LINGEL_COURSEBOOK_V5

glory (Heb 2:10). Jesus is not ashamed to call believers his brothers because they are
from the same “one,” whether that means from the same Father (NRSV) or family (NIV)
(Heb 2:11). There is an organic, familial relation with God that goes to the heart and core
understanding biblical truth. Our hope of glory is to have Christ in us (Col 1:27), and it
is Jesus’ sonship that is our access to glory (John 17:5, 22). Our destiny is to be
conformed to the image of God’s Son (Rom 8:29). We are made in God’s image. The
reason we are conformed to the image of his Son is found within the archetypal Father-
Son pattern inherent to God himself. As C. S. Lewis said in his sermon, “The weight of
glory,” we are on a journey toward home. I believe that if we delight ourselves in the
Lord, he will give us the deepest desires of our heart. Our deepest desire on this journey
toward home is to live in close, loving relationships. Relationships are most deeply
experienced within families. God is the eternal Father, and we who believe in his Son
are his sons and daughters, moving toward the glory of eternal oneness with him in
conformity to the character of his Son.

In summary, what are the theological and practical values of Christ’s eternal, divine
sonship for the believer? These treasures include:

• Jesus’ sonship, a union as Son with the Father, is the avenue for humans to be

one with God (see John 17, especially vv. 1-2, 21-2). Jesus grants human beings
access to relationship with God similar to what he himself has, a relationship
that is unequivocally expressed by his use of the term Abba, Father, in prayer.
Because Jesus is the Son of God, his followers may become sons and daughters
of God who can likewise address God as Father (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:4-5).

• Jesus’ sonship is the basis of God’s sending the Spirit to his children, the Spirit of

sonship (Rom 8:15; cf. Gal 4:6).

• Jesus’ sonship is the basis of his high priestly ministry, providing us access and

giving us acceptability with God (Heb 4:14). It is also the basis of his eternal
priesthood, in which he intercedes for his people (Heb 7:25-8).

• As the Son Jesus has full authority to reveal God (Mt 11:27). His sonship also

completes God’s revelation, which comes through him (Heb 1:1-2).

• God’s willingness to sacrifice his Son is the basis for our assurance of the depth

of God’s love and permanence of God’s acceptance of us (Rom 8:32; 1 John
4:9-10).

• Jesus’ sonship is the basis for granting believers true freedom (John 8:36).
• We are transferred from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God’s dear

Son. In the Son we have redemption (Col 1:13-14).

• Our eternal destiny is conformity with the Son (Rom 8:29).
• The Son gives eternal life to whomever he chooses (John 5:21; 6:40).
• The Son’s authority to judge terrified the demons, guaranteeing their doom.

Satan attacked Jesus’ sonship in the wilderness, attempting to corrupt his
Sonship into a self-serving distortion (Mt 4:3-6).

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 101

In short, Christ’s eternal identity as Son of God is the heart of our faith; it is
fundamental to our existence as believers. As Murray puts it, John 3:16 implies that the
faith by which believers are saved is faith directed to him in his character as the Son,
just as it is faith in the Son of God that gives us life (Gal 2:20). I will let Murray’s cogent
statement summarize the centrality of the term, Son of God:

The rudiment of faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior is that he is the Son of God. His
sonship belongs to his identity, and a faith or confession or proclamation that is not
conditioned by what he is in this specific character falls short at its center and thereby
robs the Savior of the honor that is intrinsically his.178

Questions:

1. Muslim Question: Jesus was the eternal Son of God primarily in physical terms, God
had sex [therefore had a wife] and consummated a Son? What is your response?

2. Jesus eternal Sonship and divinity could be understood in only metaphorical
categories: Jesus is a "Son" is simply a metaphorical, for another reality, and therefore
can be understood in different terms then literal renderings: "Son of God" like
"Messiah", "beloved" or "prince"? Why or why not?

3. Herman Bavinck said that: "God is Father in the real and complete sense of the
term"...as he was the first Father. How does understanding this relate to Jesus and
our adoption and sonship?

4. Dr. Richard Bauckham makes the comment about the NT inclusion of the Father and
Son in the divine identity: "The term Father and Son entail each other. The Father is
called Father only because Jesus is his Son, and Jesus is called Son only because he is
the Son of his divine Father. Each is essential to the identity of the other. So to say that
Jesus and the Father are one is to say that the unique divine identity comprises the
relationship in which the Father is who he is only in relation to the Son and vice
versa."Why is this important to understand when Muslims say, "No, Allah doesn't
have a Son"?

178 Murray, Collected Writings 62-3.

102 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

Was Jesus Really Crucified?

Darrell Bock

Darrell Bock, BA, University of Texas; ThM, Dallas Theological Seminary; PhD,
University of Aberdeen; postdoctoral study, Tübingen University. Darrell has earned
international recognition as a Humboldt Scholar (Tübingen University in Germany) for
his work in Luke-Acts, historical Jesus study, biblical theology, as well as with messianic
Jewish ministries. He was president of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) for
2000–2001, serves as editor-at-large for Christianity Today and is on the board of Chosen
People Ministries and Wheaton College. Darrell is married to Sally (for 36 years) and is a
father of two daughters and a son, and has two grandsons.

Not just a Muslim concern
! I have travelled in places like Jordan and Turkey. These are fascinating countries,
full of hospitable people. In these travels and my conversations, a question kept
surfacing that I was not used to having to answer in the West. It was what proof do we
have that Jesus was really crucified. This might seem like an odd question. It certainly
struck me that way when I was initially asked about it. But the question shows that
what one group might take for granted is not a given in another context. That is the case
with this question. Since Muslims are raised to question some details of what we see in
the New Testament, the testimony to the biblical death of Jesus does not count. The claim
is that the New Testament is sufficiently corrupt, thus it cannot be trusted. A defense of
the trustworthiness of the New Testament text we have is an essay in itself, but it should
be said on that matter that the textual evidence for our knowing the wording of those
texts is better than for any other ancient work. Another thing is certain. There is no way
those texts are so corrupt that they completely miss what happened to Jesus.

However, that is not the tact I want to take with this essay. I want to make the
case that Jesus was crucified. I do not want to appeal to the gospels or the New
Testament. I want to make that case through appeal to extra-biblical sources. Let me ask
this question: Is there evidence in early extra-biblical sources that Jesus was crucified
under Pontus Pilate? If those who resisted the rise of Christianity recognized that Jesus

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 103

died under Pilate, then this is solid evidence that he indeed was crucified. Are there
such sources? The short answer is yes. Here are the details.

Josephus, Antiquities 18.63-64
Let me start with a Jewish historian from the end of the first century, Josephus.

His full name was Joseph ben Matthias but he was better known as Flavius Josephus.
He was the son of a priest and became a Pharisee. He fought for Israel in the War with
Rome when Jerusalem was overrun in AD 70. He lost to the Romans in an earlier battle
at Gamla in AD 67. He ended up being taken prisoner and was brought to the
emperor’s house because he had predicted that Vespasian would become emperor,
endearing him to the leader. Here he wrote a history of Israel called Antiquities that ran
from Genesis to his own time. In Book 18, he briefly discusses Jesus.

This text is not without its issues. In the form in which we have it, Josephus says
that it might not be proper to call Jesus a man or claim that he was the Messiah and that
he appeared to his own on the third day. These are assertions that a Jewish writer, who
did not become a Christian, would not make. So this text, as we have it, is certainly
corrupt. All historians who work with this text recognize this. Here is the text as we
have it. I write it with the disputed parts in italics. The remainder is viewed by most
scholars as likely very close to what Josephus wrote for reasons I will discuss after
presenting the text. Here is the passage:

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a
man, for he was a doer of surprising works, a teacher of such men who
receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him many of the Jews,
and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ. And when Pilate, at the
suggestion of the principle men among us, had condemned him to the
cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared
to them alive again on the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and
ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of
Christians, so named for him, are not extinct to this day.

! We know this text existed because Eusebius mentions it in his Ecclesiastical
History (1.1.7-8). That gives evidence of this text from about AD 325. Our manuscripts
for this text date back to Latin versions from the ninth century, and our earliest Greek
manuscripts come from as early as the eleventh century. It is also important to note that

104 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

in debates with Jews in the second century there was no effort by Jesus’ opponents to
argue that Jesus was not crucified. This was a given in their debates as mentioned in
Josephus. The parts of the text that look authentic explain why. Jews also accepted that
Jesus had been executed at the hands of Pontus Pilate with encouragement from Jewish
leaders.

There is another clue that something like this was written by Josephus. In
Antiquities 20.200, Josephus discusses the death of James, Jesus’ brother, and refers to
him as “brother of the so-called Christ.” For many scholars this reference assumes that
Josephus has discussed the Christ earlier in his work or else his Roman readers would
be unlikely to know whom he was referencing in this ever so brief allusion.

All of this points to fact that at the end of the first century a Jewish historian
testifies to Jesus’ crucifixion by Pilate. Since the bulk of Jews were opposed to
Christians, this evidence is significant. When opponents recognize a point, the
discussion starts from there.

Tacitus, Annals 15.44
! The idea of there being no crucifixion and Josephus perhaps being wrong suffers
even more loss of credibility when one notes that Roman historians also refer to the
event. Now Rome was an outsider in the debate between Christians and Jews. So the
testimony of Roman historians reflects the remarks of a more neutral camp. Even more,
if the claim that Rome put Jesus to death had not taken place, the Romans would have
been quick to question it. Why take responsibility for something you did not do? So,
when a Roman historian testifies to such a death, it correlates to what we read in
Josephus and means that all three cultural participants in the time of Jesus affirm he
was crucified under Pontus Pilate.
! There is such a witness. P. Cornelius Tacitus, better known simply as Tacitus,
wrote a history of Rome known as Annals, covering the period from AD 14-68. The
origin of the work dates from around AD 115-117. In it he briefly discusses Christians. In
15.44 he writes,

Therefore, to squelch the rumor, Nero created scapegoats and subjected to
the most refined tortures those whom the common people called
“Christians,” hated for their abominable crimes. The author of the name,
Christ, during the reign of Tiberius, had been executed by the procurator
Pontius Pilate. Suppressed for the moment, the deadly superstition broke

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 105

out again, not only in Judea, the land which originated this evil, but also
in the city of Rome, where all sorts of horrendous and shameful practices
from every part of the world converge and are fervently cultivated.

The citation, as a whole, shows that Tacitus is no fan of Christians. He has no
reason to mention Jesus’ death to Pilate as a fabrication. He notes it because it is what
his knowledge of Roman activity revealed about what took place. He specifically names
Pilate and ties the remarks to the figure known as the Christ. This has to be a reference
to Jesus, since that is the link among Christians, who are the main subject of the
historian’s remarks.

A Jew and Roman agree
Here are two key extra-biblical witnesses that discuss the crucifixion of Jesus.

They come from a Jewish historian and a Roman historian. Neither of them has any
reason to mislead about this event. If Jesus had not been crucified under Pontus Pilate,
these historians would have no reason to affirm this. The easiest route for Josephus to
take is to state that the Jews and Pilate did not kill Jesus. Something else has to explain
the rise of this new religious movement. Even less clear is why Tacitus, who has no real
reason to make the point, would refer to the execution of Jesus under Pontus Pilate
unless he really accepted that Rome had crucified him. Given his clear disdain for
Christians, Tacitus could have said that Christians claimed Pilate crucified their leader,
but he really did not. He could have charged them with slander against Rome. But the
ancient historian does not do this. He simply accepts that Rome under Pilate put Jesus
to death.
! The significance of these texts on claims Jesus was not crucified is immense.
There is no solid historical reason for such a claim unless it happened. When Jews and
Romans recognize that Jesus was crucified as Christians claim, then there is no reason to
reject the idea that this event took place. Most first- and second-century opponents
accepted the point. So to argue 2000 years later that such a claim is wrong—or 600 years
later as the Qur’an does—ignores the testimony we get from all sides within a century
of the event that this moment took place. Any such denial cannot claim to be historically
based. So, if someone asks me if Jesus was crucified, my answer is that not only
Christians but also ancient Jewish and Roman historians affirm this. This gives me no
reason to deny or doubt that it took place.
!

106 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

Questions

1. What are the key points for both Josephus and Tacitus? Create a table that shows

what elements of story they have in common.

2. Using the chart you have just created that show the common elements of

Josephus and Tacitus, write a sound bite of no more than 30 seconds that will
answer the very common claim: Jesus never died on the cross and your Bible is
corrupted. So why should I believe it?

3. What other ancient documents and historians might you call upon to support the

idea that Jesus’ crucifixion really did take place?

4. What reasons can you provide for why the Qur’an is not a document to rely

upon for information about the crucifixion?

Summary
Biblical scholar, Darrell Bock, examines the evidence for the death and crucifixion of Jesus

Christ under Pontius Pilate by surveying ancient Jewish and Roman sources.

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 107

VIDEO LESSON 6
Everything You Need to Know about Radical Islam

I. Introduction
A. Islam is in the consciousness of the American people
B. There seems to be a resurgence of Islam
C. “Why do they hate us” and “Is Islam a religion of peace” are being asked
D. Has Islam truly been hijacked by radicals who misinterpret their religious
tradition?
E. If I were a Muslim striving to literally follow the teachings of their prophet
Muhammad I would be a radical Muslim.
F. The radicals are not lunatics
1. Syed Qutb, Maududi
2. Osama bin Laden’s letters
3. How many Evangelicals are concerned about materialism, etc?
G. I want to take away the shroud of mystery and fear surrounding Islam

II. IS ISLAM A RELIGION OF PEACE?
A. Distinction between Islam and Muslim people
1. Many Muslims are moderate, honorable citizens
2. Strong values; decry radicals
B. But we must look to the founder of Islam, Muhammad, to answer the question
1. He was born in Mecca
2. AD 610, Angel Gabriel gave him revelations

108 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

3. Prophetic career lasted 23 years

4. His religious teachings were very much one of peace and unity between the
different groups there

5. AD 622, lost support of many of the Arab tribesmen

6. He taught that there was only one God and that he was his prophet, but he did
temporarily yield to the temptation to allow the pagan gods a place in his
religion

7. Moved to Medina, established political community, ummah, and began
aggressive period of his life.

8. Dr. Richard Bailey, explains that within the Qur’an one can find 4 stages to
Muhammad’s fighting campaigns:

a. Muhammad lived in Mecca; he had no power; very peaceful

b. Later period in Mecca; defensive fighting permitted

c. Medina, defensive fighting is obligatory

d. Later Medina, political power and military offensive fighting commanded

i. Q9:5, “Then fight them and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and
seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of
war.” This is replaced by the verse that follows it.

ii. Q9:29, “Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last
Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His
Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e.
Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians).”
Following this is the payment of jizya.

iii. Q47:4, “So, when you meet (to fight—Jihad in Allah’s cause) those who
disbelieve, smite (their) necks till you have killed and wounded many of
them.”

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 109

iv. 149 (164?) sword verses replace the peaceful verses

v. Khilafa, or the Islamic state commanded by Allah and established by
jihad; Christians believe in a heavenly kingdom. Islam must dominate.

8. Muhammad was to be the example of faithfulness for all mankind, captured in
the Sira, the biography of the prophet.

a. Muhammad personally participated in 27 battles and assisted or oversaw
some 59 others

b. Averaged nine battle campaigns annually over his last ten years

c. They were not defensive, but unprovoked raiding campaigns giving the
option of converting to Islam, becoming a dhimmi, or dying in battle.

d. The Battle of Badr saw 1000 enemy to 300 Muslims

e. The Battle of the Trench was also significant amongst Muhammad’s
expeditions leading to executions

f. Muhammad’s example helps us understand the beheadings today (Q47:4)

9. Legacy of jihad followed after Muhammad

a. In first one hundred years, Syria, Iraq, Iran all conquered; in the first ten
years 1million killed!

b. Five Christian capitals conquered; entire Eastern world comes under attack

c. 50,000 women and children taken at one battle; if Charles Martel had not
won at Battle of Tours, Europe might be Islamic today.

d. Fregosi, “Islam has always preached war. Its founder and its heroes were
warriors. ‘The sword is the key to heaven and hell’ Muhammad told his
followers.”

e. Dr. Don McCurry, “What makes Islam unique is that it has institutionalized
and even blessed this propensity to violence in the form of Jihad . . . violent
acts committed in the name of Allah . . . it was Muhammad who

110 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

incorporated it as religious duty in Islam. . . . In order to be a consistent
Muslim, one should be a militant one.  That is the nature of Islam.”

f. Muhammad is the example; Islam must dominate; War on terrorism began
not in 1991, but since the beginning of Islam.

g. Usman Dan Fodio, Turabi, Bashir, and Al Qaeda is part of the legacy. In
some of these areas, the Church has been greatly affected.

h. One author states that “Most of the terrorism in the contemporary world
has taken place in the Muslim World or is launched by Islamist groups
against people of other creeds and nationalities.”

C. What makes a terrorist tick?

1. What all of this means is that the war on terrorism actually did not begin in
September 2001!

2. All beliefs have consequences. The violent history of Islam provides the
ideological foundation for radical Muslims and their activities.

3. These Radicals make up roughly 15% of Muslims worldwide, which equal 300
million people, or the entire population of the United States.

4. So how do Muslims become radical? What makes a terrorist tick?

a. Recruiting radicals

i. al Qaeda has trained 25,000-50,000; no one is born a radical!

ii. Mujahedeen from 1984-87, 80,000 fighters trained

iii. Abdullah Azzam, “Jihad and the rifle alone: no negotiations, no
conferences, and no dialogues . . . jihad will remain an individual
obligation until all other lands that were Muslim are returned to us so that
Islam will reign again: before us lie Palestine, Bokhara, Lebanon, Chad,
Eritrea, Somalia, the Philippines.”

iv. al Qaeda manual, “The confrontation that we are calling for with the
apostate regimes does not know Socratic debates . . . Platonic ideals . . .

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 111

nor Aristotelian diplomacy. But it knows the dialogue of bullets, the ideals
of assassination, bombing, and destruction, and the diplomacy of the
cannon and machine gun. . . . Islamic governments have never and will
never be established through peaceful solutions and cooperative councils.
They are established as they always have been; by pen and gun; by word
and bullet; and by tongue and teeth.”

b. Indoctrination

i. The Muslim thinkers inspire disillusioned Muslims to fight and then
convert a West that is in a slow demise

ii. We agree with their observations: materialism, promiscuity, and
drunkenness

iii. “Muslim leaders claim that Westerners want to ‘transform the entire
world into an entertainment house where they are free to perpetuate their
evil deeds.’. . . Furthermore, Western leaders are ‘Satan inspired, out to
create havoc everywhere especially among Muslim states like Iraq,
Algeria, Afghanistan.’”

iv. We do not overcome evil with evil but evil with good. (I Thess.5:15)

v. Peter Riddell, “The roots of radical Muslim anger against the West is not
only due necessarily to Western materialism, or nineteen century
colonialism, or even American imperialism, but that Islam, throughout its
history, has contained within itself a deep and powerful channel of
divinely-ordained violence, legitimized by certain passages of the Qur’an,
and exemplified by their prophet Muhammad himself.”

vi. Indoctrination is rhetoric and an appeal to the Qur’an

vii. To them Muhammad is deemed the perfect example of a faithful life
for all of humanity for all time. Just as Christians are called to look to
Christ as the model, the radical Muslims look to Muhammad for their
model. So these ‘radical Muslims’ read and interpret their scriptures the
same way ‘fundamentalist’ or Evangelical Christians do.

D. An inside look into the mind of a suicide bomber

112 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

1. Our understanding starts with the concept of martyrdom in Islam

a. There is a developed theology and veneration of martyrdom

b. Sure means to enter paradise is to die in jihad

c. On the Day of Judgment, Allah will weigh one’s good deeds against the
bad deeds (Q23:102-103, 101:6-11)

d. One’s destiny depends on which side of the scale is heavier and a
capricious Allah

e. But holy warriors have immediate entrance (Q47:4-6)

2. Debate among Muslims: whether suicide for the sake of jihad is permissible
and acceptable as martyrdom

a. “Our love for death is greater than our love for life.”

b. Sheikh Muhammad Yazbeck, “Let America, Israel and the world know that
we have a lust for martyrdom and our motto is being translated into reality.”

c. 36 percent of 12 year old boys in Gaza believe it is good to die as suicide
bomber

d. Where do they learn about martyrdom? Paradise summer camps.

e. Suicide bombing in the contemporary jihadist mind is rooted in orthodox
Islamic ideology

3. Carnal motivation, too?

a. Houris or beautiful large-eyed perpetual virgins

b. Silk gowns, majestic thrones; the prohibited becomes allowed

c. Very different paradise than the Christian concept

4. They leave behind letters or videos explaining their decision

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 113

a. Families are given financial grants

b. The Palestinian Authority signed a law to support the families of suicide
bombers

5. The individual or community that participates in [these actions] finds itself
between two blissful outcomes; either victory and triumph or martyrdom and
Paradise.

E. What is the apocalyptic vision of Iran?
!

1. Shi’a of Iran; president Ahmadinejad believes Israel must be wiped out

a. Letter to President Bush, May 8, 2006 inviting him to become Muslim

b. Muhammad did the same to opposition before attacking them

2. Twelver Shi’i Islam

a. 12th Imam or Mahdi will return

b. He was born in AD 868, still alive but unseen

c. Return hastened by chaos on earth; apocalyptic scenario precedes the
return of the Mahdi

F. Why aren’t moderate Muslims confronting radicals?

1. Many so-called moderates are equivalent to nominal Christians

a. They have not read their scriptures

b. Tend to be less activist and apathetic

2. Some, however, are speaking out

a. Liberal or Moderate Muslims tend to define jihad as an inward striving
against the lusts of the flesh towards faithfulness

b. The greater jihad, but radicals take a literal interpretation of the Qur’an

114 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

c. Moderate voice overwhelmed
3. But there is another dynamic as well: recall the four stages of Muhammad’s
career

a. Some moderates have radical leanings but are quite due to stage one
b. Muslims in Western nations don’t have political clout
c. Thin line between moderate and radical in Islam!
G. Why you are afraid of Islam
1. Fear should not be the evangelical response
2. Q8:57-60, “Strike fear [or terror] into the heart of the infidels.”
3. Christ has overcome the world; he has not given us a spirit of fear, but of love
and power.
4. Three reasons for our fear
a. Christians haven’t connected with a powerful, living God.

i. What is the Church’s witness?
ii. Where there is power there is no fear
iii. Nominal Christianity will not win over radical Islam
b. Christians fear Islam because of persecution
i. Jesus said some of you will be persecuted and some of you will be killed
ii. 2 Tim 3:12, to live a godly life in Christ is to suffer
c. Christians don’t know what they believe
i. How many have discipled a Muslim convert?

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 115

ii. The church’s ideas have consequences as well
iii. We fear what we do not know
III. Conclusion
A. OBL is one of the foremost radical ideologues of the Islamic faith, wrote, “You are
a nation that permits acts of immorality, and you consider them to be pillars of
personal freedom. You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or
advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You then rant that you
support the liberation of women. You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in
all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are
established on this, under the name of art, entertainment . . . and freedom. The . . .
thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery
that has spread among you.”
B. Radical Muslims are trying to solve the problems with bombs.
C. The Church must put aside fear and complacency and respond to the challenge of
Islam with equal boldness in love and witness.

Application:
Please go to page 307 and fill out the Video Lesson 4 Application sheet.
Small Group Discussion:
Discuss 2-3 points from video lesson 4 application sheet page 307

116 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

JIHAD, MARTYRDOM AND THE END OF THE
WORLD

David Cook

David Cook is associate professor of religious studies
at Rice University specializing in Islam. He did his
undergraduate degrees at the Hebrew University in
Jerusalem, and received his Ph.D. from the University
of Chicago in 2001. His areas of specialization include
early Islamic history and development, Muslim
apocalyptic literature and movements (classical and
contemporary), radical Islam, historical astronomy and
Judeo-Arabic literature. His first book, Studies in
Muslim Apocalyptic, was published by Darwin Press in
the series Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam.
Two further books, Understanding Jihad (Berkeley: University of California Press) and
Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press) were
published during 2005, and Martyrdom in Islam (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
2007). Cook is continuing to work on contemporary Muslim apocalyptic literature, with a
focus upon Shi`ite materials, as well as preparing manuscripts on jihadi groups and Western
African Muslim history. David Cook Teaches Course #21 of Mission Muslim World University
called Jihad, Martyrdom, Sh’ism, and the Muslim Apocalyptic

Introduction

Islam and the West have a lengthy history of both confrontation and cross-
pollination. For the past fourteen centuries these two adversaries have to a large degree
dominated the confluence of the three continents of Asia, Africa and Europe, and
struggled for the hearts and minds of first the peoples of these continents, and then on a
larger scale, the entire world. Today we see the continuation of this struggle, since Islam
and Christianity are two of the three belief-systems that command worldwide support
and have adherents on every continent and among almost every people. The reasons for
the struggle are not difficult to understand. Both Islam and Christianity are global,
missionary faiths whose primary imperative is to proclaim and convert the entire
world. Both Islam and Christianity are representative of entire ways of life, which the
convert usually adopts in their entirety. Both faiths have been highly successful in
preaching and converting, as well as assimilating foreign elements and controlling and

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 117

dominating others. There are few places on the globe to which, at one time or another,
Islam or Christianity has not penetrated.

Islam’s appeal is based on a number of different factors. It is a monotheistic
faith, which preaches a simple, yet profound, message that stands at the center of an
entire way of life. The message of the Qur’an is that of the necessity to repent previous
to the horrors of the impending Day of Judgment. God is merciful and accepting for the
present, but this conciliatory attitude towards humanity will not persist. On a regular
basis He sends messengers to erring humanity, all with the same message: God is one,
worship Him alone. Most of the time mankind has willfully rejected God’s invitation to
repent and persecuted the messengers. His response has been to judge and ultimately
destroy these ungodly civilizations, leaving their ruins as a reminder to future
generations to fear God. Sometimes, however, in the past these messengers have
succeeded in bringing about repentance and establishing god-fearing religions; these
such as Judaism and Christianity, however, have been corrupted on a time after time by
people who have added or deleted significant elements of the message and perverted its
original monotheism.

   ! Such is the Qur’anic presentation of the history of mankind. Much of the holy
text, however, deals with the reality of the Prophet Muhammad’s time. His situation
was similar to the above paradigm—or the paradigm was forced upon previous
historical situations—in that his proclamation to the people of his hometown of Mecca
(today in western Saudi Arabia) was met with rejections and ultimately persecution. 
The Qur’an offers consolation to the Prophet for this negative response on the part of
his kinsmen, but this attitude gradually changed as the early Muslim community
moved to Medina (about 150 miles to the north of Mecca) where they were able to
establish an independent base. Increasingly after this time, the attitude of the Qur’an
became more and more harsh towards those who did not (and still do not) accept the
message. Finally they are given no choice but to either repent or be fought and killed by
the Muslims.

   ! Probably the most problematic element of Islam as it has developed through
history is its ruling or dominationist imperative. As we will detail in a later section,
according to the traditional understanding, Islam must always be seen to be dominant
and superior. As a tradition in the authoritative collection of al-Bukhari (d. 869) states:
“Islam is to be dominant, never to be dominated.”  Muslim fighters are to fight the jihad
for the purpose of ruling and domination alone:

118 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

             “A man came to the Messenger of God [Muhammad] saying: Some men fight
for plunder, others fight for distinction, others fight to show off; which of these is truly
fighting for God? He [Muhammad] said: Whoever fights to make the Word of God [the
Qur’an] the highest is fighting for God. “

For this reason there is such a strong connection between Islam and power.
Qur’an 61:9 says, expressing this feeling of political triumphalism: “It is He [God] who
sent His Apostle [Muhammad] forth with the guidance and the religion of truth, to
make it triumph over every religion, even though the idolaters may be averse.” In the
next section we will detail how this triumph was achieved, but one cannot understand
Islam until one realizes how strong within the faith is the necessity to demonstrate
worldly power and success.   

History is crucial to understanding contemporary Islam, as many of the norms
and fundamentals of the faith are taken from its historical experience. Most important is
the history of the Prophet Muhammad (d. 632) and the experience of the great Muslim
conquests (approximately 634-743). During this time, for the most part, Islam and
Muslims enjoyed tremendous worldly success. From the control of the oasis of Medina
(today in western Saudi Arabia, close to the Red Sea) in 622, to the domination of the
Arabian Peninsula, to the conquest of most of the Mediterranean basin north and West
through Syria and Egypt, to North Africa, Spain, Sicily and southern France, and east
through Iraq, the Iranian Plateau towards Central Asia, and southeast towards India,
the Islamic conquests are some of the most impressive ever witnessed in history.

   ! Even more impressive is the fact that today fourteen centuries later almost all of
this territory (the “core lands of Islam”) remains Muslim, and much of it is culturally
and linguistically Arab.   Comparisons with the other great empires of history are
striking: the Roman, British and Spanish empires also established themselves over
tremendous tracts of territory and maintained their cultural and linguistic domination
for centuries after the end of their rule, but their conquests were achieved over a period
of centuries as well. Both Napoleon and Hitler managed to conquer similarly large
areas, but neither was able to hold on to their conquests. The Mongols matched the
Muslim conquests as well, but their cultural and linguistic domination was very short-
lived. Perhaps only the conquests of Alexander the Great (d. 333 B.C.E.) are comparable
in scope and lasting significance to those of the Muslims.

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 119

The successful career of the Prophet Muhammad and the subsequent Islamic
conquests constitute proof for many Muslims of the validity of the faith. This period of
time is the ideal age, the one many seek (unrealistically) to recreate. Therefore, it is
necessary to describe the key events that took place during this time period.

After the Prophet Muhammad received his initial revelations approximately in
610, his initial small number of converts (mostly from his immediate family, friends or
from the local slave community) came under a good deal of persecution from the pagan
majority of Mecca.   During this period of his ministry, which lasted until 622, the
Muslims were forbidden (according to the Qur’an) to fight back. In 622 the Prophet
Muhammad and the Muslim community moved to the oasis town of Medina, about 150
miles to the north of Mecca, where there was another small community of Muslims.

This move, known in Arabic as the hijra, was the most decisive event heralding
that Islam would become a success, as it gave the Muslim community access to a secure
base from which to expand. The following ten years until the Prophet Muhammad died
in 632 were ones of war. The Muslims during this time fought five major campaigns
against their former tormentors in Mecca, a pair of unsuccessful raids against the
Byzantines in Syria-Palestine (heralding the future conquests in that area), and
approximately 85 minor campaigns against Jews or Bedouin tribesmen in the regions
surrounding Mecca and Medina. The five major campaigns were a mixed bag from a
military standpoint. Badr (624) was a victory for the Muslims, Uhud (625) was a defeat,
the Khandaq (627) was a draw, the taking of Mecca (630) was a victory, but the Battle of
Hunayn (630) immediately following it was only a very narrow victory.

For the most part the Prophet Muhammad’s other battles were either victories
or else they were sufficient to overawe and intimidate the Bedouin. The four campaigns
against the Jewish tribes of Medina or the area surrounding it (624, 626, 627, 628) were
all successes that were clearly all waged with the objective of achieving easy victories
after reverses or inconclusive campaigns against tougher foes. In most cases the Jewish
tribe was required to either go into exile or assume a subordinate role; in 627 the
Prophet Muhammad massacred the males of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe (about
400-500) and converted the remaining members. Only the two campaigns against the
Byzantines were losses that were not immediately followed up by victories.  Altogether,
the number of the Prophet Muhammad’s campaigns (close to 90) is an impressive one,
averaging as it does approximately nine campaigns per year in an area of the world

120 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

where fighting is usually confined to a short time each year because of the unfavorable
climatic conditions.

The most important aspect of the Prophet Muhammad’s numerous campaigns
is the fact that a great deal of theological significance was placed upon victory, and
conversely a great deal of explanation was needed for defeat. Given the mixed bag of
victories, defeats and draws described above, it is hardly surprising that the Qur’an is a
record of both exultation and despair. It is in the verses of the Qur’an that we find the
most definitive exposition of the doctrine of jihad. Jihad is a word that defies literal or
easy translation. Most commonly it is translated as “holy war” with a comparison made
to the Christian wars of the Crusades. It perhaps could be more accurately translated as
“war that one wages with the goal of achieving God’s favor or working His will upon
the earth.” It is most literally “war as a spiritual exercise.”  

Since the Qur’an was revealed progressively over the 22 year period of the
Prophet Muhammad’s ministry, it is not surprising that the holy book speaks with a
number of different voices on the question of jihad (as it does on a wide range of
subjects). Muslims early on solved the difficulty of these apparent contradictions by
arranging the Qur’an into categories of verses that were revealed for a particular time
or stage in the Prophet Muhammad’s ministry, versus those that were revealed towards
the end of his life and are binding upon the Muslim community for all time. Many of
the most important pronouncements on the subject of jihad can be found in the last
(chronologically speaking) revealed suras (chapters) of the Qur’an.

One of the most important verses concerning jihad is recorded in a late sura of
the Qur’an, and represents a salvific covenant between God and man with regard to
fighting:

“God has bought from the believers their lives and their wealth in return for
Paradise: they fight in the way of God, kill and are killed. That is a true
promise from Him in the Torah, the Gospel and the Qur’an; and who fulfills
His promise better than God?” [Qur’an 9:111]

This powerful statement provides an assurance in terms of a business contract
specifying precisely what is incumbent upon each party. This promise is backed up by
one of the most famous verses in the Qur’an, the Verse of the Sword (Qur’an 9:5)
usually dated to the last year of Muhammad’s life (631):

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 121

“Then, when the sacred months are over, kill the idolaters wherever you find
them, take them [as captives], besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every
point of observation. If they repent afterwards, perform the prayer and pay the
alms, then release them. God is truly All-Forgiving, Merciful.” (Qur’an 9:5)

While it is true that this verse was revealed in the context of the early Muslim
community fighting the pagan Arabs that surrounded them (to whom the Qur’an had
granted a grace period of four months to repent in the previous verses), the “idolaters”
during the coming centuries were interpreted as “Christians” (because of the Muslim
rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity). The Verse of the Sword allows only for
acceptance of Islam after which tolerance can be extended to non-believers, and
constitutes the basis for a general waging of jihad without any apparent boundaries
other than those dictated by military defeat on the part of the Muslims. According to the
generally accepted view the Verse of the Sword abrogates all others which contradict it.

In accordance with the salvific covenant mentioned above, the Qur’an also
developed an intricate theory of martyrdom that aided the process of fighting
immensely. As Qur’an 3:169 says “And do not think those who have been killed in the
way of God [jihad] as dead; they are rather living with their Lord, well-provided for.”
While in Judaism, Christianity and Buddhism martyrdom is largely one of passively
receiving persecution and perhaps death, Muslims are allowed and even encouraged to
actively seek out circumstances under which martyrdom is likely to occur. Since the first
centuries of Islam were those of large-scale conquests, the most obvious place to find
martyrdom was on the battlefield. Thus we find Yazid b. Shajara (who was the
commander of the Muslim armies during the time of Mu`awiya, the fifth Muslim caliph,
reigned 661-80) saying:

“Swords are the keys to paradise; when a man advances upon the enemy, the
angels say: ‘O God, help him!’ and when he retreats, they say: ‘O God, forgive
him!’ The first drop of blood dripping from the sword brings forgiveness with
it for every sin, and two houris  come down to wipe the dust off of his face,
saying: ‘Your time has come!’ and he says to them: ‘No, the time has come for
you!’ [i.e., because he will be with them in paradise].”

Because according to this jihad ideology salvation came from the process of fighting and
dying in the cause of Islam, we find that people would often fight with the purpose of
redemption or to expiate their sins:

122 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

“The slain [in jihad] are three [types of] men: a believer, who struggles with
himself and his possessions in the path of God, such that when he meets the
enemy [in battle] he fights them until he is killed. This martyr (shahid) is
tested, [and is] in the camp of God under His throne; the prophets do not
exceed him [in merit] except by the level of prophecy. [Then] a believer,
committing offenses and sins against himself, who struggles with himself and
his possessions in the path of God, such that when he meets the enemy [in
battle] he fights until he is killed. This cleansing wipes away his offenses and
his sins—behold the sword wipes [away] sins!—and he will be let into heaven
from whatever gate he wishes...[Then] a hypocrite, who struggles with himself
and his possessions in the path of God, such that when he meets the enemy [in
battle] he fights until he is killed. This [man] is in hell since the sword does not
wipe away hypocrisy.”  

Most interesting from this tradition, which is taken from the earliest book on
the subject of jihad (that of `Abdallah b. al-Mubarak, d. 797) is the redemptive process of
the sinning yet repentant believer (the second of the three described in the tradition).
For him the fighting cleanses away his previous offenses and ensures his entrance into
heaven. Eventually, the very act of fighting (no matter what the motivation) or even the
willingness to head towards a battlefield were sufficient to provide the Muslim with a
blanket forgiveness for his sins:

“When a fighter goes out in the path of God, his sins are placed on the door
post of his house, and when he leaves it [the house] behind, he leaves all of his
sins; not even [so much as] as the wing of a mosquito stays on him.”   

In other words, his sins exist in something of a suspended animation as long as
he is fighting the jihad. With such attitudes it is little wonder that the Muslims were able
to conquer as much as they did.

Of course, it is very probable that the majority of the early Muslims did not
fight with such spiritually elevated motivations in mind. There were many others
available. Many Muslims gained fabulous wealth because of the conquests. Apocalyptic
traditions from this time say that if a man saw 100 dinars (a dinar being approximately
a week’s wage) on the ground, he would not bother to pick it up. The attitude of success

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 123

and wealth being part of the faith became part of the Muslim tradition (although there
is an equally strong attitude of personal denial and asceticism as well).

Along with the wealth, there were tremendous numbers of prisoners who
became slaves. The Qur’an provides for the prisoners either to be kept as slaves,
ransomed for money or to be killed. Most were accorded the first two options, and the
capture of prisoners became one of the primary economic supports of the jihad, and
eventually of the Muslim empire. As the historian Michael McCormick has
demonstrated it was this trade in prisoners who became slaves, the purchase of slaves
from Europe together with numerous slave raids into sub-Saharan Africa that formed
the basis for the economy of the entire empire. Not only was this trade economically
fundamental to Muslim states, but militarily as well, since many of the male slaves were
converted, trained as soldiers and used to fight their relatives in Europe and elsewhere.
This system created something of a Muslim military elite ruling large numbers of
Christians, Jews and others, and using a large number of slaves for both labor and
military action.

This leads us to the question of the interpretation of the conquests. Again, a
foundational tradition in this regard is to be found in Ibn al-Mubarak’s Kitab al-jihad:

“Behold! God sent me [= Muhammad] with a sword, just before the Hour [of
Judgment], and placed my daily sustenance beneath the shadow of my spear,
and humiliation and contempt on those who oppose me.”  

The importance of this tradition can hardly be overstated. It is a very concise
exposition of the attitudes of the early Muslim community towards the conquests and
towards their purpose in the world. It expresses the significance of the time of the
Muslim conquests (just before the end of the world, the Hour of Judgment) as well as
the relationship between the Muslims and the conquered peoples. Contemporary
Muslim radical groups have noted the significance of this tradition, and Usama b. Ladin
cites it in the very first paragraph of his “World Islamic Front Declaration of War against
Zionists and Crusaders.” According to the tradition, the purpose of the Muslim in this
world is to fight until the world comes to an end when God judges it. The Muslim army
receives its daily sustenance beneath the shadow of the spear, a clear hint that food and
other necessities were supplied by the subject populations as part of their tribute. This
fact kept the Muslims free to fight.

124 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

Unending victory is also predicted by the tradition, as “humiliation and
contempt” the lot of those who oppose the Muslims. This brings us to the question of
the theological weight given to victory in battle. Many faiths have tried to portray their
victories as those of God or to demonstrate that their believers are working the will of
God.   In the Qur’an we find a high level of divine participation in the process of
fighting; for example, 8:17 says: “It was not you who slew them, but God; and when
you threw it was actually God who threw.” This attitude, which was continued and
exaggerated even more in the Muslim jihad and apocalyptic traditions, has contributed
to a continual state of war between Islam and the rest of the world. This last statement
does not mean that times when peace has prevailed between Muslim states and non-
Muslim states or on an individual level between Muslims and non-Muslims have been
entirely absent. Usually, however, these times of peace have been limited in time and
scope, and have not brought about a change in the warlike attitudes of the Muslim side,
nor has a peace been instrumental in conferring legitimacy upon the non-Muslim side.
Peace is an unnatural state for Islam.  For the most part, there has been peace only when
the Muslim side has been at a disadvantage, not because of any fundamental acceptance
of peace as a naturally attractive state.

One of the major developments of contemporary Islam are the numerous
groups usually classified generically as “radical Muslims.” The growth of radical Islam
during the past 30 years has been greatly facilitated by the perceived failure of Muslim
societies to achieve modernization, multiple defeats by Israel and other western
countries (the United States, India, Ethiopia), and the perception that the Muslim
religious establishment is collaborative and submissive to illegitimate secular
governments. Among radical Muslims there are local groups that have the aim of
transforming their societies into Islamic societies, there are “resistance movements”
formed with the express purpose of “liberating” or detaching a given territory and then
transforming it, and there are globalists, who seek to rally Muslims worldwide to
establish a pan-Islamic state (al-Qa`ida).

These groups have several characteristics in common. One of the foundational
attitudes is that there is only one Islam, and that this Islam (the radical version) is the
solution to all problems that Muslims, both at a local and at societal level, face. The
intolerance of radical Muslims towards their more traditional brethren (mostly Sufis) is
one of the attitudes that set them apart from classical Islam, where it was comparatively
rare to make accusations of “heresy.” Today, the version of Islam that has been favored
by radical Muslims has been derived from the Wahhabi sect, which itself originates

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 125

from the Hanbali school of law (the most hardline of the four Sunni Muslim traditional
schools of law), and are usually known as Salafis or on the street takfiris (from takfir, the
accusation leveled against apparent Muslims that they are apostate). Wahhabism is
reductionist in nature, and decisively rejects popular customs in Islam (festivals,
intercession of saints or holy men, etc), as well as any version of Sufism.  

Among the tenets of radical Islam is the belief in a pan-Muslim state which
hypothetically will encompass all Muslims. Although this messianic vision is pushed
most strongly by the globalist radical Muslim groups previously mentioned, it is
subscribed to by all radical groups (whereas for other non-radical Muslims this
reunification is less important).  This state should be ruled by a caliph (a legitimate
successor to the Prophet Muhammad) who will be (hypothetically) elected by Muslims
and form a government. After this system is in place then Muslims worldwide will be
able to swear allegiance. This is a religious obligation that has not been met by Sunni
Muslims since the time when the last Ottoman caliph was deposed by Kamal Attaturk
in 1924. According to one often cited tradition:

Whoever dies while he is not under obedience [to a caliph] dies the death of
the Jahiliyya [as a non-Muslim], and if he turns against it after he has sworn (lit. after it
is around his neck), then he has no excuse before God [at the final judgment].

Because of the absolute nature of the punishment and damnation involved
here many Muslims see a need to re-establish the caliphate. Radical Muslims are the
only ones who seem willing to apply the necessary force to compel Muslims to accept a
given candidate —one should note that Mullah `Umar Mujahid (the leader of the
Taliban in Afghanistan) proclaimed himself to be amir al-mu’minin, a caliphal title in
1996—or have the spiritual prestige to give the office meaning. Ultimately, the desire of
the radicals is to unite all Muslims under this one person. Thus, Muslims from dozens if
not hundreds of differing languages and cultures would be a unity. It goes without
saying that this vision is neither very realistic in the sense of being practically applicable
given the multitude of differences among contemporary Muslims, nor could it be
achieved without the application of force.

In order to achieve their goals radical Muslims must use force and terror,
which is another of their defining characteristics. Usually their groups are not large
enough to challenge the semi-secular and authoritarian regimes in the Arab or Muslim
worlds, and since their means of proclamation are circumscribed they often use terror to

126 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

communicate their message (both to the Muslim population and to the non-Muslim
media). The use of terror is not new to Islam; it is found already in the Qur’an and the
early traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. One of the most frequently cited verses in
this regard is Qur’an 8:60:

And make ready for them whatever you can of fighting men and horses, to
terrify thereby the enemies of Allah and your enemy, as well as others besides them
whom you do not know, but Allah knows well. Everything that you spend in the path
of Allah will be repaid in full, and you will never be wronged.

The early Muslim conquerors practiced psychological warfare against their
enemies and sought to surround their borders with fear (presumably of a Muslim
counter-attack) so that anyone who thought to attack the Muslims would desist.
Muhammad is said to have stated: “I was aided [by God] with a fear in the hearts of my
enemies to the distance of a month’s travel.”  In other words, all those enemies living
within the distance of a month’s travel from the early Muslims would feel this terror.
Contemporary radical Muslims frequently cite this verse and this tradition, and
complain that the enemies of Islam do not feel this fear or terror any longer, and
therefore it is necessary to terrorize the latter in order to win back the respect they
believe Islam deserves. In many quarters of the Muslim world this message has a strong
appeal.

One of the methods by which radical Muslims have gained a great deal of
sympathy throughout the Muslim world is their clear dedication to the application of
the shari`a. Over the past 30 years the number of Muslims living under the shari`a law
has grown considerably.  However, radical Muslims have a rather Protestant attitude
towards their tradition and seek to radically reinterpret it (hence their appellation of
“radical” Muslims). For the most part they do this because of the obviously problematic
tradition that contains a vast number of scientifically impossible or ludicrous elements
(most obviously in the fields of medicine, such as the so-called “Prophetic Medicine”,
the reading of which makes modern radicals very uncomfortable).

One of the reasons for this rejection of tradition is that a dominant feature of
radical Islam is its fixation upon technology and science. Radical Muslims are often very
well educated, and a high percentage of the leadership has either traveled to or studied
in the West. Frequently followers of this movement are drawn from technical or hard
science fields. It is clear that these people are most affected by the envy of the West, and

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 127

are keenly aware that Muslim countries lag behind it in these areas that are key to
modernity. From their classical Islamic heritage they know that for centuries Muslim
civilization was superior to that of Western Europe, and feel the need to regain that
superiority. One of the most commonly cited Qur’anic verses in this regard is 3:110,
which states: “You were the best nation brought forth to mankind, bidding the right and
forbidding the wrong, and believing in God.” Even though the verse appears to be
speaking of moral and ethical superiority because of the lengthy Muslim experience as
one of the (if not the principal) dominant cultures in the world, this verse is usually
cited to demonstrate that superiority. As Sulayman Abu Ghayth, the spokesman for al-
Qa`ida, stated in June 2002:

“Those who were surprised, astonished and did not expect [the Sept. 11
attack], those simply do not know the reality of humanity and human nature,
or the effect of tyranny and oppression upon its feelings...they apparently
thought that tyranny breeds submission and that force yields resignation...
those have missed the mark twice: once, because they are ignorant of the
reality of derision towards a person, and another time because they do not
know the ability of a person to achieve victory. This is [with regard to] any
person, let alone to one who believes in God as Lord, in Islam as a religion and
in Muhammad as Prophet and Messenger. [He] knows that his religion refuses
lowliness and does not permit humiliation for him, and rejects degradation.
How could it, when he knows that his community [Islam] was brought forth to
be at the center of leadership and trail blazing, at the center of hegemony and
domination, at the center of giving and receiving?”

This citation and many others like it demonstrate that radical Islam feels very
strongly the ruling imperative of Islam, and that violence is the primary method by
which it refuses the subordinate position it feels that the world has assigned for it.

For this reason, among many others, radical Islam feels a common antipathy to
the United States as the representative of both the “West” and as the epitome of all its
values. Its very existence detracts from any sense of Muslim superiority and its
civilization and culture constitutes a temptation for Muslims worldwide (according to
the understanding of radical Muslims) that must be confronted and overcome. At every
point in the ideology of radical Islam, it is the American domination of the world that
makes realization of their vision impossible. It forbids the creation of a united Muslim
state, it protests against the intolerant elements of Muslim law, it negates the superiority

128 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

of Islamic civilization, and it keeps Muslims backward in technology and science (in
addition to other political differences). The reasons for the radical Islamic hatred of the
U.S. go far beyond the issue of Israel.

Although there are examples of radical quietistic movements (e.g., the
Egyptian Takfir wa-Hijra from the 1970s) for the most part radical Islam is violent in
expression and seeks to revive jihad against non-Muslims. According to `Abdallah
`Azzam (one of Usama b. Ladin’s mentors, assassinated in 1989):

“The life of the Muslim umma [community] is solely dependent on the ink of
its scholars and the blood of its martyrs. What is more beautiful than the
writing of the umma’s history with both the ink of a scholar and his blood…
the extent to which the number of martyred scholars increases is the extent to
which nations are delivered from their slumber, rescued from their decline and
awoken from their sleep. History does not write its lines except with blood.
Glory does not build its lofty edifices except with skulls. Honor and respect
cannot be established except on a foundation of cripples and corpses. Empires,
distinguished peoples, states and societies cannot be established except with
examples. Indeed, those who think they can change reality or change societies
without blood, sacrifices and invalids, without pure innocent souls, do not
understand the essence of this din [Islam] and they do not know the method of
the best of Messengers [Muhammad].”

This violence is intrinsic to the movement because of its usefulness in
differentiating between “true” and “false” Muslims by using takfir. Radical Muslims
according to their own thinking are merely “Muslims”; they do not accept any further
differentiations. There is only one Islam, according to their view; therefore it is the
larger body of Muslims that have veered from “true” Islam. The problem that attitude
begets is that there is no objective method to tell “true” Muslims from “false” Muslims,
except on the battlefield. For this reason, radical Muslims seek to involve themselves in
conflicts or even to provoke them as a means by which new boundaries can be drawn. It
is not enough in their minds that someone speaks the Muslim confession of faith, be
born a Muslim or be a nominal or a cultural Muslim. A “true” Muslim is one who
commits his life to the struggle and who is trying to make Islam the dominant faith in
the world either through proclamation or through jihad.

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 129

For this reason suicide attacks or martyrdom operations have become so
crucial to radical Islam.  Although suicide attacks are almost without military value,
since they are really only effective against civilians or civilian targets, they have great
religious value and are very expressive of what radical Islam needs to communicate to
the larger Muslim community as well as to the world. According to radical Muslims,
Islam has been suffering from humiliation and degradation (a point concerning which
there is wide agreement among all Muslims) and that its peaceable nature has led to a
situation where Muslims are taken advantage of worldwide. The self-sacrificial nature
of the suicide attack demonstrates the personal courage (at least to many Muslims) of
the one performing this action, and highlights the value of the belief for which the
attack was performed. The suicide attack provides an artificial sense of a balance of
terror because in striking easy non-military targets it gains quick victories that for the
Muslim audience are very emotionally satisfying. Additionally the suicide attack invites
the revulsion of the outside world and demonstrates the Muslim rejection of non-
Muslim values thus creating the boundaries radical Muslims wish to re-establish.

It is interesting (and disturbing) to note how suicide attacks/martyrdom
operations are justified according to Muslim law. Since these attacks were first
introduced among Sunni Muslims a large number of legal opinions (fatwas) have been
issued to support them. It is important to note that in the context of Muslim law
introduction of anything entirely new is problematic. Since by all accounts suicide
attacks were unknown in Sunni Muslim law previous to the 1990s, we can watch how
such a practice came to be legitimized.

   Writers of fatwas on suicide attacks start out with the Qur’an, especially with several
verses that to them indicate a tacit acceptance of such activities. From Qur’an 2:96 we
read:

“Indeed, you will find them [the evil doers] of all people the most attached to
life, even more than those who associated other gods with God. Every one of
them wishes to live for one thousand years. This long life, however, will not
spare them the punishment.”

For radical Muslims (and for many other Muslims) this verse epitomizes what
they see and dislike about the West. They see themselves as people who have nothing to
lose, from whom everything has been taken by the tyranny of non-Muslims. At the
same time, they perceive the West especially as believing in nothing, having no values

130 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

other than materialistic ones. Therefore, since their enemies desire life, it is important
for the radical Muslims to deny them life. This achieves several purposes: it highlights
their own lack of material goods and emphasizes their certainty in achieving heaven,
and demonstrates the meaninglessness of the material values upon which the West
according to their perception has based itself.  

Another Qur’anic verse that is used by fatwas justifying suicide attacks is “And
some people sell themselves for the sake of God’s favor. God is kind to His
servants” (Qur’an 2:207). Unquestionably this verse encourages the idea that a suicide
attacker is one who is self-sacrificing in a way that puts him in a different and higher
category than all other “martyrs.” Indeed, a number of radical and even mainstream
Muslim religious figures have taken to calling suicide attacks “the pinnacle of the
summit of jihad,” as if to remove the questionable religious and ethical practice from all
discussion. No mention of the innocent civilian casualties murdered by the suicide
attacker is allowed to penetrate into the spiritual experience that the “martyr” goes
through as he or she carries out whatever operation they have planned:

“There is a profound difference between one who commits suicide—because of
his unhappiness, lack of patience, weakness or absence of faith and has been
threatened with Hell-fire—and the self-sacrificer who embarks on the
operation out of strength of faith and conviction, and to bring victory to Islam,
by sacrificing his life for the upliftment of Allah’s word.”  

This declaration is taken from the “Islamic Ruling on the Permissibility of
Martyrdom Operations” which was a legal ruling written for the Chechen rebels by
Yusuf al-`Ayyiri (leader of al-Qa`ida in Saudi Arabia, killed 2003). One can see the
exclusive focus upon the spiritual benefits of suicide attacks, and the necessity to
differentiate between these types of operations and mere suicide (which is
comparatively rare in Muslim societies). Clearly the goal is one of personal spiritual
benefit to the “martyr”, but the attack must also express the goals of radical Islam and
fit its self-perception.

Another part of the goal is to radically reinterpret the Muslim laws of war in
accordance with the perceived necessities of the present time. Although one can be
amazed at the close relationship between faith and warfare throughout Islamic history
—Islam is the only religion where cowardice on the battlefield is actually a grave sin (cf.
Qur’an 8:16)—it is also true that in classical literature jihad was a closely regulated form

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 131

of warfare with harsh punishments meted out to those who looted, mutilated the bodies
of enemy soldiers or raped. In the present-day jihad we see this regulation swiftly being
eroded by none other than the religious authorities of Islam themselves. A good
example of this is the question of killing civilians, specifically women and children, who
are frequently the target of suicide attacks. The traditions in this matter are clear: the
authoritative collection of al-Bukhari (d. 869-70) states baldly that women and children
(and other non-combatants) are not to be harmed in jihad.  

Radical Muslims are quite open about the goals of the jihad. On a website
associated with al-Qa`ida (alneda.com), we read in a document entitled “The Goals of
the Jihad”:

“Among them [the goals] is the subjection of the people of the jizya to the laws
of Islam, forbidding them from declaring their faith openly, from any type of
interest [economy] or fornication or anything like that because these
circumstances from their very nature constitute a temptation (tuftan) for the
Muslim away from his religion. God commanded that the jihad be in force
until ‘temptation is removed’ [Qur’an 8:39]... Removal of temptation,
exaltation of the Muslims and humiliation of the infidels—all of this is the goal
of the jihad.”

Therefore, from trying to liberate subjugated or persecuted Muslims—a
possibly laudable goal—we quickly see the real end-point of jihad: worldwide
domination under the guise of “removing temptation.” Apparently, according to the
above analysis, Islam is not deemed to be strong enough to handle the possibility of
anyone in the world doing anything that would be contrary to the Divine Law (the
shari`a).

The use of terror is the method to achieve this end. Alneda’s statement
continues, citing a medieval Muslim commentator (Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya, d. 1350)
to say: “There is nothing more beloved of God than His representative’s antagonizing
His enemy and enraging the latter.”  To that end, Qur’an 8:60 states: “And make ready
for them whatever you can of fighting men and horses, to terrify thereby the enemies of
Allah and your enemy, as well as others besides them whom you do not know, but
Allah knows well.” As previously stated, this process of fighting will force moderate or
nominal Muslims to make a choice: either to join the fighting Muslims or to join their
opponents. All of this leads up to the final conquest of the world:

132 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

“Jihad will only cease when the entire world is submissive to Islam and has
embraced its creed, other than the People of the Book [Jews and Christians]
and Zoroastrians. As for these when they have paid the jizya and are bound by
the authoritative laws of Islam: their existence will be one of humiliation and
degradation. But even though Muslims will cease their jihad, and not harm
them, even protecting them from their enemies, the Islamic jihad will not cease
in this lifetime, since Satan will continue to lead some of humanity astray, and
the struggle between right and wrong as the way of God will never cease until
human existence ceases on this world.”

Thus conquest constitutes a principal part of radical Islam, and is the
apocalyptic and messianic vision it has for Islam: the return of the righteous caliphate
and Muslim worldwide domination.

Questions

1. What are the differences between the Muslim doctrine of jihad and the Christian
doctrine of the “just war”? When others say that jihad is the same as the sort of
conquests that are described in the Bible (e.g., in Joshua) what will we say?

2. How does a Christian respond with love towards those Muslims such as the
Nigerian Boko Haram who deliberately send suicide attackers to kill inside
churches? When is it appropriate for the Christian to use force to defend the
church and when is it not? Can we love those who are trying to kill us?

3. The growth of the church under radical Muslim regimes in Iran and the Sudan
has been phenomenal in spite of persecution. Can the church develop a
paradigm of how to live and bear witness under other regimes that promote
persecution of Christians that will work in states such as Egypt where
persecution is increasing?

4. How do we compare “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life
for his friends” (John 15:13 with the Muslim doctrine of martyrdom?

SUMMARY
The Qur’an, Muhammad’s violence, and the violence of his earliest caliphs (Abu Bakr

and Umar ibn Khattab) galvanized the spreading of Islam in the early Islamic conquests of the
seventh century via militant “offensive jihad” with sights set on global domination that
continues to the present day under the aegis of radical Islam.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 133

al-`Aliyani, `Ali, Ahdaf al-jihad. Trans. Cook, Understanding Jihad, appendix, no. 4, pp. 181-9.
`Azzam, `Abdallah, “Martyrs: the Building Blocks of Nations” at azzam.com, in Ithaf al-`ibad bi-fada’il al-jihad.
Peshawar: Maktab al-Khidmat, 1990.
Bonner, Michael, Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
al-Bukhari, Muhammad b. Isma’il (d. 869-70), Sahih. Ed. `Abd al-`Aziz b. Baz, Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1991 (5 vols).
Cook, David, Martyrdom in Islam.  Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2007.
____ Understanding Jihad. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005.
Fakhry, Majid, The Qur’an: A Modern English Version. London: Garnet Press, 1997.
Friedmann, Yohanan, “Islam is Superior,” Jerusalem Quarterly 11 (1979), pp. 36-42
Hafez, Mohammed, Suicide Bombers in Iraq: The Strategy and Ideology of Martyrdom. Washington DC: United
States Institute of Peace, 2007.
Hegghammer, Thomas, Jihad in Saudi Arabia. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2010.
al-Hindi, al-Muttaqi (d. 1567), Kanz al-`ummal fi al-aqwal wa-l-afa`l. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1987 (16 vols).
Ibn Abi Shayba, Kitab al-musannaf. Hyderabad: Da’irat al-Ma`arif, n.d.
Ibn al-Mubarak, `Abdallah (d. 797), Kitab al-jihad. Beirut: Dar al-Tali`a, 1971.
Kister, Meir, “Land Property and Jihad,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 34 (1991), pp.
270-311.
____ “The Massacre of the Banu Qurayza,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 8 (1986), 61-96.
Lawrence, Bruce, Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden. Trans. James Howarth, London:
Verso, 2005.
McCormick, Michael, The Origins of the European Economy: Communications and Commerce 300-700.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Moghadam, Assaf, al-Qaeda, Salafi Jihad and the Diffusion of Suicide Attacks: The Globalization of Martyrdom.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 2008.
Al-Suyuti, Jalal al-Din (d. 1505), Fadl al-jihad. Cairo: Dar al-Fadila, 1988.
al-Tirmidhi, Muhammad b. `Isa (d. 892), al-Jami` al-sahih.  Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d. (5 vols).

134 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

VIDEO LESSON 7 - Insider Movements

I. Introduction
A. An issue of contextualization
B. Speaking clearly into the culture
C. Normally, contextualization is an accepted practice
D. Insiders adopt the religion of Islam as culture
E. Adopting certain aspects of culture is important
1. Some things in culture a sin and need to be rejected
2. Culture can remain neutral so that it can be adopted
F. But if adopting religion, Scripture, a prophet as part of one’s identity is going too
far; prohibited.
1. Isaiah 6 -7, Jeremiah 7
2. 1 John

II. Understanding inside movements
A. Definition: “Popular movements to Christ that bypass both formal and explicit
expressions of Christian religion.”
B. 1 Corinthians 7:20, “each one should remain in the condition in which he was
called.”
C. They are not expressions of Church planting, but are outside Christianity and
within Islam

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 135

1. Followers can be called Messianic Muslims
2. Do not consider themselves Christians
3. They are Muslim followers of Jesus: a continuum of unbelief to Christ
4. John Travis, “Christ centered communities who have accepted Jesus as Lord
and savior.” C5.
5. Islamic incompatibilities are rejected or reinterpreted
6. Believers may remain active in the mosque
7. Phil Parshall, they call themselves Muslims without any reference to Christ
8. They may still perform salat, say shahada, and even perform hajj
9. They compare themselves to the co-existence of Church and synagogue
10. The hope is that Islam will be reformed from within
D. The concern for removing cultural barriers has led to insider Bible translations
1. Translators are using terms and phrases acceptable to Muslims
2. Replacement of son of God with Isa al masih or prince
3. There is no trinity with Lord, Prince/Isa al masih
4. Should be rejected
E. Biblical justification?
1. 1 Cor 7:20, justifies remaining in Islam?
2. No, speaks of marriage, etc.
3. This also ignores many passages telling us to avoid idolatry
4. Syncretism, MBB et al should be rejected as terms

136 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

5. 2 Kings 5, worshiping at the temple of Rimmon
6. OT is a polemic against false gods of the nations
F. Insider movements attempt to discriminate between idolatry and monotheism
1. Bible = True revelation is equated with covenantal revelation
2. Insider movements have erected a bridge to heresy
3. 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1, believers must not be unequally yoked
4. IM makes the case the Islam does not worship idols

i. But Allah is not personal
ii. He does not walk among us
iii. He does not have a son
iv. He is not Father
G. Placing the bar too low so that the Church does not place it too high
1. IM proponents extol the life changing effects in believers
2. Where is the Church in the IM?
3. IM proponents argue we should not simply accept creeds, confessions, or the
manner in which the Church speaks about the Trinity
4. Bad theology mixed with bad theology is part of IM
5. Joining the Church and separation from the mosque is an extra step: false
dichotomy separates Christ from the Church
6. Insiders have enough information for a decision, but it falls short of a
transformational change

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 137

H. What are the safeguards for insiders to keep from becoming heretical or slipping
back into Islam?

1. Too often insiders are kept secret
2. Self identity is Muslim
3. They remain within the religious practices of Islam, Q5:111
4. A Muslim identity card is bowing in salat
5. Hadith speaks about a Muslim holding to pillars of Islam
6. But we are not Muslims
7. We are to witness to something different
I. They look like mainstream Muslims
1. But our allegiance is to Christ
2. Insider expresses solidarity with all Muslims, not Christians
J. Deception
1. Practitioners are funded by Churches because they appear to be field
missionaries
2. But on the field they are living and acting like Muslims
3. If anyone preaches another gospel, teaches falsely
4. They are mobilizing national churches
K. Are Messianic Muslims related to Muslims or Christians?
1. Proponents are quick to associate insiders with Christians
2. But they do not fully submit to either the mosque or any Christian body

138 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

3. Proponents call these “movements to Christ”

a. Where is the movement?

b. Where is the Church: Greek ekklesia and Hebrew qahal are the words used
for the Church connected in time and space in one covenant with God.

c. Kingdom circles used by proponents of IM: misunderstanding of the
covenantal relationship with God

d. Emergent Church makes the same errors; can’t belong to two very different
groups

e. Islam is an anti-Christian religion

III. Conclusion

A. How can a follower of Christ consult the Qur’an and Muhammad?

B. IM is undefined

C. It is critical for churches to assess what their missionaries are doing

D. Church must connect to the field

E. Churches are beginning to develop “practice” statements: how they will
evangelize Muslims and what will they call themselves?

F. Camel method utilizes many Qur’anic verses

G. We need to reject these outright

Application:
Please go to page 310 and fill out the Video Lesson 7 Application sheet.

Small Group Discussion:
Discuss 2-3 points from video lesson 7 application sheet page 310

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 139

INSIDER MOVEMENTS MOVING IN THE WRONG
DIRECTION

Joshua B. Lingel & Bill Nikides

Joshua Lingel is President of i2 Ministries whose sole function is to equip and train up the global
church for the global challenge of Islam. Bill Nikides is a minister in the International
Presbyterian church and works with i2 Ministries in Insider Movement Publications & SE Asia
Ministry. For more information: www.i2ministries.org.

MISSIONARIES ARE DOING WHAT?
Chrislam’s church/mosque members practice ‘running deliverance’ in Nigeria,

believing both the Qur’an and Bible are holy texts.179 That’s not the Chrislam of this
article. Chrislam, others suggest, is the merger of Islam and Christianity as evidenced by
the Common Word document.180 It’s pastors speaking in mosques, imams preaching in
churches, and the Qur’an read to Christian congregations. It’s a growing concern—but
that’s not the Chrislam of this article either.

The Chrislam of this article is an actual missionary strategy for Muslim ministry.
Some Western missionaries who endorse this Chrislam appeal to the early Church’s
approach to the salvation of the Gentiles (Acts 15) and draw a parallel to contemporary
evangelism, discipleship and church planting with Muslims. As one missionary
describes Chrislamic missions: “If you are in a Muslim community, or a Buddhist
community, or a Hindu community, you maintain that identity in that socio-religious
community. That is where you work out your discipleship to Jesus. You follow Jesus as
a Hindu, as a Muslim, as a Buddhist, or whatever other variety of socio-religious
community you might be from.”181 Accordingly, this form of Chrislam has assumed
another moniker—insider movements (IM)—based on its encouragement of the target

179 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrislam

180 http://www.acommonword.com/

181 H. L. Richard, “Unpacking the Insider Paradigm: An Open Discussion on Points of
Diversity,” International Journal of Frontier Missions 26:4 (2009): 176.

140 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

group to remain “inside” their socio-religious community. The IM has taken root
especially in Muslim contexts.

SYMPTOMS OF CHRISLAM
In the United States, missionaries teach conferences encouraging Christians to

share Jesus from the Qur’an. For example, the “Jesus in the Qur’an” conferences (JIQ),
exegete qur’anic verses about Jesus and give them new, Christianized meanings.
Indeed, JIQ instructors say that the Qur’an teaches the Trinity, teaching attendees to
“Start with what a Muslim knows, affirms and understands in the Qur’an”182 and that Sura
4:171 of the Qur’an teaches the Trinity: “…Christ Jesus the son of Mary was indeed an
apostle of God and his word, which he bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from
him…”183 However, Muslim exegetes reject the Trinity and understand this verse as
denying Jesus’ divinity. This Christianization of the Qur’an doesn’t create doors of
opportunity for witness, it stirs emotions of hostility on the part of Muslims, and
naturally so. Christians don’t appreciate it when Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and
Muslims reinterpret the Bible’s original meaning. It’s offensive and deceitful to take a
Muslims scripture and making it say what it does not.184

The “Common Grounds” conferences have similar teachings. “Common
Ground” is a broad-spectrum teaching that Christianizes the Qur’an and Islam. In
doing so it inoculates those who go through the teaching against a proper
understanding of this inherently anti-Christian religion. The Qur’an becomes a tool for
evangelism, lending it credibility, rather than understanding it as a book that denies the
crucifixion, 185 the Trinity,186 and Jesus as the Son of God. 187 This teaching strongly
suggests that the legitimacy of Muhammad’s prophethood is a matter of personal
choice for new believers; that is, rather than a false prophet, Muhammad may be

182 Jesus in the Qur’an Conferences/Workbook, 2008 Edition, p. 36. Thanks to Adam Simnowitz
for this.

183 Ibid.

184 Cf. Adam Simnowitz, “How Insider Movements Affect Ministry: Personal Reflections,” in
Chrislam: How Missionaries Are Promoting an Islamized Gospel (Garden Grove, CA: i2 Ministries
Press. 2011), 221–226.

185 S. 4:157

186 S. 5:73

187 S. 4:171. Jesus will come as a ruler, break the cross, kill the pigs and stop Jizya (Bukhari
3:656); Jesus will force people to convert to Islam (Bukhari 3:656); Jesus talked in a cradle
(Bukhari 6:236); Jesus returns and kills Dajjal, fights Gog and Maggog (Muslim 4:7015);
Descends in Damascus (Muslim 4:7015); People go to hell for associating divinity to Jesus
(Muslim 4:6733)

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 141

considered prophet-like. Kevin Higgins, a noted IM proponent, is more direct in his
unpublished paper circulated by former Muslims in 2007:

“Perhaps one of the most intriguing developments in missiological discussion in
the last 10 or more years has been the subject of so-called “insider movements”.
Particular attention has been given to such movements within Islamic contexts.
One of the major points debated in this discussion among practitioners and
theorists is the question of the Islamic creed. In short, the question is: can a
follower of Jesus, say with integrity the Islamic creed, There is no god but Allah.
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah? In this paper I will seek to outline some
biblical, historical, and Qur’anic basis for answering this question in the
affirmative.”188
“Common Ground” also teaches other troubling notions of the kingdom of God in
which there is no difference between Islam and Christianity.189
Several years ago, I (Lingel) met a missionary at the national Vineyard Pastor’s
conference. He said he was ministering in Indonesia and seemed to be acting as an imam
(a Muslim prayer leader) of a masjid (a Muslim place of prayer) he had joined. He said
he performed the salat or daily prayers and that he wanted to make the pilgrimage to
Mecca (though his wife had not given her approval). This missionary also said he
preached in the masjid on juma or Friday. I understood him to mean he preached the
Islamic khutbah or traditional sermon that emulates Muhammad. Perhaps the most
problematic thing about all this was that he was raising money with several Calvary
Chapels, though I know they were unaware of the depths of his practices as a
Chrislamic missionary. Recently someone returned from Afghanistan who reported that
Western missionaries were participating in Insider Movement activities in mosques
there.190
I (Lingel) have consulted with the leadership of the Southern Baptist Convention
(SBC) on missions and evangelism among Muslims at various times. At a May 2009
consultation, SBC statistician, Dr. Jim Haney, stated that there are tens of thousands of
Isa al-masih jamaats, or Jesus congregations, in northern Africa. But the members of these
jamaats call themselves Muslims, do not believe in the Trinity and believe Muhammad is
a prophet of God. Are they Christians or Muslims? Why talk about them in terms of

188 Kevin Higgins. Muhammad, Islam and the Qur’an (unpublished paper), 1-23. Despite its
availability on the Internet, Muhammad, Islam, and the Qur’an, was never meant for publication
according to the author. He has changed his mind about some of what he wrote in this early
essay; however, the paper is helpful when examining the development of Insider Movements
ideas, theology, and vocabulary.

189 Cf. Jay Smith, “An Assessment of IM’s Principle Paradigms,” in Chrislam (i2 Ministries, 2011),
278–296.

190 Leaving the names of individuals and organizations they represent out.

142 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

missionary success?
One battle internal to the SBC is the validity of utilizing the so-called Camel

Method, a book developed by Kevin Greeson. It essentially utilizes many Qur’anic
verses, rather than the Bible, to witness to Muslims. There are substantial critics of the
method from within the SBC, from churchmen, North American Missions Board,
Presidents of seminaries, to the highest officers as they recognize that the nature of it is
antithetical to the clear witness of the Church.

In Malaysia, so-called “Muslim-friendly” translations of the Bible are replacing
Son of God with ‘prince’ [putera].191 Perhaps this does not seem important at first blush,
but consider that at Jesus’ baptism the Father says, “This is My beloved Son in whom I
am well-pleased” (Matt. 3:17). In Muslim-friendly translations, Jesus is no longer Son to
the Father; now he is ‘prince’, which is a functional denial of the historic formulation of
the Trinity—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—if not an essential denial. And what happens
to the Fatherhood of God if Jesus is no longer the Son? Again, the answer is quite
obvious.

Even more dramatic a change is the Arabic and Bangla (Bangladesh) translations.
In Arabic, Bible translations err by translating “Father” as “Lord”, “Guardian”, “Most
High” and “God.”192 In Bangla, “Son of God” is mistranslated “Messiah of God”
consistent with the Qur’an’s Isa al-Masih (Jesus the Messiah), which references the
merely human Jesus.193

A translation team in Turkish, in part coordinated by Frontiers,194 produced a
translation of Matthew. It doesn't use the literal word for "son" in Turkish, ("oğul") to
refer to Jesus as Son of God.   It uses a word that is closer in meaning to
"representative" ("vekil"). And it doesn't use the literal word for "Father" ("Baba") to
refer to God; it uses the word "mevla," which is a religious word that refers to God but
has no connotation of fatherhood. The Turkish church leadership has broadly rejected it.

191 A Muslim friendly translation, sometimes called “Muslim-compliant” or “Muslim idiom”
translation, uses Islamic names and Arabic words or phrases for the sake of encouraging
Muslims to read the Bible. Understanding that the idea of Jesus as the Son of God is
blasphemous to Muslims, these translations might render son in a non-literal manner, thus
removing the perceived offense; cf. Joshua Lingel, “Islamizing the Bible: Insider Movements and
Scripture Translations,” in Chrislam (i2 Ministries, 2011), 156–172. Copies of Chrislam can be
obtained at: www.i2ministries.org.

192 Cf. Adam Simnowitz, “How Insider Movements Affect Ministry: Personal Reflections,” in
Chrislam: How Missionaries Are Promoting an Islamized Gospel (Garden Grove, CA: i2 Ministries
Press. 2011).

193 Joshua Lingel, “Islamizing the Bible: Insider Movements and Scripture Translations,” in
Chrislam (i2 Ministries, 2011), 156–172.

194 www.frontiers.org

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 143

As one missionary there reports: “To obscure in Turkish what is very clear in Greek
makes it unusable.”

As Emily Belz reports, “Hersman estimated that of 200 translation projects
Wycliffe/SIL linguists have undertaken in Muslim contexts, about 30 or 40 "employ
some alternate renderings" for the divine familial terms.”195 These projects need to be
defunded.

To legitimize this form of Chrislam, impressive statistics are touted, such as
representations that there are up to 300,000-1.2 million new believers in a Muslim
country that is not often named?196 In some missionary writings that country is
Islampur, but really it’s Bangladesh. And in Bangladesh, the insider movements have
wrought havoc for the existing church. The missionary proponents of IM tell the
insiders—Muslims who come become Christians but remain inside Islam—they are not
to have dealings with the existing church. The missionaries talk about the hundreds of
thousands who have come to Christ, but one insider who left the IM and became a
visible Christian reports that the number of insiders couldn’t be more than 10,000 in his
country.197 Other former insiders have reported publicly that many insiders are really
Muslims who will do whatever it takes for the jobs and money they are offered by pro-
IM ministries to feed their families. Likewise, a significant percentage of insider leaders
in Bangladesh were already baptized Christians who were convinced by missionaries to
revert to their former Muslim identities. In other words, the IM of Bangladesh appears
to be balderdash, a fund raising mechanism outside Bangladesh.198

IS THERE A CURE?
IM proponents insist their approach is biblical and use both Old Testament and

New Testament passages to legitimize their belief that Muslims can know Jesus yet
remain inside Islam. Space does not permit examination of all passages Chrislamists
use, but two favorite proof texts are instructive.

Genesis 14: Melchizedek

195 Emily Belz: “Holding Translators Accountable” http://www.worldmag.com/articles/18687.
“Hersman estimated that of 200 translation projects Wycliffe/SIL linguists have undertaken in
Muslim contexts, about 30 or 40 "employ some alternate renderings" for the divine familial
terms.”

196 Check Wikipedia, “House Church;” or see http://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?
PID=18495&MID=44096, (Accessed on 12/15/2011) where the number is up to 800,000.

197 Personal correspondence with the author.

198 Cf. Bill Nikides, “Interview of a Former Insider, Anwar Hossein” In Chrislam (i2 Ministries,
2011), 228–237.

144 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

Higgins believes Melchizedek is an example of Yahweh acting like an insider,
someone at work in another religious tradition. The application Higgins makes for
today, of course, is that Yahweh is also working within Islam. Higgins writes,
“Abraham’s encounter with Melchizedek (a pagan priest of ‘God Most High’) shows us
that the author of Genesis sees El and Yahweh as the same Being. The fact that Abraham
offers a tithe suggests an acceptance of the validity of Melchizedek’s priesthood and
thus, religion….an astonishing acknowledgement of God’s work in another religious
tradition.”

Higgins’ correctly observes that El and Yahweh are the same being and that
Melchizedek is a Messianic antitype. The trouble is not his observations, but his
conclusion. To illustrate, take the study of 100 recently deceased men and women,
during which it was noted that just before dying each one drew a final breath and
exhaled. Researchers concluded breathing causes death. Sometimes our observations do
not necessarily lead to sound conclusions. And Higgins’ observations lead to fatal
conclusions.

The Who and What of Melchizedek
Melchizedek is interesting because he suddenly pops in and out of the biblical
narrative. His name appears twice in the Old Testament: Genesis 14 and Psalm 110:4.
Although he is a person of keen interest, he remains a man of mystery. Indeed, even his
role is a mystery. Is his appearance a Christophany? Is he a Messianic antitype, just an
historical figure, or perhaps some combination?

We have no record of Jesus uttering Melchizedek’s name, but He certainly
understood Psalm 110, which mentions Melchizedek as messianic. The Psalm
characterizes Melchizedek’s priesthood this way: “You are a priest forever according to
the order of Melchizedek” (v. 4, NASB).199 As Messiah, Jesus would have understood his
own priesthood, like Melchizedek’s, to be combined with kingship. And His priesthood
would be unique in that it was not Levitical, which was hereditary. Jesus knew
Melchizedek was a unique historical figure who foreshadowed him.

Melchizedek’s Religion. Against this background, let’s examine Higgins’ use of
Melchizedek to justify his Chrislam. Higgins reasons that Abraham offered a tithe to the
priest, signifying Abraham accepted the religion as valid; therefore, God is at “work in
another religious tradition.” What religious tradition was this and whose was it?
Higgins doesn’t tell us. He leaves it as an imponderable. But the clue is in the wider
context.

Noah was Abraham’s great predecessor. When he disembarked from the ark,

199 All Bible quotations are from the New American Standard Bible. 145
ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION'''''

among the first things he did was offer a sacrifice (Gen. 8:20). Where did Noah learn to
sacrifice? We know that his sons, specifically Shem—whose descendants are mentioned
both before and after Babel (Gen. 11:1-9)—would have witnessed the sacrifice. Abraham
was in the line of Shem (Gen. 11:10-26).

Continuing backward through Genesis, Noah’s great (to the seventh power)
grandfather was Seth. After Seth fathered Enosh, “men began to call upon the name of
the Lord” (Gen. 4:26). So Seth taught Enosh to sacrifice, who taught his son, until it was
eventually taught to Noah and then Shem. From Shem it finally reached Abraham.
Adam taught Seth about sacrifice and we can rationally suppose that Adam was taught
directly by Yahweh.

Where does this take us? Remember that Higgins’ nebulously concludes that
God is at “work in another religious tradition.” He even calls Melchizedek a “pagan
priest.” How he concludes that Melchizedek was a pagan priest (ie. a priest of gods
other than Yahweh) is mystifying. Melchizedek’s tradition is quite likely one that
Yahweh himself initiated. Indeed, Yahweh clothed Adam and Eve with animal skins to
hide their shame (Gen 3:21) and He accepted Abel’s animal sacrifice instead of Cain’s
sacrifice of crops (Gen 4:4-5). Thus, if it’s true that Melchizedek is not following pagan
traditions, then Yahweh is not at work inside another religious tradition, but inside His
own—the very one He created. Although Robert Culver does not take the true worship
of Yahweh back to Adam, but he says, “The appearance of Melchizedek in the Bible is
important theologically. It lends strong support for the notion that knowledge of the
true God possessed by Noah and his sons did not die out.”200

Altar-nate ending?
This raises another question from Abraham’s encounter with Melchizedek. What

religion did Abram practice? Melchizedek had a relationship to Yahweh, though the
particulars of his religious rites are unknown. Abraham wasn’t Jewish, and so it’s ironic
that Higgins believes scripture tell us Melchizedek was of another religion—though it
seems his religious tradition was not “another” but begun by God himself—while
Abraham had a confirmed relationship with the Almighty without religion ever
mentioned. Ironically, Higgins’ reliance on Melchizedek proves too much because his
conclusion should be applied to Abraham rather than Melchizedek.

Melchizedek’s encounter with Abraham is unique. It is not a an application from
the 18th century BC to the 21st century work among Muslims. No, the story uniquely
indicates that Yahweh has been working throughout history. He called out a people for
Himself through whom He would eventually send His Son as Redeemer for all those
ensnared in false religions.

200 Richard D. Culver, “Melchizedek,” in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, v. ii. (Chicago:
Moody Press, 1980), 510.

146 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

2 Kings 5, Naaman the Syrian
Higgins believes Naaman is the perfect picture of one who comes to faith yet

remains in his religion, again, paralleling what is happening with Muslims. He writes,
Naaman clearly changes at least some of his beliefs. He now acknowledges that
there is no God in all the earth except ‘in Israel’. (v. 15) Yet, some of his old ways
of thinking remain: since there is no God except in Israel, he asks for some of
Israel’s dirt that he might take it with him to Aram (v. 17). The Prophet allows
him to remain in this belief about the connection between the dirt of Israel and
the God of Israel. The process of change in an insider’s belief system will be a
dynamic one.201

Do we know what we don’t know? What really happened to Naaman? First, he
made a genuine confession of faith in Yahweh: “I know that there is no God in all the
earth, but in Israel” (v. 15). And he simultaneously turned away from Rimmon, his
former god. Second, Elisha does not comment on the notion that Naaman needed Israeli
soil for worship (v. 17). To make too much of this is to argue from silence. At most,
Naaman is just acknowledging that Yahweh is the only God and trying to connect to
him as best he can within his own unbelieving culture. In fact, his actions imply that his
own culture is hopelessly corrupted by false religion, but he, Naaman, will remain true
to the only living God. Third, Naaman asks about the necessity of accompanying his
master when the latter worships the god Rimmon. This implies that while his master
bows, Naaman would help him worship while Naaman refrains. Fourth, Elisha said,
“Go in peace.” While this certainly was not a condemnation of what Naaman was going
to do, it is an acknowledgement that Naaman’s tender conscience is bruised by his duty
to his king and that he does not need the added guilt.

The nature of the request. What was the nature of Naaman’s request? Was it:
“Elisha, when I am in the temple of Rimmon with my master, is it alright that I bow in
worship to Rimmon as my master bows?” If this were the nature of the question, why
did he ask forgiveness? Timothy Tennent concisely speaks to this point: “The one thing
we do know is that the context of the passage is about Naaman asking for forgiveness for
doing something which they both knew was wrong, not the Prophet’s blessing for
promoting any activity or strategy or self-identity of Naaman as a follower of
Rimmon.”202

The key is that both Elisha and Naaman knew that worshipping Rimmon—now

201 Kevin Higgins, “Inside What? Church, Culture, Religion and Insider Movements in Biblical
Perspective,” St Francis Magazine 5:4 (2009): 90.

202 Timothy C. Tennent, “Followers of Jesus (Isa) in Islamic Mosques: A Closer Examination of
C-5 High Spectrum Contextualization,” International Journal of Frontier Missions. 23:3 (2006): 108.

ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION''''' 147

that Naaman was a changed man—was wrong. How is this parallel to what is
happening to followers of Jesus who stay inside Islam? These insiders believe they are
doing something right, even noble. For instance, Mazhar Mallouhi writes, “I was born
into a confessional home. Islam is the blanket with which my mother wrapped me up
when she nursed me and sang to me and prayed over me. I imbibed aspects of Islam
with my mother’s milk. I inherited Islam from my parents and it was the cradle which
held me until I found Christ. Islam is my mother. You don’t engage a person by telling
them their mother is ugly.”203 I agree with Mallouhi that the worst way to begin a
relationship with a Muslim is to call his “mother” ugly. But if Mallouhi were to ask me
what I think about his mother, I’d encourage him this way: “You have new parents. You
have been adopted into a new family because your mother has disowned you. You now
have a Father! And he loves you enough to call you his son. Did your mother ever call
you son or were you just her slave?”

Shh! Silence is arguing. Whereas Naaman knew he should no longer go to
Rimmon’s temple, his occupation required him to. This is in no way parallel to the
insider position. Naaman had to do something that would appear to observers as
worship, so he appealed for forgiveness, not blessing. Insiders, IM proponents tell us,
are not compelled to remain inside Islam and they are doing nothing wrong by doing
so.

Naaman’s story does not justify the IM. There is too much divergence; there are no
parallels to the Muslims context. Indeed, there is nothing in the Bible that supports
insider movements. Likewise, God’s prohibition against worshipping other gods is the
main context of the Old and New Testaments.204

SHARING YOUR FAITH WITH A MUSLIM

Prepare for Spiritual Warfare
If Christians are properly prepared, Chrislam and IM don’t have to happen.

Missionaries grounded in the scriptures will probably not make the same mistakes the
proponents of IM have made.

Dealing with Islam puts Christians in the center of a fierce spiritual battle.
Spiritual forces holding captive more souls in Islam than any other religion. Paul tells
us, “The weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the

203 Mazhar Mallouhi, “Comments on the Insider Movement,” St Francis Magazine 5:5 (2009): 8.

204 David Talley, “Pagan Religious Practices and Heretical Teaching: What Is to Be Our Attitude?
Gleanings from the Old and New Testaments,” in Chrislam (i2 Ministries, 2011). Also, Jeff
Morton, “Theology of Religions: Would Jesus Be Caught Dead Working in Islam?” in Chrislam
(i2 Ministries, 2011).

148 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION

destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up
against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the
obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:4–5). Islam denies essential Christian doctrines, exalting
itself against the knowledge of the true God. Christians wage war against Islam with
spiritual weapons. These weapons are love and learning, knowledge, ideas, thoughts
and arguments. Make Jesus Lord of your life (1 Peter 3:15).

Don’t Fear Suffering
The New Testament was written by suffering Christians, to suffering Christians,

for suffering Christians. “All who desire to live godly lives in Christ Jesus will be
persecuted” (2 Tim, 3:12). “Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the
soul; but rather, fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt.
10:28). “Perfect love casts out fear” (1 John 4:18). But the Qur’an says: “I will instill
terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their
finger-tips off them” (Q8:12).205 The good news is that God has prepared for every
believer a reward that cannot be imagined (1 Cor. 2:9). Therefore, you will

-Authors would like to thank Abdu Murray and one other for their editorial advice.

Questions:

1. Is it possible to be a Muslim, Hindu or Buddhists and follow Jesus in the context of a
different religion? Why or why not?
2. If a Christian professor with a PhD in Intercultural and Islamic Studies came to you
and said it was possible to say Muhammad is a prophet according to the bible; how
would you correct him/her?
3. If a translator from one of the most reputable Evangelical translation or
denominational organizations came to you and said that it was OK to remove "Father"
and "Son" in missional bible translations among Muslims [Muslim Idiom Translations]
what might you say or do to respond to the them?
4. Is it OK to preach Jesus, (Issa) from the Qur'an, as a Christian, why or why not?

205 A. Yusuf `Ali translation. 149
ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION'''''

VIDEO LESSON 8 -
Completing the Great Commission Among Muslims

I. Introduction
A. The world is much too interdependent for one organization to finish the GC
B. God’s method is the global church
C. God commissions ambassadors who go out to the world
D. Rapid growth of Muslims
1. 1.6 billion Muslims
2. 37,000 Muslims die every day without the gospel
E. The old strategy of sending missionaries from Europe and North America is not
necessarily the best strategy

II. A different model based on the shift of the Church
A. Shift to the global south
1. Asia to 100 million
2. Africa to 370 million
3. Brazil is the third largest evangelical church in the world
4. Nigerians with a vision for sending missionaries into the world
5. i2’s training of Brazilian missionaries
B. Strategy should mobilize the workers from the global catalytic movements in the

150 ISLAM’S'ISSUES,'AGENDAS'&'THE'GREAT'COMMISSION