were mostly Muslim countries (i.e. Niger, Mali) (Kidron 1991:50-51).

Other areas were equally dismal. Take for instance Literacy: while all of the Northern countries had 90% and above literacy rates (except Romania, Portugal, and Bulgaria), not one of the 32 Muslim countries even made it into this category. The best had approximately 70% literacy rate, and the rest fell to 10% and under (Kidron 1991:52-53).

Another example is that of Schooling: whereas all of the northern countries had 90% of their children in Secondary school, the best Muslim state had only 50%, with the majority of the Muslim countries falling between 30% and 10%.

Child-mortality showed another dismal failure: All the Northern states (except Yugoslavia, Romania and the USSR) were in the top category for Child Mortality (25 children or under, out of 1,000 children, who died before 5 yrs. of age). In contrast, all of the 32 Muslim states fell into the lower categories (50 children to 200 children out of 1,000 who died before their 5th birthday) (Kidron 1991:54).

Statistics like these point out that Islam in practice has little to show when it comes to its social agenda.

Many Muslims believe that these statistics are not a result of Islamic principles, but are the result of policies instituted by the colonizing powers before they left. Furthermore, they feel that the western banks exacerbate the problem by demanding debt repayment for the loans given out since independence.

While one would agree that some of the blame can be apportioned on the West, one must bear in mind that many Asian countries also came out of similar colonizing environments. Yet they have managed to control their economies and social environment adequately, and in some cases have even surpassed those countries who had colonized them.

C2: Priesthood

Some of the new converts I questioned, appreciated that in Islam there were no priests, and that they, as believers, did not need to depend on a middle-man for their relationship with God. It might have been helpful to know whether or not these converts came from a Roman Catholic background. The hierarchy of priests is not representative of the Protestant community, where the belief in the “Priesthood of all believers;” that everyone is a priest, goes even further than does Islam in incorporating the idea that everyone is responsible for their own faith, and that each individual can have a personal relationship with God, immediately and eternally.

Indeed, it is this belief which is a primary impetus behind the massive push today to translate the Bible into every language on earth, so that every person can go to the scriptures (the Bible) for themselves to read and understand what God is saying to them, rather then depend on a priest for that guidance.

C3: Women’s Issues

Some converts pointed to women’s issues as their primary attraction to Islam, maintaining that in Islam women can own property, and that they are better protected. It would, perhaps, be helpful for women who believe Islam holds a better record to visit or live for a while in a Muslim country.

Though statistics are hard to find, we do know that, currently, of the 23 countries with the worst records of jobs for women (women making up only 10-20% of all workers), 17 are Muslim countries (Kidron 1991:96-97). Similarly, of the 11 worst offenders of opportunity between men and women, 10 are Muslim states. The widest gaps were found in Bangla Desh, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt (Kidron 1991:57).

Another revealing statistic shows that of the 12 states with the worst records for unequal treatment of girls, 7 are Muslim states. The bottom 3 listed are UAE, Bahrain, and Brunei (Kidron 1991:56).

While one may argue that this is not representative of true Islamic teaching, it does show us how those in Muslim countries treat their women, and what we might expect if we were living in that type of environment.

Those individuals who felt Islam had much to offer the world in women’s emancipation would also do well to read personal testimonies by Muslim women, or those women under Islam’s influence, such as, Betty Mahmood’s ‘Not Without My Daughter’.

They would find that in apportioning inheritance, the Shariah law discriminates against women (Sura 4:7,11), allowing her only half the inheritance of a man. They would also find that women are relegated, almost exclusively, to the home, where they are indeed better protected, but where they also would find little hope in continuing a career that would entail any contact with the opposite sex. As for their maternal rights, many women in the West are not aware that Islam gives the husband legal and ultimate control over any children, upon divorce.

In defense Muslims argue that those men have an obligation under Islamic law to use their money to support women in the family, whereas women have no such obligations, and can use their money however they wish. While this would have been legitimate in a 7th century extended-family setting, it does not reflect 20th century reality. Today, the vast majority of families are managed by women, especially in the West, where the nuclear family as well as the high rate of divorce has forced women to become the glue for the family, many times as a result of absentee fathers. This reality is not reflected within Islamic law, nor is it being raised by many of Islam’s fanatical imams who yearn to take the world back to the supposed “Golden Period” of Islam, a golden period which we now know never existed.

Perhaps, if those who felt women’s issues were an attraction for Islam were aware of these areas of inequality they may come to a different conclusion. One could argue that a locked-up individual (whether in a home, or in a Purdah) is well-protected, but is that a worthy price to pay?

In my discussions with Western women, it is these prohibitive laws as well as the practice by Muslim societies today against women, which, far more than any other, comes under the greatest criticism. In contrast to the emancipation of women in the west, much of which stems from the Biblical call to treat women as Christ treated the church, with love and sacrifice, even unto death; the Islamic example falls far short. While the West cannot be labelled as truly Christian today, it still carries a Christian memory, and it is this memory which elevates women to a role, if not equal with that of men, then at least one of honour and respect in the eyes of the world.

C4: Peace

Perhaps the area of Islamic attraction which is the most puzzling is the perception by some of the non-violence within Islam today, that it is a religion of peace. It is difficult to know where the truth lies. While the West documents and publishes its criminal activities openly, the Muslim countries say very little. Lists which delineate where each country stands in relation to murders, sex offenses and criminality include most of the Western countries, yet only 4 Muslim countries out of 32 have offered statistics for the number of internal murders, while only 6 have offered a list of sex offenses, and only 4 have divulged their level of criminality. Therefore, until more Muslim countries are willing to come forward with statistics, it is impossible to evaluate their claims: that Western “Christian” states have more degradation and criminality than that of Muslim states.

We do know, however, that in the 1980’s, of the 14 countries who were involved in ongoing “general wars,” 9 of them were Muslim countries, while only one was a non-Western Christian country.

Though statistics can be numbing after a while, from what we have seen so far, these statistics help point out, rather harshly in many cases, that Muslim countries today are not meeting the basic needs for the majority of their populations in areas such as literacy, food, education, the freedom of expression, health, and in the general quality of life.

The defense can and is made that these are not true Muslim countries, that the individuals who run them are corrupt and therefore are not representative of a true Islamic ideal. Therefore, they should not be used as examples. Yet, these countries make the claim that they hold to Muslim principles, and as such, are the only examples we have today by which we can judge whether or not Islam can provide an adequate social environment in the 20th century.

Moreover, to contend that it is merely corrupt individuals who are somehow responsible for the state these countries are in, is not only debatable, but dishonest. Muslims waste little time in denouncing the sins of western society, maintaining that it is due to Christianity’s feebleness that our countries are in the state they are in. We could just as easily say that Western countries are also run by corrupt and inept administrators, yet somehow these same “corrupt” western societies still maintain a much better record in terms of providing an adequate social environment for their populations than do those who claim to be run along Islamic principles. The fact that many of the very critics of western society are those who choose to remain here and not return to their own countries points to the hollowness of their argument.

The many who considered this category their primary reason for their conversion need to consider these findings more seriously.

Admittedly, the majority of those who chose this category were African-American converts to Islam, who live in some of the most deplorable social environments in America, a country which prides itself in being the richest country in the world, yet finds itself in that rather embarrassing position as the most violent country on earth (according to the latest statistics there are 20,000 deaths by hand-guns per year in the U.S. compared to 263 in Israel, the country which takes 2nd spot).

The Muslim converts cite, “the hypocrisy of the inner-city Church,” as well as their impression that Christians “live their religion only one day a week, when they are at Church.” And they contrast these inconsistencies with another kind of piety, that of the Muslims, who have not only created and sponsor alternative Islamic schools for their children, but who are actively involved with prison ministries, which specifically contacts African-Americans.

Possibly their greatest witness comes from being the most obvious group to stand against and attempt to eradicate the highly-publicized drug and prostitution rings that have run rampant on their streets. These are the “forgotten” inner-city people, and understandably Islam is “scratching them where they itch.”

Islam is also a religion, which, like many cults today, is especially attractive to insecure people, those who need others to make their decisions for them. Its myriad laws and regulations give a prescription for every facet of social life, and can and do affect the “dregs of society.”

While Christianity prides itself in ministering to the poor and oppressed, and has many active examples to which it can point, the perception within the West, and particularly in the U.S. is that it is the religion of the oppressors, a religion for the “whites.”

C5: Law

Many Muslim converts I talked to pointed out that the Islamic Shariah law was best adapted for the problems which exist in the West today. Yet, when I asked them to explain the precepts of Shariah Law, they had difficulty describing what particulars they had in mind, or how they might apply Islamic rules within a Western context.

For those countries who use or aspire to use Islamic Law, further statistics prove revealing. According to Kidron, while only five Northern states (or Western industrialized states) are categorized as “Terror States” (meaning those involved in using assassination, disappearances and torture upon their own population), 29 of the 32 Muslim states fall into this category (the exceptions are UAE, Qatar and Mali) (Kidron 1991:62-63).

Would Western Muslims welcome this sort of law, considering how it can and is being abused in other parts of the Muslim world?

Generally, the primary desire for discipline among those individuals I had contact with was an overriding concern, despite the fact that it could not be defined.

Yet, I found a contrast to this assertion as well. The prison ministries, though they are touted as one of the crowning achievements of the Muslim community because they instil discipline; are successful, it appears, providing the inmates remain in prison.

I asked the imam of the Harrisburg Masjid about his prison ministry, and he cautioned that the program was not going as well as the press inferred, stating:

“In the prisons, the men have nothing to do, nowhere to go, and so they come and listen to what the brothers have to say. They commit themselves to Islam, and before two witnesses say the “Shahada,” and for the most part come regularly to Jumma prayers. Many of them “talk big” about what they will do once they get out of prison; how they are going to reform, and make a better life. The problem, however, surfaces once they get out. These men come out having resided for four or five years in an environment where all their decisions were made for them. Instead of looking to the mosques for help, they revert back to their former lifestyles, and many times end right back in prison.”

The Islamic prison ministry was appreciated by the prisoners, and became a rallying point for them while they were in prison. But once they left that confined environment, and were again back in “control” of their own decisions, out on the street, they had no more use for that ministry, and possibly found its rules and regulations more debilitating then helpful.

---

D: Conclusion

This then brings us to the crux of the matter concerning the witness of Islam and Christianity in relation to the social agenda.

While Islam gives people the impression that they can change their lives by changing the way they act, or by becoming disciplined, or by simply adopting new names, it fails to pinpoint the essential criteria for a sincere life-change; a new and redeemed heart, which is not natural at all, but something totally supernatural, and something which Christianity not only claims to offer, but delivers as well. Since we are created in the image of God, it is only He who can bring us back into relationship with Him, taking on His image, and thereby becoming the person He had intended us to be, with the help of the Holy Spirit. That indeed has consequences which are not simply immediate but eternal.

For a while, within the heightened atmosphere of a Muslim madrasa, or Muslim community, where they find support and encouragement, new Muslim converts can improve their life, and many do. But out on their own, where they once again find themselves face-to-face with their own inadequacies, new converts will inevitably find failure, and a loss of hope, and even reversion. In the final analysis, we would have to say that Islam is only a man-made and natural religion.

Christianity on the other hand, gives us parameters and guidelines, or patterns to live by which were instigated and passed on to us by the creator Himself, via the Holy Spirit, reflecting the patterns He had intended from the time of creation.

Is it no wonder then, that the witness of Christian nations (even those who continue to retain only a memory) rings superior to anything Islam can offer? While Muslim nations today fail to offer their populations a decent quality of Life, failing in almost every category researched, the witness of the social programs of Christian nations goes from strength to strength. One need only look as far as the number of immigrants from Muslim lands pouring into the West daily to understand that even they have come to the same conclusion which these statistics provide. Though they may refuse to admit to the authority behind the social laws which regulate life in our lands, they, nonetheless admire the justice and equality which those same laws provide.

That then is where we come in. God has given us the responsibility to be His vice-regents here on earth. With those responsibilities comes the knowledge that we have a God who works supernaturally, changing people from the inside, through their hearts, and they in turn, changing institutions and communities into that which God had intended us to be all along: His children, under His Lordship, bringing about His supernatural Kingdom here on earth. This is truly an attractive social agenda.

The Attraction of Islam and a Christian’s Response – Part 4

Jay Smith

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

---

Conclusion

In the West, Islam is a religion in search of an identity. Gone are the days when Islam could run “slip-shod” over cultures, dominating and subjugating them militarily, and then implementing its own culture and religious precepts through the process of “Islamic Ambience.” Today, Muslims are waking up to a new world, one in which they find themselves humiliated militarily, dominated economically, and the brunt of a hostile media. Yet, they are learning quickly how to adapt, employing a new and aggressive approach in propagating their beliefs in a world where, they believe, Islam holds the key to the world’s future.

Much of this adapting reflects the borrowing of evangelistic ideas and strategies tried and proved by Christian missionaries worldwide for hundreds of years. Men like Hasan al-Banna’, Abu A’la Mawdudi, and Khurram Murad have moved away from the rigid hierarchical control evidenced in much of the traditional Muslim world, and have adopted the low-missiological approach common to the Christian Pietistic Movement. As a result, hundreds of people in the West are being introduced to Islam for the first time. They are attracted by its ideas and precepts which are propagated in universities and in prisons, and they are consequently adopting Islam as their own faith.

We, as Christians, must be aware of this current attraction to Islam. Many of us are ignorant of the fact that of the approximately 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide, four-hundred and fifty million of them reside outside the traditional Muslim countries, in the Diaspora; in areas of the world where Christianity has traditionally had a strong influence (World Christian News 1992:10). Muslims are, in effect, “right on our doorstep,” living next door, sitting at the next desk at work, and playing at recess with our children. Yet, we pay them little attention, because they are, “Americans now, and so much like us.”

We cannot continue to pass-off their conversion-growth as simple aberrations. We must look at what the Muslims are saying, how they are saying it, and how we can meet the needs which they seem to be answering. We can do this by taking the initiative to make relationships and by spending time dialoguing with our Muslim friends.

The gospel of Christ is clear, simple and rational, despite the claims of Muslims to the contrary. Indeed, in many respects it is clearer, and simpler than the message of Islam. It has often been forgotten that salvation in Christ is, indeed, by faith, alone. If we would return to that basic message, being careful that in our presentation we understand what we are saying, and distinguish between those beliefs which are essential and those which are not, the message could be comprehended and accepted.

New converts to Islam claim that Islam has a better record of being involved in the world, and of dealing adequately with racism. While there is room for disagreement, we must not descend into the pitfalls of argumentation, but work all the more to exemplify Galatians 3, and seek avenues to do what is best for those in need around us, irregardless of their race or creed, while recognizing and respecting their cultural differences.

The perception by new believers to Islam, is that we are polytheistic, and worship three gods. This misconception must be rejected at every turn. Yet, it can only be done if we, and not they, take the initiative to define who God is. In order to attain this we will need to return to our authority, the scriptures, and show clearly that they have not been corrupted, but are as authoritative today as they were two-thousand years ago. Only then can we use them to rectify theological inconsistencies which may exist.

The claim by many Muslims that Christians live immoral and hypocritical lives has to be approached with sensitivity. We cannot answer for others, as unfortunately, the moral record of those who call themselves Christians, historically, has been dismal. Until we ask forgiveness for the sins of the past, and strive to reclaim the credibility which has been lost, we will never be able to be the witnesses which Christ calls us to be. We must differentiate clearly between what a true Christian is, and what a nominal Christian is, so as not to confuse Christianity with “what we find in the West today,” as so many Muslims do.

And finally, because those converts who have been attracted to Islam believe Islam is the final way to God, we must ask whether or not Islam affords any assurance for their salvation? Salvation is the key to our message. The Bible gives the only true answer for the world today, because only it defines the true moral dilemma of humanity, and it alone provides the only solution: the sacrificial act of a merciful and loving God; who, through the forgiveness of His Son, allows all of humanity to find, and then choose that assurance of salvation.

To keep these truths to ourselves is improper. We have the mandated responsibility to share the message of the cross with the world, which includes our Muslim friends; by going to them, where they live, and dialoguing with them, face-to-face.

A point of caution concerning dialoguing with a Muslim: It is important to realize, from the outset, that the gospel of the New Testament will counter, and offend a Muslim’s way of thinking, due to its emphasis on The Cross, and the exclusiveness of Jesus, the Christ.

Dialogue, therefore, can be used for contextualizing, and for creating a bridge to those individuals with whom we have a relationship. This means that we must reach out, by listening to them, so that we can understand their culture, their thought-forms, and their world-views. Only then, will we be able to win their trust, and so gain the right to, then, interpret for them, what God has given to us; the good news of Jesus Christ. This is especially important in the context of Islam, where the historic and current atmosphere between the two religions is almost indelibly marked by miscommunication and mistrust.

Dialogue, however, by its very nature, involves two differing points of view. Thus, it is requisite to respond to the Muslim beliefs with those of our own. But this will be difficult, for a number of reasons, three of which I will list here.

First, Islam is antithetical and opposed to the message of the atoning death, and most everything that delineates Jesus, as Messiah. For this reason it has no answer for the human moral predicament: that humans are in need of a savior.

Second, orthodox Islam has traditionally created its own interpretation of God; one, who is distant and impersonal, and unreachable, in direct contrast to the Biblical view of God as Abba, Father.

Third, Islam has no tradition, nor does it allow any form of criticism (verification or falsification) concerning its beginnings, or its authority.

In order to have true dialogue of any worth with a Muslim, these issues must be addressed; otherwise the one party will talk right past the other, with little hope of a meaningful exchange or understanding.

Obviously, what we are hoping for in a dialogue is that we demand of the Muslim that which we demand of ourselves: to accept only those truths which can stand up to verification.

Therefore, as we seek to bring about the true Kingdom of God, we pray to find those individuals who are truly hungry and thirsty, those who are searching, or who are willing to question all thought-forms, including, by heredity, their own. For this reason, we pray constantly to God, that He will steer to us those who are hungry for The Truth.

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

The Attraction of Islam and a Christian’s Response – Part 3

Jay Smith

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

---

5: The Qur’an’s Beauty and Applicability

The Qur’an, for Muslims, far exceeds in importance, any other writing. Many of those who were interviewed pointed to its beauty, and some gave it even mystical qualities. For these and similar reasons, the Qur’an is treated as something “holy in itself,” almost worthy of worship.

Take for instance the old man I met in the Harrisburg mosque who was highly revered due to his ability to quote, by memory, any passage from the Qur’an (and therefore given the title of Hafiz). Yet, I never saw him lead any discussions on the Qur’an. A younger man from Saudi Arabia was given that responsibility. When I asked, “Why?” I was told that the old gentleman didn’t understand Arabic well (memorizing doesn’t endure understanding).

It shocked me to find a man who had spent years memorizing the Qur’an, yet had no yearning to understand the content of its message. Is it no wonder, then, that Muslims have so little desire to translate their most holy book? Merit is found in the rote reading of the Qur’an in Arabic, and not in its message.

My friend who considered the Qur’an to be the epitome of beauty, offered me certain Suras as examples. Yet, when I asked him to quote from the text, he could not. Some of the Pakistanis who could quote certain passages had great difficulty in explaining their meaning. I found it disconcerting that the “beauty of the Qur’an” had so much appeal, yet its “beauty” seemed, in fact, to discourage its rationale which became an enemy to its mystique.

Here then is the key which points to the difference between the scriptures of the Christians and that of the Muslims. The fact that Muslims accord the Qur’an a place of reverence and worship, while memorizing its contents without necessarily understanding it, almost sparks of idolatry.

In much of the Muslim world leather amulets worn on the body are sold outside the mosques. Within these amulets one can find folded pieces of paper with an ayya, or verse from the Qur’an written on them. These verses supposedly have power to ward off evil spirits and diseases. For these Muslims the very letters of the Qur’an are imbued with supernatural power.

Christianity stands against this view of God’s written word. We believe that the power and authority for the scriptures comes not from the paper it is written on, but from the words, or the truth it expresses. We also believe that the Bible is the testimony of God’s revelation to certain men, and so is not holy in and of itself, but is a text which must be read and studied, much as a textbook is read and studied in school. Therefore, its importance lies in its content, rather than in its physical pages, just as a newspaper is read and thrown away, though the news it holds may remain imprinted on the readers mind for years to come.

Over a period of four months, during my weekly trips to the local masjid, I would spend an hour or two with the members, studying the Qur’an in English, but reading it aloud, always, in Arabic. Yet, when it came time to discuss and explain the meaning of the text, they would many times quote from the Bible to make a point, leaving the Qur’anic texts for the Islamic commentator Bukhari to explain (though not a commentator, Bukhari was a collector of hadith, some of which refer to the Qur’an).

Even more revealing concerned the content of our discussions, which tended to center around Biblical theology, and used ideas such as, “the substitutionary sacrifice for one’s sins,” and, the Biblical idea of “being in the world but not of it,” concepts which are unique to Christ’s teaching.

This was not atypical to the group at the Harrisburg mosque. During a presentation on television, Louis Farakhan quoted directly from the Bible four times, while not once citing the Qur’an or any other Muslim writing. Maybe this curiosity points to his previous background as a Christian, yet it denotes the fact, that, though the Qur’an is revered for its beauty, it often is not well-understood. It seems that for many American Muslims it has not become a primary influence, and, therefore, is often measured by the standards of the Bible, the very book it claims to “supersede.”

Nor is the traditional reverent concern for the physical treatment of the Qur’an, exhibited by my Asian immigrant friends, practiced by all Muslims in America. In a number of the masjids I visited, I saw copies of the Qur’an on the floor, while some had their front covers missing.

Perhaps, the criticism by Muslims that Christians abuse the Bible, is a result of their misunderstanding of its purpose. Christians believe that the Bible is a text which must be read and studied, much as a textbook is read and studied in school. Consequently, there is no injunction against writing in it, or against laying it on the floor (though most of the Christians I know would not do so, out of respect for its message; not that it is holy in itself. Yet, having been sensitized, I cringe when an evangelist or preacher clutches or leafs through a very worn personal Bible).

Muslims hold a high view for all scriptures, including the Bible, yet the Qur’an, they contend, retains supreme position and ascendancy over all others because, “initially, it was never written-down by men and so was never tainted with men’s thoughts or styles.” It is Allah’s ultimate revelation to humanity because it came down directly, word for word to Muhammad via the angel Jibril (this process is called “nazil”).

Left unsaid is the glaring irony that the claim for nazil revelation of the Qur’an, comes from one source alone, the man to which it was supposedly revealed, Muhammad. There are no outside witnesses both before or at the time who can corroborate Muhammad’s testimony. Not even miracles are provided to substantiate his claims.

In fact, the evidences for the authority of God’s revelation, which the Bible emphatically produces are completely absent in the Qur’an, namely: that the revelation of God must speak in the name of God, Yahweh; that the message must conform to revelation which has gone before; that it must make predictions which are verifiable, and that the revelation must be accompanied by signs and wonders, in order to give it authority as having come from God. Because these are missing in the case of the prophet Muhammad and of the Qur’an, for those of us who are Christians, it seems indeed that it is the Qur’an and not the Bible which turns out to be the most human of documents.

That the Word of God was written by men holds little consequence for a Christian, as we know that these men were always under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21). Whereas the Qur’an is alleged to be ‘free of any human element,’ we know that God deliberately chose to reveal His Word through individuals who were inspired prophets and apostles, so that His Word would not only be conveyed directly to humanity but that it would be communicated to their understanding and powers of comprehension as well. This the Qur’an cannot do if it has no human element, as is generally alleged.

Therefore, Christians believe that the Bible, alone, consisting of the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the inspired Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16,17). By inspired, we mean that the messages of God were relayed to His chosen men who spoke or wrote them, using their own language, personalities, and cultural thought-forms (Inspiration, thus, does not mean “divine dictation”). King David wrote as an inspired poet, and the prophet Jeremiah spoke as an inspired preacher, and so on.

When we read 2 Timothy 3:16, we read that all Scripture is inspired. The word used is “theopneustos” which means “God-breathed,” inferring that what was written had it’s origin in God Himself. In 2 Peter 1:21 we read that the writers were moved by God. Thus, God used each writer and his personality to accomplish a divinely authoritative work, for God cannot inspire error. The writers received the actual recording of truth.

How, Muslims ask, was this done? Did God use mechanical dictation, or did God use the writers own minds and experiences? The simple answer, according to 2 Peter 1:21, is that, “prophecy never had it’s origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” Thus, the Spirit’s control was always with them in their writings, so that what we have today is, “The Mind of God in the words of men”.

God, in His omnipotent power, saw to it that what was written was that which He desired to be written, and that it kept to its subject matter, which was, “God as Redeemer” (see II Samuel 23:2,3 and II Timothy 3:16). God also made sure that it was not tampered with, an idea misunderstood too often by most Muslims.

Concerning the literary style of the Qur’an, Muslims believe it is superior to all other books in the Arabic language because of it’s pure Arabic text and it’s sophisticated literary style. They quote Sura 10:38 which says: “Will they say ‘Muhammad hath forged it? Answer: ‘Bring therefore a chapter like unto it, and call whom ye may to your assistance, besides Allah, if ye speak truth.” This is echoed in the Hadiths (Mishkat III, pg.664), which says: “…This book is second to none in the world according to the unanimous decision of the learned men in points of diction, style, rhetoric, thoughts and soundness of laws and regulations.” Muslims conclude that due to the fact that there is no literary equivalent in existence, this proves that the Qur’an is a, “miracle sent down from God, and not simply written by any one man.”

In response we ask whether the Qur’an can be considered a miracle written by one man, when we know from historical research that the Qur’an which is in our possession today was derived from the memory of Muhammad’s closest companions and finally compiled fourteen years after the fact by a group of men who, then, destroyed the evidence by burning the original from which they copied. Where is the miracle in that?

The logic of the claim to it’s uniqueness, according to Dr. Anis Shorrosh, is spurious as well, as “this no more proves its inspiration than a man’s strength demonstrates his wisdom, or a woman’s beauty, her virtue. Only by it’s teachings, principles, and content can a book be judged rightly, not by its eloquence, elegance, or poetic strength” (Shorrosh 1988:192).

One must ask, moreover, what criteria is used for measuring one literary piece against the other? In every written language there must be a “best piece” of literature. Take for example the: Rig-Veda of India (1,000-1,500 B.C.), or the eloquent poems in Greek, the Odyssey and the Iliad by Homer, or the Gilgamesh Epic, the Code of Hammurabi, and the Book of the Dead from Egypt, all which are considered classic masterpieces, and all which predate the Qur’an?

Closer to home; would we compare Shakespeare’s works against that of the Qur’an? No! They are completely different genres. Yet, while few people today would dispute the fact that Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets are the best written in the English language, no-one would claim they were, therefore, divine.

Yet, what do we say concerning the Qur’an’s supposed literary qualities? When anyone who is familiar with the Bible picks up a Qur’an and begins to read it through, there is the immediate recognition that he or she is dealing with an entirely different kind of literature than what is found in the Bible.

Whereas the Bible contains much historical narrative, the Qur’an contains very little. Whereas the Bible goes out of its way to explain unfamiliar terminology or territory, the Qur’an remains silent. In fact, the very structure of the Bible, consisting of a library of 66 books, written over a period of 1,500 years, reveals that it is ordered according to chronology, subject and theme.

The Qur’an, on the other hand, reads more like a jumbled and confused collection of statements and ideas, interposed many times with little relationship to the chapters and verses which preceded. Many scholars admit that it is so haphazard in its make-up that it requires the utmost sense of duty for anyone to plow through it! The German secular scholar Salomon Reinach gives a harsh analysis, stating that: “From the literary point of view, the Koran has little merit. Declamation, repetition, puerility, a lack of logic and coherence strike the unprepared reader at every turn. It is humiliating to the human intellect to think that this mediocre literature has been the subject of innumerable commentaries, and that millions of men are still wasting time in absorbing it” (Reinach 1932:176).

McClintock and Strong’s encyclopedia concludes that, “The matter of the Koran is exceedingly incoherent and sententious, the book evidently being without any logical order of thought either as a whole or in its parts. This agrees with the desultory and incidental manner in which it is said to have been delivered” (McClintock and Strong 1981:151).

Even the Muslim scholar Dashti laments the literary defects of the Qur’an, saying, “Unfortunately the Qur’an was badly edited and its contents are very obtusely arranged.” He concludes by noting that, “All students of the Qur’an wonder why the editors did not use the natural and logical method of ordering by date of revelation, as in ‘Ali ibn Taleb’s lost copy of the text” (Dashti 1985:28).

When reading a Qur’an, you will discover that the one-hundred and fourteen Suras not only have odd names for titles (such as the Cow, the Spoils, the Bee, or the Cave), but their layout is not at all in a chronological order. Size or length had more to do with the sequence of the Suras than any other factor, starting with the longest Sura and ending with the shortest. Even within the Suras we find a mixed chronology. At times there is a mixture of Meccan and Medinan revelations within the same Sura, so that even size is not an infallible guide in dating them.

Another problem is that of repetition. The Qur’an was intended to be memorized by those who were illiterate and uneducated. It therefore engages in the principal of endless repetition of the same material over and over again. This all leads to a good bit of confusion for the novice reader, and gives rise to much suspicion concerning it’s vaunted literary qualities.

In contrast to the Bible, which was written over several hundred years by a variety of authors, and flows easily from the creation of the world right through to the prophecies concerning the end of the universe; the Qur’an, supposedly revealed by just one man, Muhammad, in a span of a mere twenty years, seems to go nowhere and say little outside of the personal and political affairs of this one man and his companions, at one particular stage in history.

With no logical connection from one Sura to the next, one is left with a feeling of incompleteness, waiting for the story to give some meaning. Is it no wonder that many find it difficult to take seriously the claim by the Hadiths that the Qur’an is “a book second to none in the world,” worthy of divine inspiration?

Almost all Muslims contend that the explanation for numerous contradictions between the Bible and the Qur’an are due to additions and corruptions of the Bible by Jews and Christians over the years. Yet, not one Muslim I have talked with has been able to point out where our current scriptures differ with the originals, or when these substitutions could have been made.

This is compounded by the fact that the Qur’an, itself, gives authority to the Bible, assuming it’s authenticity at least up to the Seventh Century. Consider the following Suras:

Sura Baqara 2:136 states that there is no difference between the scriptures which preceded and those of the Qur’an, saying “…the revelation given to us…and Jesus…we make no difference between one and another of them.” Sura Al-i-Imran 3:2-3 continues, “Allah…He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus)…as a guide to mankind.” Sura Nisaa 4:136 carries this farther by admonishing the Muslims to “…Believe…and the scripture which He sent before him.”

In Sura Ma-ida 5:47,49,50,52 we find a direct call to Christians to believe in their scriptures, “…We sent Jesus, the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him. We sent him the Gospel… Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein, if any do fail to judge by the light of what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel…” Again, in Sura Ma-ida 5:68 we find a similar call, “People of the Book!…Stand fast by the law, the Gospel, and all revelation that hath come to you from YOUR LORD. It is the revelation that has come to thee from THY LORD.”

To embolden this idea of the New and Old Testament’s authority we find in Sura 10:95 that Muslims are advised to confer with these scriptures if in doubt about their own: “If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee. The truth had indeed come to thee from thy Lord.” This is repeated in Sura 21:7, “…the apostles We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration. If ye realize this not, Ask of those who possess the message.”

And finally, in Sura Ankabut 29:46 Muslims are asked not to question the authority of the scriptures of the Christians, saying, “And dispute ye not with the people of the book but say: We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and that which came down to you.”

If there is anything in these Suras which is clear, it is that the Qur’an emphatically endorses the Torah and the Gospel as revelations from God. This coincides with what Christians believe, as well.

Furthermore, both the Christian Bible and the Muslim Qur’an hold to the premise that God does not change His word, His revelation (despite the law of abrogation found in the Qur’an). Sura Yunus 10:64 says, “No change can there be in the words of Allah”. This is repeated in Sura Al An’am 6:34: “There is none that can alter the words of Allah,” and again in Sura Qaf 50:28,29.

In the Bible we, likewise, have a number of references which speak of the unchangeability of God’s word, such as Deuteronomy 4:1-2; Isaiah 8:20; Matthew 5:17-18; 24:35; and Revelation 22:18-20.

Why should a Jew or Christian before or after the time of Muhammad be interested in changing God’s revelation? Does he or she want to go to hell? (See Revelation 22:18-19). The only conceivable reason to bring about changes would be that it was the Qur’an, which came after, which differs from the “Book”, and not the other way around.

Why do Muslims continue claiming that the Bible has been corrupted? When, one must ask, was the Bible allegedly polluted? Surely the Qur’an would have clearly stated that it was defiled. If Muslims continue to claim that the scriptures have been corrupted, they have an enormous responsibility to show from what time in history and where these corruptions exist in the text (the task of textual criticism).

The New Testament, they say, has been tampered with by Christ’s disciples. Their authority for such claims is derived from nameless liberal scholars, who, using the same criteria, would play havoc with the authenticity of their own Qur’an.

Christians, in response, need only point to the numerous existing copies on open file at numerous museums around the world to corroborate the accuracy of the ancient New Testament text, with what we have today; manuscripts which existed long before the Qur’an was even written.

The New Testament is the historical record of the manner in which God fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah, and established the New Covenant. It contains the account of the life and teachings of the Messiah (the Gospels), the creation of the Church (Acts of the Apostles), the explanations of Christian beliefs and conduct (Epistles), and a description of the end times, when God’s purpose for humanity will be fulfilled (Revelation). Understood in its entirety, it’s truth and it’s unity with the Old Testament Messianic message gives credence to the Old Testament Scriptures which came before.

It is no wonder, then, that Christians accept only the Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible as God’s inspired written Word, consisting of teachings by more than thirty prophets and apostles, written over a period of tremendous historical change and diversity, spanning more than 1,500 years, yet held together by a common unifying idea; that God, the Creator/Redeemer is at work in history with the intent to redeem and to save humanity for Himself.

Nowhere do we find these redemptive concepts in the Qur’an. In fact, much of the Qur’anic account has little to do with the Biblical scriptures which preceded it, and contradicts many of the teachings of the “previous prophets”. Take for instance the following examples:

Some of the Qur’anic teachings seriously conflict with important Christian teachings. Jesus, in the Qur’an was not crucified (Sura 4:157), nor did God beget a son (Sura 19:36-36,92; Sura 112:3), the Qur’anic account suggesting a physical act, which is outrageous to both Muslims and Christians alike: “How shall I [Mary] have a son, seeing that no man has touched me…” (Sura 19:20-21).

The trinity is misunderstood in the Qur’an, and consists of God, Jesus and Mary, God being the third of the three (Sura 5:119). One must ask how, God, if He is all-knowing, could send to Muhammad such an erroneous concept of the Christian trinity, one which only a small and insignificant sect believed and taught, and certainly was not representative of the scriptures, nor of Christendom as a whole.

Other contradictions confuse names and people. Abraham in the Qur’an is called the son of Azar (Sura 6:74), though in the scriptures he is called Terah (Genesis 11:27). Imram (Biblical Amram) was the father of Moses, Aaron and Mary, the mother of Jesus (by implication in Suras 19:28; 66:12; 20:25-30). Yet, the mother of Jesus was born one-thousand, five hundred and seventy years after the sister of Aaron, or Miriam. Yusuf Ali explains that according to Luke.1:5, Elizabeth is the “daughter of Aaron”, being of the priestly line, and so Mary, her cousin would also be seen as such. How then could the father of Aaron and Mary (the mother of Jesus) be Imran?

Some of the Qur’anic stories are quite confused. In the Qur’an we find that Moses’ wife (Zipporah, daughter of Jethro) was given to Moses in exchange for eight to ten years service (Sura 28:22-28), confusing this account with that of Jacob, two-hundred and twenty years earlier, who pledged seven years to Laban in order to have Rachel (Genesis 29:18 and Exodus 2:16). We also find that King Saul selects his small army of three-hundred from thirty-two thousand men (Sura 2:249), almost mimicking the Gideon account of the same (Judges 7).

Haman in the Qur’an is a servant of Pharaoh, who built a high tower to ascend unto the God of Moses (Sura 28:38). But the Babel tower occurs seven-hundred and fifty years earlier (Genesis 11), and Haman is found in the story of Esther in Babylon, one-thousand one-hundred years after Pharaoh. Yusuf Ali believes this is another Haman, yet this is ridiculous, as Haman is not an Egyptian name, but Babylonian.

In the Qur’an Ishmael rather than Isaac is chosen for Abraham’s sacrifice, on mount Mina (near Mecca) rather than mount Moriah. Though Ishmael is not named, Muslims assume it is he since in Genesis 22:2 God refers to Abraham’s “only son” to be sacrificed, thus Isaac must not have been born.

The more likely explanation is that God accepted Isaac as the only son of Abraham, since he was born by God’s hand to Abraham’s legitimate wife, and not that of a concubine (Hagar). In the same chapter (Genesis 22) Isaac is named as Abraham’s only son, and the covenant bearer (Genesis 21:12), even though Ishmael was alive at the time.

The Qur’an continues to confuse this story, stating that Abraham took Hagar and Ishmael to Paran (which it claims is near Mecca). This conflicts with the Biblical account, as Hagar and Ishmael were unaccompanied by Abraham, and Paran is not near Mecca but is south of Israel, in the Sinai Peninsula.

The question must be asked of Muslims, “If the Qur’anic accounts are indeed correct, then why would God allow so much of His revelation to be abrogated and compromised?” Furthermore, “if the preceding scriptures were authoritative, then why do their principle ideas disagree and contradict so much with what we find in the Qur’an?” If the Qur’an is the final revelation from God, it must not only agree with what God said before, but it must fulfill that which is in the Biblical scriptures, which He sent to all humanity via His chosen prophets.

Christians are convinced that the Bible is not only completely authoritative, but that it is truthful and answers all that anyone needs to know concerning who God is, and what He demands of them. They stand behind these convictions by desiring that the gospel of salvation, the Bible, be read by all the people of the world. It is for this reason that the Bible has been translated into over two-thousand languages so that now ninety-three percent of the world’s population can read it in their mother tongues. It is, therefore, no surprise that the Bible continues to be the best-selling book in the history of humanity.

So what can we say about the authority of the Qur’an’s beauty and applicability? Can we say it is a divinely inspired book sent by Allah for all of humanity, in all ages? Can it claim supernatural as well as literary qualities, which not only place it above other revelations, but point to it’s divine origins? Much of what has been offered points to the fact that the Qur’an lacks in all three qualities, and seems to reflect more the life and times of it’s author than that of the heart of a universal God. The idolatrous tendency of Muslims towards the Qur’an, as well as the confusion of its literary makeup, and the special conditions given to its author, point more to a book put together by one man, rather than an inspired piece of God’s revealed word.

If one were to contrast the sixty-six books of the Bible written over hundreds of years by a multiplicity of authors, with the Qur’an which came through one man, Muhammad, during his lifetime, there would be no contest as to which was the superior literature. In the final analysis, the Qur’an simply does not fit the breadth of vision, nor the literary style or structure of that found in the Old and New Testament. To go from the Bible to the Qur’an is to go from the superior to the inferior, from the authentic to the counterfeit, from God’s perspective to that of an individual, caught up and controlled by his own world and times. I end this section with a quote from a Qur’anic expert, Dr. Tisdall, who says:

The Qur’an breathes the air of the desert, it enables us to hear the battle-cries of the Prophet’s followers as they rushed to the onset, it reveals the working of Muhammad’s own mind, and shows the gradual declension of his character as he passed from the earnest and sincere though visionary enthusiast into the conscious imposter and open sensualist. (Tisdall 1901:27).

6: The Simplicity of Islamic Teaching

Some Muslim converts believe that the simplicity of the Islamic religion can be found in its flexibility. Though I have not formally investigated these claims, I would imagine they refer to the many cultures, worldwide, where Islam has acquiesced to native beliefs and practices which are not in accordance with Islamic teaching, a phenomenon which anthropologists label, “Folk Islam.” These syncretistic allowances are not, however, necessarily accepted by most Muslims. Nor are they given authority by the Qur’an or the hadiths.

Contrariwise, the historical record shows that instead of accepting the beliefs and practices of other cultures, Islam has effected just the opposite, imposing its own culture on that of the host or conquered culture. Take, for instance, the Sind culture, in Pakistan, which gave us Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. Here is a good example of how the Arab culture has dominated and eradicated a once sophisticated host culture. (As I was born and raised in India, I am familiar with the history of the Indus Valley and Afghanistan, both good illustrations of Islam’s non-adaptation and eradication of host cultures.)

A few Muslims appreciated the simplicity of the decor within the mosques interior, contrasting it to the “gaudy icons” found in many Roman Catholic cathedrals. Although most Protestants would agree with many Muslims on this point, a question needs to be interposed here: “What, for both Muslims and Christians, is the function of a place of worship?” A mosque is a place designated for prescribed prayer. Posturing, also, is standardized; hence there is no place in a mosque for open and expressive worship, and consequentially there is no need for pews or hymnals, or for overhead projectors, for that matter.

A church building, or a cathedral, on-the-other-hand, is dedicated for more than mere prayer. It is a rallying point where people from the community come to assemble for corporate togetherness and worship. Praise to their Lord takes the form, expressly, of music. Singing, therefore, for a Christian, is not for “showing-off,” as Muslims perceive it, but is for offering individuals and the corporate body the chance to praise God, as King David did with his Psalms. Differences in needs, therefore, demand appropriate contrasts in venue.

A further criticism by Muslims is that the presence of women impedes the act of worship. I find this extremely demeaning to women, and really I wonder if, indeed, this is a universal concern for most Muslims. If so, one needs to question why the presence of women would cause men to think evil thoughts? Are women really only sexual objects? Sexuality may be a particular problem for certain individuals. Yet, to exclude one-half of the human race for the sake of the few who would go against any religious ideal is ludicrous. Furthermore, to penalize the women for the weaknesses of the men sparks not only of sexism, but fails to address the primary issue, that the real problem is the men, and it is they who must come to terms with their inadequacies, not the women.

Lack of complexity has often been forwarded as the cornerstone of Islamic theology and practice, and for some a great attraction. Yet, simplicity may be its undoing as well. As nations continue to advance and become more sophisticated, and as mobility has brought much of the world to consider itself as a large “global village,” the rigid inflexibility of thought and practice, religiously adhered-to for the last fourteen centuries, will not suffice for the fast-moving pace of the twenty-first century.

Islam has not managed well at adapting. This fact, as we have discussed earlier concerning Islamic Da’wah, has not been universally acknowledged by it’s adherents worldwide.

Answers to many of today’s important issues are no longer black and white, and it is those gray areas which will keep Islam increasingly out-of-step with the changing world culture around it, forcing its devotees to either assimilate and so neutralize their message, or solidify and therefore isolate themselves from what is happening around them.

7: The Testimony of other Muslims/Muhammad

The witness and lifestyle of Muslims within Islam is ongoing and attractive. A large enough number of Muslims I interviewed indicated this feature to convince me that this element could be a real asset for Islamic Da’wah activity in America.

Muslims have done well to tap into this wealth of ready-made and easily accessible material for their evangelistic campaign. One cannot dispute the suitability of a personal testimony, since it is nigh impossible to cast doubt upon a personal account of one’s changed life. Christian journals and pamphlets have used this vehicle for years to attract non-believers to the claims of Christianity. In fact, all religions use this tactic to their advantage.

The question which arises is whether Islam can take credit for the persons changed life, or whether any religion could have done the same for that individual?

One must not forget, that religion, by its very nature gives an individual a sense of belonging, a sense that he or she is part of a larger group. Religion also offers accessibility to a being (a god) who is larger than themselves. It is, therefore, logical that anyone who commits themselves to a religion will enjoy the security and identity which that religion affords them, a new-found identity which they will want to share with others who are not so fortunate. It is possibly this factor, more than any other, which Islam has a lot to be thankful for.

Take for example an Indian Muslim whom I befriended at the Harrisburg Mosque, who invited me to his home. During our conversation he told me that he knew many of the men who came to the Harrisburg Islamic center, while they were still in their homeland, India. He went on to say that most of them rarely attended the mosque in India, and would not have qualified as being religious, by anyone’s yardstick. Yet, in the U.S., they routinely attended the Jumma prayers, as well as all of the religious festivals. He believed that this new “religiosity” was due to their cultural insecurity in a new and foreign land. In time, he felt, “appearing religious” would wear-off, and they would assimilate as other newly arrived groups preceding them had done.

The true litmus test of a person’s testimony is found in how their changed life works to help others, and how the religion which claims to be a change-agent brings about a lasting benefit to the society in which it is involved (following James argument that “faith without deeds is dead,” James 2:14-26). The earlier discussion in this study dealing with the failings of Muslim countries points to the dearth of good examples for the witness of Islam. Though certain Muslim individuals enhance Islam’s name, the image of the worldwide Islamic community is possibly more detrimental then it is an asset for the witness of Islam.

However, in all my interviews with converts, the overwhelming attention-getting topic was not necessarily the testimony of other Muslims but “the person of Muhammad, himself.” His life, and his persecution in Mecca caught their imagination. For others, the attraction was the fact that he was chosen by Allah as the “seal of all the prophets.”

Christians, of course, before they can look at the merits of Muhammad, must evaluate whether or not Muhammad was a God-appointed prophet. It is unacceptable to take as authoritative the attestations of one witness who has no objective divine proof, such as a prophecy of divine signs. The Bible demands a sign to prove a prophet’s authenticity (read Deuteronomy 18:21-22; Exodus 10:1-2; and Isaiah 41:21-23).

We know from the Qur’an, that Muhammad’s arrival and subsequent claim to prophethood was not accompanied by any signs (Suras 2:87,99,118-119,151,252; 3:183; 6:37,109,124; 7:203; 13:7,30; 17:59,88,93 all attest to this). This puts doubt concerning his claim.

A prophet’s message, finally, must correspond with that which preceded him. A Christian must view Muhammad in light of the total Biblical revelation, culminating with God, the Son, who is Jesus, the promised Messiah. They must ask three questions: 1) to what extent did the prophet Muhammad fully accept the “former scriptures” (refer to Deuteronomy 4:2; Isaiah 8:20; Matthew 5:18 and 24:35; and Revelation 22:18-19 to understand the importance of this decree by God), 2) to what extent did the prophet Muhammad point to the central significance of Jesus as Redeemer (John 14:26 and John 16:14), and 3) to what extent did the life and teachings of Muhammad exemplify suffering redemptive love, which is demonstrated by Jesus the Savior (John 15:5; 16:7-11)? Unless Muslims can show otherwise, Christians will continue to find him completely lacking in all three.

While the witness of certain Muslims in any community is admirable, it is, nonetheless, difficult for Christians to assume that this attribute qualifies Islam the status it demands. Until Muslims can demonstrate that their faith transforms society holistically, and until they can demonstrate that Muhammad, indeed, conformed to the revelation and message which preceded him, Christians will continue to doubt the veracity for the claim of Islam’s witness in the twentieth century, as well as the assertion that their prophet can insist on the status of a true prophet from God.

8: The Rationality of Islam

No-one can argue with Muslims, that Islam, as it is presented to the world, is a seemingly rational religion. This attribute will always be an attraction for Islam, especially for those people who yearn for simplistic answers to simplistic questions. What is more important, however, is whether or not rationality alone necessarily implies Truth. The ways of God are profound, and complicated to explain. Much of it is purposely clouded in mystery.

In order to fully understand God’s plan for humanity, or to understand the heart of God, or even His character, one must bring God down to our level, and anthropomorphize Him. This, however, is not easily accomplished, and many times impossible, unless God, Himself, has revealed it to us.

Take for instance the idea of the love of God, a belief which both Christians and Muslims can agree upon. It is not until we comprehend the trinity (a doctrine much maligned by Muslims) that we can truly understand love. For it is within the trinity that love if fully expressed. True love by it’s very nature requires an object, otherwise it becomes self-centered, self-serving and carnal. If God were one-dimensional, where would true love have originated? The trinity, encompassing the tri-une godhead, delineates the source from which love began, as each person of the godhead, since eternity, has given and received love from among themselves. The best example of the love between the godhead is exemplified by God the Father who sent God the Son to earth (John 3:16); and by God the Son, who in turn “being in very nature God…made Himself nothing…being made in human likeness…He humbled Himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:7-8).

As a result of this extreme act of love, we humans, being made in the image of God, can now explain and model perfect love to the world, using the examples of God the Father towards God the Son, and the ongoing relationship of God the Holy Spirit in our lives counselling us to become more like Him, by exemplifying that same love.

When Muslims maintain that Allah can be defined as the God of love, our response must be that this claim simply is not rational. For where is it exemplified in history, or in our lives today, and from where did it originate? Rationally speaking, love is much easier understood within the context of a loving God, who not only modeled it Himself, but continues even now to aid us in that same endeavor.

Muslims, while maintaining the rationality of their beliefs, have a difficult time rationally explaining many other beliefs, most of which we share in common with them. Some of these are: the virgin birth, the meaning of the title Messiah, the erroneous name for Jesus (Issa), the significance of the unblemished sacrificial lamb, and the significance of the burning bush. Yet, their inclusion in the Qur’an makes its authenticity no less authoritative. Both scriptures fall prey to accounts and beliefs which cannot be explained by rational means. Therefore, rationality alone should never be the criteria for delineating Truth.

I end with the example of the cross. Who, but God could think up the cross? To the world it is irrational. How could the infinite creator God allow Himself to be crucified by His finite creation? Yet, without the cross, God’s entire substitutionary and sacrificial plan for humanity’s salvation comes to naught. “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing (the world), but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate” (I Corinthians 1:18-19).

9: The Practices of Islam

The practices which were most admired by the responders were: polygamy and praying. Polygamy is a historic practice which has had a wide appeal even outside Islam, particularly amongst many African tribes. I find it incredulous, however, that there are Muslims today who believe polygamy is better-suited for Americans than monogamy (most of the men I meet in the U.S.A. are in enough trouble with the one wife they already have).

Monogamy gives recognition, status and integrity to a woman. Where is sexual fulfillment found for a woman who has to share her husband with other wives? But the greatest criticism of polygamy must be centered around what it does to a true understanding of love between a husband and wife.

“Polygamy excludes devoted love, for love between the sexes is exclusive, otherwise it is degraded in essence to mere sexual fulfillment. No woman who loves her husband and wishes to be fully loved in return, can tolerate a partner” (Nehl 1987:110). Invariably, with a plurality of wives, one wife must be favored over the others. In the Middle East and in Africa a definite hierarchy is inevitable, with the first wife dominating the subsequent wives. I saw, personally, the damage that this wifely competition and domination brought about, with the “lesser wives” almost relegated to the status of slaves.

Nor are very many Muslims prepared to speak to the issue of easy divorce (permitted in Islam), or prepared to answer, “What happens to the children in divorced situations?” In Senegal, the children remain with the husband’s family. Yet, in almost every case, they are never treated as equals with the other “legitimate” children.

A Christian would, furthermore, point to the Genesis 2:24 passage, where God took Eve and presented her to Adam, and, “The two became one.” This is echoed by Jesus in Matthew 19:4 and Luke 16:18, where he says, “What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” Why, then, would God change this universal law, and allow the descendants of Adam to marry additional spouses to add to their “harems?” Muhammad can be excused for having lived in a polygamous society. But he also lived after Jesus and ought to have been aware of His teaching.

Islamic prayer, for converts, was a high-priority attraction, and should be discussed here. Due to opposing interpretations of the significance of prayer, Christians and Muslims will differ. For a Muslim, prayer (Salat) is a mechanical act of obedience. It is not important, therefore, that the believer understand what he or she is praying, nor whether or not the prayer pertains to the situation at hand. Posturing and quoting the Qur’an in Arabic is considered an act of obedience for a Muslim.

For a Christian, prayer is understood in the context of relationship. A Christian “speaks” to God in order to praise Him, to communicate with Him, or to intercede for themself and for others. All these demand an ongoing vital personal relationship with a God who is infinite yet personal, who is transcendent yet not distant, and who is immediately present at all times and in every situation. Until Muslims discover and receive the God of Jesus Christ who is like “Abba,” Father, they cannot hope to understand the ramifications of true prayer, nor can they hope to be personally communicating with and receiving, the blessings of the God who is there, which a life of prayer can offer.

10: Islam’s Superiority to All Other Religions

Two respondents stated that the superiority of Islam is found in its attainability; that, in contrast, Christianity is simply too difficult to obey. Perhaps, it would have been helpful for them to have compared what is required of a Christian with that which is required of a Muslim.

I mentioned earlier, that, in conversations which I have had with Muslims on this issue, they have admitted that there are few examples of Muslims who have actually attained the ideal Muslim life. In fact, I am convinced that it is this very factor, Islam’s simplistic approach to the “unattainable,” which has kept so many Muslim countries in poverty and dysfunctional in modern times.

On the other hand, as has been noted, there are millions of examples of Christians worldwide, who have committed their lives to the Lord Jesus Christ, and who, because of His gift, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, have seen dramatic transformations in their lives, which has affected not only themselves, but also has caused dramatic changes in others around them. Missiologists have coined the term “Redemption and Lift” to explain this phenomenon.

A large number of converts considered Islam superior because it had received the most recent and “final” revelation. Islam is not singular in claiming such an “added” revelation. The Mormons, the Moonies, and the Ahmadiyyas, to name a few, believe that they have received further revelations which supersede those of both traditional Islam and Christianity.

A question begs for an answer: “Have these ‘additional’ revelations fulfilled what had been said previously about God, and about His redemptive work for humanity? (an idea which is prominent throughout the earlier scriptures: the Old and New Testaments.)

Other converts felt that Islam is superior because it has had the greatest influence on the modern world. There are those who would agree that Islam is influential, but many would wonder whether or not it can claim the same influence as, say, Judaism, or Christianity, religions which have been credited with setting the stage for The Renaissance and the Enlightenment; which, in turn, set the stage for the Industrial Revolution, affecting, dynamically, the world in which we live today.

Claiming the superiority of one religion over another can be tenuous, as one’s definition will be colored by their religious affiliation. Many Muslim booklets make the claim that much of the technological advances found in the West today are a direct result of earlier Islamic teaching, and it is this which makes it superior.

While one can debate the validity of the above comment, it perhaps is more important to point out that much of what we have in the West is not necessarily Christian, but an accumulation of knowledge borrowed from a vast array of cultures both secular and religious, over a vast period of time.

If one were perfectly honest, however, they would have to admit that all religions tend more to retard creativity and research. Both Christianity and Islam are guilty of this. Yet the fact that modern science found a particular fertile ground in the “Christianized” West has more to do with the fact that in those countries, and especially in those which were run by Protestants, which for theological reasons separated church and state, the secular world was afforded the freedom to go about its business of creating the modern technology which we all marvel at today. Ironically, it is this very “Westernization” which poses the greatest threat for domiciled Muslims who live in the West today, as they watch their children assimilate ideals and aspirations which reflect a Western secular mind-set rather than that of their Islamic heritage.

11: The Theology found in the Qur’an

Surprisingly, a few converts considered Islam a religion of peace, though the prophet Muhammad, himself, was involved in over forty separate military campaigns. The fact is that many of Islam’s best successes have been attributed to its military conquests.

Apparently, today, due to Islam’s newly precarious position in a global society, dominated by an “anti-Islamic” superpower, the “former” militarism of Islam is, conveniently, no longer overtly taught or practiced. That is not to say that Muslim nations do not involve themselves in war, as can be attested by the earlier statistics concerning current global conflicts involving Muslim countries.

Possibly the greatest curiosity, however, is the view that Islam has no specific teachings on sin. One respondent may have been referring to the concept of spiritual sin, an idea well-understood in Christianity, but defined in Islam as social sins. Or, perhaps he felt that Christianity put too much emphasis on the guilt of sin, and so preferred the Islamic approach, which does not really deal with the moral predicament, promising instead the innate goodness of humanity.

Christianity emphasizes the heinousness of sin. According to scripture, any sin is an abomination to God whose character is holy and righteous. Sin, in essence, is a rejection of His character. However, Muslims, as do Christians, believe that Satan tempts them. Yet, according to Christians, it is not Satan, but each individual who is responsible for their own actions, and for their own sins.

Both Christians and Muslims believe that everyone has the choice to resist Satan’s temptation. The Bible insists, throughout, that the consequences of sin is death, and that everyone is guilty (Romans 3:23). Therefore, everyone deserves eternal death, Muslims and Christians alike (Romans 6:23).

Since Islam has not dealt with the fact of moral sin, it maintains no theory for its consequence, which is death. The Bible, however, begins with and faces up, head-on, to this predicament. Therefore, it is tragic to find individuals who have chosen Islam due to the fact that it has no guilt-inducing teachings. A belief must never be chosen for how it makes one feel, or how it can meet one’s needs. God’s truth does not function that way. God creates the boundaries of reality and truth. He, therefore, may not bend to our whim or fancy, but must stand consistent to His own character. The onus is on us to conform to His truth, to proclaim what God defines concerning sin, death, and salvation, and form our reality accordingly.

For a Christian, death no longer has a sting, because God, in His mercy, has not left us in our guilt, but has offered exoneration and forgiveness for those who receive it. He has sent His Son to die in our place, to take upon Himself our guilt. Therefore, those who believe in His historical redeeming death on the cross, and who repent of their sins, are saved from death, and eternal separation (John 3:16,17). But those who reject Christ, the only one qualified to be the mediator between God and humanity, will be eternally separated.

Muslims, understandably, cannot fathom the efficacy of Christ’s atonement. Would anybody believe that another human-being could pay for another person’s sins? Of course not. On that, we all agree. The question must come to: Who is this Redeemer? He is not just another human-being. Christ, as God, incarnate, fulfills all that is required for our redemption. But those who reject this crucifixion death of Christ, will remain, unforgiven, to spend eternal punishment, in total isolation from God; because, in rejecting God the Son, they have also rejected God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, and this sin alone is unforgivable (1 John 2:22-23).

There are individuals who may not accept the Biblical message of justification and redemption, because it does not fit their needs. Yet, consequences follow every decision a person makes, and in this case, the consequences are eternal. Therefore, for those who have truly believed and have received Christ as their Lord and redeemer, they do not fear Christ the judge, and it is to them that eternal life is granted with God in heaven (John 5:22-24; Acts 17:30-31).

Muslims believe that paradise consists of a garden full of carnal pleasures, where men are waited-upon by beautiful virgins (Sura 78:33). Curiously, it is this very sensuous environment, which can, in this life separate us from God. I wonder, indeed, where lies the attraction of heaven for Islamic women?

Compare this view with that of the Bible, where heaven is envisioned as the place where both women and men will go, to enjoy the very presence of God Himself, and where they will live forever with Him in love and in joy. For, as it says in Revelation 21:1-7: “Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people,… He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain.”

12: Islam’s Spirituality

For some Islamic converts the idea that Allah has total control over all that happens, including history, gives them the security they crave. What they fail to acknowledge, is that this belief, as was mentioned earlier, smacks of the mechanical doctrine of predestination, a non-questioning acceptance of destiny and a resignation to fate (Kismet).

For some, Allah’s complete control leads to a fatalism and passivity; while for others, it frees the mind from matters over which it has absolutely no control. Kismet makes the Muslim fanatically self-sacrificing in war, yet resigned in defeat or in bereavement or in disaster, or in the presence of preventable evil such as epidemics (because these could fall under the “will of Allah”).

Furthermore, Allah is not bound by any moral obligation, as this would limit his sovereignty. It follows that Allah is also the author of evil. He is under no necessity of his own nature to be right, or just, or merciful. Therefore, a Muslim exhibits this twist-of-logic by saying, “Allah does not will an act because it is good; rather, it is good because he has willed it.”

Other attributes of Allah point out the contrast between him and the God of the Bible. “Allah,” according to Muslims, “loves only those who do his will,” whereas the God of the Bible not only loves those who are good, but He loves those who are sinners, those who reject Him, even to the point of giving His life for them (Romans 5:1-10).

Unlike Allah of the Qur’an, who is portrayed as a distant, remote, God with whom no one can have a personal relationship, the Biblical view of God is of One who desires a true, personal relationship with each of His creatures (John 1:11-14; 15:9-15).

In the Qur’an, as was indicated above, Allah is considered to be the author of evil. Yet, in the Bible we find just the reverse. God is infinitely righteous and holy (Psalm 77:13;99:9), for His, “eyes are too pure to look on evil” (Habakkuk 1:13).

When we take these three attributes of the Biblical God: 1)a God of selfless love, 2)who is in relationship with His creation, 3)yet is unable to create or accept evil, we will find in these three the relationship that He seeks with His creation as well.

Though new Muslim converts testify to the superiority of Allah, they fail to take into account that which is missing, that which Allah cannot offer. He cannot offer redemption of his people through a loving act on his part, nor can he offer a personal relationship with them; nor, because of his character, can he accept their possible rejection of him. In fact, all that Allah can offer is that his disciples follow him blindly. Completely lost is their response to a wooing of love.

In contrast, the God of the Bible does not seek a total and blind obedience from His creation. For that would not illustrate true love. True love seeks the best for the loved-one, at the owners expense. This sacrificial love is best exemplified in the crucifixion of Christ on the cross. It is this same quality of love which God desires from us, both in our relationship with Him, and in our relationships with all of humanity, who are made in His image, sinner and saved alike.

The Bible tells us that humans were created in God’s image (Genesis 2:27), a view which is in direct contrast to that of Islam, which perceives humans as slaves. According to the Bible, we were never created to be slaves to God. We were created, from the very beginning, to be His children, in perfect relationship with Him. This assumes, however, freedom of choice, in that we can accept or reject that relationship with Him, despite the fact that He is our creator.

And finally, according to the Bible, by God’s very nature, He can neither create nor tolerate evil. Thus, He has not brought about, nor can He tolerate the evilness of humanity. Sin is of our own doing. But God has made a way by which sin can be forgiven, so that we can, once again, be brought back into a true relationship with God, as was intended from the very beginning with Adam and Eve. Our fate, therefore, is never arbitrarily predestined. Anyone can, by simply acknowledging Christ as Lord and Savior, be assured that they will be united here, and later in heaven, in the presence of God, for eternity.

These, then, are the true attractions of Christianity.

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

The Attraction of Islam and a Christian’s Response – Part 2

Jay Smith

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

---

A Christian’s Response

From this discussion it is possible to see that Islam has been and is making a dynamic impact on the world. Many people are coming into contact with Islam for the first time, and are finding that there is something appealing for them. But does Islam really answer all it claims? Is it as attractive as converts seem to testify?

In the final section, I would like to take these areas of attraction, and discuss them from the perspective of a Christian. I realize that Islam is making an impact in the United States today. And I am sure that this impact will continue. But I think American people are appraising Islam incorrectly, or even, at times, dishonestly. Within the list of twelve attractions there are, I feel, errors of perception, as well as errors in interpretation. These I would like to address. There are also misconceptions of Christianity’s position which must be redressed. And finally, many of these categories are those which, I feel, Christianity has a stronger claim to, than Islam.

1) Islam’s Social Laws

As Christians living in America, we have to accept and admit that the perception by many in the West is that Islam meets the social needs of people better than does Christianity. The fact that this category was chosen by converts as, “the primary reason to convert today,” speaks to the success Islam in America has enjoyed with some of its social programs.

The picture outside of America is quite different. Consider some of the most current statistics compiled by Michael Kidron and Ronald Segal in The New State Of the World Atlas:

Worldwide, there are nineteen countries which will never be able to provide adequate food for their populations. Fifteen out of the nineteen are Muslim countries, and include Afghanistan, UAE, Oman, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Western Sahara, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, Niger, Mauritania, and Bangla Desh (Kidron 1991:28-29). Of the twelve countries with the lowest record of life-expectancy (under forty-five years), seven are Muslim countries (Kidron 1991:40-41).

Probably more revealing is the “Quality of Life Index” compiled by Frank Kaleb Jansen, of Target Earth. This index measures the mortality rate, male life expectancy and female illiteracy. When one tabulates the countries of the world within this index, they find that twelve of the lowest twenty countries rated in the world are Muslim, while thirty-two of the top forty rated countries world-wide are those traditionally considered Christian (Jansen 1989:90-91).

When one adds further criteria to this index, such as: education standards, health status, women’s status, defense allotments, economic and demographic factors, as well as political stability and participation, it is interesting to find that out of the top forty countries listed, thirty-nine are Christian in background, while all of the twenty-three Muslim countries included fall well below this level, with five of the worst ten countries on the list Muslim countries (Jansen 1989:92-93).

Kidron concurs in his analysis on the quality of life, finding that whereas all northern countries (made up of all European countries except Portugal and Romania, as well as North American, Israel, Japan and Australia) fall into the highest category for the Quality Life Index (nine and above), not one of the thirty-two Muslim countries made it into this category, the majority of them placing within the medium to very low categories. The lowest rated in the world were mostly Muslim countries (i.e. Niger, Mali) (Kidron 1991:50-51).

Other areas were equally dismal. Literacy: while all northern countries had ninety percent and above literacy rates (except Romania, Portugal, and Bulgaria) not one of the thirty-two Muslim countries made it into this category. The best had approximately seventy percent literacy rate, and the rest fell to ten percent and under (Kidron 1991:52-53).

Schooling: whereas all the northern countries had ninety percent of their children in Secondary school, the best Muslim state had only fifty percent, with the majority of the Muslim countries falling between ten to thirty percent (Kidron 1991:53).

Child-mortality: All of the northern states (except Yugoslavia, Romania and the USSR) were in the top category of child mortality (twenty-five children or under, out of one-thousand children, who died before five years of age). All thirty-two Muslim states fell into the lower categories (fifty children to two-hundred children out of one-thousand who died before their fifth birthday) (Kidron 1991:54).

Concerning the area of violence in the world, it is difficult to know where the truth lies. While the West documents and publishes its criminal activities openly, the Muslim countries say very little. Lists which delineate where each country stands in relation to murders, sex offenses and criminality include most of the Western countries, yet only four Muslim countries out of thirty-two have offered statistics for the number of internal murders, while only six have offered a list of sex offenses, and only four have divulged their level of criminality. Therefore, until more Muslim countries are willing to come forward with statistics, it is impossible to evaluate their claims that Western states have more degradation and criminality than that of Muslim states.

We do know, however, that in the 1980’s, of the fourteen countries who were involved in ongoing “general wars,” nine of them were Muslim countries, while only one was a non-Western Christian country.

Though statistics can be numbing after a while, they do help point out, rather harshly in this case, that Muslim countries today are not meeting the basic needs for the majority of their populations in areas such as literacy, food, education, the freedom of expression, health, and in the general quality of life.

The defense can, and is made that these are not true Muslim countries, and therefore should not be used as examples. Yet, these countries make the claim that they hold to Muslim principles, and as such, are the only examples we have today by which we can judge whether or not Islam can provide an adequate social environment in the twentieth century. The many who considered this category their primary reason for their conversion need to consider statistics like these seriously.

Admittedly, the majority of those who chose this category were African-American converts to Islam, who live in some of the most deplorable social environments in America, a country which prides itself in being the richest country in the world. They cite, “the hypocrisy of the inner-city Church,” as well as their impression that Christians “live their religion only one day a week, when they are at Church.” And they contrast these inconsistencies with another kind of pietism, that of the Muslims, who not only have created and sponsor alternative Islamic schools for their children, but who are actively involved with prison ministries, which specifically benefit African-Americans. Possibly their greatest witness comes from being the most obvious group to stand against and attempt to eradicate the highly-publicized drug and prostitution rings which have run rampant on their streets. These are the “forgotten” inner-city people, and understandably Islam is “scratching them where they itch.”

Islam is also a religion, which, like many cults today, is especially attractive to insecure people, those who need others to make their decisions for them. Its myriad laws and regulations give a prescription for every facet of social life, which can affect even the “dregs of society;” and in reality it does do just that.

When asked for clarification, many of the individuals I asked responded by saying that the Islamic Shariah law proved to be the best law to live by. Yet, when asked to explain the precepts of Shariah Law, they had difficulties describing what particulars they had in mind, or how they might apply Islamic rules within an American setting.

For those countries who use or aspire to use Islamic Law further statistics prove revealing. According to Kidron, while only five northern states are categorized as “Terror States” (those involved in using assassination, disappearances and torture), twenty-eight of the thirty-two Muslim states fall into this category (except UAE, Qatar and Mali) (Kidron 1991:62-63). Would American Muslims welcome this sort of law, considering how it can and is being abused in other parts of the world?

Generally, the primary desire for discipline, among those individuals I had contact with, was the overriding concern, despite the fact that it could not be defined.

Yet, I found a contrast to this assertion as well. The prison ministries, though they are touted as one of the crowning achievements of the Muslim community, because they instill discipline, are successful, it appears, providing the inmates remain in prison.

I asked the imam of the Harrisburg Masjid about his prison ministry, and he cautioned that the program was not going as well as the press inferred, stating:

In the prisons, the men have nothing to do, nowhere to go, and so they come and listen to what the brothers have to say. They commit themselves to Islam, and before two witnesses say the “Shahada,” and for the most part come regularly to Jumma prayers. Many of them talk big about what they will do once they get out of prison; and how they are going to change, and make a better life. The problem, however, is once they get out. These men come out having been in prison for four or five years, where all their decisions were made for them. Instead of coming to the mosques for help, they go back to their former lifestyles, and many times end right back in prison.

The Islamic prison ministry was appreciated by the prisoners, and became a rallying point for them while they were in prison. But once they left that confined environment, and were again back in “control” of their own decisions, out on the street, they had no more use for that ministry, and possibly found its rules and regulations more debilitating then helpful.

Some of the new converts I questioned, appreciated that, in Islam, there are no priests, and that they, as believers, did not need to depend on a middle-man for their relationship with God. It might have been helpful to know whether or not these converts came from a Roman Catholic background. The hierarchy of priests is not representative of the Protestant community, where the belief in the “Priesthood of all believers” (that everyone is a priest), goes even further than does Islam by incorporating the idea that everyone is responsible for their own faith, and that each individual can have a personal relationship with God, immediately and eternally.

Indeed, it is this belief which is a primary impetus behind the massive push today to translate the Bible into every language on earth, so that every person can go to the scriptures (the Bible) for themselves to read what God is saying to them, rather then depend on a priest for that guidance.

Concerning the attraction of women’s issues which some converts point to, that women can own property, and that they are better protected; it would perhaps be helpful for women who believe Islam holds a better record to visit or live in a Muslim country.

Though statistics are hard to find, we do know that, currently, of the twenty-three countries with the worst records of jobs for women (women making up only ten to twenty percent of all workers), seventeen are Muslim countries (Kidron 1991:96-97). Similarly, of the eleven countries with the worst record for diparagement of opportunity between men and women, ten are Muslim states. The widest gaps were found in Bangla Desh, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt (Kidron 1991:57). Another revealing statistic shows that of the twelve states with the worst records for unequal treatment of girls, seven are Muslim states. The bottom three listed are UAE, Bahrain, and Brunei (Kidron 1991:56).

Again, while one may argue that this is not representative of true Islamic teaching, it does show us how those in Muslim countries treat their women, and what we might expect if we were living in that type of environment.

Those individuals who felt Islam had much to offer the world in women’s emancipation would also do well to read personal testimonies by Muslim women, or those women under Islam’s influence, such as, Betty Mahmood’s Not Without My Daughter. They would find that in apportioning inheritance, the Shariah law discriminates against women (Sura 4:7,11), allowing her only half the inheritance of a man. They would also find that women are relegated, almost exclusively, to the home, where they are indeed better protected, but where they also would find little hope in continuing a career that would entail any contact with the opposite sex. As for their maternal rights, many women in the West are not aware that Islam gives the husband absolute legal control over any children.

Perhaps, if those who felt women’s issues were an attraction for Islam, were aware of these areas of inequality they may come to a different conclusion. One could argue that a locked-up individual (whether in a home, or in a Purdah) is well-protected, but is that a worthy price to pay?

In my discussions with Western women, it is these prohibitive laws as well as the practice by Muslim societies today against women, which, far more than any other, comes under the greatest criticism.

2: Unity of God (Tawhid)

Perhaps no other category is as important to deny, from the Christian perspective, as the Islamic misconception that Christians believe in and worship three separate gods. This accusation is the one issue we must center all our energies on to condemn. Obviously, it is this “polytheism” which disturbs Muslims the most.

Christians and Muslims, alike, worship the God of Abraham. Furthermore, Muslims and Christians, alike, are monotheistic, believing in only one, righteous, and transcendent, creator God. Muslims must understand that we echo them on this point. The key verse of the Torah of the Prophet Moses states that: “The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:4). God is one and He commands us to love Him totally.

Jesus Christ, speaking more than one-thousand years after the prophet Moses says: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength” (Mark 12:28-30 and Matthew 22:37). Remember that this is the man who claims to have equality with God who is speaking.

Thus, both the Torah and the Gospel (Injil) agree that God is one. We are commanded to love one God. Only He has the right to command our ultimate loyalty. All other gods which man invents are totally false (Hosea 13:2,3).

The greatest criticism against Christianity posed by Muslims is, ironically, the ridiculous view of the plurality of God. Muslims contend that the Bible teaches God is made up of three: “God the Father, Mary the mother, and Jesus the son” (Suras 5:73 and 5:116). This view is more repugnant to Christians than it is to Muslims, as it claims something which the scriptures never even alluded to, while at the same time it contradicts the theology of the church both before and after Muhammad’s time.

Obviously, an error of this magnitude puts suspicion on the veracity of the Qur’anic sources. If these were direct revelations from an all-knowing God, why, then did He not know what His previous revelations said, or at least what those who received it believed?

A more likely explanation points to a source closer to home. Research reveals that there was a heretical Christian sect, known as the Choloridians, who had contact with Muhammad during his tenure in Mecca, who taught a view of the trinity similar to what we find described in the Qur’an.

We must say, however, to our Muslim friends, that from the scriptures we find revealed a Divine unity of three Characters: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, commonly known as, “The Trinity.” It is impossible to fully define the mystery of God as “triune.” To correspond with Biblical revelation, the Christian must equally emphasize that God is one and three. Though God is immensely complex, and cannot be exhaustively known, He has so revealed Himself in scripture that He can be truly known. The early church theologians wrestled with the difficulty of defining God from what is revealed in scripture with the limitations of the human language, which had no word to express the reality of one God, who is three (even this definition in English seems illogical, and illustrates the point).

For centuries theologians adopted many words to try to express God’s revelation of Himself as three in one (for instance, words such as three prosopon, hupostasis, and trias), yet they were all inadequate. It was the early church theologian, Tertullian (145-220 A.D.) who finally coined the word trinity, which was adopted three centuries later by the Church.

Therefore, we readily admit that the word trinity does not exist in the Bible. It is simply a theological term which expresses what the scriptures delineate as God comprised of three persons, who are infinite, yet personal, in complete unity of will, purpose, action and love, yet cannot be separated though they have different functions.

The scriptures speak of God the Father, who is the co-Creator with God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, who blesses (Ephesians 1:3-4), initiates (John 17:2-9), and sends (John 17:3,18). God, the Son, who speaks-out the creation (John 1:1), and acts into history, both during the time of the prophets (Genesis 32:25-30; Exodus 3:2-5; 13:21; 33:9-11; Judge 2:1), and physically incarnated as the savior, the historical Jesus Christ (John 1:14).

And finally, the scriptures speak of God, the Holy Spirit, who is resident within the followers of Jesus Christ, who guides, instructs and empowers them (John 14:16-17), and who mediates Jesus Christ and His atoning work (John 15:26).

Jesus referred to this ‘Trinity in Unity’ when He commanded His apostles to go everywhere and to persuade men to become His disciples, and to baptize believers, “…in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19).

It is important that God as “Father” must not be viewed within a biological context. Christians share with Muslims the prohibition against conceiving of God in the form of an image (made by humans). God as “Father” refers, rather, to a relationship; a description of the covenant and fellowship relationship between God and humanity. Nonetheless, it is this relationship of the Godhead which confounds Muslims profoundly, especially in the context of God the Father, and Jesus the Son. “How,” they ask, “can Jesus, a man, be God?” The audacity of equating a puny man with the transcendent God begs understanding. And we agree, as the assumption behind this question is that somehow the prophet Jesus was given divine status by His followers: thus, Jesus became God. Yet, nowhere in our scriptures do we find that Jesus became God. He always was, from the beginning, God (John 1:1). Muslims, therefore, are asking the wrong question! It would be more correct to turn the question around and ask, “How can God be the man, Jesus?” I have not yet met a Muslim who claims that becoming a man is not possible for God. It would be simple for God to come down to earth and take on human form. On that we agree. The question, then, that Muslims should be asking, is not How can Jesus be God, or How did God become a man, but Why did God become a man. Once we answer why God took on the form of a human, then the question of How loses it’s relevancy.

When Christians explain the trinity to a Muslim as I have above, they neutralize any criticism leveled against Jesus of being totally other than God. With that established, Christians can point to the function of Jesus, as redeemer, which highlights the price of our sin, and reminds us that though we cannot pay for the consequences of our sins, God can, and has done so. Jesus, the Christ, by taking on Himself that substitute responsibility, not only proved Himself to be divine and, therefore, equal with God, but showed Himself to be worthy of our thanks and worship, in that He has now eradicated eternal death brought on by sin. This, then, answers why God became a man.

Perhaps, the problem between Muslims and Christians has been accentuated due to the “Christian” environment in which transplanted Muslims find themselves; an environment which Muslims have incorrectly assumed is polytheistic. The Prophet, Muhammad, had similar circumstances during his tenure in Mecca, where the polytheistic practices of the local religion caused him to speak out clearly and often against idolatry. Therefore, it stands to reason that the reactionary concept of God as one unit would be the focus of the Muslim evangelistic thrust. In the bookstore of the Islamic Center, on Massachusetts Avenue, in Washington D.C., I counted six books which dealt with the subject. I took special note that these had been strategically placed near the door to attract the attention of any browser who happened to enter.

Above the entrance of the Dar Al Hijrah Mosque, in Falls Church, Virginia, inscribed into the facade, is a quote from the Qur’an reminding the adherents that God is unique (one unit). This is the first inscription an individual sees when they come to do their prayers.

I wonder whether this same emphasis would be evident in a Pakistani or Middle Eastern mosque, where, due to the small number of Christian churches present, the doctrine of the trinity is not so pronounced.

Three people in my survey felt that Islam is the only religion which gives every individual the choice for their own salvation. I find that curious, since every knowledgeable Muslim I have asked has clearly stated that Muslims have no assurance for their salvation; that the choice can only come from Allah, and that the outcome will only be known at the day of judgment.

These respondents may have been confusing one’s choice for salvation with that of conversion to Islam, the fact that one can choose it. If so, then more needs to be said on the freedom of Muslims to also reject “inherited” Islam. Many western Muslims have not adequately reviewed the strict laws concerning apostasy in Islam, which gives little freedom, whatsoever, for the rejection of one’s faith.

3: Brotherhood

I was initially surprised with the assertion by many converts that Islam evidenced a high degree of Brotherhood. In my discussions with African-Americans, it soon dawned on me that many of them were mis-informed or ignorant concerning the historic record of Islam. To say that, “Islam offers a greater degree of brotherhood because it is not responsible for slavery, and harbors no racism,” is just not credible.

Understandably (as I have been often reminded), the majority of African-Americans have been hurt by racism in America. Every one whom I talked with had stories to tell of discrimination at the hands of whites. One black Muslim approached me in a mosque, and, confronting me three inches from my face, yelled at me that he hated all whites, and blamed his present poverty on “white racist attitudes.”

The perception of African-Americans that I have met maintains that racism in America can be blamed on white Christianity, since whites control and perpetuate Christianity. Islam, on the other hand, because it comes from a non-white part of the world, has no such racist stigma.

There are those who believe that Christianity, alone, must be blamed for the enslavement of the black race. Although, historically, the church did condone slavery, and even, at times, used scripture for its substantiation; the majority of historians today agree that it was Christian missionaries overseas, and Christian clergymen in the homeland who were responsible for the leadership of the Abolitionist Movements against slavery in America and elsewhere (Wilberforce and the “Clapham Sect” in London, for example). While Europeans were involved with the slave trade for a few hundred years, the existence of the traffic of “slaves” had been well established one-thousand years before.

The position which places the entire blame for the invention and practice of black slavery at the door of Christian Europe, is simply not historically tenable. Both the Grecian and Roman societies were slave states, yet most of their slaves were Caucasian. In fact, the word “slave” meant a person who was of Slavic origin. Robert Hughes, in his essay on “The Fraying of America” in the February 3, 1992 Time magazine puts the record straight when he says:

The African slave trade as such, the black traffic, was an Arab invention, developed by traders with the enthusiastic collaboration of black African ones, institutionalized with the most unrelenting brutality, centuries before the white man appeared on the African continent, and continuing long after the slave market in North America was finally crushed… Nothing in the writings of the Prophet [Muhammad] forbids slavery, which is why it became such an Arab-dominated business. And the slave traffic could not have existed without the wholehearted cooperation of African tribal states, built on the supply of captives generated by their relentless wars. The image promulgated by pop-history fictions like Roots-white slavers bursting with cutlass and musket into the settled lives of peaceful African villages-is very far from the historical truth. A marketing system had been in place for centuries, and its supply was controlled by Africans. Nor did it simply vanish with Abolition. Slave markets, supplying the Arab emirates, were still operating in Djibouti in the 1950’s; and since 1960, the slave trade has flourished in Mauritania and the Sudan. There are still reports of chattel slavery in northern Nigeria, Rwanda and Niger (Hughes 1992:49).

It would be helpful for those who believe that Islam was responsible for eradicating slavery, as did the imam I talked with, to honestly look at the historical record. Slavery still exists in some North African Muslim countries today (Mauritania, Mali), yet receives little or no attention, let alone criticism from other Muslim states.

Finally, one needs to look at the record of Muhammad’s life, a man who, himself, owned slaves. The argument, by some, that slavery was “God’s way of converting Africans to Islam,” is much the same argument suggested by some earlier Christians who said that, “bringing Africans to America gave them the opportunity to hear the Gospel;” an argument which holds little credibility, and dishonors the character of God.

Many Muslims mentioned that the best example of Brotherhood in Islam is found during the Hajj: Understandably, this is a heightened time for many pilgrims, a time to put away one’s prejudices and to enjoy this once-in-a-life occasion. What needs to be asked, however, is what happens after the Hajj, when people return home again, and are confronted with the everyday problems facing them? Does the ideal of brotherhood remain with them once they come back home?

I asked this question of the imam of the Harrisburg Masjid. He agreed that within Islam, the problem of racism still exists. He was well aware that his masjid is made up almost exclusively of African-Americans, while the more affluent Asian Pakistanis and Indians preferred their own Islamic center a few miles distant. A further concern was that rather than investing in the masjid, which needed repair, the Asian immigrant group were, at that time, conducting a fund-raising program for constructing a new, and modern center farther out-of-town, in an area approachable only by car (Not wasted on the imam was the fact that few of the black converts owned cars).

He mentioned that none of these Asian immigrant Muslims would ever condone the marriage of one of their daughters to any African-American. “Even the Asian women,” he stated, “move away from our women, when we occasionally go to visit.”

While interviewing the imam of the Masjid Muhammad, in central Washington D.C., and the administrator at the Masjid Ul-Haqq, in Baltimore, I found that both related almost identical situations of racial ostracism by the Asian Muslim community. Yet, each felt that the problem had more to do with economic and cultural differences than with color or race. I agree that these are more likely the reason for the animosity. Yet, to claim that what is happening within white Christian communities is somehow different, is in my opinion dishonest. We are all guilty of gravitating to and preferring those of “our own kind.”

Christian missiologists have long recognized the need for people of different backgrounds and cultures to worship in settings which are the most similar to their own. Thus, Donald McGavran’s HUP principle (Homogenous Unit Principle), which speaks to this very issue, is now being adopted by many denominations throughout the U.S.A. and the world.

Muslims in America will soon see that the lack of integration in their groupings is not as much one of racism, as much as it is that of multi-culturalism. The fact is that people do reflect the culture in which they were born, and so prefer to worship God in a familiar setting, whether that be familiar forms of worship, familiar dress, language, or ethnic groupings.

Other respondents were attracted to Islam’s teaching on enquiry and broadmindedness and felt that the tolerance within Islam is, indeed, unique. Again, I found this surprising, as few people I know would designate Islam as a religion which embodies these attributes. Rather, the opposite seems to pertain.

Most religious historians agree that the primary reason for Islam’s decline after the tenth Century had to do with the threat Muslim clerics felt towards the enquiry into scientific advances which seemingly did not agree with the Qur’an. Take for instance the present on-going restrictions for Qur’anic schools in the West which are only permitted to teach science and philosophy within the parameters of the Qur’an. A better known example is that of the Fatwa imposed on the Briton, Salman Rushdie, by the Fundamentalist Muslim world, which points to a blatant lack of broadmindedness, and enquiry.

Furthermore, people who are knowledgeable concerning world events agree that there are few Muslim nations that grant full equality to other religions. In my own personal experience, I have seen, first-hand the persecution of not only the adherents of foreign religions (and of Islamic sects, such as the Ahmaddiyas), but also the persecution of those who are sent to propagate other than Islamic beliefs (particularly foreign missionaries). Despite the denial by many Muslims in the West that this problem exists, the absence of religious freedom is evidenced most profoundly worldwide within Muslim countries.

For example, there are eleven countries worldwide whose stated belief is strictly imposed, while all other beliefs are repressed. Two of them are communist (N.Korea and Angola), one is Buddhist (Bhutan), and the remaining eight are all Muslim (Mauritania, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Iran, Pakistan, and the Maldives) (Kidron 1991:72-73). It is difficult to find an aura of toleration in statistics like these.

Even the Qur’an is unclear on this matter. How does one reconcile the verse which maintains “no compulsion in religion” (Sura 2:256), with others which call Muslims to, “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them [captive], and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush” (Sura 9:5), or the call to, “strike off their heads in battle” (Sura 47:4), and “make war on the unbeliever in Allah, until they pay tribute” (Sura 9:29)? Muslims are also asked to, “fight then…until the religion be all of it Allah’s (Sura 8:39), threatening “a painful doom to those who disbelieve” (Sura 9:3), seemingly a call for the eradication of all other beliefs, and certainly not one for toleration.

Is it no wonder that of the twenty religious conflicts worldwide in the 1980’s, sixteen of them involved Islam, and twelve of these were against people from other faiths. Passages from the Qur’an, backed up with current statistics such as the above paint a rather contrasting picture of Islam to that volunteered by the new converts.

4: Islamic Morality

The discrepancy evidenced within the surveys, between the earlier European group, who did not consider morality an important issue towards their conversion, and those more recent respondees from the U.S.A., who did, may have something to do with their differing geographical locations, as well as having a common misconception of Christians.

Those Europeans who had written their testimonies, had been introduced to Islam while traveling in foreign lands, either while performing military duties or while overseas in diplomatic service. Many of them had written little concerning the moral condition of the host countries. Their attraction to Islam had been due, primarily, to the precepts it taught, and not due, as much, to the testimony of its adherents.

Furthermore, most of these European converts came from Christian backgrounds, and so had no problem differentiating between the immorality expressed in a culture, and that practiced by Christians. In those days, I would assume that the overt societal immorality was not considered as much of a problem as it is today.

On the other hand, the majority of those who chose this category as important, are present-day Americans, who had rarely, if ever, traveled to a Muslim country (except the trip to perform the Hajj in Saudi Arabia). Their sole criteria for choosing, therefore, was the positive testimony of Islam in their own neighborhoods, a testimony which fared well when contrasted with that of church-attending Christians, as has been discussed earlier. Therefore, the moral standards of Muslims had a greater impact on their decision to choose Islam, as they contrasted the morality of Muslim friends with that of Christianity. Interestingly, it might be helpful to note that, according to INTERPOL, the number of sex offenses in the USA, a supposed “Christian country,” came only twenty-second on the list of countries worldwide (with thirty-five cases per one-hundred thousand people), almost half as many as Kuwait (with sixty per one-hundred thousand).

Concerning the mistreatment of women by Christians, in all fairness, there are men in every culture and religion who mistreat their wives, regardless of whether or not this is permitted by their religion. They should not be held as representative of a particular culture or religion. It would be far more helpful to investigate the religious teachings which deal with the treatment of women to see whether or not each authority gives women the equality and respect they deserve.

Christianity has a high regard for women, and considers them equal to men in the eyes of God. If a Christian man chooses to dishonor his wife he is disobeying the scriptures, which say, “Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the Church.” According to our scriptures, Christ loved the church (and, in fact, the whole world) so much that He gave His life for her. This is the example we are to follow with our wives, a relationship which centers on self-sacrifice.

Islam, however, has little to say concerning the sacrifice of a husband towards his wife. Instead Islam allows a husband to divorce his wife without giving a reason for his actions (Sura 2:224-230). In addition to the four wives allowed by law, a Muslim man can have an unlimited number of slave girls as concubines (sexual partners) according to Sura al-Nisa (Women) 4:24. Furthermore, women are required to be absolutely obedient to their husband, and can be beaten for being rebellious (Sura 4:38). No such privilege, however, is reserved for the wife (Sura 4:11,176). There is, therefore, more allowance for a Muslim man to mistreat his wife than there is for a Christian husband. I will say, however, that in my experience with Muslim men, I have not seen many who have mistreated their wives as one would expect, considering the permissibility they have to do so.

Perhaps the greatest obstacle, for a Christian, in answering, “Why do evil people exist within a Christian environment?” may be in defining what is a Christian environment versus that of a secular state. For a Muslim, society, itself, is defined by Islam. All facets of that society must come under Islam’s authority. Therefore, all areas, including that of morality, come under Allah’s control. The Muslim hierarchy, as his regents, then take on that authority, interpreting and defining how people are to act; and what punishments, if deserved, they must receive.

For a Christian, one’s morality is measured by scripture and by their personal relationship with God. God, the Holy Spirit, admonishes the individuals character and conduct. The elected Church leaders do have authority for guiding and counseling believers to adhere to the precepts found within scripture. Yet, the only punitive control they have is in their ability to excommunicate recalcitrant parishioners. Thus, individuals, who live within a “Christian society,” such as we find in most western countries today, where the Church exists distinct from any political authority, do not come under the church’s jurisdiction. How they live morally, is up to each person. They are answerable directly to God. The church has no real authority, other than to give them guidance, if and when they ask for it.

What I find exciting, however, is the testimony of Christians who have come under the love-authority of God, the Holy Spirit. One is always overwhelmed with the testimonies of how their lives have been changed, and how this transformation, in turn, has affected others.

I once had a conversation with a Muslim businessman from Senegal, who claimed that the Islamic lifestyle (which included its ethics and social practices) was better suited to the world today, than was Christianity’s. I asked him, therefore, to show me where there was a country or region of the world which adhered correctly to these “better-suited” precepts of Islam? He, of course, was unable to show me, saying that, “All Muslim countries are run by men who don’t follow the Shariah,” and that was the reason Islam was having so many problems today. I then asked him to point out individuals who follow Islam correctly, and he began to name off a list of Muslim celebrities, many of whom were politicians or well-known religious figures.

My response was that according to his argument: Islam must be a religion for super-humans alone, or for people who were very rich, or very famous, or very disciplined; because only these could follow it correctly.

I, then, projected a video-tape of a Billy Graham Crusade altar call, and told him to notice the hundreds of people marching forward to commit their lives to Jesus. I told him that the majority of these people were not rich or famous, and perhaps not very disciplined. In fact, I would even venture to say that all of them considered themselves sinners, and probably had many problems in their lives. Yet, if we were to talk with them a year later, we would find that there had been a dynamic change in their lives; and that they would be continuing to change more and more into the “character of Jesus Christ.” And of even more importance, this dramatic character change would not only affect their own lives, but also, many others around them.

“Thus,” I concluded, “While Islam requires an immense amount of disciplined effort, it offers no outside help towards its fulfillment.” “Therefore,” I contended, “Islam is nothing more than another natural religion, one which takes superhuman effort to obey. Christianity, on the other hand, proves to be a supernatural religion, a religion which requires something no one could hope to obey on their own, yet which is being followed by thousands and millions, worldwide, because of their repentance, and the supernatural power of God, the Holy Spirit, in their lives.” Which, then, is the better-suited for the world today?

For this reason, true Christians, deny that America is a “Christian society.” The scriptures are clear on this point: “Many will call Him ‘Lord, Lord,’ but [God] will not recognize them.” Only the living God knows the heart condition of a man or woman. Clearly, the example of most Americans show that they do not heed the call of Jesus Christ, nor do many display the witness (the proof) of God, the Holy Spirit, admonishing them in the ways of the Lord.

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

The Attraction of Islam and a Christian’s Response – Part 1

Jay Smith

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

---

Introduction

Islam is not perceived by most people as a religion which is overtly evangelistic. In fact, the vast majority of individuals who are Muslims today, are so because of their birth. Personally, I have always believed that Islam, because it is a religion condusive to the Arab mindset, to its worldview; has a much higher attraction amongst those who either come from that part of the world, or have had strong cultural ties with it. Only recently was I made aware of Islam’s dynamic evangelistic thrust (known as Da’wah, or ‘the call’), and that it is growing, not simply by biological growth, but by conversion growth as well.

In my work in Senegal, and during my stay in the central part of Pennsylvania, I had personally seen an increasing evangelistic thrust by Islam amongst the native populations. The local mosque in Harrisburg, near where we lived, claimed to convert approximately three to four Americans per month. The Muslims there had plans to enlarge their premises so that they could build an Islamic Center which would cater specifically to North Americans. When speaking in churches, many people who had come into contact with Muslims asked me why Islam was growing worldwide, and what the attraction was. Unfortunatley, I had not been able to adequately answer them, because little had been done by Christians to ascertain what it was the Muslims were doing, or how successful their endeavors were, and why it was that those who were from outside the faith were attracted to Islam.

Previously, in Senegal, it had been simple enough to answer the question, “Why was Islam attractive?” as 92% of the population in Senegal is Muslim. Thus, most of the people there are born into Muslim families, and continue the religious traditions they have inherited.

In the United States, however, this is not the case. Most of those who have been attracted, or who have converted to Islam, have come from either Christian or non-religious backgrounds. They have, therefore, made a deliberate choice to reject a former faith and become believers in Islam. For that reason they are the best qualified to answer the question of, “What exactly is the attraction of Islam?”

In order to carry out this research I needed to conduct personal interviews with individuals who had converted to Islam, and find out from each why he or she had converted, what were the methods used, and how they had fared now that they were Muslims (including the acceptance or rejection felt by their family and friends).

These face-to-face contacts were not possible in the area I was living. Therefore, in 1992, over a period of four months, I traveled to seven different cities: Harrisburg, Lancaster, New York, Montreal (Canada), Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington D.C. In each city, in the mosques or Islamic centers, I was able to participate in numerous prayer sessions, and attend many religious meetings. I also talked with seven imams and interviewed over thirty American converts, some of them at length, and others more briefly.

From these conversations, along with printed written testimonies and my ongoing research, I was able to glean the necessary data to determine what the “Da’iyyahs” (Muslim evangelists) have done, what they are continuing to do, and what they plan to do.

To find out what the convertees felt were the factors for their conversion, I administered a questionnaire by mail to about twenty converts of Islam, and had personal interviews with the others whom I met in the mosques and Islamic centres. From their responses I was able to tabulate the 12 most common reasons for converting to Islam. They are listed below (in order of importance):

1. Islam’s Social Laws

2. The Unity of God (Tawhid)

3. Brotherhood (taught and practiced)

4. The Morality of Islam

5. The Qur’an’s beauty and applicability

6. The Simplicity of Islamic teaching

7. The Testimony of Other Muslims

8. Islam’s Rationality

9. The Practices of Islam

10. Its Superiority to all other Religions

11. The Theology found in the Qur’an

12. Islam’s Spirituality

With this information, I have been able to come to some conclusions concerning the attraction of Islam for Americans, and whether or not the reasons for Islam’s attraction will continue in the future. The following, then, is a summary of the significance of those studies.

1: Islam’s Social Laws

While some may be surprised to find Islam’s social laws at the top of the list, most of those whom I talked to had good, solid reasons why they felt it should be of the highest motivation for converting. In this category were included a number of factors from the original list (see paper on Da’wah in North America, Figure 1, page 106). For instance, a number of individuals felt that these social laws are comprehensive, that they are a complete guide to life, and consequently, that they brought about orderly living. This points up the fact that people need boundaries by which to live, especially in a society like the U.S. which emphasizes catering to special interest groups, while leaving-out the needs of the majority.

As a contrast, quite a few responders felt Christianity was just not powerful enough to change the evils of modern-day life. The majority of those who expressed this idea were African-American, all of whom live in inner-city areas of some of the largest urban centers in America. They see, first-hand, the anarchy going on all around them, and they feel Islam is the only religion which can stand up to the deprivation and violence, the racism and injustices in the U.S.A.

A number of those with whom I talked had come into contact with Islam in prison; and there, they had been reformed by “Muslim brothers” who came weekly for the Jumma prayers and Qur’anic classes. Now that they were “out,” they believed the disciplined lifestyle, espoused by Islamic laws, was the sole criteria to keep them from going “back in.” They were appreciative of the local masjid’s role in driving out drug dealers from their inner-city neighborhoods, and the ongoing campaigns to keep children off the streets and out of gangs.

A further attraction is Islam’s lack of a priesthood. Islam has no medial agents. As a result, the believer is not dependent on some-one else for his relationship to God, but can go directly to Allah.

The subject of an “Islamic education for young children, while they were still impressionable,” was mentioned frequently. I personally visited four Muslim schools; two Sister Clara Muhammad Schools, in Philadelphia and in Washington D.C., and two Qur’anic schools in Baltimore, at the Al Rahman Masjid, and the Masjid Ul-Haqq. While the schools appeared to be small and ill-equipped, the children appeared to be well-disciplined and happy. And, not surprisingly, the schools had become the center for other Islamic activity in their local areas.

According to imam Yusuf Saleem, from Washington D.C., though the students do not excel academically any better than they did at the public schools, the problems of discipline, crime, and sexual abuse are almost non-existent in these Muslim schools. That is their greatest attraction.

I made a particular note, that among the responders, there were three women who felt that Islam permitted them to own property, and that Islam gave them the best protection. While this may surprise some of us, the perception by most Muslims with whom I talked is that, “We take care of our women better than do the Christians.”

2: The Unity of God (Tawhid)

Monotheism, or the belief in the oneness of God, again, came near the top of this priority list. Under this heading I included the problem with the belief in the Trinity, the fact that Islam has no intercessor, and the belief that, “Each person has a choice in his/her salvation.”

The first and greatest teaching of Islam is proclaimed by the Shahada: “La Ilaha illa-l-lah, Muhammadun rasulu-l-lah.” (“There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the apostle of Allah.”) It is this very confession, which, once uttered sincerely, makes one a true Muslim. In Islam, Allah is one (Wahid), and has no partners, no equals. According to the Qur’an, Sura 28;88, it is stated: “And cry not unto any other god along with Allah. There is no god save him.” Thus, Allah is totally other. He created and maintains the world, and since Allah is one, no one else can share even an atom of his divine power and authority. Islam makes it clear that Allah has no son, no father, no relative, and no associates.

In the Hadith, Muhammad is reported to have related the ninety-nine names of Allah, to express some of his attributes. A number of these are: that he is merciful (that he provides humanity with food, drink, the means of movement, and all the necessities of life), that he is all-powerful (omnipotent), that he is wise and all-knowing (omniscient), and that he is eternal (has no beginning and no end).

This idea of the uniqueness of God (Tawhid) is repeated time and again in the Islamic institutions I have visited. In fact, there have been instances where I wondered if, indeed, they did it solely for my benefit when I appeared.

A number of my friends in the Harrisburg mosque questioned why we needed an intercessor, and specifically one who was human? They felt that in giving Jesus deity we had diluted the power of God, in that God would then be dependent on someone else to fulfill His purposes on earth. “Islam,” they felt, “corrected that perception, and put God back in his rightful place, where he belonged.”

In my conversations, the relationship of Jesus to God caused concern, as well. The administrator of the Masjid Ul-Haqq, in Baltimore, asked, “How could we believe that God would ever let Himself be killed?” and “Where is Jesus now?” “If He is sitting at the right hand of God, then that would imply that there are two gods, and that Jesus never went back into His original form (one with God).” It was this very idea, which directed this administrator, the son of a second-generation Baptist minister, to accept Islam as, “The only true religion,” and to become, probably, the most eloquent defender of Islam of those whom I interviewed.

Obviously it is clear to see that the belief in the uniqueness of God, and the rejection of Jesus as the Son of God, have a strong appeal. In fact, if we were to combine the two lists together (referred to in the paper on Da’wah), this category would be placed right at the top, in first place.

3: Brotherhood

The idea of a sense of Brotherhood was the third most popular attraction for these converts. In this category is included the ideas of equality, charity and love, as well as the view that Islam allows for tolerance and broadmindedness. The universal brotherhood and equality for all Muslims is a cardinal tenet of Islam.

Poston, in his study found, curiously, that while almost all Europeans mentioned this category, not a single American male did so. The Europeans, he discovered, believed that Islam had a distinctively positive stand on social justice and racial equality (Poston 1992:178).

In my research, I found that this area, which was ranked second by those from a primarily European background, came third among African-Americans. Yet, the stress on “Brotherhood” was probably the most often mentioned in any interviews, among these same African-American converts. Almost without exception, they believed Christianity had failed miserably, stating in one case that, “Islam gives identity to the dispossessed, providing them with Allah’s identity, which is larger then one’s own. That is why Islam will always be accepted by the Blacks.”

This same individual, a son of a minister in Harrisburg, and, himself, the imam for the masjid there, believes that, “It is Islam which has eradicated slavery, and it will be the Blacks who will be the forerunners of Islam, worldwide, fulfilling what Muhammad prophesied during his life-time concerning Bilal’s descendants.”

When discussing the attribute of Brotherhood with Muslims, they point out that only in Islam does racism not exist. To back this up, they point to the Hajj, where millions of believers come together from many social, economical, and ethnic backgrounds, to put on robes, and fulfill the obligations prescribed in the Qur’an; all in unison, with no thought as to who or from where the person standing next to them is.

4: Islamic Morality

A surprising priority in the second listing was the category of Islam’s morality. For those who accepted Islam earlier-on, morality was near the bottom of their preferences, yet, for the more recent responders, the question of morality was the fourth most important category.

In Poston’s research, he similarly found that, eighteen percent of those who responded within the United States considered Islamic morality as the most significant factor for conversion, while only five percent of the Europeans mentioned it. He assumed the difference was due to a conservative American environment (Poston 1988:429).

Many of those I interviewed also equated the immorality of the West with that of weakened Christianity, believing it was the lack of correct ethical teaching and practice that had brought about the hopeless situation found within the inner-city families, where over fifty percent of all African-American families are now made-up-of and run by a single parent.

Others I interviewed believed Christians were hypocritical. A young Muslim in Harrisburg asked me, “Why are Christians holy only one day out of the week?” Another in New York stated that, “Of the families he knew, the Muslim men treated their women better than did the Christians, with few Muslims ever considering cheating on their wives.”

One administrator in a Baltimore mosque pointed out that the very day I was with him, the leader of the largest Black Baptist convention had just admitted to attempting to bribe a young girl with one-hundred thousand dollars to keep her quiet concerning an attempted rape by a well-known boxer, who had just offered to give five million dollars to that church. This, he said, does not happen amongst Muslims in the U.S.A.

Unfortunately, some of this is true. Islam, without taking the antics of earlier Muslim leaders into account, often does have a better moral witness than that of Christianity. Even in Africa, the rule-of-thumb is that a woman is safer on the streets of an Islamic capital than those of a Christian one. Our own experience in Senegal bears this out as well. Because of Islam’s stricter social laws, there will be dividends in areas such as morality. In any highly controlled society, there will be noticeable and direct consequences, and Islam can well-afford to claim credit where credit is due.

5: The Qur’an’s Beauty and Applicability

Both groups believed that the Qur’an was important in their decision to convert to Islam. They felt an almost mystical quality in the Qur’an, which they could not explain. The mere reading of it gave them unspeakable joy.

While Jews accept the Old Testament, and Christians accept both the Old Testament and the New Testament revelations as authoritative, Muslims consider the first three existing “revelations:” the Tawrut, the Zabur, and the Injil to be so. Yet, Muslims believe that human imperfections, or abrogations, have been introduced into the Tawrut and Injil. The Bible, they say, seems to be a mixture of history and revelation. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to separate the true revelation in the Bible from that of “history” and human intervention.

For that reason, the Qur’an, they believe, was sent as the perfection and culmination of all the truth contained in the “earlier scripture,” The Bible. Though written down in Arabic, The Qur’an is the Book for all times, and for all humanity. It guards the previous revelations by restoring the eternal truth of Allah (Sura 3:3-4a), and clears up all uncertainties.

In the Harrisburg Islamic Center I was introduced to an older man from Pakistan, who was highly revered for having memorized the entire Qur’an. Though he had been in the United States for a number of years, he could hardly speak a word of English, and so was totally dependent on others for his transportation and welfare. Yet, it was he who led the exercises of Qur’anic reading, and whenever he entered the room people stopped whatever they were doing and bowed. This is an example of the Qur’ans mystique, influencing Muslims worldwide.

Since the Qur’an is so highly honoured, it is treated honourably. No one would be permitted to let their Qur’an touch the floor. Every individual, therefore, is urged to use ornately decorated book-stands to rest their Qur’an on when studying its contents. My Muslim friends were horrified to learn that Christians not only stacked Bibles alongside other lesser books, but wrote notes in the margins.

Quite a few individuals explained that it was the beauty of the Arabic text in the Qur’an which had the greatest influence on them. One imam mentioned that “the wording within the Qur’an is pleasing and beautiful, and as such, a good guide.” He pointed to Sura 24:35-38, and Sura 2:3-18 as good examples of this.

6: The Simplicity of Islamic Teaching

Simplicity is an attraction which is mentioned by many Muslim converts. “Islam,” according to one imam in Harrisburg, “has a simple message for the world; believe in God and his prophets, and live a life which follows the Qur’an, and all will be well.”

Essentially Islam requires, only, that a convert repeat the “Shahada” (“There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger”) to become a Muslim, and then throughout his life to follow the Five Pillars of practice (the Shahada, the five daily Prayers: Zakat, the Fast of Rammadan, the Pilgrimage to Mecca: Hajj, and Almsgiving: Zakat), and know the Six Areas of Belief (Iman). But these are not complicated actions or beliefs, and require no engagement in theological or philosophical speculation.

“Theologically speaking,” according to another Muslim friend, “Islam has little to impede its understanding. There are no mysteries which get in the way. Even a child can explain it and follow it.” This is the reason, he believes, that Islam will always be more attractive than Christianity. If the believers can understand it, then they can, in turn, explain it to others.

For some, surprisingly, the flexibility of Islam has been an attraction. “It gives us lee-way to express our own African-American culture; to practice our own identity.” When queried further, the responder explained that, only in Islam does he feel free to be black, because only Islam admits to the injustices put upon the black people by whites, and so gives him the opportunity to become black again.

None of those I questioned felt that the Arab culture or its language was being imposed upon them; believing instead that Islam with its Arabic influence was really Allah’s culture and Allah’s language.

Another attraction is the dearth of religious trappings in Islam. There are no idols or lavish decorations as is well-evidenced in many Roman Catholic cathedrals and in Eastern Orthodox paraphernalia.

“The mosque,” a believer from Baltimore said, “is the best example of simplicity. There is nothing there to clutter your mind. You enter, and all around you are four empty walls, a carpeted floor, and the microphone, facing toward Mecca to focus your thoughts and prayers on God alone. There is no singing to show off your voice; and, to keep your mind from wandering into evil thoughts, women are kept out of sight.” What is more simple than that!

7: The Testimony of Other Muslims

Probably, one of the most recurring ideas which has come out of the literature on “Da’wah in America,” is the attraction of the witness of individual Muslims.

We have already mentioned the success of this witness in the area of morality within the community. The fact is that many individuals have converted because of the witness of another Muslim in their lives.

One of the few white Muslims that I know invited me to his home in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to discuss his conversion. He admitted that his initial interest and on-going search was due to the example of his roommate in college, a foreign-exchange student from Saudi Arabia. Ironically, this student admitted to having not been very religious while in Saudi Arabia, but that during his studies in the United States, he felt compelled to go regularly to the mosque. It was this witness which so impressed my friend, that he, in turn, acquiesced to Islam eleven years ago.

A number of those who responded to my questions claimed they were attracted by the honesty and trustworthiness shown by the Muslims they had met. But the overwhelming testimony expressed by most converts was the attraction of Muhammad himself. Many converts had seen videotapes of Muhammad’s life, produced and distributed by the Muslim League, for university campuses in the United States. While I am told that some of the historical data in these videotapes is somewhat suspect, there is no question that the story the videos portray of Muhammad as a prophet and statesman has impressed many who have viewed them.

8: The Rationality of Islam

Another category on the list of attractions is Islam’s rationality. Islam is considered to be a supremely rational faith. As was mentioned earlier, there are no real mysteries to explain in Islam, as there are in Christianity. Concepts such as “The Trinity,” and “The belief in the Incarnation,” as well as “The belief in personal sin,” and “The need for Redemption” are areas Muslims do not have to contend with. Islam has no water baptism, no catechisms, and no complicated traditions, as has Christianity.

In fact, interestingly, many responders turned to Islam out of a distaste for these very cardinal beliefs in Christianity. “The mystery of The Trinity, and the untenability of redemption was too much to believe, let alone accept,” one convert said. Other beliefs, such as The Incarnation, The Resurrection, and the belief in Transubstantiation were much “too mystical.” They were ideas which were “not compatible with reason and science.”

Another new convert was disappointed by the Roman Catholic Church, and the inadequacy of nuns who had taught him, because, “They had no explanations for their beliefs, and did not seem to know their Bible well.” He concluded, that, “There is a progression within the three faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam); that…God introduced His revelation through the Jews, but as they kept it to themselves, God gave this revelation to the Christians; yet, they strayed off the path and introduced new and difficult ideas, and, so, Muhammad was sent to re-introduce the simple revelation of Islam.” Rationally-speaking, if one believes in “the evolution of religion,” it makes sense.

9: The Practices of Islam

According to the responses, the most attractive Practices of Islam are: the allowance of polygamy, and the protection of the daily ritual of calling and chanting portions of the Qur’an.

Understandably, none of the women who responded spoke to the issue of polygamy (this being a factor which attracted the men primarily). I was able to speak to an administrator of the oldest mosque in Baltimore, who has two wives, each, with her own residence to live in. He felt that polygamy, when practiced as the Qur’an prescribes, would be a definite asset for Americans today. “Women,” he said, “needed the protection and security men could give.” He believed that the law against polygamy in America would soon fall, as the government would see how advantageous a polygamous marriage could be. He was not ready to explain what advantages these marriages had over monogamy.

On the practice of prayer (Salat), many I interviewed felt that it was best expressed in the context of obedience, which only Islam exemplified. To them the belief that God is personal, that He could be talked-to as with another human-being, was repugnant and audacious.

10: Islam’s Superiority to All Other Religions

The idea that one’s belief system is superior to all others is understood by most adherents; otherwise, there would be no reason to hold to it. Therefore, this category may seem rather redundant. Yet, enough respondents chose this category, believing strongly in the superiority of Islam over all other religions.

As an example, many of the respondees considered Islam to be practical. It is considered by them to be this-worldly, in contrast to Christianity, which is perceived as abstract in the extreme. Rather than preparing the individual for the hereafter, as Christianity does, “Islam,” they say, “provides a solution to the acute needs of human society, answering all of man’s problems, while bringing-in the Kingdom now.” Muhammad, Muslims believe, left behind a political, social, economical, and moral program, founded on religious principles, while Jesus, advocated nothing more than the hope of his imminent return.

Islam is also considered superior because it is compatible with science. Maurice Bucaille’s book The Bible, The Koran, and Science figured in a number of discussions. I was surprised to find that a large proportion of the converts were still not aware that this book has been refuted by many scholars as being erroneous and simplistic. Yet, even today it can be found in many Islamic bookstores.

During my time at the Al Faruqi Mosque in New York city, I was shown a video-tape proving the superiority of the Qur’an as it pointed to embryological breakthroughs which are just now beginning to be understood (i.e., the Alacca, or leech like stage expressed in the Qur’an, fourteen centuries ago, parallels what we can now observe in a human embryo).

Perhaps the greatest reason for Islam’s superiority, according to those who responded, is that it is the final revelation, and so fulfills the revelations which have preceded it. The other faiths were only precursors to the final and greatest faith, that of Islam. Christianity was corrupted and syncretistic, while Islam was preserved in its original form (Poston 1992:177).

Some believed that Islam was superior as “it has had the greatest influence on mankind.” At one session in the Harrisburg Masjid, the converts there related how Islam was responsible for “The Renaissance, Modern Science, and The Reformation!” While they could be blamed for not studying their history better, they could not be blamed for their exuberance in the knowledge that Islam’s influence is exemplified by its rapidly increasing population worldwide.

11: The Theology Found in The Qur’an

Theology is the cornerstone of any religion, and is studied and analyzed by great minds. For that reason it is not recommended that one use theology as a tool for evangelizing. It is surprising, therefore, that this area was chosen by some as the reason for their conversions.

A possible explanation could be, that the new adherents may not have understood what they were adopting. Take, for instance, the idea, offered by a few, that, “Islam has no doctrine of sin.” Very few Muslims would accept this conclusion. In fact, one woman who answered a questionnaire took offense to this statement, commenting that “nowhere in all her reading did Islam make this claim.”

As a contrast, Poston discovered that the sin question was actually a deterrent for Christianity. Only one of the seventy-two he questioned, believed that sin was a factor for conversion. Many felt they were not sinful people, that the Christian doctrine of original sin was repulsive, and for this reason they found Islam’s view of the innate goodness of humanity appealing (Poston 1992:175).

For a Muslim, personal sin is a private matter. The idea that one’s sin is consequential from one generation to the next does not exist. This is due to the belief that “Satan is the root of all sin; and Allah, who is all-merciful, will quickly forgive those who ask for forgiveness.” There is one sin, however, which is unforgivable, the sin of “shirk,” the practice of associating anyone or anything with Allah. It is this very category, according to Muslims, that Christianity, with its belief in the “Son of God,” falls into.

Sin, furthermore, is not necessarily the person’s responsibility. The sin of Adam and Eve (Adama and Hauwa) was not really their fault, as they were tricked by Satan, and, “they asked for forgiveness, and were given it.” Thus, contrary to the prevailing view of the Biblical account, their sin is not hereditarily passed-on.

For the Muslim, one’s salvation is attained not by faith alone, but also by works: by observing the five pillars of Islamic practice, by avoiding the major and the minor sins, as well as having faith. It is simple and easy to understand, and even easier to accept. Therein lies its attraction.

To add to the simplicity is Islam’s view on Paradise, described as a perfumed garden of material and sensual delights, surrounded by rivers and flowing fountains, populated with black-eyed virgins, who are there to serve the men with all variety of fruits (Suras 47 & 56).

On the other hand, a vivid hell (Gahenna) awaits those who fail the test, a hell which consists of boiling water, gore and fire, a hell of extreme physical pain (Suras 4, 38, & 50).

The theology of piety, that Muslims must be dutiful in their religion, conversely, is well-known in Muslim circles, and well-practiced. “If Muslims are anything,” one African-American convert told me, “they are disciplined in their faith, always filling the mosque for Jumma (Friday) prayers, and dutifully bringing their children to the Sunday School.”

Another convert told me that “Islamic theology is better then that of Christianity, because it is comprehensive; it tells you what to believe in every area of life.” Whether he was confusing Muslim practices with its theology, I am not sure. The impression is, however, that converts believe Islamic theology gives, much as a handbook gives, answers for all of life’s problems, and does it better than does Christianity.

A large number of those who conversed with me mentioned Islam’s emphasis on peace. “Islam,” according to the imam of the Masjid Muhammad in Washington, D.C., “is the religion which offers peace to the world, not just politically, but within the family, and society.”

I was interested in his statement, and so, asked the Saudi Arabian imam of the Islamic Center, also in Washington, D.C., why Islam is perceived as a religion of peace. “Peace,” he said, “has to come from Allah alone. Only he can offer peace. He is the creator, and he has created rules which are for this world. When we obey what he has demanded, we will live as he wanted us to live, and we will have peace. It is very simple.” When I asked him if there were any examples today of peace in the Muslim world, he answered, not surprisingly, “Yes, Saudi Arabia is the most peaceful country in the world”. It’s that simple.

12: Islam’s Spirituality

The final attraction of Islam is a difficult one to understand. The majority of those who chose it had written their testimonies many years ago, and so were not available for comment. Of those who responded, two felt Islam answered all their “spiritual” needs, while two others believed it was a combination of the spiritual and the material needs.

The definition of spirituality is: “purifying from the corrupting influences of the world.” With this definition I would have thought that this category would have been at the top of many peoples’ list. Yet, it dropped to last place on both the earlier and more recent lists.

There were many, who, in their conversations, mentioned that Islam was the only answer for today’s corrupting problems. I listened for two hours to an imam address over five-hundred believers in a mosque in Philadelphia. During the entire time he never ceased from describing the evils of American society, explaining that Islam was the only religion which could come to America’s rescue. This argument and definition of spirituality does exist within Muslim circles. In the answers to my questionnaire, however, “Spirituality” was not singled-out as one of Islam’s more attractive influences, or as a deciding factor for conversion.

On the other hand, the idea of Allah’s power and control came out clearly in interviews with many individuals. “Allah,” they said, “must be lifted high. He must be given complete allegiance. He is the all-powerful, the all-mighty, the all-compassionate…”

The word, “Islam,” means submission to the will of Allah. A Muslim, therefore, is one who submits, much as a slave submits to his master. The reason for this submission is found in the belief that, everything, including good and evil, faith and unbelief, is pre-ordained. As a religion, Islam is a code of political, ceremonial, civil, and criminal law, as well as moral and religious precepts, all promulgated in Allah’s name, while leaving nothing to the believer’s initiative. It is this all-encompassing view of Allah which has attracted many, as they seek to find a God bigger than themselves and their problems on which to rely.

Allah, they feel, fulfills that need. Muslims believe that Allah is in control of all of history. This belief embraces the doctrine of pre-destination, an acceptance of destiny, and a resignation to fate (Kismet). Allah, therefore, is sovereign. Thus, anything that happens is the will of Allah, and is attributed to him, explaining why the phrase “In sh’allah,” which translated means, “If Allah wills it,” is so common in the Muslim world.

These are the attractions of Islam. What, then is our response?

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

The Attraction of Islam and a Christian’s Response

Jay Smith

From the Master’s Thesis

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

---

Part I

Introduction

The Attraction of Islam

1. Islam’s Social Laws

2. The Unity of God (Tawhid)

3. Brotherhood (taught and practiced)

4. The Morality of Islam

5. The Qur’an’s beauty and applicability

6. The Simplicity of Islamic teaching

7. The Testimony of Other Muslims

8. Islam’s Rationality

9. The Practices of Islam

10. Its Superiority to all other Religions

11. The Theology found in the Qur’an

12. Islam’s Spirituality

Part II : A Christian’s Response

1. Islam’s Social Laws

2. The Unity of God (Tawhid)

3. Brotherhood (taught and practiced)

4. The Morality of Islam

Part III : A Christian’s Response

1. The Qur’an’s beauty and applicability

2. The Simplicity of Islamic teaching

3. The Testimony of Other Muslims

4. Islam’s Rationality

5. The Practices of Islam

6. Its Superiority to all other Religions

7. The Theology found in the Qur’an

8. Islam’s Spirituality

Part IV : Conclusion

Contents | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

Islamic Da’wah in North America

The Dynamics of Conversion to Islam in Western Societies

By Larry Allan Poston, Northwestern University (Dissertation for Doctor of Philosophy 1988)
Printed by: UMI, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Reviewed by Jay Smith

---

Introduction

[iii] Da’wah (“to call,” “to summon,” “to invite”) has two approaches:
1) “High-Church” (jihad), involving the conquest of nations, establishing Muslim institutions, and the conversion which came about over many generations, as they became enculturated to the new environment (used historically).
2) “Low-Church”, conversion of individuals, seeking to influence society from the bottom upwards (used today).
[3] Sura 16:125=The expansionist verse for Da’wah: “Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way.” Versus Sura 2:256, which prohibits compelling others to enter the Islamic faith (pg.6).
– Muhammad Khurshid: believed it was to be active, dynamic, progressive, to all individuals with the objective that everyone may submit to the will of Allah. His view is becoming increasing popular (pg.6)
[4] Isma’il al-Faruqi: believed our lifestyle was to be a powerful attraction, causing others to inquire, presupposing Muslims to be “devout” and immersed in society (a problem for No. Americans).
– Believes No. American Islam has acquiesced and compromised itself to U.S. culture, so must be brought back into the fold.
[7] Ahmad Sakr believes conversion of outsiders to Islam is prohibited, because there is no compulsion in religion.
[8] ‘ahl al-dhimma’ (protected persons) applies to Christians and Jews. Thus Da’wah is a form of resurgence or reformation within Islam alone.
[9] When Da’wah pertains to others, it is for correcting the distortions found in others theology, but thus be transformed into a Muslim sect (?).
[14] Survey-questionnaire met with much distrust, and hostility, so had to drop it.
[16] Black Muslims movement under Elijah Muhammad was only an “elitist ethnic movement”, not recognized by the rest of the world, but today, under Warith al-Din Muhammad, now has noteriety.

---

Chapt. One: 7th-19th Centuries

I Da’wah in the East

[20] Doubtful whether Muhammad intended a world-encompassing religion, but rather something succinctly Arab and monotheistic.
[21] Expedition to Tabuk in 630 and Transjordan raid, just before his death, are the beginnings of international endeavors.
– After the Riddah wars, the military forays began. Their chief aim was to convert men and women to Islam.
[24] In middle East and No. Africa the Muslim raiders (Mujahidun) were welcomed with open arms as liberators.
– The classical theory of Jihad demands that enemies must be given the option of converting to Islam or pay the Jizya Tax, before attacking them (Sura 17:15,
Sura 16:125), and Sahih al-Bukhari.
– Thus, Da’wah is preliminary to Jihad, an invitation to convert before the military quest was taken.
[26] “The role of temporal power in creating a total Islamic environment as a precondition of the fostering of the right attitude and state of mind in individuals” (Levtzion, “Toward a Comparative Study” pg.11)
[27] executive, judicial and legislative control ensures the missionaries that their work could go forward.
– Setting up the institutions such as: Masjid (religious agency), Madrasa (educational agency), Shari’a (legislative, economic structure, and court system), helped to persuade and pressure them to convert.
[30] In order to create an “Islamic ambience” (a surrounding, all-emcompassing atmosphere of Muslim religiousity that eventually appeared in every institution and at every level of society), political, economic and judicial control over the culture was essential. This would provide an ideological framework through which the precepts of Islam could be disseminated. It would also protect the “divines” (professional men of religion) or agencies of propagation of these teachings (p.48).
– Muslims needed to speak from a position of power; to be seen as superior because of their literacy, magical, and wealthy, a contrast with Christian proselytizers, who came into a foreign society as guests mostly, and so were seen as inferior.
[31] Commerce was used, as only Muslims could be admitted to the credit system. Divines came along with the traders to propagate Islam. They allowed the use of amulets and indigenous beliefs, adapting and contextualizing to the culture there. They could only speak from superior learning and miracles.
– Contextualization= “kernels of supracultural truth (absolutes) are re-packaged with trappings of the target culture to be understood by the indigenous population.”
[33] It was the Sufis who made real gains in non-Muslim territories, as they sought to pursue God in esoteric and individualistic means.
– Were against the worldliness of the Muslims as well.
[37] They began Tariqas between the 12th and 14th centuries which propagated Islam by individual and personal contact with the natives.
[40] Around 1250 A.D. the shift from an offensive to a defensive mode for Muslims came about. Consolidation was more the need.
[41] The Mongols came onto the scene, and this caused the Muslims to interpret this defeat as Allah showing judgment on them because of their worlkliness. The Mongols forced the Turks back to Turkey, where they consolidated there power for the

Ottoman empire

, while the descendants of Ghenghis Khan went into India and brought about the Mogul Empire. The new name for their soldiers were ghazis or “raiders.”
[48] -The message was concise (5 pillars), theological ideas such as Tawhid, and elements of Shari’a law, proved ints superiority to other religions. Any syncretism was seen as bida’, and heretical.
– The Ottomans tolerated the absorption of Greco-Christian thinking, while the Mogul rulers were universalistic, and so syncretistic. Akbar was so relaxed that he tolerated Dhimmi treatment (protected persons, usually reserved for Jews and Christians) for the polytheistic Hindus.
– From the 18th-19th centuries the orientation of Islam changed from offensive to defensive, and has remained so to this day.

II Da’wah in the West: North America

[52-56] 5 waves of immigration:
1) 1875-1912= individuals and families, mostly unskilled and uneducated Arabs fleeing from bad political and economic situations back home. Had to assimilate.
2) 1918-1922= from E. Europe and Middle East, after WW1 (assimilated).
3) 1930-1938= relatives and acqaintances of earlier immigrants.
4) 1945-1967= post WW2 displaced people from India, Pakistan, and E. Europe. Mostly ruling elite, educated, westernized, rich, thus avoided assimilation.
5) 1967-today= wealthy individuals or families, highly educated professionals from Pakistan or Arab world. Don’t clump together.
[58] Most Muslims are Black Muslims. But others are growing, and have renewed pride in their ethnic and religious heritage
[59] Estimated 5 million Muslims from 60 countries. Arabs=2 million, but 90% are Christian. Turks are the most secularized of the group.
[60] Most of the influence in the U.S. is by the Pakistani’s (who are the chief suppliers of imams, teachers, guest lecturers and teaching material), and the Arabs.
[62] Shi’ites=6%
[67] 2 kinds of Islamic Da’wa in U.S.: 1) Defensive Pacifist, 2) Offensive Activist
1) Defensive Pacifist:
– Dar al’Islam (Muslims) and Dar al’Harb or Dar al’Kufr (the unbelievers) were to keep away from each other except as visitors or for learning, thus only to be in their territory for a short time.
[70] Muslims first believed all military victories were indications of Gods favour. Then the Mongols defeat showed Gods judgment of their worldliness. But the defeat by Christians (Dhimmis) in the 19th century caused a problem.
– The response was to exhort Muslims to pursue and overtake the West by imitating it. Yet Islam has done just the opposite, trying to stifle science and stop its progress (Esposito: Islam in Transition, p.16).
[71-72] But those who sought to follow the example of the new theologians made it easy for many to come to the west, as now in the U.S. there were constitutionally guaranteed individual rights & religious freedom, not found in their own countries.
[74] The earlier Muslims mostly assimilated into the mainstream, married Christians and became such themselves, except for those who built the first mosque, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa (1934).
[75] Most Muslim organisations in U.S. are geared towards caring for the social affairs of each particular group, rarely proselytizing, but calling or exhorting nominal Muslims.
[78] Yet, no mosque or Islamic center has ever accomplished the objective of reviving Muslim populations.
[80] Christian missions was seen as “the leavening of the total life of the surrounding culture with the basic ideals of a Christian culture, thus creating a more favorable atmosphere in which direct missionary work can be done.” (Braden, “Islam in America”, p.317).
– This is different that ‘Muslim ambience’ as it is done without having political control, as guests in a country.
[81] In Muslim countries the govt. wants one religion only, that of Islam, to control society. In the U.S. the govt. maintains strict independance from religious control. Constitutionally it can neither further or establish any one religion, but protect all. Thus there are 3 appeals for expansion:
1) size (if everyone belongs, than I want to belong)
2) similarity (the tradition is in accordance with contemporary culture)
3) differentiation (culture is in decline, so rel. trad. is a viable alternative).
– Islam in No. American exhibits none of the above (except Black Islam).
[85] To alleviate the problem of knowledge for Muslims in U.S. volunteers are sent to Al-Hazar, but only a few who learn few answers for believers living in Dar al’ Kufr. U.S. Imams are from Saudi Arabia and Egypt, too strict with little English.
[89] Muslims in America are those: “whose past is a painful memory, however romantically expressed, whose present is comfortable and confused, and whose future is a boundless haze.” (Haider “Canadian Saturdays…” pg.38).
2) Offensive-Activist:
[89] Not many in U.S., and mostly amateurish, but they will be coming more popular.
[90] Two kinds:
1) Temporary foreign students, who have nothing to lose. They see the un-Islamic facets of American life, and attempt to change it.
– Some, who have never been activists in their own country become so here, out of a reaction, as they are forced to compare, or are questioned by Americans about their beliefs. They have a identity crisis, see lack of ethical lifestyle (high crime, drugs, and pornography), get a sense of mission with purpose and meaning, and so work to introduce the superior Islamic values (pg.91).
2) New immigrants (25,000-35,000 per year). Come with reformist and activist ideologies (espoused by Ikhwan al-Muslimun).
[93-94] Isma’il al-Faruqi, in his “Islamic Vision”, speaks of 5 reasons for Muslims who come to the U.S. to be Offensive-Activists: (“Islamic Ideals” pg.268)
1) -must assuage any guilt for coming as immigrants, because God was leading them to become a da’iyyah, or ‘Missionary.’
2) -by seeing the U.S. through Islamic eyes, he will see that the U.S. is not so great, but quite inferior.
3) -the immigrant is given a feeling of being personally called by Allah to call all non-Muslims to Islam, in word as well as deed.
4) -the Islamic vision would provide the immigrant with necessary criteria for transforming this culture to conform to will of God.
5) -a deep attachment for the U.S. is given to see it become a nation finally returned to God.
[95-99] The immigrant is to constantly focus on his homeland, so that he will one day return there, and, as well, not be assimilated into the U.S.
– Yet, must not be isolationist, but “participate” in the culure (Maher Hathout: “Muslim Americans Dilemna, pg.48).
– Schools must be in accord with the Shari’a law: strict dress code, separation of the sexes, non-participation in plays & proms, or Christmas, Easter, Halloween, and St. Valentines day. Exemption from classes on Fri. (1-2p.m.) and 15 break each afternoon. No pork in meals.
– “An Open letter to the President” blames Zionism for political U.S. problems.

---

Chapter II: Towards Islamic Pietism

I “High Church” and “Low Church” Strategies in Religious Proselytization

[100-103] Conquest of the world requires strategies which may work in one part of the world but not in another.
–Two categories for entry of missionary agent:
1) Upper, authoritative level, by the executive, legislative, judicial
economic, and bureaucratic structures.
2) Lower, subject level, among the masses.
1)Upper level: high-church groups, are heirarchical, with formal and structured liturgy, controlled by officials (status), believing in the amillennialist approach to the Kingdom of God, that the Church had responsibility to bring it in. Thus religious and political spheres are bound together. (i.e.=Constantine, Holy Roman Empire, Crusades, and Conquistadores).
[105-106] Colonialism by the west was somewhat due to a desire for natural resources, and power, but the wider reason was the belief that “their nations had been divinely commissioned to transmit the Christian principles underlying Western civilization and in so doing produce a like civilization in non-Christian lands.”
– “It has to be remembered that in the 19th century the alternatives for many peoples were not independence and enslavement, but destruction by unscrupulous exploiters or through the slave trade, or the possibility of survival in a state of colonial dependence. They found the people divided, poor and barbarous, and left them united, prosperous and on their way to taking their places in the councils of the nations of the world.” (Neil History, pg.249)
– Since the enlightenment, religious beliefs have been relegated to the private sphere, and so there is no need to establish the physical kingdom of God.
[107-111] In Islam, the high-church missiology is quite evident, as there is a definite heirarchy (caliphal office), formal liturgyand beliefs (brings efficacy, in that one who prays 5 times washes the sins away-S. Imtiaz Ahmed, on the prophet).
Also the idea of a material kingdom to be established is strong.
– Political conquest brought about Islamic ambience, which allowed Islam to gradually pervade the culture at all levels, and thus make conversin more socially acceptable.
– Muslims always operated from a position of superiority, and conversion to Islam became a culturally positive phenomenon.
– In a newly Muslimized country, “traders could improve their credit, government bureaucrates could retain their offices, nobility could hold on to their property, if they became Muslims” (Levtzion in “Comparative studies” pg.9-11).
– A. Bausani states: “the truth of Islam is not, or not chiefly, a
theoritical truth, but also and prevalently las and customs
felt as given by God, and obvioulsy cannot be spread through personal conversion but only through physical conquet of the
region to be converted.”
(Bausani, from Whalings “Missionary Transplantation”, pg. 331, from a lecture given in 1972 at the University of London).
[112-116] What should those in the U.S. do? Sura 16:125 states: “Call unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation.” A call for Da’wah.
2 options: 1)abandon the mission because it is too impracticable in the U.S.
2)abandon the traditional missiological approach.

2 models:
a)Educational model, vs. military model. Bring in the Islamic world-view within the educational system, 1st to Muslims schools, then non-Muslim ones.
-i.e.=International Institute of Islamic Thought in No.Va. suburb of Wash. D.C. has taken the idea to recast university disciplines, by eliminating, amending, reinterpreting, and adapting its components to the Islamic world-view.
[118-126] b)Low-Church model= PIETISM. Modeled after Philipp Jakob Spener (1648). Focus must be on the Christians experience, upon his deeds, lifestyle, and morality. Using Romans 13:1-7, he felt Christians were not to be bedded with government, accepting all govts. as from God, even when they are evil, “just as a jewel remains a jewel, whether it is in the hands of an honest man or a thief.”
-History operates on two dimensions:
1) the physical/earthly dimension (political, economical, and social control), where kingdoms and empires rise and fall (according to the dictates of Gods permissive will-Catholic & Reformed), and
2) the metaphysical/spiritual dimension, in which lie the truly important aspects of life: spiritual regeneration, moral transformation of the individual, sanctification and the spreading of the Gospel.

Pietests distinctives:
a)-Aimed at individual conversion at the level of the masses.
b)-They then were expected to experience a new life-style, which would, in turn, have a leavening effect upon society in general (redemption and lift).
c)-According to Luke 17:21 and John 18:36, the emphasis is on the internal life of the Christian, and a separation of church and state.
-Now, no need for earthly security by a govt. for proselytizing, as was seen by the Catholics and Anglicans.
d)-Christianization, because of its emphasis on individual conversion, would occur from the level of the masses upward, as against the structures downward.
[126-132] Sufis also espoused a similar view as the Pietists.
a)-Focused on internal experiences rather than external observances. Had a strong distaste for doctrinal controversies, materialistic lifestyles, and the affairs of state. They became ascetic, and isolationists, however, and so undercut any missionary orientation.
b)-advocated an activist approach to sanctification and spiritual growth. -The idea of a military Jihad was rejected and replaced with a Jihad against personal wishes and sensual desires, thus spiritualizing it. For this rea- son Sufis were able to move outside Dar al-Islam and spread their ideas amongst the Dar al-Kufr. Allah was their provider and sustainer, instead of political entities.
**-Believed in the Jihad al-lisan or Jihad al-qalam= the Holy War of the tongue or pen (Peters, Islam and Colonialism, pg.119). (pg.130 for other sources).
c)-allowed for an eschatological motivation in the form of the Mahdi (the “guided one”), who would appear at the end times, to spread Islam in all the earth.
– This gave the Muslims (Sufis) a sense of purpose and mission.
Thus, “Sufism provides an alternative in the form of low-church missiology which aims at the conversion of individual persons within society followed by training in Islamic precepts, which will in turn enable each convert to induce further conversions.” (132)

II Hasan Al-Banna and Abul A’la Mawdudi: Pioneers of Modern Islamic “Pietism”

[135] Two movements using low-church methodology: 1)Hasan al-Banna’ (1906-1949)
2)Abul a’la Mawdudi (1903-1979)

[135-146] A) Hasan al-Banna’ and the “al-nizam al-islami”: (Egyptian)
– Founded the Hasafi Welfare Society, to build up a high moral character and to curb the activities of the Christian missionaries in Egypt. Assasinated at age 42.
Objectives were: a) To make every individual a true Muslim.
b) Develope the Muslim family on Islamic lines.
c) Establish a Muslim ‘umma (community).
d) Establish an Islamic state in Egypt.
note: al-Banna’ begins at the level of the masses and works upwards, whereas Levtzion’s model works the reverse direction.
– He sent students to coffee-houses, and public places to preach Islam, asked people to shun coffee, story-telling, and idle activities, & invited them to Islam.
– Believed Islam regulated every aspect of life, and established an “Islamic Order” al-nizam al-islami, which would in turn act as a leavening agent for society.
– Every Muslim was, like a khalifa, much like our ‘priesthood of believers.’
– The Muslims lot in this world was to be subordinate to his mission, in order to gain a reward in the next life for his self-sacrifice.
– His appeal was to the young, who had “nothing to lose”.
– Problem: there was an absense in his writings of a precisely defined model for the brotherhood’s goals. No way was given to achieve the 4 above objectives.
[147-162] B) Abul A’la Mawdudi and the “Jama’at-i Islami” (India and Pakistan)
– Born in India, and later moved to Pakistan, was influenced by Sufi teaching by his father. Was a journalist and editer of Taj. Became an activist, rebeling against traditional ways, a voice of dissent.
– Believed best way was to create a small, informed, dedicated and disciplined group, to transform the world to Islam.
– Began with Muslims, seeking to purify them, using Sura 2:143. Believed that: “the transformation of the political, economic and social institutions could only be achieved by transformed individuals.” (pg.150) (see Khurram Murad on Muradi, pg.27)
– Established in 1941, the Jama’at-i Islami (Islamic movement) 7 phases:
1) The da’i, made up of individuals from the masses, should expect to find trials and persecution in their work. They are to go out and “draw to the light” those bound to them by kinship, friendship, neighbors, buyers, and sellers. Not be isolationists.
2) Those who came were to go to training camps, to be purified, and prepared for their new mission.
3) The group was made up small groups of transformed individuals, who assuaged the severity of the present trials (Dunya=this world) by looking toward the rewards of the hereafter (akhira=hereafter). The focus was inward.
4) From these groups elected officials got appointed to office in the state.
5) They then had institutional control of the state.
6) The state then would implement decisions for the populace for Islam.
7) An Islamic ambience would be instilled, as the trasformation of a significant number of individuals would effect changes in the structures.
8) A new awakening in the populace, would affect the masses (see page 159).
– Problem came about, when the above was implemented, because little attention was given to more practical and mundane aspects of the Islamic state; a failure to consider the working out of principles and applications. “Technique, which has been of supreme importance in the West since the Industrial revolution, finds little to commend it in the Muslim world.” (162)
[162-167] For Christian Pietists, the lifestyle serves only as supportive of the verbal witness, rather than being a witness in and of itself.
– Mawdudi and al-banna’ felt the methods are not important so long as the life of the communicator is in order. All one need do is display it.
– The teachings of Mawdudi and Al-banna’ have entered the U.S. in 3 ways:
a) the influx of immigrants from Egypt and Pakistan
b) the Muslim Student Association founded in 1963, at Univ. of Ill., Urbana, all founding members belonging to the Muslims brotherhood of Al-banna’.
-The Islamic Society of North America, came out of this group and relects the writings of Mawdudi and Al-banna’.
c) through the speeches and writings of Khurram Murad, a disciple of Mawdudi, residing in Great Britain, who writes of Da’wah in the west.
– 80% of U.S. Islamic Da’wah writings are by or about al-Banna’ and Mawdudi.

III Khurram Murad: Contextualization of the Islamic Movement for the West

(168-189) -Indian, born in 1932, went to Pakistan in 1948, and joined the Islamic Movement under Mawdudi. Received Master of Science in Michigan, U.S., and in 1978 became director of Islamic Foundation, based in Leicester, England. His booklets and speeches are considered as standard for Islamic workers in Britain and the U.S.
*“Islamic Movement in the West: Reflections on some Issues” (1981)
“Da’wah among Non-Muslims in the West: Some Conceptual and Methodological
Aspects” (1986).
– For him the Islamic Movement is “an organized struggle to change the existing society into an Islamic Society based on the Qur’an and the Sunna, and make Islam, which is a code for the entire life, supreme and dominant” (“Islamic movement” 1981)
– Methodology is low-church, done by locals using Al-‘Imran 3:187 and 110, al-Baqarah 5:159-160 and al-Hajj 22:77-78 as his authority.
– Thus, for Muslims in the U.S., they must “fix the whole direction of their lives, activities, programs, institutions and structures towards the goal of making American society Islamic and Muslim.” (Murad “3rd Opportunity,” pg.10). “Every non-Muslim is a potential Muslim.”
– Murads Strategy involved:
1) Literature, to proclaim message of Islam & aimed at the non-Muslim mind.
2) Da’wah amongst non-Muslims:
a) People are invited back to their “own religion.” Judaism and Chris- tianity, in their original form were the same as Islam today, but were corrupted purposely or by accident, thus making it necessary for a renewal by Muhammad.
b) Begin with full surrender to Allah; to have justice in the world.
c) Must begin their witness by showing the commonalities between the be- liefs (found in Al-‘Imran 3:64); emphasis on concepts and values vs. Islamic forms.
d) No-one must accept the historical Islam of the last 14 centuries, but should accept the Islam of the Qur’an and the Sunna.
e) Evil of modern man should be partially blamed on Islam, because they have not given a good witness, and so let the Kafirsgo astray.
f) A Kafir= a rebel against God. He is not ignorant of his Creator. So everyone to be witnessed within their context, by others of his kind (HUP principle)
g) Since each prophet spoke in the vernacular, and in their context, a Muslim must do so today (Contextualization necessary), to make the message relevant.
3) Support Home movements by stimulating the Islamic movements at home.
4) Create appreciation for Islam amongst children of immigrants.
5) Create appreciation for Islam amongst foreign Muslim students.
6) Resolve Community Needs amongst the Muslim communities by setting up community centers for Muslims to help them, and give added schooling to children.
7) Co-ordinate thinking, planning and action between the various Muslim groups in the U.S. or whatever foreign country they find themselves.
– Murad believed that the primary reason for problems within the Muslim communites in foreign lands is because they no longer are involved in missionary activity. If they would concentrate on Da’wah, the problems would evaporate.
– “Da’wah is a command to be obeyed, a strategy to be implemented, and an activity to be performed.” (189)

IV The Muslim Missionary Today (190-211)

Islam has not produced highly-organised missionary agencies, as in Christ- ianity, due to the belief that all Muslims are “Da’is,” & so automatically share.
Muhammad Kurshid (Texas) believes Da’wah should be amongst the rich: exhibit that what Muslims say is true, evince boldness in lifestyle, and a practical inde- pendent testimony, even to martyrdom. Arabic is to be used only after conversion, for training, as it attracts the hearer.
Emphasis is on: Laicization, lifestyle, and education. Kurshid feels all methods must: communicate to the hearer, be simple, plain, clear, goal-oriented, global, without antagonism, creating an atmosphere to talk on the listeners level.
Rashid al-Ghanoushi (Tunisia) feels a moral lifestyle is not an issue for U.S.
Fathi Yakan (Lebanese), holds to 3 emphasis’ above, but believes it must be amongst the poor, and involve “al-isti’ab” (“full and total comprehension”=context- ualisaton). Be “Cultural Chameleons”, understanding the settings and weaknesses of the hearers, to communicate, comprehensibly, Islam to them. Borrowed from x-tians.
Problems: No way to help the masses to learn these precepts. The Manual of Da’wah for Islamic Workers is not comprehensive, poorly written, and has a strong anti-Christian polemic(210). Only a few professional “Da’is” in the U.S. now.

---

Chapter III: The Institutionalization of Da’wah in the Western Context

I “Para-mosque” structures and Their Development

Intro: (212-226)

– Def.=”Para-church” or “Para-mosque” is any spiritual ministry whose organization is not under the authority of a local (Christian/Muslim) congregation or body.
– Problems: no accountability, no support of local church, duplication & non coordination of resources, and built around a central figure.
2 Muslim examples: Hasan al-Banna, and Abul A’la Mawdudi.
In west, the mosque has taken on a different feature, much like a church (visiting, counselling, prayer-room, educational center, political forum, & social hall). Thus, Imams must play role they never were trained for.
– So, no over-arching authority, no checks and balances to prevent the forming of self-interested, and blatantly heretical sects, breaking down “umma.” (221)
– Most Islamic institutions in U.S. are defensive in orientation. There were several attempts to propagate the “gospel of Islam” but many (if not most) were unsuccessful and were abandoned within a few years of their inception.” (226)
– “They failed to grasp the nature of western society & its dynamics, mostly ethnic groups, with emphasis on preserving their cultural identity” (Arabia-226)

A The Islamic Information Center of America (227-231)
Musa Qutub, Quaker educated, from Jerusalem, established the Center, in 1983, with John Merenkov, an American Doctor. 3 objectives:
1) deliver the message of Islam
2) inform non-Muslims about Islam
3) aid U.S. Muslims to deliver the message to others.
– goals fulfilled by: contacting people, giving lectures, conducting seminars, writings, giving out Qur’ans, using T.V., radio, and Newspaper.
– no governmental connection, non-profit, and lay-oriented
– depends on contributions; donaters will receive rewards, up to 700 times.
– Qutub seeks to give viable spiritual alternative to dissatisfied Americans. No debate or discussions, but do so for the love of Americans.

B The Muslim Student Assoc.(MSA) & Islamic Soc.of No.America (ISNA) (231-245)
Started in 1963, some 75 students, at Urbana campus in Illinois formed the MSA, to improve students’ knowledge of Islam, perpetuate the Islamic Spirit, explain Islam to Americans, and help the restoration of Islam in students home countries.
– In 1983, 310 student chapters with more than 45,000 members (MSA & USA p.63).
– MSA’s magazine is “Al-Ittihad”, ISNA’s is Islamic Horizons (The Muslims answer to ‘Christianity Today’, edited by U.S. graduates of the Medill School of Journalism). Has good quality.
– “Know your MSA” brochure states: “the most important task is da’wah among non-Muslims, as the campus is where the most curious, the most inquisitive, and most open-minded audience for Islam.”
– Other groups: Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS), the Association of Muslim Scientists and Engineers (AMSE), and the Islamic Medical Association (IMA) Islamic Book Service (Muslim writings & videos), & Islamic Teach. Cent. (activist organiza- tion preparing workers with lectures, correspondance courses, & training camps (238)
– Recommended reading: Yusuf ‘Ali’s Qur’an, Malik’s Al-Muwatta, ‘Abd al-Ati’s Islam in Focus, and Abul A’la Mawdudi’s Towards Understanding Islam.
– MSA has $21 million building with 124 acres of land, for a mosque of 1500, and library of 80,000 volumes, in Plainfield, Indiana (near Indianapolis).
– MSA is N.America’s leading activist agency, the backbone of ISNA (241).
– “Long characterized by immaturity, American Muslims are now being co-ordinated and refined by an influx of indigenous converts to Islam and by the steadily-rising level of education of its leaders.” (244)
– Murrad wants U.S. as a “Muslims continent, teaching Islam in Public schools, on the Qur’anic Morality and Ethics, political and economic development” (245).

C Rabitat al-Alam al-Islami (The Muslim World League) (245-249)
Founded by the Saudi Arabian govt. in 1962, “to combat the influence of Nasser and Islamic Socialism.” (Haddad-Muslims in Canada).
– Low-church organization, dedicated to Da’wah in those countries where Islam is a minority religion.
– Functions: assists Islamic centers, youth camps, summer schools, provides teachers and imams, develops prison min., fellowships and grants for Univ. profes- sors, produces T.V. & radio programs, and Muslims newspapers (Sakr-Isl.conf.)
– Muhammad Ali al-Harakan felt World League was to “perform the obligation of jihad, to propagate Allah’s religion…” (248).
– League is moving more firmly into the activist camp (249).

D Sh’ite Organizations (Islamic societies of Georgia and Virginia (249-254)
– population of Shi’ites is quite small in U.S. Yasin T. Al-Jibouri from Atlanta was imam of the Islamic Center of Atlanta, until they found he was from the Jafari school of Law.
– Most Shi’ite converts are black in the U.S. Literature comes from Iran (World Organization for Islamic Services) and East Africa (Bilal Muslim Missions of Tanzania and Kenya).
– Much more politically oriented than that of Sunni’s, due to the inferiority complex inherent in minority groups (253).

E Islamic Circle of North America ICNA (Canada) (254-257)
– established in Montreal in 1971. It is a well-developed group, with evangelical intent (255). Put together Manual of Da’wah for Islamic Workers. Is poorly written, with bad grammar and style. Stresses Door-to-door canvassing.

F The Ahmadiyya (Non-Orthodox Organization) (257-262)
– Calls itself the “True Islam” but is seen as heretical by other Muslims.
– Founded by Ghulam Ahmad, born in 1839, to a well off family in Qadian, India.
– Had visions and dreams; that he was appointed mujaddid (renewer). By 1891 took on title of Khalifa, and saw himself as Christian’s Messiah and Hindu’s Krishna (258), thus was repudiated by other Muslims.
– Ahmad castigated both Christians and Muslims.
– His eccentric personality and teachings of Jihad were attractive to many. Holy War, he felt was wrong, and Islam was to preach “with reasoning and heavenly signs.” (Inniger, p.160)
– Ghulam Ahmad came to Chicago in 1920, with Mufti Muhammad Sadiq, borrowed freely strategies of Christians. As of 1981, there were 26 (jamaats-chap-ters), run from Pakistan, with missionaries serving 10 yrs. (Richardson, Islamic Cultures).
-7-year course for missionaries at Punjab univ., including: linguistics, world religions, contextualization, apologetics, mass media, doctrines. (261)
– Every adherent must give 1/16th of income, thus many frugal missionaries, using American strategies: “blitz” campaigns and city-wide evangeliz. programs (262)

G Other Para-Mosque Organizations and Strategies (262-270)
– Many Muslim Organizations fail to contextualize their message, giving cultural interests a higher priority than the interests of the Muslim community.
– “No Muslims organization or institution established in the West has made any serious effort to make a systematic study of the west in order to develop a meaningful dialogue with its leading institutions.”
– A lack of capable leaders, not well educated, either in religion or in secular culture, read no western books or newspapers, with views of the west from “literature which originated in their countries some 30-40 years ago.” (268)
– “Incompetency and lack of education of leaders, makes it unable to produce competent followers.”
– “The programs which do exist are said to consist of little more than recita- tions of verses from the Qur’an which are intended to inspire the aspiring worker to perform da’wah activity.”
– “There is a complete lack of self-evaluation on the part of Missionaries, and none of the organizations encourage criticism or discussion, due to feelings of inferiority. Thus one must assume para-mosque agencies are making very litte progress in their mission of bringing Islam to North America.” (269)

II Para-Mosque Strategies and Methodologies; Intro: (270-278)

– Want to define the strategies and methodologies of the “offensive-activist” Muslims involved in Da’wah in No. America.
– Only the Ahmadiyya movement borrows an evangelical approach of evangelism without apology for its ‘Moorish Temple Foundation.’
– By 1959, the Ahmadiyya had 500 converts, 30% orientals, 5-10% of Muslim extraction, the remaining negroes, and only 5-10% white.
– *”The chief appeal of the (Ahmadiyya) movement lay in its presentation of Islam as non-discriminatory with regard to race, as a simple and rational religion and as a viable alternative to Negroes dissatisfied with their treatment at the hands of Christian churches.” (274)
– “It is generally conceded among Sunni and Shi’ite groups that imitation of Christian practices is unacceptable for Muslim workers.”
– Islahi forbids borrowing because of a situation he knew of in India, in which a Muslim leader allegedly “adopted a christian practice in urging “Muslim whores” in Delhi to preach Islam to their non-Muslim customers.” (Islahi-Call to Islam, pg.13)
– Isma’il al-Faruqi prefers to adopt “lifestyle Evangelism”, so that it would attract the non-Muslims to Islam.
-Fathi Yakan is scathing in his denunciation of lifestyle concept, in that it “guarantees nothing, it is slow, and it has little effect, and is an aspect of the Christian missionary approach.” (Yakan, Isl.Move. p.111)
– Akbar Muhammad agrees but says: “American converts of Islam, who of necessity must experience some form of conversion, are infinitely more effective in their proselytization efforts than are those who boast Muslim parentage or ancestry…they seek to produce an experience in others which duplicates their own, and this lends an effectivety to their efforts which is not observable in the case of “lifestyle” advocates.” (Akbar Muhammad, Some factors…pg.41-43)

A “Lifestyle Evangelism” (278-289)
1) –Muhammad Imran says: “Take Islam to the West not by pulpit preaching or mailing Islamic literature, but by doing what Muslims ought to do, living, drinking, eating, sleeping and behaving as Muslims are enjoined to do.” (Imran,15)(presence)
– It is more comfortable, not necessary for the witness to actually confront a targeted individual, and thus run the risk of trauma or scorn, and rejection. (279)
– Yakan mentions: “the humble da’i is the one who lives together with the people, receives the people, speaks…visits…loves…serves…is bonded…and lives for others, not for himself…rejoices at the happiness of others.” (Yakan 45)
– Personal contact with a devout adherent of a religious faith is nearly always instrumental. (281)
– “In order to produce a witness that will pinpoint Islam as the root cause of one’s lifestyle orientation, some intellectual interaction must inevitably occur.”
-One must be aware of the doctrines of Tawhid and Muhammad, and have intel lectual contact before religious commitment can occur (proclamation-183).
2) -Some believe Muslim education is a middle approach between the two.
– Robert Crane advocates a “databank” where one could ask any question on politics, economics, law, morality etc.. and instantaneously receive an “Islamic” answer or solution. 20 “Ummatic Scholars” would work 20 years compiling the info.
– Islamic institutions must be established as alternatives to secular schools. Not to seperate Muslims from non-Muslims, but an invitation for all to receive info.
– Children would be exposed to Islamic teachings.
– Problem: whereas Catholic and Fundamental schools are an acceptable alternative in U.S., Islamic schools would not be. (289)

B Activistic Preaching (290-312)
aslama=submitting to Allah, kafara=refusing Allahs demands.
-Allal al-Fasi from Sura 16:125 draws 3 principles, the 2nd of which is: “gentle preaching with reasonable and acceptable ideas which will attract the people.”
– Islahi speaks of 7 principles for Da’is: a)begin with own people, b)quality greater than quantity, c)clear, self-evident, dignified and effective call, d)present arguments, e)exhibit uniformity, f)never be antagonistic, g)regard for the feelings of others (Islahi).
– Ahmadiyya’s are the most practiced in arranging seminars, and debates. Billy Graham refused to debate in early 70’s, “showing his cowardice” (294).
– Public halls are preferred, because general populace would come to them.
– Lectures and Seminars are shunned by non-Muslims.
Dialogues: 4 types: 1)Discursive dialogue=intellectual inquiry, with sympathy for each person’s position.
2)Human dialogue=stress on humanity of individuals, & the I-thou relation ship
3)Secular dialogue=recognition of man’s situation, and joint concern and action to rectify it.
4)Interior dialogue=emphasis on the mystical contemplative tradition, rather than intellectualization (296)
– According to the Islamic Circle, Da’is should: develop friendships, engage in dialogue, present concepts of Tawhid, prophethood of Muhammad, the Day of judgment, and explanations of the erroneous teachings of Christianity. (Manual of Da’wah,21)
– Steve Johnson believes dialogues should include diverse Christian groups to show the diversity of Christianity vs. the unity of Islam. (Johnson Pg.21)
– Muhammad Khurshid is against dialogue because its very spirit is not to unravel truth, but to create a myriad of confusion and enigma. He believes “nothing short of direct, confrontational preaching is acceptable…because according to the rules of propriety, (in a dialogue) the da’i must relinquish the freedom to preach which is his by right of Allah’s appointment of the Muslim ‘ummah, to be “witnesses” unto mankind. A Muslim does not bandy words with unbelievers; “his sole aim is to convince any and every person of the Truth.” (Kurshid)
– Door-to-door is not acceptable, as it invades privacy, not cold-turkey, but visiting other Muslims by appointment. (300)
– Maryam Jameelah (American convert) feels Small study circles in private homes, especially for women, with their close female friends and small children is an option.
– Offensive-activists are only a small fraction of the Muslim population, because evangelism is perceived as 1)a violation of the Qur’an’s non-compulsion directive, and 2) difficult due to the inability of speaking English by many Muslims who are the most active (new immigrants-those contrasting the spiritual atmosphere of their homes, and the religious poverty of the west). (301)
– Youth camps and summer schools also advocated, but for other Muslims.
Prison Ministries are highly effective, as prisoners are technically a “displaced people” & therefore more susceptible to religious transformation. The Islamic Teaching Center, in 1981, contacted 4,000 inmates in 310 prisons, and enrolled more than 500 in Islamic Correspondance courses.
– Black Muslim movement “had been criticized for its heretical tendencies and that Blacks commonly viewed Islam as something other than merely a personal faith to be adopted in pietistic fashion (303). It appeals to blacks by presenting Islam as an African religion and therefore the Black Man’s religion, in contrast to Christianity, identified with the White man, oppressive, and the originator of the ‘darkie slave’ phenomenon. (304)
– In 1974, suggestion was made to study foreign missionary techniques to establish Islamic broadcasting stations.(305)
– Literature is used by all the groups to further Islam and their causes.

C Contextualization Struggle (312-320)
Muslims have been negligent in studying the west
Rashid Al-Ghanoushi states: “Islamic literature needs to transcend the stage of idealsim..which does not go beyond generalizations whose relationship to the environment of da’wah hardly varies from place to place or from one age to another…rendering Islamic ideology an empty or vacuous form, with no basis in actual facts” (Ghanoushi,p.13)
– He believes this neglect is fear of bida’, the introduction of Islamic heresy.
-Sharafuddin Murghani suggests they “observe the Sufis, who are a major force behind conversion to Islam in Britain…and that to understand people, one must either rule them or get right into their culture for long time.” (Murghani-p.46)
– Both Islahi and Khurshid stress the need to address Da’wah to the influential people, who will in turn reform the common people.
– Fathi Yakan disagrees, believing it must be done among the poor (317-318)

D 100% Mobilization of the Muslim “Umma” (320-323)
All Muslims are responsible, but not all can be involved to the same degree. 3 categories: 1)those who have the best abilities, 2)whose abilities hover between strength and weakness, and 3)those whom natural abilities appear non-existent.

E Dilemna of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) for Da’wah

Qur’an is ambivalent on this issue.
– Musa Qutub: “Da’wah should not be to the people of the book, but rather to “those who have gone astray.” (324)
-The Ahmadiyya, interpret Sura 46:28 as indicative that Islam was meant to prevail over all other religions.
– Muzzamil Siddiqui concurs, stating that “the People of the Book are kafirun, and that Muslims are therefore obligated to perform da’wah among them.” (325)

F Training
Ahmad Shafaat studied Christian Missionary methods and wrote about it in his Missionary Christianity and Islam. Shows Muslims what Christians do, by examining missionary manuels, answering the assertions point by point. Focuses on doctrine of abrogation (that it is in Bible as well), and the true concept of God (as being only monotheistic). (Shafaat,p.5)
-Materials for training Da’is are inadequate, using archaic suggestions, and misunderstanding Christian theology, with flaws on the treatment of Protestantism.

G Issue of Leadership

Muslim leaders in the west are not well-read in Western literature or culture.
Khurshid: “Whoever found himself thrown out of the world of competition and endeavor, became satisfied by becoming the imam of a local masjid and kept on beating about the bush, with no vision and without knowledge.” (Khurshid,pg.32)
– Leadership based on the following of Islamic principles and ideals is flawed because principles and ideals must be both created and modelled by exemplary individuals if they are to have a lasting effect. (336)
Robert Crane suggests a solution would be to design an Islamically-formed educational system. (336)
– 3 options: 1)using immigrants who were trained in their own country. But are they willing to serve, have practical experience in Da’wah, and do they acculturate to U.S. easily? 2)utilize visiting lecturers, but do they understand English, and know how to acculturate the message to U.S.? 3)send American Muslims overseas, but there is lack of volunteers, language difficulties, problems of adjustment, and inapplicability of teaching methods for the American situation.

III Contemporary Apologetics: The Literature of Proselytization

– Muslims almost exclusively rely on the printed word, and so have produced an imposing array of literary works. But, they have not come up with the number of tracts and small booklets which Christian evangelicals use for their “plan of salvation”. The Literature used by the da’is is necessarily more intricate since in Islam “Salvation” is not obtained by following a three or four step formula, as is done in evangelical Christiandom. (340)
– Most books are by Hasan al-Banna’, Abul A’la Mawdudi, and Khurram Murad.
–3 booklets for New Muslims by Mawdudi:
1)Towards Understanding Islam, an explanation of the 5 pillars.
2)Islam: An Historical Perspective, a panoramic view of history by Muslims,
3)What Islam Stands for, a continuation of the former, with a view of Islam as being universalitic and holistic. These three are geared for the new convert, and not non-believers.
–3 writings for seekers:
1)“Islam at a Glance”, emphasizing Islam as the only true religion, explaining 5 pillars, the Qur’an, hadith and Tawhid.
2)“Ten unique features of Islam”: a)the only religion given its name by its prophet, b)the only religion with any sense or outlook on life, c)the only religion with a multi-purpose institution (mosque) for religious, social, educational and political community needs, d)the only religion with divine and democratic institu- tions, e)the only religious book (Q ur’an) which was unaltered, f)the prophet Muhammad, alone has a historical significance, g)the only religion which gives a platform from which to overthrow oppressive powers, h)the only religion with plain & simple teachings, and i)there are no large-scale defections in its history (345)
-all claims are debatable, some quite false.
–*”What the Muslim authors have failed to do is deal adequately with Protestantism, which is the more influential sect on the North American continent. The Christianity being opposed here is in the main, Roman Catholicism. Many of the “unique features” would not appear unique at all to a Protestant.” (346)
3)The Islamic Correspondance Course: 11 unit study of basic principles of Islam, 247 pages, with lots of doctrine and history, of most value to a new convert.
– Ahmad Shafaat writes The Gospel According to Islam, about the 93 verses about Jesus, showing Muhammad as the messenger of God denied by Christians (Shafaat-intro)
-Ahmad Deedat, born in Gujarat, raised in Durban, South Africa, had discussions with missionaries of evangelical American mission there, and set about to answer their questions.
-In 1958 founded the Islamic Propagation center, which puts out books and videos to combat Christian proselytization. His main encounters, and much of his literature deals with Jehovahs Witnesses, and 7th Day Adventists and Worldwide Church of God.
-Deedats successor is Yusuf Buckas, a young South African lawyer.
– “The IPC aims not at the scholarly Christian who is familiar with the argu- ments against the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures and the Deity of Christ, but rather those who are not deeply grounded in their faith and to the uncommitted.” (352)

IV The Anti-Christian Polemic

“The concept of the ‘ahl al-dhimma (protected persons, usually used as a synonym for ‘ahl al-kitab) grew out of a situation in which Islam was a superior ideology by right of conquest. This is not the case in the contemporary world in which Islam, despite the fact that its adherents constitute a fifth of the world’s population, holds a position of a minority as well as being inferior with respect to the West in matters of technology and economic and social development.” (353)
“Many of the most recent works attack Christian missionary activity as being politically oriented; it is generally believed that Christians seek to dominate Muslims politically, economically and culturally as well as religiously. The idea of a purely spiritual motive for proselytization does not appear to have credence and this is not difficult to understand, given the traditional inability on the part of Muslims to divide between the spiritual and material realms. Missionary endeavors are interpreted…under the concept of Jihad, but the term used is “crusaders”, a continuation of the medieval incursions of Europeans into the Middle East in the 15th century, with aims at the total annihilation of Islam as a world religion.” (355-356)
– Examples of this are seen in Samuel Zwemers writings: “…before we can establish Christianity in the hearts of Muslims we must destroy (hadama) Islam in their souls…the destruction of Islam in the soul of a Muslim implies the destruction of the religion in general.” (Al-Jindi,p.27) (356)

-“Zwemer can therefore speak of ‘the destruction of the religion in general’ and mean only the religion, but to the Muslim this would be tantamount to annihilation of his external environment.” (357)

-Therefore Zwemers “destruction of the religion in general” implies for a Muslim that which the term “holocaust” today connotes for a Jew.
– Many Muslims reiterate commonly that Paul, and not Jesus, was the actual founder of the Christian religion, and came up with ideas such as the trinity, the crucifixion, the resurrection. (Ahmad Deedat, Cruci-fiction, p.1)
– Thus Hasan Al-Banna’ felt that “the missionary…was the major ‘agent’ of cultural imperialism.” (358)
– Maryam Jameelah writes against Westernization and Christianity in her book Islam Versus Ahl al-Kitab (see pp.398-399 =how Jesus would reject x-tianity and choose Islam when he returns). She has no academic credentials, but popular (361)
– Ahmad Deedat receives $10,000 renumeration, has vitriolic style. Says in his “Roman Catholicism” brochure-1985 “Now, for the conquest of Britain for Islam” (363)
– Is critical of recent missiological strategies, calling Josh Mcdowell “sick”, for whom “every trick in the bag is permissible to clinch a convert for christ” (Deedat-Crucifiction,p.76). Tells readers to: “take the wind out of the mission- aries’ sail. You can CRACK HIS SKULL, exactly as young David…did.” (Cruci-p.59)
– Notice Deedats use of words to describe missionaries: “…merciless mission- ary punched the wind out of the Muslim with snide remarks…the hot gospeller, the door to door peddler of Christianity and the shameless insulter of Islam…I humbly undertook…from the assaults of Christians.” (Deedat-Bible God’s, p.62)
Ata’ullah Siddiqi in his “Islam and Missions” criticizes the missionaries contextual approach as less honest when they call themselves “followers of Isa”, and churches as “Masjid Isa”, hoping to fool the Muslims (364).

---

Chapter IV: The Dynamics of Conversion to Islam

I Religious Conversion: The Traditional Western Paradigm (pgs.367-394)

I Conversion to Christianity

William James, James H.Leuba, and Edwin Starbuck all led the field in research in conversion.
– Starbuck administered a questionnaire to 192 converts in the 19th cent.,
72 males and 120 females, and found that primarily adolescents were converted at the ages of 13-14 for females and 16 for males, with the conclusion that “the frequency of conversions correspond with the periods of bodily growth for both males and females (puberty).” (368)
– At adolescence, individuals are forming a world and life view, as well as an identity. Two things must happen: 1)one must experience a sense of incompleteness or wrongness concerning one’s life in general, and 2)there must be a positive ideal which one desires to attain. In addition both of these must be expressed in religious tenets (i.e. sin and righteousness repectively). (370)
– Starbuck points to 2 types of conversion:
1) “volitional”, conscious and voluntary, the end product of a reasoned
and thoughtful search.
2) “spontaneous”, involuntary and unconscious, a self-surrender, or an
emotional experience. (a pseudo-solution for some, most likely to
occur in neurotic, prepsychotic or psychotic persons, according to
Salzman (Salzman 177-187)
F.J. Roberts in 1965 studied 43 theology students, 23 of whom had sudden conversions. Found that those from Christian backgrounds were more neurotic than those who converted from outside, due to the parental pressure they felt. (374)
– John Lofland and Rodney Stark explained a form of reverse psychology in conversion: “individuals would relinquish a more widely-held perspective for an unknown, obscure and often socially devalued one.” Conversion thus became a form of protest against familial or social conditions deemed to be less than ideal.
– Reasons for conversion were: an experience of tension, the feeling that con- ventional methods for solving problems weren’t good enough, so alternatives were sought; believing they were pilgrims, seekers, at a turning point, came to make a decision, at which time relationships were established which attracted them towards that decision, while negative factors (sometimes relationships) pushed them away from their roots, and intensive interaction was had with the new group (377).
– Some believe the above is only an escape mechanism.
Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman talk of “snapping” for spontaneous conversion.
Characteristics of Conversion:
1)Integration factor-people choosing a religious grid to make sense of their problems and difficulties around them.
2)During Adolescence is when the most occured, as this is the period during which individuals are most intensely involved in constructing a world and life-view as well as forming a personsl identity. It is only logical to expect that the highest rate of conversions will take place during the time when the struggle to integrate reaches its peak intensity (387).
3)It happens during a time of Personal Stress or anxiety. In the U.S. only 10-30% experience some form of religious conversion, and for the majority of these it apparently is a satisfactory experience. The attrition rate of religious converts is actually quite low. (Starbuck p.360).
4)Interprsonal relationships are important in the conversion process, especially those who have themselves been converted. This can be a positive rela- tionship with them or a negative reaction against the group they are coming out of.
5)Conscious Motivational Factors are influential at the time of conversion:
a)fears= an insecurity concerning life in general.
b)Self-regarding motives= a desire for status, or to enter the ministry, or see a loved one in heaven.
c)altruistic motives= desire to be a part of a religion based on ethic, love, sacrifice.
d)Following out a moral ideal.
e)Remorse for and Conviction of Sin.
f)Response to Teaching=an intellectual or rational decision.
g)Example and Imitation= the influence of family, relatives, or peers.
h)Urging and social Pressure= more direct than the above. (390-391)
– Thus, a western convert to Christianity can be one who: is between 12-18 years, usually a female, one who has grappled to integrate internal and external factors impinging on their life, resulting in stress, whereupon they have looked to a religious solution, which is found in a relationship with another individual of like mind. The final commitment could be spontaneous or gradual, and may be attributable to one or more of the above motivational factors. (393)

II Conversion to Islam (pgs.394-443)

Intro: (394-399)
Muslim literature is poor in recording conversion to Islam. Most of the conversion which are recorded do not emphasize supernatural phenomena, because Muslims believe propositional tenets of his faith are self-evident. Thus the focus of his proselytization is the proclamation of these tenets.
Nehemiah Levtzion, a convert to Islam questions whether or not conversions during the early history of the Islam were forced by the mujahidun, and concludes that this was rarely the case. (395) He showed the importance of traders and Sufi’s for its spread.
Richard Bulliet felt ‘Individual conversion would be true “conversion” while the communal phenomenon would be considered “adhesion.”‘ (Bulliet, p.4)

A Research Methodology (Postons Questionnaire)
– Must note that a “typical” western convert to Islam differed significantly from that of the “typical” religious convert.
– Poston put together 4-page questionnaire, sent out a general letter to 20 Muslim (offensive-activist) organizations, but only 8 organizations were agreeable. 136 questionnaires were distributed, but only 10 were returned (7%), due to suspicion, because he wasn’t a Muslim. Personally gave out 15 questionnaire at a conference, but only 2 were returned (401).
– Islamic Horizons offered to publish the questionnaire in its Jan.-Feb. 1988 issue, 15 answers came back but were not released to the author (402).
– Thus Poston sought to peruse written accounts (60), and put together a composit of 70 converts: U.S. (32=46%) and foreign (38=54%) responses (28=British). 49 (70%) were male and 21 (30%) were female.
– Yvonne Haddad claimed that in 1982- 5,000 individuals of European background had converted to Islam, but gave no documentation for this figure (405).

B Results of the Study

[1] Male-female ratios (405-410)
– In the study, of the 70 respondants 49 were males and 21 females. While Christianity is characterized as appealing mainly to women and children, Islamic studies indicate that men are attracted as much as or perhaps more so than women.
Why more males are attracted than females:
1) It is a male dominated religion.
2) Women are to be veiled and in seclusion.
3) Womens attendance is not required at mosques functions.
4) They are excluded from from official positions of leadership.
5) The Muslim male emphasis on virility and masculinity.
6) The media protrays Muslim women as veiled, secluded, uneducated and little
more than a material possession of the male. (407)
– In Europe, more males were converted to Islam then females, while in the U.S. it was about equal. This is due to 3 reasons: a) Women in America are found to adhere in greater proportions to all expressions of faith, b) Some women have reacted negatively to the feminist movement, and c) American women are less opposed to marryiung Muslim men, which nearly always involves conversion to Islam.
– Concerning marrying for reasons of marriage: Ghayur found in U.S. 90% are females who married Muslims, and so converted. Henningsson found the same in Europe. Haddad found, however, that converts are generally U.S. men who have married Muslim women. (411)

[2] Dissatisfaction with Christianity: (410-412)
– Most common reasons were: 1) “irrationality of the concept of Trinity, 2) the doctrine of transubstantiation, 3) the disappointment that Christianity couldn’t speak to modern social issues, and 4) it’s exclusivistic claims.

[3] Age for rejection and Conversion: (412-416)
– The average age of conversion for a Muslim convert is 31.4 years (U.S.=29 years, Europe=33.7) (John Renard: “Understanding the World of Islam,p.207). The age of rejection of Christianity was 16.8, thus a “Moratorium period” of 14 years, where they were experimenting with other beliefs, was noticed (412).
– “Whereas in a Christian context, conversion is at ages 15-16 for maximal commitment, followed by a period of “backsliding”, when they look for financial security, then followed by renewal to religious values later on, the convert to Islam rejects completely their natal religion, followed a Moratorium period of 14 years, during which other spiritual options are explored, and then a final conversion to Islam in the late 20s to early 30s. There appears to be little backsliding on the parts of Muslim convers.” (415-416)

[4] What does one do to become a Muslim? (416-427)
– Testimonies are usually silent on this issue.
– Some believe it is through a private conversation with a friend, or a public recitation of the Shahadah (“There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger”). Others felt they had always been Muslims, and so now are reverting.
– Conversion did not involve an upheavel: 69 of the 70 converted over time, as a process, rather then as a “spontaneous” experience. Not an emotional reaction, no crisis; no sense of desperation. They were fully conscious, making careful examinations and considerations of alternatives; by means of conversations with Muslims, reading the Qur’an, and journeying to Muslims lands.
– Islamic conversion, differs from Christian conversions. They are ‘conversions of the head’ (the intellect) not ‘conversions of the heart’ (emotions). (421)
– The overwhelming majority experienced no crisis, which may be attributable to their age, being beyond the stresses which accompany adolescence. (421)
– 60% of converts mentioned the influence of a Muslim friend in their decision.

[5] The attraction of Islam: (428-441)
– Some saw the only hope for uniting mankind & creating equality was in Islam.
– Many found a haven in the “strictness” of the new faith.
– 18% considered Islamic morality to be the significant factor for conversion, yet only 5% of Europeans mentioned this (due to conservative U.S. environment).(429)
– Only 1 of the 70 felt sin was a factor for conversion. Many felt they were not sinful, that the doctrine of original sin was repulsive, and so, were attracted to Islam’s view of the innate goodness of man.
– Some stated that while family and friends attempted to understand and accept, they could not comprehend the reasons for the decision. (Benjelloun. pg.6)
-42 of the 70 mentioned that individuals had influenced their decision. So, a pietistic lay witness (low-church) is the key to spreading Islam in the west (441).
– “The Response to Islamic Teachings” was the chief motivating factor (52 out of 70 converts=74%), which made Islam qualitatively superior.
1) Simplicity (20%), much less complicated and easier to explain, just Shaha dah and 5 pillars; no baptism, catechism, or complicated traditions. Christianity was corrupted and syncretistic, while Islam was preserved in its original form (434)
2) Rational (20%), strictly in harmony with reason and science, not irra tional like x-tianity (i.e.=trinity, incarnation, resurrection, transubstantiation)
3) Tawhid (the oneness of God)
4) Brotherhood of Man (20%) Almost all Europeans mentioned this, while not a single American male did so. Felt, also that Islam had positive stand on social justice and racial equality.
5) This-worldly focus, (19%). Provides a solution to the acute needs of human society, answering all of mans problems, and bringing in the Kingdom now.
6) Lack of Priesthood (9%). No medial agents, that the believer can go directly to God.

A typical Muslim convert:

An individual, who after deliberately rejecting their parents religion at age 16-17, after pursuing religious alternatives for 6 or more years, makes a commitment to Islam in late 20’s or early 30’s, after considerable intellectual, rather than emotional thought, as well as contact with another Muslim, due to aspects of Islamic doctrine, which are found appealing.

---

Chapter V: The Future of Da’wah in the West

– Expansion of Islam in the U.S. is more like a trickle than a torrent. It makes up not even 2% of the U.S. population. The majority of Muslims continue to be assimilated into their secularized environments. Offensive-activist organizations are increasing in size, but are small, disorganized, poorly staffed, and funded.
– “Only 1/5 of U.S. Muslims participate actively in a mosque.” (Haddad,p.75)
– “In pluralistic America the one who is most forceful in his presentation gains the most publicity and, hence, the greatest number of converts.” (444)
– Over the years ethnic concerns were given priority rather than matters which involved the ‘umma as a whole. (447)
Kerry Lovering (publications secretary of SIM) in 1979 wrote: “Christianity…has failed miserably…it is now Islam that ofers salvation from the drunkenness, sexual license, political corruption, violence, blasphemy and corrupt lifestyles that afflict ‘Christian’ nations.” (Lovering, p.6)
Martin Marty speaks about certain traits which have been ingrained into the American ethos which will stay. Islam can answer many of these quite well:
1) Pluralism and Experimentalism: generic traits, the willingness of Americans to both seek and practice spiritual alternatives. Islam will thus be assured of a hearing, if it proclaims its distinctive elements.
2) Scripturalism: adherence to a written revelation. The Qur’an as the revelation of God accords this distinctive.
3) The Enlightenment thinking of ‘Reason’: Islam has a viable alternative for those repulsed by the emotional emphasis of contemporary Christianity.
4) Voluntaryism: the view that the Church or institution should be supported by voluntary contributions rather than the state. Islam is lay led in the U.S., and thus should be attractive in this area. (Marty, Religion and Republic, pp.36-48)
– But, changes must be had for the Muslims to gain on these traits:
a) Islam in the U.S. must develope an indigenous leadership, or else it will retain a distinctly foreign character, which will inhibit its growth. (451)
b) New converts to Islam must stop adopting an Arabic name upon conversion.
c) Much seek to change the stereotypical image of Islam as consisting mainly of Iranian and Libyan terrorists, Black activists, and male chauvanists.
d) The anti-Christian polemic must cease, as such attacks serve to increase the interest of nominal Christians in the precepts of their faith.
e) Unity, as envisioned by Muslims, is a vain pursuit, and best abandoned. The diversity of the Muslim world will have to be accepted, much like HUP principle.
f) Khurram Murads low-church missiological approach must be expanded and continually developed. Muslim laymen must be mobilized.
Dr. Abdel-Halim Mahmoud: “We cannot deny that U.S. Muslims might one day try to replace the Constitution with Shari’a law.” (Lovering,p.6)
Isma’il al-Faruqi: “The Islamic vision endows No.Am. with a new destiny worthy of it. For this renovation of itself, of its spirit, for its rediscovery of a God-given mission and self-dedication to its pursuit, the continent cannot but be grate- ful to the immigrant with Islamic vision. It cannot but interpret his advent on its shores except as a God-given gift, a timely divine favor & mercy.” (Faruqi-p.270)
Musa Qutub: “The people of the West (U.S.) will assist (in spreading) the Truth when the Hour comes.” (Sahih Muslim, Bab al-Imara 177). (455)

---

Bibliography

Benjelloun, Amina, “Why I am a Muslim,” Islamic Horizons, September 1984, p.6

Braden, Charles S. “Islam in America”, International Review of Mission, XLVIII (July 1959): 309

Bulliet, Richard. Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979

Deedat, Ahmad, Crucifixion or Crici-fiction?, Durban, S.A.: Islamic Propagation Centre, 1984

Deedat, Ahmad, Is the Bible God’s Word?, Durban, S.A.: Islamic Propagation Center, 1980

Donahue, John J. and Esposito, John L., eds. Islam in Transition, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1982

Al-Faruqi, Isma’il Raji, ” Islamic Ideals in North America,” In The Muslim Community in North America. Edited by Earle Waugh et al. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 1983

Al-Ghanoushi, Rashid. “What We Need is a Realistic Fundamentalism.” Arabia: The Islamic world Review, October 1986: 13-15

Haddad, Yvonne Yazbeck. “Muslims in Canada: A Preliminary Study.” In Religion and Ethnicity, pp.71-100. Edited by Harold Coward and Leslie Kawamura. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier Univ. Press, 1978

Haider, Gulzar. “Canadian Saturdays, Pakistani Sundays.” Whole Earth Review, (Winter 1985):38

Hathout, Maher. “Muslim Americans’ Dilemna: A Response.” Arabia: The Islamic World Review, July 1987, p.47.

Imran, Maulana Muhammad. Importance of Da’wah (Tabligh) in Islam. Lahore, M. Siraj-ud-Din and Sons, 1976

Inniger, Merlin W. “The Ahmadiya Movement: Islamic Renewal?” In Dynamic Religious Movements. Edited by David J. Hesselgrave. Grand Rapids; Baker Book House, 1978

Islahi, Amin Ahsan. Call to Islam and How the Holy Prophets Preached, Kuwait: Islamic Book Publishers, 1978

Al-Jindi, Anwar. Afaq Jadida lil-Da’wah al-Islamiyya fi ‘Alam al-Gharb. Beirut: Mu’assasa al-Risala, 1984

Johnson, Steve, Da’wah to Americans: Theory and Practice (Plainfield: Islamic Society of North America, 1984), p.21

Khurshid, Muhammad. Da’wah in Islam. Houston: Islamic Education Council, n.d.

Levtzion, Nehemia. “Toward a Comparative Study of Islamization”, In Conversion to Islam, pp.1-23. Edited by Nehemia Levtzion. N.Y.: Holmes and Meier Publishers, Inc., 1979

Lovering, Kerry. “Tough at Home, Aggressive Abroad: Islam on the March,” Muslim World Pulse, August 1979. p.6

Manual of Da’wah for Islamic Workers. Montreal: Islamic Circles of No. America, 1983

Marty, Martin E. Religion and Republic (Boston: Beacon Press, 1987), pp.36-48

“MSA and Family Builds in the U.S.”, Arabia: The Islamic World Review, May 1983, p.63

Muhammad, Akbar, “Some Factors which Promote and Restrict Islamization in America”, American Journal of Islamic Studies (August 1984): 41-43

Murad, Khurram Jah. Da’wah Among Non-Muslims in the West. London: The Islamic Foundation, 1986

Murad, Khurram Jah. Islamic Movement in the West. London: Islamic Foundation, 1981

Murad, Khurram Jah. “Third opportunity to Keep Islam in the West.” Islamic Horizons, November 1986, p.10

Murghani, Sheikh Sharafuddin. “When In Rome…” Arabia: The Islamic World Review, May 1987, p.46

Mawdudi, Abul A’la, Witnesses Unto Mankind: The Purpose and Duty of the Muslim Ummah, ed. and trans. Khurram Murad (Leicester: The Islamic Foundation, 1986)

Neill, Stephen. A History of Christian Missions. N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1964

Peters, Rudolph. Islam and Colonialism: The Doctrine of Jihad in Modern History. N.Y.: Mouton Publishers, 1979

Renard, John “Understanding the World of Islam,”, America October, 20, 1979

Richardson, E.Allen. Islamic Cultures in North America N.Y.: The Pilgrim Press, 1981

Sahih Muslim, Bab al-Imara 177

Sakr, Ahmad, Proceedings of the First Islamic Conference of North America. N.Y.: Muslim World League, 1977, pp.62-63

Salzman, Leon, “The psychology of Religious and Ideological Conversion,” Psychiatry (May 1953): 177-187)

Shafaat, Ahmad. The Gospel According to Islam, (N.Y.: Vantage Press, 1979)

Shafaat, Ahmad. Missionary Christianity and Islam (2 Volumes) Montreal: Nur Media Services, 1982, I,p.5

Starbuck, Edwin D., The Psychology of Religion (N.Y.: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1900)

Whaling, Frank. “A Comparative Religious Study of Missionary Transplantation in Buddhism, Christianity and Islam.” International Review of Mission LXX (October 1981): 314ff.

Yakan, Fathi. Islamic Movement: Problems and Perspectives. Indianapolis; American Trust Publications, 1984

Mutual Misconceptions: Christian Misconceptions About Islam and Muslim Misconceptions About Christianity

Keith Small

---

Introduction

All of us know the personal hurt of being misunderstood. It is all the more tragic when misunderstandings and misconceptions are elevated to national and cultural levels extending the hurt to millions. In these days of increased travel and communication we have the opportunity of diminishing misconceptions that have plagued us, sometimes for centuries. We have the opportunity to talk to and listen to each other as never before. Let us not squander this opportunity. I hope my contribution today will be a small part of overcoming some of the many misconceptions that have arisen between Muslims and Christians.

To truly understand each other we must talk and listen with as much fairness and objectivity as we can muster. It is too easy to yield to prejudice when we are confronted with something difficult to understand or something contrary to what we expect or contrary to what we want to believe. Such prejudice does no one any good. It only reinforces inaccurate stereotypes and prolongs and deepens misconceptions. Modern science at its best strives to overcome ignorance and misunderstanding with impartial research. We would do well to adopt this attitude of impartiality toward the more difficult issues that science cannot address that are addressed by our faiths.

This is a short attempt to address some of the major misconceptions between Muslims and Christians about each other and each others’ religions. I prefer to say that the misconceptions are between Christians and Muslims rather than between Islam and Christianity because fundamentally, misunderstandings occur between people, not systems of belief.

I. Christian misconceptions about Islam.

These are things those of us who are Christians need to take to heart.

A. Many Christians see all Muslims as extremists, terrorists, or intolerant.

There is a tendency to see all Muslims as religious fanatics instead of normal, pious people. I think there are three main reasons for this.

1. Many Christians believe media bias which often shows extremism. They don’t realize that they are being given an incomplete picture. Many are often ignorant of the variety within Islam that there are peaceful groups as well as violent ones, spiritually motivated groups as well as politically motivated ones.

2. Many Christians don’t understand the political side of Islam. Christians tend to be ignorant of Muhammad’s role as political ruler in Medina and the enormous amount of teaching and law in the Qur’an and Islam regarding politics. Many tend to simplistically look at Muhammad through the example of Jesus who did not have a political agenda.

3. Although Jesus grew up under an oppressive imperialistic power, Western Christians don’t know the experience of being dominated by a another political or economic power. Note I have said Western Christians and not Middle Eastern, African, Eastern European, and Chinese Christians to name a few. Western Christians find it hard to appreciate the hurt much of the West’s involvement in the Middle East has caused Muslims. They don’t understand the frustration that fuels much of the violence the extremists commit. Western Christians often don’t understand poverty and oppression because their lives have been relatively free from injustice and want.

These are the reasons why I think Christians often make unfair generalisations as to what Muslims are like.

B. Many Christians don’t understand Muhammad’s place in Islam, and it leads them to two kinds of misconception concerning Muhammad.

1. Often Christians out of ignorance tend to think that Muhammad holds the same general place in Islam that Jesus holds in Christianity. They don’t realize that Muslims don’t see Islam as “Mohammed’s” religion, that is, a religion that Muhammad began. Muslims see Islam as the basic religion that all prophets proclaimed, Muhammad happening to be the last prophet. This is why the term “Mohammedanism” is offensive to Muslims and is more properly replaced with “Islam”. The misconception here is over-estimating the importance of Muhammad to Muslims in the religion of Islam, almost believing they worship him.

2. On the other hand, Christians also undersestimate what Muhammad means to Muslims. This is seen in that many Christians don’t understand the current attitude toward Muhammad as expressed in the Salmon Rushdie affair. While Muslims don’t worship Muhammad, Christians often don’t understand the place of affection and devotion he does have so that they understand the hurt defaming remarks cause. Muslims see Muhammad as the last and greatest of the prophets and so accord him the greatest amount of respect that they give to any man. It is like the hurt Christians feel when they hear Jesus called “just a good teacher”, “just a man”, or even “just a prophet”. To Christians, Jesus is so much more, and to call Him something less is blasphemy. Christians need to understand the emotions involved in others’ beliefs and be sensitive to Muslims.

C. Many Christians have misconceptions about the roles of politics and religion in Islam.

1. Christians can tend to believe that Islam is exclusively spread by the sword. They are often ignorant of world history that shows that much of Islam’s spread in the world was the result of traders and Muslim Sufi missionaries. This is especially true for Islam’s spread in Asia. Western Christians tend to know more about the wars with Islam that occured around the Mediterannean and in Europe.

2. Also, many Christians are ignorant of the political nature of Islam so they think it should not be involved in politics today. Throughout history Islam has seen political means as being appropriate for accomplishing the spread of the religion since the religion of Islam is meant to embrace the whole of life. Christians often don’t realize that the Qur’an and Islamic law embrace not only personal religion but family law, civil law, and criminal law.

3. Christians also forget that for much of the history of Christianity, the Church shared this view that it was to be intimately involved in politics. The Church has for much of its history seen the sword of political authority as a necessary and proper support for its position. Only in recent years has this expectation been overturned .

D. Many Christians see Islamic culture as backward and unrefined.

1. Christians are often ignorant of Islam’s rich and full cultural heritage. They don’t know that Muslims have extensive bodies of literature in Arabic, Persian, and Urdu. They don’t know that Islam has a long and full history in architecture, calligraphy, poetry, philosophy and science. This leads to Christians not understanding why Muslims often take more pride in their Islamic cultural heritage than in the cultural achievements of the West.

2. Like the West in general, Christians often tend to judge other nations in terms technological progress, or they slip into simple prejudice at something that they don’t understand.

3. Christians are often ignorant of the influences Islam has had on our own culture. They don’t realize that our knowledge of Platonic and Aristotelean philosophy came through Arabic translations of these texts. Many are ignorant of the debates and discussions in theology that took place between Islamic and Christian scholars for hundereds of years. They don’t realize that all of our sciences and especially mathmatics, medicine and astronomy were influenced by Medieval Islamic books and research. Many don’t realize that all of our fine arts have been profoundly influenced by Islamic fine arts, from painting and literature to architecture and music. In general, many Christians are ignorant of the long and varied history of contact and influence between Islam and Christianity.

These are just some of many areas where Christians need to become better informed concerning Islam.

II. Muslims’ misconceptions about Christianity.

Please accept this as an outsider’s view. These are misconceptions I have encountered personally.

A. Many Muslims view all Westerners as Christians.

1. Because culture and religion are so intertwined in Islam, I think Muslims have a hard time realizing that all Westerners are not Christians. The West has a Christian cultural heritage, but in the main our culture and society have left that heritage to pursue a more secular course. Religion in the West has been moved out of public life to be a mostly private affair. Crime, immorality, drug abuse, and drunkenness are not things that Christianity promotes or allows. It is adamently opposed to them for the sins that they are in themselves, and for the hurt and tragedy they foster.

2. Many Muslims have a hard time understanding that most countries in the West do not allow the Church to have dominant political power. The limiting of the Church’s power is a reflection of the biblical teaching that coercion and true religion do not go together. Muslims tend to confuse Jesus with Muhammad and think that He left a law and political agenda similar to Muhammad’s. Jesus didn’t do these things. The law He left is the Law of love summed up by what is called the Golden Rule: “So in everything, do to others what youwould have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” (Matt. 7:12, NIV). It is this teaching, which still operates to a great degree in the West, that is behind people being allowed to freedom of speech, even to the degree where Muhammad is insulted in The Satanic Verses, and Jesus is degraded in The Last Temptation of Christ. This alsocontributes to why the West views it as wrong for even blasphemers to be injured or killed. Christians are also taught to love their enemies and pray for their repentence.

3. Also, Muslims tend to misunderstand that, according to the Bible, becoming a Christian is primarily a personal decision, not a cultural or family identity. No one is born a Christian. Everyone must decide for themselves that they will trust in Jesus’ death for them on the cross for the forgiveness of their sins. Jesus said, “For God so loved the world that he gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16) A culture becomes “Christian” only secondarily after many people choose Christ and obey His teachings, and it affects the way they live.

B. Many Muslims view the basic message of Christianity and Islam as the same, that in essence they teach the same thing.

1. I appreciate the tolerance that this sentiment is trying to express. But it is not fair to Christianity or Islam to say they teach essentially the same thing. Islam claims to be the final religion. This is the claim of the Qur’an itself (Surah 61:9, “As-Saff” or “The Ranks”): “He it is who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may makeit conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse.” (Pickthall’s translation) Likewise, Jesus claims to be the only way to the Father, and His teachings the most authoritative statements of truth given by God to mankind (John 14:6): “Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No-one comes to the Father except through me.”(NIV)

2. Such statements, though well intended, only confuse the issue of truth. In order for both Islam and Christianity to be true at the same time, then major parts of each would have to be viewed as wrong. For instance, Islam holds that sincere repentence is enough for God to grant a person forgiveness. Christianity holds that repentence is not enough but must be united with trust in the atoning death of Christ. These are very different views. They involve differing views of the nature of sin, of God’s character, and of forgiveness. Neither side can yield its view without giving up essential foundational doctrines.

C. Many Muslims assume that the Bible has been corrupted, that is, that it’s content and meaning have been intentionally and radically changed.

Most Muslims I have talked to are convinced that the Bible has been corrupted so much that it cannot be trusted. This matter in itself is of such great importance that it should not be treated lightly by anyone but should be searched out with care and objectivity. The Bible and the Qur’an each claim for themselves to contain the truth that will lead to eternal life. Yet they donot agree with each other. Here are four issues that are commonly misunderstood by Muslims concerning the Bible:

1. The existence of so many different translations of the Bible means that there are many different versions of the Bible, meaning different Bibles. This is completely wrong. There is only one Bible, in the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. There are many different translations of this one book because of the nature of language. Language changes, so translations need to reflect these changes. Language is also rich in meaning. Additional translations bring out nuances that might be missing in others. The basic meaning in all these translations is the same. This situation is the same as is found with English and Urdu translations of the Qur’an. There are many different translations of the same book. Also, there has never been a hesitation in Christianity to translate the Scriptures. The original languages have never been regarded as divine languages defying translation. The Bible presents that revelation can be adequately conveyed in human languages. Revelation is meant to be understood, loved, and obeyed (Deut. 30:11-14). That is why Christians take so many pains to see the Bible translated and translated accurately.

2. It is often believed that since there are four gospels in the New Testament that there was originally one which the Church corrupted. There is no historical evidence that this was ever the case. There is no evidence that Jesus left a book to His disciples called “the Gospel.” In fact, Jesus promised, not to leave a book, but to guide the disciples into all the truth as they wrote of Him. Jesus left the task of recording Scripture to His disciples whom He would guide by the Holy Spirit (John 14:25,26; 15:26,27).

3. It is often remarked about the Bible that since there are variations in the manuscripts that the text must be corrupt. I have found that most Muslims do not realize that their own book, the Qur’an, is in a similar situation. In the reliable Islamic traditions it is recorded that many of the companions of Muhammad had collections of the Qur’an that differed from each other. These differences have been preserved. The Qur’an collections differed in many respects, for example, the number and order of Surahs, the spelling of words, and the use of different words in the exact same contexts. If one examines these variations fairly, they will realize that the situations for the Bible and the Qur’an are the same. These variations in detailsdon’t affect the overall reliability of the text. There are small areas that are in doubt as to the exact reading, but none of the variant readings affect any major or minor doctrine in Islam or Christianity. Both books are amazingly accurate as regards the historical preservation of their texts. The significant difference between the two books is in their message, not their textual history. It is a misconception to believe that one has been corrupted beyond reliability in the transmission of its text while the other has not.

4. Also, Muslims are often ignorant of the history of the transmission of the Bible that bears this out. The Old Testament of the Bible has been the holy Scriptures of the Jews since before esus, and they still are to this day. The New Testament has been the holy Scriptures, with the Old Testament, for the Christians since the days of the Apostles of Jesus. In the five centuries preceding Muhammad this same Bible that we have today was the Scripture of the Christians. It’s content and meaning have not been changed either before Muhammad or after.

D. Many Muslims believe Christians have made Jesus out to be God, that is, that they have elevated a man to deity.

All that the Christians believe about Jesus being God comes from Jesus’ own words and actions in the Gospels, and the testimony of Jesus’ closest disciples as preserved in the New Testament. Christian belief is based on what Jesus said about Himself and did to prove it and what the disciples had seen of Jesus and what they had been taught by Him. If you read the Gospels fairly you will see that Jesus identifies Himself as God and does many things that are the perogative of God alone. Christians have not made Jesus out to be God. We have only accepted what Jesus revealed about Himself. Christians are as sensitive to blasphemy as any Jew or Muslim. We have only accepted Jesus as God by examining the evidence left by Jesus Himself. These are some of many areas where I have found Muslims could be better informed.

Conclusion

1. As I said at the beginning, these are just a few of the major misunderstandings between Muslims and Christians. If you feel I have not been fair, or that I have left out any of greater importance than these, please say so and help me to learn.

2. My burden is that we discuss our faiths fairly, clearly, and with respect and sympathy. We would all agree that God is to be served with our entire lives and hearts. Let us approach each other sincerely and seek to correct our mutual misconceptions.

3. Thank you for allowing me to address you. May God bless you as you seek Him and seek out truth.

Given by Keith E. Small, 18 February 1997, Bradford University, Bradford, West Yorkshire.

Some missiologists prefer a relational approach to Islam, while others prefer a more confrontational approach. Which do you prefer and why?

By Toby Jepson

---

Our approach to Islam can say a lot about us. It can also communicate very different things to the Muslims with whom we are speaking. In the following essay I would like to look at a couple of the options available and consider the pros and cons of each. Then I shall look at situations in the Bible that throw light on the subject and conclude by summarising my own view.

In the first section I shall examine the relational and confrontational approaches. It should be borne in mind that rarely will any one person rely exclusively on either of the two. My own view, seen later, is that the biblical model is an excellent example for us today, combining both elements as is appropriate to each situation.

The Relational Approach

If it is possible to condense this approach down to one phrase, I would say that it is concerned primarily with the personbeing spoken to, their own needs, culture and sensitivities.

People who rely mainly on this approach tend to shy away from dwelling on issues such as the reliability of the Bible or the Qur’an, the trinity, the divinity of Jesus and the prophethood of Muhammad. It is often said that subjects such as these will only inflame a discussion and lead to a fruitless war of words that benefits neither party. Much emphasis is placed on friendship, showing the love of Christ to a Muslim so that they will be drawn to the Christian life. Should a Muslim wish to question certain aspects of the Christian faith, answers will often be given, but again shying away from the more controversial aspects.

The Confrontational Approach

To summarise this approach in turn, it is concerned primarily with the propositional truth of Islam and Christianity. Ultimately, it is up to the person concerned whether or not they accept the implications, but the aim is to persuade them that the gospel is objectively true and then invite them to live in accordance with it. In this context, the very issues that the relational approach may avoid come to the forefront. Right at the heart are questions such as, ‘which is more reliable – the Bible or the Qur’an?’ Leading on from that, the divinity of Jesus or the trinity, issues that so often confuse Muslims and lead them to reject Christianity, may be examined and discussed.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Clearly these two different approaches are broad ones that will be used differently by different people, with varying degrees of combination of the two. It could be said that they represent two opposing ends of the spectrum and that rarely is a person operating solely at one end or the other. However, it is useful to consider them in isolation and to look at the respective advantages and disadvantages of both.

Relational

The great strength of this approach is that it considers each person as an individual and is concerned that discussion and dialogue proceed at the pace of that person. Much use can be made of material that is common to both religions, for instance the sacrifice of Abraham’s son. This may be used as a bridge to talk about the sacrifice of God’s unique son, Jesus, with all the reasons for and implications of this. It is easily usable in Muslim countries, where a more confrontational approach may quickly lead to deportation and the end of any effective ministry in that place.

Its weaknesses tend to be simply the other side of the coin. When we are too concerned about the sensitivities of the individual and a desire to proceed at their own pace, we may never get to the crucial issues that they need to face. Is it not inevitable, after all, that at some point we will need to deal with issues that Muslims find uncomfortable? They cannot come to believe in the crucifixion, resurrection and divinity of Jesus (the heart of the gospel) without denying the infallibility of the Qur’an and the prophetic authority of Muhammad. At least, if they can, something has gone wrong somewhere! If we become more concerned with a pleasant relationship with our Muslim friends than with their eternal destinies, we are wasting our time and toying with their souls. The friendliest and most loving thing we can do in this situation is to challenge them to change.

Confrontational

We serve a God who has touched history, who has come down in the person of Jesus Christ and walked among us. We learn of that revelation through the Bible, the most valuable book in all human history. Unfortunately, Muslims consistently deny the authority of that Bible and so many of its most crucial teachings. It is vital that at some point they be urged to consider the claims of Christ and the validity of the Bible with fresh eyes. This is the chief value of this approach. Confrontation can be defined as meeting face to face or as comparison. The confrontation is primarily that between the key conflicting teachings of Islam and Christianity. At its root it is simply looking at the fundamental issues side by side and asking where the truth lies. It does not necessarily imply aggression, insult, arrogance or violence.

Unfortunately, our human natures can often distort this approach so that it takes on just those ugly features. Our inbuilt xenophobia and insecurity constantly tempts us repel those who oppose us or our beliefs with little regard for their intrinsic value as humans. This is the weakness of confrontation, that so often it leads to fruitless disputations where each side is more concerned with scoring points and bolstering their own sense of security than actually meeting the other person in dialogue.

Biblical Models

I shall take as my examples the two greatest biblical evangelists, Jesus and Paul. As we shall see, they used both approaches flexibly, as they saw fit in each individual situation.

Jesus

Jesus was no stranger to a relational approach. He shared his whole life with the twelve apostles, especially his ‘inner circle’ of Peter, James and John. Very often it was his life and actions that convinced them of who he was, such as the stilling of the storm in Matthew 14:22-33. In these situations he did not use rational argument to prove that he was the Messiah – he simply got on with the business of showing it, so the disciples were forced to ask themselves what other option there was. Yet even with his closest friends, he was not afraid to call a spade a spade and lovingly point out their error when necessary. His strong rebuke of Peter in Matthew 16:21-23 show that he was far more interested in his soul than in simply having a pleasant and cordial relationship.

In other situations he challenged the assumptions of those he met. The rich young ruler thought he was complimenting Jesus by calling him ‘good rabbi’, but Jesus threw it right back at him. Without denying his own goodness, he forced the ruler to reconsider what he was saying – only God was truly good, so did Jesus fit the bill…? Then he cut straight to the heart of the man’s problem – his love of wealth, showing him that he needed to change drastically in order to be a disciple (Luke 18:18-25).

With the Samaritan woman he gently led her on by provoking questions, but he was not afraid to challenge her immorality or to point out her erroneous beliefs: ‘you Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews’ (John 4:22).

Finally, when confronting the arrogance and hypocrisy of certain Pharisees, he did not mince his words: ‘Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!…woe to you, blind guides!…you blind fools!…you snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? (Matthew 23:13-33). Nor was he particularly empathetic to the money changers in the temple (Luke 19:45,46). As Jay Smith points out:

He did not seek to discuss their position in an atmosphere of mutual understanding. Rather, he stormed in and upturned their tables. 1

Paul

As was the master, so the disciple. Paul shows good evidence of mixing his approach as the need arose. In Philippi, the conversion of Lydia seemed to proceed naturally from a friendly discussion by the riverside. Here there is no evidence of antagonism or heated debate (Acts 16:13-15).

Yet Paul was a master of reasoned argument and used it extensively in his ministry. We are told that he made a habit in each new town of going first to the synagogue and reasoning with the local Jewish population. In Pisidian Antioch he entered the synagogue with Barnabas in cordial circumstances and began to show from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah. This stimulated much interest and it was only later that opposition arose (Acts 13:14-48). In Iconium the pair ‘spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Gentiles believed’ (Acts 14:1). At Thessalonica Paul ‘reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead’ (Acts 17:2,3).

In the face of opposition we see that Paul ‘preached fearlessly in the name of Jesus’ (Acts 9:27). In the Areopagus at Athens he took the people from where they were and used their own beliefs as an effective bridge to preach the gospel in a way they could understand (Acts 17:19-34), with a measure of success as well as much derision. Paul’s desire to persuade his hearers of the truth of his message even led him to hold ‘discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. This went on for two years, so that all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord.’ (Acts 19:9,10) He preached before angry mobs (Acts 21:40-22:22), a hostile Sanhedrin (Acts 22:30-23:9), Roman governors (Acts 24:1-21; 25:7,8), a king (Acts 25:23-26:29) and perhaps even Caesar himself (Acts 25:12). In all these situations he clearly set out his gospel in order to persuade his hearers, answering their challenges as necessary. His own methodology is clear (2 Cor 10:5):

We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Even when it was his opponent was obviously evil and closed to the truth, Paul spoke out without fear (Acts 13:10):

You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery. Will you never stop perverting the right ways of the Lord?

Putting the Pieces Together

We have seen above some of the many and varied ways in which Jesus and Paul approached their hearers in the course of spreading the gospel. Although often gentle, they were never afraid to reason and to show where necessary that people’s beliefs were deficient. With this in mind I would like to put forward some principles for use in Muslim evangelism.

Firstly and perhaps most importantly, there is no need for an artificial separation between the relational and confrontational styles of evangelism. Both are necessary and were used to good effect in varying degrees and combinations by both Jesus and Paul. We must crave divine discernment to determine what each situation requires.

When using more relational principles, we must be never be more concerned with platitudes than truth. Bearing in mind all the principles of good friendship, we must lovingly point out error when necessary in order to lead our friends to a saving knowledge of Christ. Ultimately the kingdom of darkness is being illuminated by the kingdom of light. We cannot avoid an element of confrontation, no matter how pleasant we are, or mindful of the need to proceed ‘with gentleness and respect’ (1 Peter 3:15).

In more confrontational situations we must never give way to arrogance or unnecessary humiliation of others (if anything humiliates a Muslim it should be the truth and not our delivery of it). We should never resort to a simple slanging match where we are simply concerned with sounding impressive. Even when confronting pure evil, as demonstrated above by both Jesus and Paul, we must speak out of a simple love for the truth and not a misplaced self-righteouness. If we find ourselves having no concern for the dignity of the individual, we need to ruthlessly question our motives for engaging Muslims.

My own experience has been largely gained at Speakers’ Corner, Hyde Park. This is admittedly an unusual situation, perhaps not unlike the Areopagus in Athens, but it gives a whole variety of opportunity, requiring many different approaches.

At times there people who come asking good questions and not being belligerent or unnecessarily argumentative. With these it is possible to proceed pleasantly through important issues in a friendly manner, even though I am challenging the very foundation of their faith.

Then there are those who are less responsive and more aggressive. Particularly with Asian Muslims, it is easy to misinterpret their passion as hatred or anger. In this situation, to be timid and placating, declining to offer evidence for my beliefs, will show in their eyes that I do not really believe what I am saying, or that it is indefensible. I attempt to give a robust answer in such situations, without resorting to insult or simple put-downs.

As a speaker on a ladder, it is easy to be drowned out by a sea of hecklers shouting irrelevant statements or insults. Shouting is often necessary to be heard, yet this in no way needs to be angry ranting. Many hecklers may need to be ignored, simply so that the message can be heard, answering appropriate challenges when they are made.

Also testing is heckling a Muslim speaker from the crowd. It is often necessary to speak out, as rarely will a Muslim conclude his talk without some false jibe against Christianity. Those listening who know no better must hear that there are answers, yet it can be hard to be heard. The speaker is at an advantage, controlling the crowd from the ladder and often attempting to humiliate any opposition.

Perhaps the most difficult and trying situations occur when faced with someone who is aggressive, abusive, insulting and has no desire to dialogue or to listen to anything I may have to say. Their aim is simply to humiliate me in public and to look good to the onlookers. Should I simply walk away, convinced that there is no benefit in talking to them? Should I fight fire with fire and throw back abuse at them? Though they may be closed, they need to be warned, and it must be clear to onlookers, Muslim and non-Muslim, that Christianity can stand up to attack. My own approach here is often to appeal to the onlookers and ask them if the person is being reasonable. I may demand evidence for any accusations that are being thrown (usually at a mind-boggling rate) and point out what an obnoxious fool they are being. It certainly is hard to maintain respect for such people, but we must do our best with God’s help.

Conclusion

As mentioned already, we must take our example from Jesus and Paul, mixing our approach as the situation demands, yet not forgetting either the person or the message. The love we must have for Muslims should not be confused for the sloppy emotionalism that avoids upsetting at all costs. Love must often be tough and false beliefs that blind people to the truth must be confronted, in as creative and godly a manner as possible.

Reference

1. Lang, and Walker, The Armenians, p. 8.