Issues Facing Missions Today: 42. Biblical Bases for Christian Toleration


Introduction

Toleration has become a cardinal virtue in the West and countries influenced by the West.  Like equality, it is understood as a virtue related to freedom or liberty.  In democratic societies, toleration is a necessary virtue to restrain the tyranny of the majority.  Peculiarly, toleration of preferred minorities over against others has become the mark of twenty-first century, Western democracies.  

This is because certain minority communities actually support majority perspectives at a higher level of abstraction, such as when the 2% homosexual population is given affirmation as a minority expression because it supports the more abstract or general affirmation of sexual freedom.  Caricature and persecution of those holding to tradition views of sexuality and marriage are, suddenly, legitimate objects of derision and persecution.

Over against Western culture’s experiment with these virtues lie many Islamic societies’ practices of intolerance.  Beating, imprisonment, stoning, amputations, and beheading are not only the practice of so-called fanatical or extremist versions of Islam but also of governments under Sharia Law, such as Saudi Arabia or Iran.  The Taliban of Pakistan and Afghanistan forbade girls an education and required women to cover themselves with burkas.

Examples of every version of tolerance and intolerance could be cited from Christian history.  Yet there is a Biblical basis for a Christian version of tolerance, and Biblical teaching offers authoritative corrections to any malpractice throughout the history of the Church.  Several things might be said about a Biblical understanding of toleration, and what follows is presented as ten Biblical bases for a Christian version of tolerance

Ten Bases for Christian Tolerance.

1. The Old Testament notion of God’s own people among the other people of the world leads to an expectation of different standards in the world.  God’s making a people for Himself entails giving this people His Law.  He says,

Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine,  6 but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the Israelites" (Ex. 19.5-6).

God’s people are not to do the things that other nations do:

Leviticus 18:1-4 The LORD spoke to Moses, saying:  2 Speak to the people of Israel and say to them: I am the LORD your God.  3 You shall not do as they do in the land of Egypt, where you lived, and you shall not do as they do in the land of Canaan, to which I am bringing you. You shall not follow their statutes.  4 My ordinances you shall observe and my statutes you shall keep, following them: I am the LORD your God.

2. The New Testament notion of Christians as God’s own people also involves a view on toleration, although it brings a shift of thinking from the Old Testament.  Now God’s people are those ‘in Christ,’ persons from among both Jews and non-Jews, the Gentiles, who have acknowledged Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour. This led Christians to move away from an Old Testament, Jewish view that did not distinguish religious communities from nation states.  This Christian view is the basis for a distinction between the Church and ‘secular’ society.  Christians in the second century began to speak of themselves as a ‘third race’—a new people made up of both Jews and Gentiles.  As Paul said in the first century, ‘But our citizenship is in heaven, and it is from there that we are expecting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ’ (Phl. 3.20).  Paul, arguing in line with the Old Testament prophets, restricts the notion of God’s people from all descendants of Abraham to a remnant who truly follow God (see especially Isaiah and Rom. 9-11).  On the other hand, not all Gentiles are considered to be outside of God’s people.  This leads to a distinction between the ethics of Christians and the ethics of those outside of Christ.  As Paul says,

1 Corinthians 5:11-13 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat with such a one.  12 For what have I to do with judging those outside? Is it not those who are inside that you are to judge?  13 God will judge those outside. "Drive out the wicked person from among you."

Indeed, Christians do judge those in their own communities who claim to be faithful followers of Jesus Christ but who are not living according to Biblical commandments.  When Jesus said to his disciples that they should not judge others lest they be judged, he was speaking about not being hypocrites (Mt. 7.1-5).  Judgement in the community, however, is done with an eye toward attempting to restore others (Mt. 18.12-35; 1 Cor. 5).

3. The Biblical notion of the ‘Fall’ entails a belief in toleration.  People aware of their own sinfulness are hardly likely to lack toleration for others.  This belief states, as Paul says, that ‘all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God’ (Rom. 3.23).  Christians see all as sinful, separated from God, and in need of a Saviour—who is Jesus Christ.  Understanding their own journey to God and their own inability to save themselves, they therefore have a certain tolerance of others, including non-Christians.  They see themselves as recipients of grace who should tell others the good news that they, too, can receive God’s grace through Jesus Christ.  Jesus taught his disciples to pray, ‘forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone indebted to us’ (Lk. 11.4).

4. Christian teaching about ‘faith’ also calls for a Christian view of tolerance.  The Bible understands salvation to be by faith in God, that is, in God’s provision of salvation.  This was true in the Old Testament as much as in the New Testament.  The difference between the two testaments is not that righteousness is through works in the Old Testament but through faith in the New Testament.  Rather, God’s salvation remains a promise in the Old Testament, but it is fulfilled in the New Testament through Jesus’ sacrificial death on a cross for our sins.  For our purposes, this teaching on faith means that salvation is not our own accomplishment but is by God’s grace.  As with the Biblical teaching on the Fall, so also with the Biblical understanding of salvation by God’s grace: whether sinners or saved Christians, we have no basis to approach God or others as superior to others.  This is at the centre of Christian faith, and it is also an essential basis for a Christian view of toleration.  Also, Christian faith means there is no room for coercion.  People cannot be forced to be Christians; they must ‘come to faith.’

5. Toleration is also based on the central teaching of the Christian Gospel: the death of Christ on a cross.  As John says in Revelation, Christians ‘have conquered [their accuser] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death’ (Rev. 12.11).  Christian life is ‘cruciform.’  Jesus’ victory came through His death on a cross, not through military action or some other use of force.  His victory becomes exemplary for Christian practice as well (a point too often missed in the history of Christianity!).

6. The Christian view of God’s reign (the kingdom of God) also involves a perspective on tolerance.  The Old Testament already clearly teaches that God is King over the entire world—a view consistent with Jewish monotheism.  The psalmist says, ‘Say among the nations, "The LORD is king!’ (Ps. 96.10).  The world is coming to know that God is their King.  Ultimately, the nations will acknowledge that the Lord is the only God, and all will bow their knees before Him (Isaiah 45.23; cf. Phl. 2.10-11).  Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, has already been exalted as Lord (Eph. 1.20-23).  Paul sees the interim time as a time when Jesus subdues his enemies (picking up the language of Ps. 8.6, ESV): For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.  26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death (1 Cor. 15.25-26).  Thus, Christians believe that God’s reign is ‘already’ as well as ‘not yet.’  God’s present rule has the purpose of bringing salvation (2 Cor. 6.2); his future rule will bring judgement.

7. Christians believe in an ultimate reckoning before God.  There is coming a judgement day.  Toleration does not mean acceptance of whatever people believe, desire, or do.  God’s justice will be meted out on the day of judgement, even as it has already been meted out in providing forgiveness of sins through the sacrificial, substitutionary death of Jesus Christ for us.  The delay between the justice of the cross and the justice of God’s final judgement is a matter of divine forbearance—toleration.  As Paul says, God our Saviour ‘desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth’ (1 Tim. 2.4).  God's 'toleration' in regard to human sin is not a permissiveness towards sinners but a forbearance until the problem of sin is resolved--which He has done in the atonement for sin by Jesus Christ (Romans 3.25).

8. Moreover, retaliation and vengeance is not Christians’ responsibility but God’s.  Paul says,

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord."  20 To the contrary, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head."  21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good’ (Rom. 12.19-21).

This is consistent with Jesus telling his disciples to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them (Mt. 5.44).

9. Christians also have a view that there are some matters of indifference, such as whether to eat food sacrificed to idols in the marketplace (1 Cor. 8-10) or to follow Jewish cultural practices (circumcision, eating kosher foods, observing particular days—cf. Rom. 14.1-15.3).  Some issues are essential to uphold a holy community, but these standards are not to be forced on those outside the church (1 Cor. 5).

10. Finally, love of God and neighbour is the ground for laws (Mt. 22.37-40).  Similarly, God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Mt. 9.13; 12.7, quoting Hos. 6.6).  Paul’s great chapter on love is a chapter that makes room for tolerating others:

1 Corinthians 13:4-7  4 Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant  5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;  6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.  7 Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.


Western culture bases tolerance on the value of freedom; Christian theology bases toleration on the virtue of love.  Therein lies the difference between a coercive, permissive culture and a compelling, transformative community.

Conclusion

The Christian understanding of toleration is uniquely Christian.  It is not based in liberal democratic views but is based on a Biblical worldview, particularly on Jesus’ own victory on a cross.  Biblical teaching on the people of God in the world, the Fall, sin, grace, faith, the reign of God, the judgement of God all lead to a unique and consistent view of tolerance.  It is a view that can appreciate both forgiveness and judgement.  It can oppose wrong views while still tolerating them.  Toleration is not a matter of affirming relativism but is rather patient and hopeful, cruciform, and a matter of letting God be God in dealing with people while showing love toward enemies.  Toleration also entails appreciating that there are certain matters of indifference while others are important to uphold within Christian communities.  Ultimately, love is key to Christian relationships, and this provides a final and important basis for toleration.

The Church: 7b The Essence of Biblical Worship--Part Two

The Church: 7b The Essence of Biblical Worship--Part Two


Introduction
Worship entails being aware of and responding to God’s glorious and holy presence.  Various narratives from Israel’s history emphasise this point.  The holy of holies, with the real presence of God in the midst of His people, symbolises this aspect of worship for those who now worship God in Spirit and in truth.  What Christians, aware of their own sinfulness, add to this worship is their entering God’s glorious and holy presence through the Lord Jesus Christ, the mediator and intercessor of our faith.
A Sinful People and a Holy God
God’s purpose for Israel in the Old Testament narrative is to make of her a holy people for himself.  Moses was to tell the Israelites,
Exodus 6:6-8   'I am the LORD, and I will free you from the burdens of the Egyptians and deliver you from slavery to them. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment.  7 I will take you as my people, and I will be your God. You shall know that I am the LORD your God, who has freed you from the burdens of the Egyptians.  8 I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; I will give it to you for a possession. I am the LORD.'"
Israel would be released from slavery in Egypt for three reasons:
1. God had earlier established a covenant with the Patriarchs and promised them the land of Canaan;
2. Israel was treated as slaves in Egypt and would be freed from their burdens;
3. God wished to make Israel into a people for Himself.
 Tied to the first point is the history of the people of Canaan.  God does not take their land away from them until their sins have reached a tipping point.  For example, God says to Abram that his descendants ‘shall come back here in the fourth generation; for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete’ (Gen. 15.16).  God warns Israel not to sin like the Canaanites, who were vomited out of the land for their wickedness (Lev. 18.25).
The second point does not stand on its own: Israel’s liberation from Egypt is, at the same time, a matter of God forming Israel into a nation under His own rule.  The story of the exodus does not lend itself to a liberation theology without it also being a subjugation story of Israel under God’s Law: the exodus from Egypt is equally a story of the Law at Sinai.  If the first point on its own could lend itself to an Apartheid theology—God choosing a particular people without regard for others—the second point on its own could lend itself to a Liberation Theology—God being on the side of the slaves, marginalized, and poor.  Yet neither theology is correct, and the correction comes most especially when one realizes point three: Israel is to live according to God’s Law or else be destroyed just as the Canaanites, and they are to be liberated from the oppression of Egypt in order to live under God’s Law.
Moreover, Israel’s relationship to the land is essentially one of never securing the right to possess it.  They do not take the land during the time of the Patriarchs because they haven’t the numbers and because the wickedness of the Canaanites as a whole—unlike Sodom and Gomorrah—has not yet reached its zenith.  Israel is held off in the wilderness from entering the promised land for forty years because of its own sinfulness.  It enters the promised land as a holy people, led by the angel of the Lord to conquer the sinful Canaanites.  However, they fail to do so precisely because of their own sinfulness.  We might be inclined to read the story of the conquering of Canaan from the perspective of justice: how could God possibly destroy a people and let one nation depose another from its home territory?  The Biblical story, however, should be read in terms of Israel’s failures.  Israel fails to enter the land for forty years because of its own sinfulness.  The Canaanites are vomited out of the land for their gross iniquities.  The Israelites fail to cleanse the land and instead take on the wickedness of the Canaanites (a story powerfully illustrated in the repetition of Sodom’s sin by the town of Gibeah, Joshua 19).  Moreover, they are ultimately thrown out of the land, taken into exile, because of their wickedness: what God does with the Canaanites he does with His own people, and for the same reason: sin.  The story of Israel, therefore, is not of a holy nation that replaces an unholy nation.  It is rather the story of a nation that never lives up to the holiness God requires and that is ultimately judged just as the other nations.
In the historical records of the Middle East, one will find rulers bragging of their great victories, the glorious reigns of their rulers generation after generation.  Remarkably, and uniquely, the record of Israel’s kings in the Biblical historical records is one of God’s just punishment for repeated misrule and sinfulness.  Even the sins of the greatest Israelite king, David, are recounted.  What people have ever told their story with such awareness of their own sins?  Israel’s history is the history of a people uniquely aware of their own sinfulness before a holy God.
God’s Decision to Dwell Amidst a Sinful People
The remarkable part of all this, however, is that God chooses to dwell amongst this sinful people.  The theological understanding of this appears in Exodus 33.  In this remarkable chapter, following on the story of the sinfulness of Israel in worshiping their golden calf idol and breaking the Ten Commandments, God offers Israel the land of Canaan without his presence:
Exodus 33:3 Go up to a land flowing with milk and honey; but I will not go up among you, or I would consume you on the way, for you are a stiff-necked people."
God essentially says that He will fulfill His promise to the patriarchs but let Israel become just one of the nations—not a chosen, special people for Himself.  He warns Israel that, if He were to go with them, He in His holiness would consume them (Ex. 33.5).  But Moses responds by saying that, if God’s presence does not go with His people, He should not send them into the land of Canaan (Ex. 33.15).  Through the negotiations, God agrees to go with Israel.
God’s presence in Israel remains problematic: He is a holy God dwelling in the midst of a sinful people.  1 Samuel 3 tells the remarkable story of Israel bringing the ark of the covenant to the front line of battle against the Philistines in the hopes that God would fight for them.  Instead, the Philistines overthrow the Israelites and capture the ark.  Yet the ark is a problem for them, toppling their own god’s statue, Dagon, and either killing or giving the population of Ashdod and Ekron tumors (1 Sam. 5).  Another 70 persons were killed in Beth-shemesh when the ark is taken there, and the people ask, ‘Who is able to stand before the LORD, this holy God? To whom shall he go so that we may be rid of him?’ (1 Sam. 6.20). 
Samuel, as God’s appointed prophet over Israel, then helps Israel prepare for God’s presence among them.  He calls on them to put away their foreign gods, direct their hearts to the LORD, and to serve Him alone (1 Sam. 7.3).  Subsequently, however, the place where God’s presence dwells in Israel, Shiloh, is devastated due to the people’s sinfulness.  Jeremiah remembers this:
Jeremiah 7:12 Go now to my place that was in Shiloh, where I made my name dwell at first, and see what I did to it for the wickedness of my people Israel.
King David later has the ark of the Lord taken to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6; 1 Chr. 15), and it is eventually placed in the Holy of Holies of the Temple that King Solomon builds (1 Kings 8; 2 Chr. 5).  The presence of the Lord in the Temple, however, departs in the days of Ezekiel (Ezek. 10).  God’s people are themselves exiled from the land and await the return of God’s Spirit to restore them from exile and to renew them in righteousness (Isaiah 59.20-21; Ezek. 36.26-27; 37.14; cf. Jer. 31.31-33).  Ezekiel concludes with a vision of a restored Jerusalem that is called, ‘YHWH is There’ (Ezek. 48.35, my translation).
Worship in the Presence of a Holy God

This history of God’s holy presence among a sinful people is captured well in Isaiah 6, where the prophet appears before God in the Holy of Holies in the Temple.  Before God’s glorious presence, Isaiah is made aware of his own sinfulness and that of the people of Israel:

Isaiah 6:1-7 In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lofty; and the hem of his robe filled the temple.  2 Seraphs were in attendance above him; each had six wings: with two they covered their faces, and with two they covered their feet, and with two they flew.  3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory."  4 The pivots on the thresholds shook at the voices of those who called, and the house filled with smoke.  5 And I said: "Woe is me! I am lost, for I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!"  6 Then one of the seraphs flew to me, holding a live coal that had been taken from the altar with a pair of tongs.  7 The seraph touched my mouth with it and said: "Now that this has touched your lips, your guilt has departed and your sin is blotted out."

Significance of Israel’s Narratives for Christian Worship

For the Christian, who can look back to the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the cross and the ripping of the Temple curtain separating humanity from so holy a God as He whose presence is in the most Holy Place, the shout of ‘Woe’ is replaced with the praise of ‘Hallelujah!’  Christ has made it possible to enter the presence of God without fear.  Anticipating this work of Jesus, Zechariah says of the baby Jesus in the Temple,

Luke 1:68-79 He has raised up a mighty savior for us in the house of his servant David,  70 as he spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old,  71 that we would be saved from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us.  72 Thus he has shown the mercy promised to our ancestors, and has remembered his holy covenant,  73 the oath that he swore to our ancestor Abraham, to grant us  74 that we, being rescued from the hands of our enemies, might serve him without fear,  75 in holiness and righteousness before him all our days.  76 And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways,  77 to give knowledge of salvation to his people by the forgiveness of their sins.  78 By the tender mercy of our God, the dawn from on high will break upon us,  79 to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace."

The author of Hebrews makes this point by contrasting the first covenant with that established by Jesus:

Hebrews 9:11-14 But when Christ came as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation),  12 he entered once for all into the Holy Place, not with the blood of goats and calves, but with his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.  13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer, sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified,  14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to worship the living God!

Jesus is the mediator between God and humanity, as we read in 1 Timothy and Hebrews:

1 Timothy 2:5-6  or there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human,  6 who gave himself a ransom for all-- this was attested at the right time.

Hebrews 8:6  But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises.

Hebrews 9:15  or this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, because a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant. (Cf.Heb. 12.24)

Isaiah spoke of a coming suffering servant who would intercede for sinners because he ‘bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors’ (Is. 53.12).  Jesus both died for us and has been raised to the right hand of God, where He intercedes for us (Rom. 8.34).  Jesus, says the author of Hebrews, permanently holds the office of priest to intercede for and save those who approach God through Him (Heb. 7.25).

Conclusion

In worship, therefore, we come before a holy God even though sinners. We do not presume to do so without approaching Him through our mediator and intercessor, the Lord Jesus Christ.  Jesus has made a way possible to come before God—the way of the cross.  He died for our sins, taking on himself the iniquity of us all (Isaiah 53.6).  As Paul writes of Jesus,

Titus 2:14  He it is who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.

No worship service should be without an awareness of God’s holiness, and no worship service should be without a deep appreciation that Jesus has removed our sin through his own blood shed for us.

Worship that replaces the Lord’s Table in the middle of the room with something else, such as a band of musicians, is likely worship that elevates human talent above an awareness of the holiness of God and the sacrifice of Jesus to enable us to enter into God’s presence.  Worship that is more about the music and the preacher’s rhetorical abilities is likely not the worship that takes one into God’s presence with thanksgiving and praise.  Worship that has no space for quiet reflection, confession of sins, and seeking God will likely not experience God’s presence in all His glory and honour, grace and mercy.  Worship must reverently lead us into God’s holy presence with thanksgiving to Jesus Christ, our Saviour, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith (Heb. 12.2).

Issues Facing Missions Today: 41. Is it ‘Islam’ or ‘Radical Islam’?

Issues Facing Missions Today: 41. Is it ‘Islam’ or ‘Radical Islam’?

Western liberals wish to avoid the politically incorrect issue of whether terrorists from Middle Eastern and North African countries do what they do because of their Islamic faith or not.  Is this a religious matter, or is it terrorism without any religious motivation?  Even when the terrorists claim that they murder because of their faith, liberal Westerners embarrassingly try to insist that this is not the case.  They try to criticize the terrorists for misunderstanding their own faith, as though they are somehow more able to explain Islam than Muslims.  Some will say that the agents of death are not true Muslims but ‘radicalised Muslims,’ but others will avoid the term ‘Muslim’ altogether.

Why would someone attempt this rather peculiar ‘doublespeak’ (a term coined by George Orwell in his work on politically correct totalitarianism—Nineteen Eighty-Four)?  One reason, apparently, is that liberals in the West have for decades tried to sweep religion under the cultural rug.  They have exiled religious faith to private places—behind church walls or in houses—anywhere but in the public square.  They have legislated against holding Christian convictions if they translate in any way to public life.  So, if any Muslims do commit violence because of their faith, they must, the denial mill purports, have been provoked—as in the now infamous story knowingly invented and shamedly told about an offensive video in Bengazi, Libya as the cause of an attack on the American embassy in 2012.

A second reason appears to be that President Barack Obama began his presidency by attempting to mend relationships with Islamic countries.  He has, however, repeatedly found himself in the embarrassing position of trying to address unrest in the Middle East when denial of the issues becomes impossible.  He would prefer to think of this unrest in terms of attempts to establish democracy or in terms of the previous administration's bungling into foreign wars or in terms of oppression and ethnicity (especially when Israel is part of the equation).  In other words, President Obama lacks the will or ability—or both—to analyze a deeply religious part of the world in terms of religion.  He is not alone.  Believing that reality is constructed, not a matter of facts, Western liberals seem to believe that their version of others’ beliefs is just as viable, if not moreso, than what people say.

As a result, public discussion in the West cannot rise to the real issue of whether terrorism is normative Islam or radical Islam.  Is the heart of Islam being exposed in the horrific attacks over recent years, or is this some cancerous aberration of some ‘true’ and peaceful Islam?  Divisions in Islam appeared right after the death of Mohammed, of course, and one cannot really speak of a ‘true’ form of Islam—only major traditions.  Also complicating any answer to the question are the facts that sacred texts ought to be read in Arabic rather than translation and that what is written needs to be read in some context with explanations.  This is the missing dialogue as the Western media attempts to present events without religious analysis. 

The following quotations might be a start for those who are capable of reading documents before passing judgements and able to listen to uncomfortable views without feeling that their predetermined views are being threatened.  Sadly, this rules out many in the government, on university campuses, and in news agencies in the West.

These quotations are from the Sahih Bukhari, which is one of the books of the Kutub al-Sittah.  The Kutub al-Sittah contains six collections by Muhammed al-Bukhari of sayings of Islam’s founder and form part of the Haddith.  The Kutub al-Sittah is given particular authority by Sunni Muslims (of which ISIS would be a representative).[1]

Quotations

From Volume 4, Book 52: Jihaad

Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' " (4.52.176)

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." (4.52.177)

Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)" (4.52.196)

I asked Allah's Apostle, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, what is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." I did not ask Allah's Apostle anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more. (4.52.41).

The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."  (Sahih Bukhari 4.52.256).

Allah's Apostle sent us in a mission (i.e. an army-unit) and said, "If you find so-and-so and so-and-so, burn both of them with fire." When we intended to depart, Allah's Apostle said, "I have ordered you to burn so-and-so and so-and-so, and it is none but Allah Who punishes with fire, so, if you find them, kill them." (4.52.259).

Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " (4.52.260).

I asked Ali, "Do you have the knowledge of any Divine Inspiration besides what is in Allah's Book?" 'Ali replied, "No, by Him Who splits the grain of corn and creates the soul. I don't think we have such knowledge, but we have the ability of understanding which Allah may endow a person with, so that he may understand the Qur'an, and we have what is written in this paper as well." I asked, "What is written in this paper?" He replied, "(The regulations of) blood-money, the freeing of captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel." (4.52.283).

From Volume 8, Book 82: Disbelievers

Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die. (8.82.794)

From Volume 9, Book 84: Dealing with Apostates

Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. (9.84.58; also in 9.89.271)




[1] For a searchable English translation of the Sahih Bukhari, see: http://www.sahih-bukhari.com/.

Issues Facing Missions Today: 39.16 Mission as Renewal Ministry

Issues Facing Missions Today: 39.16 Mission as Renewal Ministry

Introduction

Our sixteenth point to evaluate in the proposed Missions 101 course is

Point 16: ‘Foreign missions is really something of the past: Asia is now sending missionaries, North and South America and Australasia are Christian, the Church is growing fastest in Africa, there is no open door in the Middle East, and Europe is where the Church started.’

An obvious focus in our course in response to this dubitable perspective is to discuss the unfinished task in evangelistic mission.  For that I might suggest engaging the project of mapping the unfinished task in missions undertaken by Mission Frontiers.[1]  What I would like to consider, however, is another matter that arises: the proposition that not all mission work is pioneering, evangelistic work.  My interest is not here about holistic missions, whereby the task of mission is expanded such that it can never be a finished task (‘you always have the poor with you,’ Mark 14.7; Mt. 26.11; Jn. 12.8).  Rather, my contribution here will be to reflect on mission—Great Commission missionary work (Mt. 28.18-20)--as renewal ministry.  In this regard, mission to the West (or in South Africa and countries in Europe, North America, and Australasia) comes into clear focus.

Sometimes evangelism and church planting provide the appropriate focus of missions in a certain region; sometimes Biblical teaching and Church renewal rise to the forefront of missionary efforts.  All such concerns are characteristics of Great Commission missionary work (Mt. 28.18-20).  Paul’s missionary work was pioneering (‘not where Christ has already been named,’ Rom. 15.20).  Yet his ‘second missionary journey’ began with revisiting the churches established during his earlier missionary travels.  His letters, moreover, were attempts to teach established churches from a distance even as he pressed ahead with new pioneering activities.  These letters were, on some occasions, concerned with correction and renewal.

Mission to the West may involve a replanting of the Church in fallow ground, in fields that have returned to hardened soil infested with thorns and thistles.  In such circumstances, the Church’s missionary activity is once again evangelistic, and denominations and churches in the region need to support new evangelism rather than protect existing yet dying parishes.  Furthermore, much of renewed mission to the West needs to involve revival or renewal work.  The line between churches still alive but needing revival and churches already dead is sometimes difficult to determine. 

Dying, Dead Religion

In his excellent work on the history and dynamics of Church renewal, Richard Lovelace stated:

Periods of spiritual decline occur in history because the gravity of indwelling sin keeps pulling believers first into formal religion and then into open apostasy.  Periods of awakening alternate with these as God graciously breathes new life into his people.[2] (40).

Formal religion, I would suggest, is that form of religion whereby liturgy becomes rote; Scripture’s authority is attacked while the community’s own dialogue is considered authoritative; dynamic belief is reduced to a mere, philosophical worldview; the call to radical discipleship of Jesus is equated with either social conservatism or a cultural, liberal activism, no longer challenging—not even uncomfortable; mission becomes little more than foreign, short-term excursions and de-emphasizes proclamation of the Gospel; invitations to conversion are replaced with concerns for religious dialogue; unity of the faith is understood as tolerance of diversity rather than agreement about the singularly true Gospel of Jesus Christ; the power of God is understood only as forgiveness and redemption and not also as transformation and God’s working of miracles; finances are devoted primarily to operating costs, salaries, and buildings; and so forth.  If so, then the formalization of religion is, as Lovelace suggested, the doorway to apostasy.

Yet there is hope.  Mission is God’s mission.  Renewal is renewal by the Spirit of God.  Nothing is so dead that God cannot resurrect it.  To seek such revival, though, requires realizing that what were once Christian communities witnessing the Gospel have become sick and, all too often, have already died.

Characteristics of Renewal

More important than determining whether a church or denomination has died is to focus on the characteristics of revival and the dynamics of renewal.  We more easily confirm what is alive than that something is dead—we call a doctor to confirm a death, but a child can say if something is alive.  Lovelace suggested five distinguishing marks of a genuine work of the Spirit of God in renewing the Church: the church that is being renewed by the Spirit (1) exalts Jesus Christ, (2) attacks the kingdom of darkness, (3) honours Scripture, (4) promotes sound doctrine, and (5) pours out love toward God and humanity.[3]  

It is actually important to expand this sort of a list, acknowledging that it is difficult to provide a complete list or ordering of the characteristics of renewal.  The leader of the first great awakening of the Church in New England, Jonathan Edwards (18th c.) expands on several of the characteristics of revival noted by Lovelace and would also have us add some more characteristics.  What follows are some further elements of renewal from Edwards’ Thoughts on the Revival of Religion in New England, part I (written in 1740).

Regarding honouring the Scriptures, Edwards says,

If we take the Scriptures for our rule, then the greater and higher our exercises of love to God, delight and complacency in him, desires and longings after him, delight in his children, love to mankind, brokenness of heart, abhorrence of sin, and self-abhorrence for it; the more we have of the peace of God which passeth all understanding, and joy in the Holy Ghost, unspeakable and full of glory; the higher our admiring thoughts of God, exulting and glorying in him; so much the higher is Christ’s religion, or that virtue which he and his apostles taught, raised in the soul (Thoughts on the Revival, I.II.I).

Relatedly,[4] Edwards stated that revival is marked by a conviction of the truth of the Gospel (cf. Lovelace’s ‘sound doctrine’):

to a firm persuasion that Christ Jesus is the Son of God, and the great and only Saviour of the world; and that the great doctrines of the gospel touching reconciliation by his blood, and acceptance in him, are matters of undoubted truth.  They have had a most affecting sense of the excellency and sufficiency of this Saviour, and the glorious wisdom and grace of God shining in this way of salvation; and of the wonders of Christ’s dying love, and the sincerity of Christ in the invitations of the gospel. 

Several additional characteristics of revival that Edwards notes include the following five.  There is (6) a deep repentance over sin.  For this point, Edwards draws attention to several revivals in the 17th century, including one in 1625 in the west of Scotland.  Many people, he says, were

so extraordinarily seized with terror in hearing the word, by the Spirit of God convincing them of sin, that they fell down, and were carried out of the church, and they afterwards proved most solid and lively Christians (I.II.III).

Another characteristic of revival is (7) a concern for propagation of the Gospel.  Edwards speaks of a ‘deep distress for the souls of others’ (Thoughts on the Revival, I.II.II).  Related to this, are (8) actual conversions.  The advancement of the Gospel to new frontiers and among new ethnicities characterizes revival:

there have been many of the remains of those wretched people and dregs of mankind, the poor Indians, that seemed to be next to a state of brutality, and with whom, till now, it seemed to be to little more purpose to use endeavours for their instruction and awakening, than with the beasts.  Their minds have now been strangely opened to receive instruction, and been deeply affected with the concerns of their precious souls; they have reformed their lives.... (I.IV)

A ninth, related characteristic of revival is (9) a seriousness about the things of God.  Edwards states in regard to the New England revival that:

There has been a great increase of seriousness, and sober consideration of eternal things; a disposition to hearken to what is said of such things, with attention and affection; a disposition to treat matters of religion with solemnity, and as of great importance; to make these things the subject of conversation; to hear the word of God preached, and to take all opportunities in order to it; to attend on the public worship of God, and all external duties of religion, in a more solemn and decent manner; so that there is a remarkable and general alteration in the face of New England in these respects (I.IV).

Edwards expands his comment about a sense of seriousness about God:

They have also been awakened to a sense of the shortness and uncertainty of life, and the reality of another world and future judgment, and of the necessity of an interest in Christ.  They are more afraid of sin, more careful and inquisitive that they may know what is contrary to the mind and will of God, that they may avoid it, and what he requires of them, that they may do it, more careful to guard against temptations, more watchful over their own hearts, earnestly desirous of knowing and of being diligent in the use of the means that God has appointed in his word, in order to salvation.  Many very stupid, senseless sinners, and persons of a vain mind, have been greatly awakened. (I.IV)

Finally, revival of the Church is characterized by (10) a change in people’s practices:

There is a strange alteration almost all over New England amongst young people.... [They have forsaken] frolicking, vain company-keeping, night-walking, their mirth and jollity, their impure language, and lewd songs....  And there is great alteration amongst old and young as to drinking, tavern-haunting, profane seaking, and extravagance in apparel.... (I.IV)

Edwards reiterates the role Scripture plays in guiding Godly conversations—another practice evident in churches experiencing revival.  Relatedly, a stricter observance of the Lord’s Day, confession of wrongs to one another, making restitution, awareness of the worthlessness of mere religious performances (I.IV).

Conclusion

The task of Great Commission missions (Mt. 28.18-20) involves teaching disciples all that Jesus commanded.  This would include sound teaching of the Kingdom of God, of the Gospel, of Holy Scripture.  Such teaching is foundational for new believers, essential for growing as disciples of Christ, and the key for any correction of error.  Missional work involves not only evangelistic efforts but also training in discipleship and teaching in order to revive the Church where it has fallen into error and laxity.  Revival and renewal of the Church is an essential part of missions.  Where the Church needs correction and renewal, such as in many parts of the West, the task of mission continues.  While some regions of the world require a planting or replanting of the Church, other regions need a mission of renewal along the lines described by Richard Lovelace and Jonathan Edwards.  Thus, evangelistic missionary efforts may proceed geographically, but renewal ministry and Biblically sound teaching is more universal and ongoing.




[2] Richard Lovelace, Dynamics of Spiritual Life: An Evangelical Theology of
Renewal (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1979), p. 40.
[3] Ibid., p. 42.  Also, over several chapters, Lovelace discusses the preconditions of continuous renewal (under the topics of knowing god and knowing ourselves, the depth of sin, the flesh, and the world), the primary elements in renewal (justification, sanctification, the indwelling Holy Spirit, and authority in spiritual conflict), and the secondary elements in renewal (orientation towards mission, dependent prayer, the community of believers, theological integration, and disenculturation).
[4] My own efforts to promote sound doctrine have particularly in recent years been directed towards the heretical affirmation of homosexual practice in mainline denominations and some other churches, colleges, and institutions in the West.  My co-author, S. Donald Fortson, and I have just completed the final editing for this work, which is especially a study of primary sources in church history, Scripture, the Ancient Near East, Judaism, and ancient Greece and Rome.  It should be in print by January, 2016: Unchanging Witness: The Consistent Christian Teaching on Homosexuality in Scripture and Tradition (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2016).

The Second Week of Advent: Preparing for the peace of God

[An Advent Homily] The second Sunday in Advent carries the theme, ‘preparation for the peace of God’.   That peace comes with the birth of C...

Popular Posts