Evangelical Christian missions are coming under criticism today for having failed to properly “contextualize” the Christian message so as to make it more acceptable to the receivers. Two previous articles have shown how that criticism ignores much of the long history of those missions and that it fails to do justice to the real theological differences between Christianity and the non-Christian religions such as Islam. Pretending that there is little difference will not help to convert people.

III. THE BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

It is when we view the modern contextualization movement among the neo–evangelicals from the Biblical perspective that we become especially alarmed. One fails to see how the major Biblical themes which deal with the mission of the church in the New Testament age have been taken into consideration. Furthermore, one notices upon the reading of the literature of the contextualization movement, the impact of the theologies of the World Council of Churches. Just as one takes notice of the eclectic nature of the wee teachings and pronouncements. so one finds the same thing occurring among the proponents of the new missiology. More emphasis on “incarnational” theology and less emphasis on preaching and proclamation. There is more preoccupation with secondary issues such as forms of worship. fasting and the timing of baptism than a genuine desire to understand the true nature of Islam and the Biblical guidelines for missions among Muslims. The guide of the new approach. as stated earlier in this paper, is not so much the Bible as the new discipline of cultural anthropology.

In this third part of my paper. I plan to deal with two main passages of Scripture which have tremendous implications for missions: Romans 10 and I Corinthians 1 and 2.

Romans 10

In Romans 10, Paul deals with the main reason for the failure of the Old Testament people of God in reaching their destiny. “They are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they do not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness” (Romans 10:2b, 3 NIV).

Paul does not deny the general principle revealed in the Old Testament that “The man who does these things will live by them” (Leviticus 18:5 NIV). The Jews of Paul’s days believed that they could be saved by doing the requirements of the law. The Muslims believe that God is pleased with them when they live in accordance with the Shari’a (Law). As we have noticed in the second part of this paper, in Islam salvation takes place under the auspices of revelation. While Paul did not deny the truth of Leviticus 18:5, he taught that there was no human being who could attain salvation by doing the law. God revealed another way which was suitable to the fallen state of man. Paul does not theologize as if no doctrine of redemption had been revealed. He quotes at length from the 30th chapter of Deuteronomy. Moses points to a righteousness which is given to the repentant sinner by God’s grace. The instrument or means to give this gift to us is the saving Word of God. Personifying the “righteousness that is by faith” Paul writes:

Do not say in your heart, ‘who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down) or, ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? ‘The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,’ that is the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead. you will be saved (Romans 10:6–9 NIV).

It is evident from these words of Paul that he puts the emphasis on both content and proclamation. Through this activity of the church. the saving Word of God comes so close to the hearers that it is as near to them as their own heart and mouth. Of course, the saving message must be appropriated. It must be believed and confessed. Paul is giving us in this chapter a very important teaching about missionary activity. He summarizes the teaching of this section of his Leuer to the Romans by saying in verse 17: “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.” Paul is dealing here with what is commonly known as the instrumental cause of our salvation. Saving faith, regardless of the cultural background of the hearer, comes into being in an atmosphere where Christ is proclaimed. This is not meant to aggrandize the role of the apostle or the messenger of the gospel. This is simply the God-ordained way of missions across the ages, in all lands and among all cultures.

     

I Corinthians 1 and 2

When we come to the teachings of Paul in I Corinthians 1 and 2, we meet the same high regard for the doctrine of proclamation. In doing his work as an apostle and pastor and in correcting doctrinal errors, Paul called the church of Corinth back to the fundamentals of the faith. He stated his thesis both negatively and positively. “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (I Cor. 1:17 NIV).

In elaborating this thesis in the remaining verses of chapter l and in chapter 2, Paul equally emphasized the contents of the proclamation and the appropriate method which was compatible with the message. His agenda after his conversion was simple: The preaching of the cross of Christ. Why was Paul concerned equally about message and method? He was aware of the fact that the content of the message: Jesus Christ and Him crucified, required a methodology which gave all the glory to the triune God and not to man. The faith of the converts must be anchored in the power of God and not in the wisdom of man.

Paul teaches us in a passionate way the importance of guarding the integrity of the Christian faith when propagating it. He must have been tempted to compromise in order to make the message more acceptable to the hearers. He knew very well that the presuppositions of the Greeks precluded any belief in the crucial doctrine of the resurrection of the Christ. Furthermore, Jewish tradition was not for the doctrine of a suffering and dying Messiah. But Paul did not compromise. This is what he said: “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God” (I Cor. 1:18 NIV).

When applying these words to the situation in the Muslim world, we have to realize that the message of the cross is foolishness to the followers of Muhammad. The gospel of the cross is denied both on Quranic and doctrinal grounds. According to Islam, Allah (God) did not and could not have permitted the Messiah to be killed by the Jews. But we must recognize that Muslims throughout history have not always been totally consistent with the teachings of their faith. The legalism of Sunni (orthodox) Islam has pushed many to look for peace with God in the way of Sufism (mysticism). Also, suffering and redemption are not foreign to the minds of the Shi‘ite Muslims. Neither should we forget in our missionary work that Muslims are never sure about their standing with their creator on the day of Judgment. All these factors must be taken into consideration when we present the gospel to them as well as when we elaborate missionary principles for work among them. But the fundamental reason why we must proclaim without compromise the word of the cross is that God has ordained it to be the means of grace for the salvation of all those who put their trust in the crucified and risen Messiah.

In our reflection on the first two chapters of I Corinthians, we also notice that Paul deals with the utter failure of man to find his way in the universe by relying on his own wisdom. “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe” (I Cor. 1:21 NIV). The implication of this apostolic teaching is tremendous. In God’s sovereign disposition, he has ordained that all humanly originated attempts to find him must fail, and they cannot but fail since man’s heart is totally darkened by sin. The only God-ordained way of salvation is through the preaching of the gospel. This great emphasis on proclamation may sound rather out of place in an age when dialogue is becoming very fashionable and when all kinds of gimmicks are being used to bring about conversions. And yet the words of Paul are very clear: “God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” We cannot avoid the offense of the word of the cross. The contextualization which the Muslims require of us to make our message really acceptable to them is nothing less than unconditional surrender. It is rather naive on the part of the many missiologists who are flying the banner of “contextualization” in missions to Muslims to think that the followers of Islam will settle for anything less than the Islamization of the Christian messenger!

Paul’s concern was always the utter necessity of being faithful to the received gospel. His mind was focused on the message. This does not mean that he neglected what today is called cross-cultural communication. As a native of the Mediterranean world, Paul was at home in several cultural milieus. He spoke the language of the people and gave not only the gospel message but himself with the message. He became all things to all men that he might win some. But he never compromised on the fundamentals. His main concern was always God-directed. Or as he put it in the second chapter of I Corinthians:

When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony of God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on men’s wisdom, but on God’s power (vv. 1, 2, 4, 5).

The faith which Paul spoke about in these verses was not simply the orthodox or apostolic teaching about the Messiah, but it was equally that personal faith which was evoked and created by the Holy Spirit. This is why the human instrument or channel was deemphasized by Paul. He wanted the faith of the converts to rest not on men’s wisdom, but on God’s power. It was such an important subject for the apostle that he kept on discussing the crucial importance of a proper methodology. The unique role of the Holy Spirit must be maintained in any teaching about missions. Unless and until the Spirit of God touches the hearts of those listening to the proclamation of the gospel, the words of the missionary remain fruitless. As Paul put it:

This is what we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in words taught us by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned (vv. 13, 14).

Needless to say, the apostle ended his teaching about the importance of the message and the proper method which must deliver the message with a special emphasis on the unique role of the Holy Spirit. He alone is the author of conversion. Regardless of the cultural or ethnic background of any human being, and no matter how hard we try to bring the message to His attention, the work of the Holy Spirit remains indispensable for his or her conversion.

Today’s Opportunity

Today, the mission of the universal church is at the crossroads. Unlike the early years of this century when it was rather easy to distinguish between liberal and Bible believing and orthodox missionaries, the lines are rather blurred in our times. The Liberationists quote Scripture in order to re-interpret the meaning of salvation and desire to clothe their ideology with the mantle of the gospel. Neo-evangelical missiologists who are especially concerned about the challenge of Islam, are eager to stress that they do not want to part company with the historic Christian tradition. However, our examination of their claims from the historical, theological and Biblical perspectives has shown us that their map for a successful missionary endeavor among Muslims cannot stand the test. If we follow in their footsteps, we are not showing fidelity to the tremendous missionary heritage of the ancient church or of the specifically Protestant era of missions during the last two centuries.

In conclusion, I would like to submit for reflection and discussion the following theses:

1. The Christian mission to Muslims has a bright future as long as it is carried on in the time-honored apostolic tradition, i.e ., with emphasis on the centrality of the preaching of the Word of God.

2. The present situation in the Muslim world is unique. Since 1800, it has been undergoing radical changes due to the end of the isolation of its masses from the currents of world th oughts. It is therefore uniquely open to the impact o f the Christian message. 3. The advent of mass communications is bringing the gospel to many areas of the Muslim world which had never heard its redeeming message. Young Muslims are very eager to learn about the contents of the Christian Scriptures. This provides us with a golden opportunity to present the claims of Christ. 4. The Muslim diaspora (dispersion) in the West presents a unique opportunity for mission work. The uniqueness of the Muslims’ presence, neither as conquerors nor as conquered, but as guests and immigrants, is a new situation which has no parallel in history. 5. A reading of Muslim literature written by open–minded writers and of listeners’ letters who are responding to gospel proclamation, indicates that the Lord is moving by His Word and Spirit. He is creating hunger and thirst among the Muslim masses for a message which can be found only in the authentic gospel. Our hope is re–kindled and we believe that the best days for missions among Muslims are ahead of us. Muslims will be converted through Christian testimony and through the preaching of Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

This paper is based on the presentation of Rev. Bassam M. Madany at a Caucus on Missions to Muslims held at Four Brooks Conference Center near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on July 9–11, 1985. Rev. Mr. Madany has for over 25 years been the minister of Arabic broadcasting of the Christian Reformed Back-to-God Hour at Palos Heights, Illinois. Born in Lebanon and preaching in his native language, he is intimately acquainted with the Muslim world.