Judaism, Islam, and Christianity: Three Views on Religion in Politics — Veritas Forum at Oxford

Veritas City of God? Christianity, Judaism and Islam in the Public Square, a Veritas Forum at Oxford with presentations from

is interesting, informative, and worth a watch or listen. Even the fact that such dialogues are happening today speaks to the happenings of our time.

However, it is frustrating that such interfaith discussions tend to degenerate into mere earthly-focused political chats which nearly disregard the whole premise of religion–that the supernatural grounds the natural. It is helpful to hear what heaven has to speak to earth; it is boring to bear with lips waxing eloquent on what earth wants to speak to heaven. Such talks will not be worth their salt until the supernatural comes into its own.

Related Reads

A Secular Faith: Why Christianity Favors the Separation of Church and State - by Darryl HartEvangelicals in the Public Square - by J. Budziszewski

Confessions for Confessing Christianity’s Unique Trinitarian Monotheism

Stan Guthrie weighs in on A Common Word, claiming that “All Monotheisms Are Not Alike.” His argument is that Christians ought to keep the Apostles’ Creed at hand when engaging in interfaith dialog, otherwise we lose our most basic confessional foundation from which to distinguish ourselves from other religions.

Aside from the obvious disappointing fact that due to Evangelicalism’s tepid theological context such articles have to advocate (instead of presume) the most basic of Christian creeds (a disappointment, BTW, which ought to cause the Evangelical world at large to ask itself, How did we get to the point where we have lost our most basic understandings of foundational Christian doctrines?), perhaps Guthrie’s thought allows reflection and expansion in other related directions.

For example, contrary to popular stereotypes which claim Reformed theology is “dead” or results in “frozen chosen” mentality, Reformed churches are the most suited to interfaith dialog, evangelism, and missions in our pluralistic world; for, to further Guthrie’s thought, if the Apostles’ Creed is so necessary and helpful for confessing our basic beliefs (i.e. within the context of interfaith dialog surrounding A Common Word), does it not follow that the more robust confessional riches of the Reformed tradition (i.e. the Westminster Standards and the Three Forms of Unity) are even more necessary and more helpful for filling in the picture of what the whole Bible teaches within the give and take of such interfaith dialogs?

Continuing this thought with a hypothetical, imagine the advantages in terms of clear and concise communication a Reformed believer will have in answering the following basic questions from the confessional standpoint of the Westminster Shorter Catechism (as opposed to Christians who have no such confessional moorings): What is man’s purpose (WSC 1)? What does the Bible teach (WSC 3)? What is God (WSC 4)? Do you believe in one God or three (WSC 5-6)? Is Jesus God or man (WSC 21-30)?

Like trained athletes ready to run the race, Reformed churches with confessions in hand ought to be first to the interfaith fray, eagerly seeking opportunities to confess the person and works of our Great God according to the Scriptures. In spite of (yea, in the very face of) “hyper-Calvinism” and “dead orthodoxy” stereotypes, Reformed believers ought to rejoice (with trembling, of course–Psa. 2) in their preparation for engaging wholeheartedly in interfaith dialog, evangelism, and missions amidst today’s pluralism with a confession that is worthy of the whole Gospel which it proclaims from the whole Holy Bible in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Related Resources

Reformed Confessions Harmonized 1523-1552

Westminster Confession of Faith Together with Larger and Shorter Catechisms (Hardcover) Heidelberg Catechism

Exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith (Hardcover) - by Robert Shaw Theology of the Reformed Confessions (Paperback) - by Karl Barth

Catholic-Muslim Forum – Day 3

This morning the Vatican news service published the Final Declaration of Catholic-Muslim Forum:

FINAL DECLARATION OF CATHOLIC-MUSLIM FORUM

VATICAN CITY, 7 NOV 2008 (VIS) – Made public yesterday afternoon was the final declaration of participants in the First Seminar of the Catholic-Muslim Forum, which took place in Rome from 4 to 6 November on the theme: “Love of God, Love of Neighbour”.

Each of the two sides in the meeting was represented by 24 participants and five advisers who discussed the two great themes of “Theological and Spiritual Foundations” and “Human Dignity and Mutual Respect”. Points of “similarity and of diversity emerged, reflecting the distinctive specific genius of the two religions” the English-language declaration says.

  1. “For Christians the source and example of love of God and neighbour is the love of Christ for His Father, for humanity and for each person” reads the first of the fifteen points of the declaration. “Love of neighbour cannot be separated from love of God, because it is an expression of our love for God. … Grounded in Christ’s sacrificial love, Christian love is forgiving and excludes no-one; it therefore also includes one’s enemies”.

    “For Muslims … love is a timeless transcendent power which guides and transforms human mutual regard. This love, as indicated by the Holy and Beloved Prophet Muhammad, is prior to the human love for the One True God”.

  2. “Human life is a most precious gift of God to each person. It should therefore be preserved and honoured in all its stages”.
  3. Human dignity is derived from the fact that every human person is created by a loving God and has been endowed with the gifts of reason and free will, and therefore enabled to love God and others. On the firm basis of these principles, the person requires the respect of his or her original dignity and his or her human vocation. Therefore, he or she is entitled to full recognition of his or her identity and freedom by individuals, communities and governments, supported by civil legislation that assures equal rights and full citizenship.
  4. “We affirm that God’s creation of humanity has two great aspects: the male and the female human person, and we commit ourselves jointly to ensuring that human dignity and respect are extended on an equal basis to both men and women.
  5. “Genuine love of neighbour implies respect of the person and her or his choices in matters of conscience and religion. It includes the right of individuals and communities to practice their religion in private and public.
  6. “Religious minorities are entitled to be respected in their own religious convictions and practices. They are also entitled to their own places of worship, and their founding figures and symbols they consider sacred should not be subject to any form of mockery or ridicule.
  7. “As Catholic and Muslim believers, we are aware of the summons and imperative to bear witness to the transcendent dimension of life, through a spirituality nourished by prayer, in a world which is becoming more and more secularised and materialistic.
  8. “We affirm that no religion and its followers should be excluded from society. Each should be able to make its indispensable contribution to the good of society, especially in service to the most needy.
  9. “We recognise that God’s creation in its plurality of cultures, civilisations, languages and peoples is a source of richness and should therefore never become a cause of tension and conflict.
  10. “We are convinced that Catholics and Muslims have the duty to provide a sound education in human, civic, religious and moral values for their respective members and to promote accurate information about each other’s religions.
  11. “We profess that Catholics and Muslims are called to be instruments of love and harmony among believers, and for humanity as a whole, renouncing any oppression, aggressive violence and terrorism, especially that committed in the name of religion, and upholding the principle of justice for all.
  12. “We call upon believers to work for an ethical financial system in which the regulatory mechanisms consider the situation of the poor and disadvantaged, both as individuals, and as indebted nations. We call upon the privileged of the world to consider the plight of those afflicted most severely by the current crisis in food production and distribution, and ask religious believers of all denominations and all people of good will to work together to alleviate the suffering of the hungry, and to eliminate its causes.
  13. “Young people are the future of religious communities and of societies as a whole. Increasingly, they will be living in multi-cultural and multi-religious societies. It is essential that they be well formed in their own religious traditions and well informed about other cultures and religions.
  14. “We have agreed to explore the possibility of establishing a permanent Catholic-Muslim committee to co-ordinate responses to conflicts and other emergency situations.
  15. “We look forward to the second seminar of the Catholic-Muslim Forum to be convened in approximately two years in a Muslim-majority country yet to be determined”.

The declaration concludes by affirming that all the participants “expressed satisfaction with the results of the seminar and their expectation for further productive dialogue”.

OP/CATHOLIC MUSLIM DECLARATION/… VIS 081107 (860)

My preliminary “Presbyterian” reflection is that point number 1 is the only one which dares to approach the ethical questions from a theological standpoint; the rest of the points appear merely sweet-talking, political-ethical rhetoric, a collective statement saying, “we both believe in being nice one to another.”

Whatever implications may have been implied in point 1 are ignored throughout the remaining 14 points. From a Christian perspective, are we supposed to understand from this statement, for example, that trinitarianism has no significant role in Christian ethics other than in characterizing its transcendent foundation? Are we to conclude further that having Christ, the God-man, as “source” and “goal” yields no practical ethical difference than were we to believe in an impersonal, transcendent power which is revealed by a non-God-man?

That theological differences between Christian and Muslim ethics are hardly approached in this statement is somewhat baffling if the stated purpose of the forum was to have a theological dialog concerning “Theological and Spiritual Foundations.”

Opening Day of the Catholic-Muslim Forum

For anyone following A Common Word and its aftereffects in the realm of international Christian-Muslim relations, here is the Vatican’s news release about the opening day of its Catholic-Muslim forum:

FIRST SEMINAR OF THE CATHOLIC-MUSLIM FORUM

VATICAN CITY, 4 NOV 2008 (VIS) – The First Seminar organised by the Catholic-Muslim Forum will begin this morning in the Vatican. The Forum was established by the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and by Muslim representatives in the wake of the Open Letter sent on 13 October 2007 to His Holiness Benedict XVI and to other heads of Churches and ecclesial Communities by 138 Muslim leaders, and of the reply, sent by the Cardinal Secretary of State in the Holy Father’s name on 19 November 2007.

According to a communique released by the Holy See Press Office, the theme of the Seminar – “Love of God, Love of Neighbour” – will be tackled from two main standpoints: “theological and spiritual fundamentals” and “the dignity of the human person and mutual respect”. The Catholic and Muslim sides will both deliver reports on each of these sub-themes, and their statements will then be the basis for the subsequent debates. Each of the two sides in the meeting will be composed of 29 people, including experts, religious authorities and advisers.

On the third day the participants in the Seminar are scheduled to be received in audience by the Holy Father. At 4.30 p.m. that afternoon a public session will be held in the Pontifical Gregorian University for the presentation of the Joint Declaration approved during the course of meeting. A Muslim and a Catholic representative will be present to answer any questions concerning the Seminar.

CON-DIR/MUSLIM CATHOLIC FORUM/… VIS 081104 (260)

A lot has happened since the initial publishing of A Common Word. It will be interesting to see whether the reports given at this forum will be made public.

Calvin on Angels: “Ministers and Dispensers of the Divine Bounty”

How often to angels enter into your view when considering the Christian life? If you’re like me, hardly ever. In fact, the subject of angels at first glance seems to be one of those topics that more fantastical and subjectivistic Christians like to dwell upon–and by which they are swept away into manifest follies and fantasies (i.e. books like this one).

While to our collective shame as Christians much folly surrounds the topic, the Holy Scriptures do tell the church at least some things about angels. And those things are encouraging! For example, listen to Calvin in his Institutes describe the chief duties of angels:

But the point on which the Scriptures specially insist is that which tends most to our comfort, and to the confirmation of our faith, namely, that angels are the ministers and dispensers of the divine bounty towards us. Accordingly, we are told how they watch for our safety, how they undertake our defence [sic], direct our path, and take heed that no evil befall us. There are whole passages which relate, in the first instance, to Christ, the Head of the Church, and after him to all believers. “He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.” Again, “The angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them.” By these passages the Lord shows that the protection of those whom he has undertaken to defend he has delegated to his angels. (Quoted from Calvin’s Institutes, 1.14.6, CCEL version.)

Calvin has some other great insights on the topic of angels, and the whole of chapter 14 is worth reading. Perhaps all of us (but especially us Reformed Christians) need to be more aware of the full magnitude of God’s works in creation (both natural and supernatural); isn’t it amazing to consider that angels are a means God uses to minister His bounties?

Besides enlarging our considerings about the Christian life, another area Calvin’s angeology may have some application for us is in Reformed missiology. For example, a topic Calvin does not deal with (at least directly) is one which comes up frequently in Muslim evangelism (and perhaps Eastern Christianity more broadly): What role, if any, do angels play in a person’s conversion? Many Muslim converts to Christianity claim to have visions of angels and/or visions of Jesus, etc. (I.e. watch Afshin’s testimony, or read Into the Den of Infidels.) Do Calvin’s reflections have anything to offer us as we Reformed Christians consider the issue?

I don’t have the answers, but my small experience thus far leads me to conclude that questions like the following are at least worthy of the church pondering together as she comes more and more in contact with her Muslim neighbors:

  • Am I even open to the idea that God uses angels as “the ministers and dispensers of the divine bounty toward us”?
  • Can the Scriptures help us embrace the supernatural works of God through angels while guarding our sinful lusts for fantasy and folly and keeping our focus on Christ?
  • Does a rigid focus on the “ordinary means of grace” tend to limit/forget God’s freedom to use “extraordinary” means?
  • And does a rigid focus on “extraordinary” means tend to pour contempt upon the “ordinary” means?

Islamist Ideology in the UK and Christianity’s Theology Toward Islamism

In his brief article, Islamist Ideology in the UK: Doing Fine (10 Aug. 2008), David Aikman argues two lines of evidence that show Islamism is “doing fine” in the UK:

  1. “poll after poll has revealed that British-born Muslims at British universities share a view of Islam dangerously sympathetic to Islamism, the preferred technical term for radical Islamic ideology,” and
  2. “two former British Islamists, Ed Husain and Maarjid Nawaz, have founded a counter-extremist Islamic think-tank in the UK [the Quilliam foundation] that exposes the domestic roots of British Islamic extremism and is attempting to counter extremist ideas freely current in the British Muslim community.” [For an example of its mediation work, see this Quilliam press release.]

Aikman concludes that, because “Islamists in the UK are far more numerous now than before 9/11 or 7/7,” groups seeking to counter Islamic extremism–like the Quilliam foundation–face “an uphill battle.”

To shift the evaluation of Islamism’s gaining strength to the narrowly religious sphere (which is a divergence from Aikman’s political evaluation) the Christian church faces a pressing religious question: Should Christians fear Islam, whether in its extreme Islamist form or its non-extreme forms? Is the church facing its own “uphill battle” when it faces Islam?

The God whose throne is heaven and whose footstool earth (Isa. 66:1; Matt. 5:34-35), the triune LORD who both creates and sustains all that exists (Gen. 1-2; Rom. 11:36), did He not promise to build his church, notwithstanding even the very gates of hell (Matt. 16:18)? Has He not, from the beginning, always fought His own holy wars, physically under the old covenant (i.e. Exo. 14:14, etc.) and spiritually under the new (Eph. 5)? Did He not already send His only Son, the Annointed One, to accomplish the task of salvation for the church? Is not Christ the promised seed of Eve who has indeed crushed Satan’s head (Gen. 3:15), who has ascended to heaven’s throne while his enemies are made His footstool (Psa. 2; Heb. 8:1; 10:13)? Is not the church now partaking in the Great Commission’s fulfillment (Matt. 28:18-20)? Why, then, should we fear “anything that is frightening,” even Islamists and Islam (1 Pet. 3:6 ESV)?

For Christians, the Alpha and Omega alone is our fear; it is foolish to fear anyone or anything less (Pro. 1; Heb. 12:29). Our God always fights “downhill.” This is not cocksurity; rather, it is the simple holy boldness akin to believing God is … God.

A Saudi Perspective on 9/11 and ‘Corrupt’ Christianity

Saudi Arabia’s former Minister of Information, Muhammad Abduh Al-Yamani, gives his perspective on 9/11 (it has been unfairly pinned on “Islam”) and Christianity (its scriptures are corrupt, and Islam calls Christians back to true monotheism).

On Al-Yamani’s former argument, American Christians may need to at least be willing to listen patiently. With his latter arguments Al-Yamani gives fairly standard Muslim apologetic defeaters against Christianity. Are we Christians ready with loving and sound apologetic defeater-defeaters?

Fitna and Faith: Pursuing A Christian Response – Part 5 – Where to Start

Geert WildersIn this fifth and final post on a Christian response to Geert Wilder’s Fitna film (see parts 1, 2, 3, and 4), I argue that the most basic starting point in our response is to ask ourselves the underlying theological question: Do I treat Muslims like images of God?

Cutting Through the Political Noise

Due to the constant political propaganda and jaundiced media coverage surrounding Islam’s so-called “clash with the West,” American Christians (especially those who, ironically, have never made a Muslim acquaintance) are constantly tempted to classify “Islam” and “Muslims” in broad-brush, propagandized terms: “All Muslims are terrorists” and “All Mosques are halls of hatred” are, sadly, common sentiments found not only in the media but also on the lips and in the hearts of Christ’s bride. Brothers and sisters, this ought not be.

Asking the Underlying Question

For Christians, fearing an unknown “other” leaves us in ironic bondage to our own fears and removes our gaze from our only proper fear: God Himself. However, Christians’ attitudes toward Muslims in our “post 9-11″ and “post 7-7″ days are more heinous than simply fearing an unknown other; for, by fearing our own caricature of the “other” we deprive him or her of the most fundamental connection we have with all others, the imago Dei. When we fail to see “the other” as a fully dignified human being created in God’s image, our vision becomes darkened like Cain’s, and we allow the most heinous de-humanizing sins to crouch at our doors.

The underlying question for Christians, then, in thinking through our response to Fitna is primarily theological, not political (but not without political implications): Are Muslims images of God, just as Christians and all other people? If yes (and yes is how the Sacred Scriptures answer, i.e., Genesis 1 and 2), then our response must be lived out in the fear of God, the giver of all human dignity.

Listening to Muslims Themselves

One way to treat Muslims with God-given human dignity and to cut through the political noise is listen to Muslims who themselves are debating questions about their own fundamental identity, such as:

In other words, if your primary knowledge of Islam comes from the media’s nightly newscasts, then you are woefully ill-equipped to engage Muslims in meaningful relationships. For, how would we Christians like it if Muslims started saying all Christians are like the wacky televangelists who spew their money mongering and cheap spiritual trickery all over the airwaves? Should we not extend the same courtesy to Muslims that we would expect of them in their understanding of Christianity?

Learning from Thoughtful Christians

The Protestant world is slowly awakening to its ignorance of the Muslim world. So, not many Christians are writing and speaking thoughtfully on Islam or Muslim evangelism. And, sadly, some of the ones who are speaking on Islam treat the subject more from a political than theological standpoint. These speakers usually end up proffering propagandized fear mongering than proclaiming the Gospel’s power to change lives. So, as a Christian you’ve got to be discerning when you listen to self-proclaimed Christian “experts” on Islam.

Perhaps one of the best places to start learning from Protestant leaders is former Muslims who converted to Christianity. These authors have first-hand, intimate knowledge of their former religion, and this experience allows them to cut through the noise easier than second-hand “experts.” Former Muslims who are providing thoughtful and loving engagement with Muslims include:

Where to Start Cutting, Asking, Listening, and Learning

Christian friend, do you know any Muslims by name? If not, you have just found your beginning: Instead of buying a book or starting a “research project,” visit a local Mosque, and make a Muslim friend. (The former things will only make sense in the context of the latter, and your experience will propel your studies.) Or, if you pay attention to who is living in your own neighborhood, you might not even have to visit a Mosque.

Fitna and Faith: Pursuing A Christian Response – Part 4 – Protestant Laity’s Ambivalent Attitude

Geert WildersSo far my attempt to think through a faith Christian response to Fitna has (1) introduced Geert Wilder’s film, (2) surveyed its political repercussions, and (3) examined how the Christian world is officially responding to Fitna. In the final two parts I will (4) fill out the Protestant picture by exploring the laity’s response and (5) suggest a theological trajectory for living out your own Christian response.

What do we see, then, in the Protestant picture when we add the laity?

Filling in the Protestant Picture: “Unofficial”/lay response

In the conclusion to Part 3 I suggested that more must be added to the picture in order to see the whole Protestant landscape; That “more” is the laity. Although Protestant groups such as the WCC (World Council of Churches) and PCN (Protestant Church in the Netherlands) have stood with Muslims in strongly condemning Fitna as heinous political propaganda, Protestantism’s laity does not fully agree with her leaders. Some Protestant parishioners even support Fitna.

Painting with broad brushes, two basic attitudes have emerged among Protestant laity in response to Fitna.

Seeing Two Basic Lay Responses: Arrogant “Amen!” or “Nuance Needed”

Arrogant “Amen!”

First, one group of Protestants is saying a hearty “Amen!” to Wilders’ Fitna film and is thanking him for simply “showing the scriptural [Koranic] authority for a lot of the acts we see on the news today.” Apparently, such Protestants interpret Wilders’ film as an unbiased, fair representation of the truth about Islam. This “Amen” approach is seen, for example, in Jay Smith’s response to Fitna:

(Excursus: Speaking from my own experience visiting Mosques and attempting to forge friendships across the Cross and Crescent divide, the arrogance, ignorance, and odiousness of such “Amen!” responses from Protestants is appalling, especially to those of us who are actively engaging in Muslim evangelism. When Muslims themselves, Christian leaders, political leaders, and news media all admit that Fitna is obvious political propaganda, Christians who give a hearty “Amen!” to Fitna allow themselves to be used as vessels of political fear mongering and preachers of bigoted social exclusion. Such actions are directly contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which calls upon all Christians to love their neighbors, including their enemies. How shall we ever share the Gospel with Muslims if we do not love them enough to even listen to what they have to say about violence in their own religion, but instead paint them all as terrorists?)

“Nuance Needed”

Second, a contrary Protestant voice can also be heard by those who see Fitna not as an unbiased presentation, but rather as an obvious display of political propagandizing. For example, Australia’s Center for Public Christianity produced a Fitna response calling for a nuanced and loving Christian response which sees through the political smoke and mirrors without ignoring real difficulties:

(See also the Center for Public Christianity article by Richard Shumack, Fitna: A Christian response to an anti-Islamic film.)

Comparing the Protestant Response to the Political

While surveying the international political responses to Fitna in part 2 I noticed two basic attitudes: derision or downplay. The common element is that both attitudes recognized Fitna‘s genre to be political propaganda: One group saw the film and shrugged off the propaganda; the other condemned the propaganda; but, both groups saw the propaganda.

Although the Protestant response also reveals a basic twofold division (“amen” or “nuance needed”), the demarcation is different. On the one hand the “nuance needed” Protestants see Fitna‘s genre clearly as political propaganda, and these Protestants condemn the film and/or call for a much more nuanced approach to Christian-Muslim relations. On the other hand the “Amen to Fitna!”portion of the Protestant church does not account for the film’s genre and thus praises Fitna for shining an unbiased light of truth. How could Protestants, then, be so divided especially when the film’s genre seems so obviously propaganda?

This important question leads us into our fifth and final post in which we will briefly sketch the underlying theological framework Christians need to live out their own faithful response to Fitna in their local churches and communities.

Islam: Monolithic or Multifarious? Ask a Muslim Mystic

A Mystical JourneyAs the world awakens to the growing Muslim population one of the new questions facing Christians is whether all Muslims are alike. While we Christians are no strangers to wide streams of diversity within our own religion, strangely we have had a hard time of allowing the possibility of diversity within Islam. Perhaps we should spend more time listening to Muslims themselves explain their own diversity, as is the goal of A Mystical Journey, a group of Sufi and other esoteric Muslims traveling across America to share their diverse expression of mystical Muslim traditions.

Watch the CNN video coverage of A Mystical Journey.