MISSIOLOGICAL METHODOLOGIES

2009

Christians say: “Christ is the Only Way to God!”

• Problem: We now live in a 'global village'• A multi-faith society • A multi-cultural society• An ‘inclusive’ society• Thus, ‘exclusive’ claims may offend.

Many People Say:• Jesus: great teacher, prophet, leader and

reformer• Perhaps one way to God. • Thus Christians are arrogant, intolerant and

narrow-minded to suggest he is the only way• Politically incorrect

“All Faiths Must be the same”

Commonalities:• Spiritual dimension • Moral codes• Authority for PeaceDifferences :– i.e. Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism– Nature of God, man, sin, salvation, and the world– Too many differences

They cannot all be right!• Perhaps all contain aspects of the

truth. •But if one is true, in an absolute

sense• Then it follows logically that none

of the others can be also. • It's one or none• So, believing this, how should we

go about persuading others?

WHAT METHODOLOGIES EXIST?

• There is no one ‘best’ method• What works in London, may not work in Ludhiana• Learn from those who have gone ahead– The missionaries who have stayed on, they know what’s

best

• There are a few classical models which we can learn from, and employ…

Let’s look at the primary models:

[1] Tent-Making

• Getting into ‘closed countries’ by using a skill– Doctors, nurses, teachers, students, engineers…

even tourists• Through that means you introduce the gospel

into your conversations• Usually only for a short time• Often you will need to leave the country

periodically (visas, etc…)

Advantages:

• It is many times the only way to get into certain countries: Middle East, etc…

• It gets you close to people immediately• It is non-threatening• You come in with status, especially if you are in the

medical profession• You don’t necessarily have to know the language• In many cases you don’t have to raise money

Problems:• You can only do ‘moon-lighting’ evangelism• Difficult to understand the culture• Difficult to make long-term relationships (you will

always be perceived as an outsider)• You are at the mercy of your ‘company’, or the

government• There is little ‘in-country’ support• Converts have little ‘follow-up’, discipleship

[2] Programs

• Schools• Hospitals• Orphanages…etc…

Advantages:

• They provide a need to the society• Are non-threatening• Usually are more permanent (great legacy)• Can provide education and employment for

Christians• Gospel ‘should’ be preached within the context of

the program (chapels, classes)

Problems:• Expensive (‘white elephants’)• Often lead to ‘Rice Christians’• Tend to become utilitarian, and often secular• Can be abused by local people (orphanages)

[3] Proclamation

• To proclaim Christ and the gospel publicly by speaking and/or preaching.

• Open-Airs, Public meetings…• Using media, tracts, literature, TV, Radio,

internet, etc…• The Most Common form of evangelism.• Usually is long-distant evangelism

Advantages:

• Easy to prepare• Simple to Understand• Lots of Examples to follow• Sometimes Cheap• Takes little time• Presents your agenda• Uses your background and experience

Problems:• Can be expensive• One-way communication • Few responses• No rebuttals• Few relationships• Least effective way to win Converts

[4] Irenic/Friendship evangelism:

• Coming together through shared relationships.• Attending their meetings (Campus or Mosque)• Mosque visits• Home visits

Advantages:

• Easiest way to meet ‘cold contacts’• Many times the only way to meet contacts• Conducive to ‘Irenic’ relational cultures• Little hostility• Little persecution• Good way to ‘set an example’

Problems:

• Takes time and energy• Difficult to get beyond friendships– Due to fear of losing the contact

• Can cause jealousies• Gospel isn’t always preached effectively

[5] Gospel in the Qur’an (Camel):

• Finding Stories/verses in the Qur’an as a Bridge• Using these stories to introduce Gospel truths• Once they believe these truths about Jesus, you can

then introduce the Gospels• Examples:– Sura 19:33 (&15) ‘Jesus did die on the Cross’– Sura 19:19 ‘Jesus was the only perfect Man’

Advantages:

• It begins with something they are familiar with…the Qur’an

• It doesn’t confront their view of ‘Issa’• It makes it easier to make contacts• It is not as threatening

Problems:• It is ‘eisegesis’ (reading into the Qur’an what is not

there)• It can create anger in Muslims who know better.• It can give authority to the Qur’an unintentionally• It can easily ‘cheapen’ the gospel• Once you start with the Qur’an, it’s hard to move

on

[6] Contextual Model:

• Breaking down any social barriers to the Gospel, by incarnating oneself in the local context.

• Became popular in the 1970s (i.e. Phil Parshall & Frontiers)

• ‘Walking, eating, dressing, living incarnationally, etc… (C1 – C6)

Advantages:• It helps you to become part of the culture and

adapt easily• It makes it easier to gain relationships and trust• People tend to be more responsive…initially• The Church, and converts don’t stand out as

foreign, or strange• There is normally not as much persecution of

converts

Problems:• Can lead to Syncretism – (‘Son of God’, ‘Jesus as Lord’, ‘saviour’ -> ‘Jesus as messenger’)– 5 Pillars are all salvific. We are now freed from them.

• Often seen as deceitful, & leads to persecution when they find out

• Can mis-communicate & confuse the Gospel.– Muslim worship forms were imposed on all cultures, & thus

define Islam.– To adapt prayers, dress, or x-tian mosques, confuses & threatens

them.• Muslims define themselves by external dress– Forms function by reinforcing the meanings of beliefs and

ideology.

[7] ‘Insider Movement’

• Acts 21:20-26 – Paul does purification rites to show he is still ‘living under the law’

• 1 Cor. 9:19-22 – Paul says we must “Become Like” those we minister to (i.e. Become like Muslims)

• 1 Cor. 7:17-22 – Paul says those who believe should “stay like” that which God called them to.

Advantages:• There is little to no Extraction [i.e. ‘Put new wine

(love for Jesus) in ‘new’ wine skins (Islam), and not ‘old’ wineskins (Christianity)]

• Thus, there is little to no Persecution• There is little to no Parasitism (no financial

responsibilities)• There are many ‘believers’ & many ‘Janaat’s’• Insider believers can ‘minister’ to their families (i.e.

‘Lamps on a stand’)

Problems:• There is a manipulation of Scripture to find

authority for this paradigm (i.e. Lamp on a stand, and ‘old’ wineskins)

• There seems to be a fear of persecution, yet persecution is promised in Matt. 10:34-39

• There seems to be an unhealthy desire for quick numbers

• This is primarily chosen by young American Christians who are embarrassed by their church/culture

Problems cont.• It is impregnated with ‘Post Modern’ thinking• They aren’t able to separate Arab culture from

Islam• They trivialize the importance of Islamic ‘identity

codes’• They don’t understand the spiritual power of these

codes• Their ‘Christology’ is weak to non-existence (i.e.

“Mahatma Gandhi will be in heaven due to his love of Jesus”)

[8][8] DIALOGUE:DIALOGUE:Four Principles of Dialogue (British Council of Churches)Four Principles of Dialogue (British Council of Churches)• Dialogue begins when people meet each other, pointing out that

each person needs to be approached as individuals, and not simply representing a system of beliefs.

• Dialogue depends upon mutual understanding and mutual trust, suggesting that each person should be permitted to define themselves concerning what they believed.

• Dialogue makes it possible to share in service to the community, alluding to the fact that dialogue can be a vehicle to bring about harmony between those of separate faiths.

• Dialogue becomes the medium of authentic witness, suggesting that because it begins in a context of trust, dialogue allows not only a witness of one’s own faith, but “assumes the freedom of a person of any faith, including the Christian, to be convinced by the faith of another” (Riddell 2004:111)

• Inclusive Principles

Problems with DialogueImpractical:

rarely engage publicly with that which is foundational to each faith, yet likewise separates them, namely, their conflicting and often contradictory belief statements.

Unequal No reciprocity

Un-trustworthyMuslims suspect dialogue, as it leads to religious syncretism, compromises the faith, a subtle ploy towards prosletysm, a Western Christian initiative, perceived as an adjunct of colonialism, a covert form of evangelism, since usually Muslims are invited as guests, and are not able to set the agenda, so they feel they have little to gain

UnpopularThey do not attract Muslims

CONCLUSION:

• Dialogues do bring Christians and non-Christians together• Dialogues ‘get the ball going’, start the agenda• They offer a wide range of modelsBUT:• They are usually promoted by Christians only• They attract Liberal-Western & elite Muslims• They tend not to be robust, more acquiescent on the part

of the Christian participants.• And most importantly, they don’t reach the ones causing

most of the problems today (i.e. the radical Muslims)So, what’s the solution?

[9] Debate/Confrontation:

• (2 Cor.10:5) “demolish arguments and take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ”

• Openly challenging the beliefs of another person, using literature, media, etc...

• Using the conventional format of public debate.

Advantages:• Gets right to the ‘nub’ of the problem• One of the few vehicles which confronts Islam

publicly• Is conducive to Muslims, as it fits their culture, and

their form of communication• Brings in the crowds• Helps Christians feel confident• Forces Christianity into the public sphere, where it

belongs, but hasn’t been…

Problems:

• Can create tensions• Goes against our cultural proclivities• Few places to train, or practice• Not many good models today• Consequently, not very popular• Can create fear of repercussions• Don’t know the answers to the questions

(FAQs)…so…LEARN THEM!

Colin Chapman (7 Criticisms)

1854 Munazara in Agra: between Carl Pfander & Valpery French vs. Rahmat Allah & Dr. Wazir Khan

1) Attacks against another belief sometimes degenerate into polemics, resulting in nothing more than a ‘tit-for-tat’ criticism of Christianity by them, and vice versa.

• Yes, however, culturally good for communication, & exchange of ideas, since the Gospel is confrontational, so should expect ‘tit-for-tat’ and let people compare, and come to their own conclusions.

• Zwemer, “If the missionary to Moslems has a creed of less content and holds it less passionately than the loyal and orthodox Moslem holds his own-so much the worse for the missionary” (Zwemer 1941:225)

2)Debates appealed too much to the reason and the intellect, and not enough to the heart

• Yet, Muslims/Humanists instigate reasoned intellectual challenges, geared towards auth. of Bible, & Jesus

3)Christian debaters are not aware of the latest Biblical critical research ongoing in the West, and so become helpless when opponents use them.

• ‘Shame on us’! Learn it, always be a student, in praxis

4) Debates are conditioned by the social and political context in which we work, i.e. freedom to be critical.

• Yes, so let’s use those freedoms, and not run away, or only allow our opponents these freedoms!

5) We should question the validity of public debates which concentrate entirely on theological issues at the expense of the many social and political issues which both Muslims/Humanists and Christians share in common

• Be involved in ‘social gospel’, but introduce Jesus crucified, and debates will naturally evolve.

6) Responding in a polemical fashion merely mimics the agenda of our protagonists, which merely forces the Christian on to the defensive, and we fall into a scriptural paradigm we probably don’t even accept ourselves.

• Confuses content and methodology, Jesus is our revelation, but debate helps us convince them so.

7) Chapman argues for a complete cessation of polemics itself, believing it to be not only disrespectful, but unloving.

• Define disrespect and love, was Christ disrespectful or unloving in chasing out the money-changers (Mat.21:12-13), or confronting the Pharisees (Matt.23:13-33)?

Purposes for Evangelism

Criteria and Methodology to help in your ministry with Muslims

1) Public:

Purpose is to Define what you believe, Defend it, then Reverse the challenge publicly.

• You are in hostile arenas• You are in public arenas• Now is the opportunity to learn your apologetics/polemics

adequately, before applying it elsewhere.

2) Laboratory:

Remember now is the time for trial and error.

-A place to practice what you have learned in class, in your research, in your discussions, etc...-Expect to make mistakes.-Don’t be upset when you do.-Simply learn from them, then ‘get back up on the horse’, and try again, or move on.-You are a ‘sojourner’ here, thus you won’t be held accountable for the mistakes you make here.-Learn from those mistakes, and make sure you don’t repeat them.-This is ideal preparation for your chosen field.

3) Mosaic: Muslims are not monolithic, but multi-faceted.

• Any sort of Muslim can be standing in front of you

• Allows you to ‘dovetail’ (apply) responses for each personality.

• Forces you to meet their specific need.• “What is good for Abdul may not be good for

Ahmed”

4) Focus: The Audience is your primary goal, not necessarily the one you’re speaking to

• So, concentrate on them, and not on the detractors.

• By focusing on them, you neutralize the detractors• Use the crowd to substantiate your view. • Look at them when you talk, speak to them,

question them, involve them, and employ their support.

• Your larger audience are the ones you are trying to convince.

METHODOLOGY:

1)1) Pray:Pray:

• Always have a prayer covering.• Remember this is a battle you are in, and thus

requires ‘weapons not of this world’.• Prayer is to be employed: before, during, and

after the time you are ‘in battle’.

2) Pairs:

• Try always to go in twos, or more.• One person to speak, the other to pray.• Preferably, one should be a veteran, with

experience.• Roles can be flipped, depending on the need, or

time.

3) Rule of Thumb # 1

• ‘Scratch where they itch’• To know them, you will need to first listen to them.• Yet, maintain control at all times.• Don’t let them set the agenda.• Stay away from ‘shopping list questions’

4) Rule of Thumb # 2:

• ‘Scratch where they don’t itch’• You must go beyond friendship, to introduce the

Gospel, which will confront!• Assume a heated response.• The Person-hood of Jesus will confront, a worthy

battleground.

5) Response:

• ‘3 C’s’ = ‘Quick’, ‘Concise’, yet ‘Comprehensive’• We tend to take our time, so learn to give ‘2

minute sound-bites’ (usual attention time)• We tend to be verbose, so be succinct.• We seek erudition, so seek simplicity (remember

‘8th grade educational level’)• We tend to be ‘fuzzy thinkers’, so learn to be

logical.

6) Praxis:

There is a need to be multi-faceted in your response.

• We must use both Apologetics and Polemics.• We must be both Irenical and Confrontational• So that the onus is not always on us, but back

where it belongs…on them.• Not ‘either’ - ‘or’; but ‘both’ - ‘and’

7) Mannerism:

• Be Gentle, yet Passionate, Be Considerate, yet Forthright.

• How you say it is almost as important as what you say.

• Show confidence in your material, and in your decisions.

• Do not employ ‘Character Assassination’.• Our material is too good, and our testimony too

precious.• Don’t waste time on innocuous argumentation

(i.e.“Don’t throw pearls before swine”)

8) End-game:

• Bring discussions around to the Gospel • (i.e. ‘How could God have a Son’, ‘Is Islam or

Christianity peaceful and tolerant’)• Remind yourself who is in charge, and for whom

you are there [the Lord]!

EXTERNAL LOGICAL FALLACIES: -typical arguments afforded by Muslims (with help from Robert Morey)

1. “B B” Paradigm: Make any claim, without sourcing it in scripture. • You become your own highest authority • (i.e. Benazir Bhutto: ‘Islam is relevant to 20th c.’)

2. Imposition Paradigm:

Take your premise and impose it on another• (i.e. ‘Tanzil’ revelation, Where does Jesus claim ‘I

am God’, Jesus’ seeming inferiority, Paradigm of a ‘dualistic’ God)

3. Smokescreen/Red Herring:

Tactic to divert attention from the weakness of one’s own premise, with the intention of putting us on the defensive

• (i.e. trinity, Crusades)

4. Historical Precedent:

The new may test the old, and takes precedent over it

• applying ‘law of abrogation’ [S.2:106; 16:101] to scripture

• (i.e. Scriptural corruption, Jesus of faith vs. Jesus of history)

5. Cyclical Argument:

Assume in your premise what you are going to state in your conclusion

• (i.e. Muhammad gives authority to the Qur’an, and vice versa)

6. False Analogy/Equivocation:

Comparing two things as if they are parallel when they are not

• (i.e. revelation, Jesus, Allah)

7. The Fallacy of Irrelevance:

Introducing issues with no logical bearing on the subject, as a proof of credibility

• (i.e. ‘Sura like it’, Qur’anic science, Celebrity conversions, Islamic growth)

8. Phonic Fallacies:

The phonetic sound of a word should not be used to twist its meaning

• (i.e. Allah = Allelujah, Muhammad = Machmad, Mecca = Bacca)

9. Straw Man Arguments:

Put false arguments into mouth of your opponent, then knock them down

• (i.e. S. 5:116, Catholicism)

10. ‘Might is Right’ Fallacy:

Loudest and most long-winded supposedly wins the argument…having the last say…

• (i.e. ‘Poke, Punch & Pinch’)

INTERNAL LOGICAL FALLACIES: (typical arguments afforded by Christians)

1. Losing Friends:

• It’s a risk, but with gentleness & respect (1 Pet.3:15-16) they will stay

2. Appearing judgmental:

• Being Good = Being Christian, thus non-Christians are not good?

3. We must use only Dialogue, never stoop to confrontation:

• Dialogue: We cannot talk to non-Christians about the Gospel unless we first talk with them, & so earn the right to be heard.

• Confronting: >demolishing arguments and taking captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ’ (2 Cor.10:4-5).

• showing the holes in peoples thinking (in Lk.20:20-39; Acts 17:28-29)

• i.e. lead out on a current topic, and go on into >deeper things = (news, sports etc...)

• Start with their ideas & lead them ‘to their logical conclusions’

Conclusion – Things we MUST do:1) Accept the need for a Public Confrontation of Islam2) Realise that we are the only ones capable of engaging it3) Move beyond our fear of Confrontation4) Move beyond our fear of Repercussions5) Move beyond our desire for Security6) Move beyond our opponent’s Sensibilities7) Move beyond dialogue → to debate8) Begin to teach Christian Apologetics & Polemics9) Begin to publicly confront their auth. (Qur’an)10) Begin to publicly confront their models (Muhammad)11) Some leaders must model it (i.e. ‘ol Codgers’) 12) Others can begin to practice it: &

We must ‘Stand in the Gap’1) It’s the best way to get their attention2) Forces our antagonists to respond3) May be the 1st time they have heard criticism4) Gets the agenda moving5) ‘Pre-Evangelistic’6) We don’t have a choice

-Muslims/Humanists tend to initiate the confrontation-Fits their cultural paradigm

7) Creates a Christian Public Presence8) Does that which the state may/can not do9) Upgrades and strengthens the church10) We have the only alternative!11) We have the Best Material!12) WE HAVE THE TRUTH…and his name is JESUS!

What weapons will we use?What weapons will we use?

• “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they are divine power to demolish strongholds. 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”

(II Corinthians 10:3-5)