One of the keys to making disciples of Muslims is to have a process to help Muslims who want to learn more about Jesus to come to Him. In our ministry, we use a 14-step path. This blog post aims to give a straightforward outline of this process. I hope this will become very easy for you to follow and utilize if you need a method for your ministry to Muslims.
Command #5 – Go and Make Disciples – John 4:4-42 (Click here for a transcript of how some people are sharing this teaching)
Command #6 – Love – Luke 10:25-37 (Click here for a transcript of how some people are sharing this teaching)
Command #7 – Lord’s Supper – Luke 22:7-20 (Click here for a transcript of how some people are sharing this teaching)
Command #8 – Give – Mark 12:41-44 (Click here for a transcript of how some people are sharing this teaching)
In general, here is how we use these 14 steps.
For the gospel (step 1), we proclaim the gospel as often as we can, looking for people who are open to learning more. We call these people “yellow lights” (Click here for more information).
For the rest of the steps (steps 2-14), we use either inductive Bible study or storying, depending on how literate the person is we are teaching. If they can read the Injeel Shareef for themselves, we open up the Injeel Shareef with them. We ask them to read it and discuss the passage using the inductive questions below. If they cannot read, then we story the passage to them, meaning that we tell the story to them until they can memorize it. Then, after they memorize the story and can repeat it back to us, we ask the same inductive questions.
We use only one inductive question for the Five Unique Things teachings, “What does this passage teach us about Jesus (Isa)?”
When we teach the Five Unique Things, we ask learners often, “Are you ready to become a follower of Jesus (Isa)?”
We usually transition from the Five Unique Things studies to the Eight Commands by telling learners that the first five studies were about learning who Jesus is, and the next eight teach us what it means to be His disciple. Many learners want to learn more about what it means to follow before they are willing to make that decision.
When we teach the Eight Commands of Christ, we use four inductive questions:
(1) What does this passage teach us about God?
(2) What does this passage teach us about people?
(3) What should we do after studying this passage?
(4) What shouldn’t we do after studying this passage?
The Eight Commands are meant to be obeyed rather than only learned. Therefore, planning for obedience at the end of each teaching is essential when teaching the Eight Commands. Then, begin the next meeting by discussing whether they remember the previous lesson and how they obeyed it. Some learners will want to keep learning but be willing to follow a particular step once they learn more. Move forward with those learners, but keep asking them whether they are ready to obey those past lessons.
It is impossible to lay out an entire discipleship plan in a single blog post! But I hope this simple process might help you learn more about making disciples of Muslims in your work!
Subscribe below to get updates about the No Cousins Left Blog!
Here are a few more blog posts on No Cousins Left about Making Disciples:
Discipling MBBs through Persecution. In Muslim ministry, it is inevitable that your MBB friends and disciples will face persecution for their faith in Jesus. Learn hear how we try to help our MBB friends during persecution. https://nocousinsleft.com/2021/10/27/discipling-mbbs-through-persecution/
The Person of Christ. Understanding the dual nature of Jesus as both fully God and fully man is vital for MBBs. As MBBs come to understand the Person of Christ, they are empowered to leave Islam. Here is a Bible study that one of my teammates developed on this subject for MBBs. https://nocousinsleft.com/2022/11/30/the-person-of-christ/
It is well-known that Islam in South Asia has a structured caste system (there is even a Wikipedia article about it!). I contend that the caste issue in Islam is essential for those seeking to share the gospel with the Muslims of South Asia. In brief, it seems that lower-caste Muslims have been the most receptive to the message of Jesus. This blog post explores this phenomenon. This blog post describes three aspects of the Dalit background of South Asian Islam:
Casteism in South Asia: Ashraf, Ajlaf, and Arzal.
The conversion of Dalits to Islam during the Delhi Sultanate.
Historic People Movements to Christ in South Asia.
Casteism in South Asian Islam
Casteism in South Asian Islam is a complex and multifaceted issue. I am providing only the broadest strokes here. South Asian Islam is broadly broken down into three categories:
Ashraf are the descendants of foreign Muslims who emigrated to South Asia, such as Arabs, Persians, and Mongols. Ashraf Muslims are considered high-caste Muslims, with different ethnic backgrounds having higher and lower ranks. The highest caste in South Asia are the Sayyid, who claim descendency from the Qureshi tribe of Saudi Arabia. While Ashraf are only about 15% of Indian Muslims, they dominate the leadership in Muslim organizations, whether religious or secular. During Partition, more Ashraf had the financial capacity to emigrate to Pakistan, so the rate of Ashraf there is higher than in India.
Ajlaf are Hindu converts to Islam who are indigenous to South Asia. Historically, lower-caste Hindus more readily converted to Islam, so there are few Brahmans among the Ajlaf, but there are numerous Rajputs in certain areas. Together the Ajlaf and Arzal are about 85% of Indian Muslims. It is difficult to determine the percent difference between Ajlaf and Arzal, although the percentage of Arzal is much higher.
Arzal are Dalit converts to Islam who are indigenous to South Asia. Historically, many Dalits have abandoned Hinduism to see if they could find favor in other religions. Many Dalits have converted to various religions in South Asian history. B.R. Ambedkar’s conversion to Buddhism in 1956 with 500,000 supporters is perhaps the most famous historical movement of Dalit conversion. Although it is difficult to find accurate historical data, I contend that Arzal Muslims are the most common Muslim community in many areas in South Asia.
The Conversion of Dalits to Islam during the Delhi Sultanate
The most considerable shift in South Asian history of conversions to Islam occurred during the Delhi Sultanate period from 1206-1526 AD. During this period, Muslim rulers from Central Asia dominated Pakistan and North India. Their rule created a period in which Sufi mystics could freely travel and propagate Islam. As they spread the message of Islam, the Islamic government in South Asia began policies that were favorable to conversion to Islam.
For example, Muinuddin Chisthti (1143-1236 AD) journeyed to Ajmer to spread Islam in 1192 AD. Around that time, Afghani warlords conquered North India. Muinuddin Chisthti then formed the largest Sufi movement in South Asia. He is considered the seventeenth mystic in the Chishti silsila. During the Delhi Sultanate, the four most significant Sufi mystics in South Asian history lived and ministered. They are the seventeenth to twentieth figures in the Chishti silsila.
Moinuddin Chishti (1143-1236 AD), whose dargah is in Ajmer, Rajasthan, India.
Qutubuddin Bakhtiar Kaki (1173-1235 AD), whose dargah is in Meherauli in Delhi, India.
Baba Farid (1173-1266 AD), whose dargah is in Pakpattan, Punja, Pakistan.
Nizamuddin Auliya (1238-1325 AD), whose dargah is in Nizamuddin in Delhi, India.
The modus operandi of these Sufis was to feed the poor through their langar (i.e., soup kitchens), live among the people as mystics, and proclaim Islam. The Islam proclaimed by these men was syncretized with Hinduism leading to disciples who were partially Muslim and partially Hindu. These men often clashed with the orthodox Muslims of their time regarding their theology and practice. For example, these men loved singing praises to Muhammad and Allah and using musical instruments, which orthodox Muslims condemned as haram.
Nizamuddin Auliya is famous for developing 700 lieutenants who went and formed 700 langars across South Asia as points to practice and proclaim Sufi Islam. These Sufis focused on ministry to the poor, which would have made the Dalit population their primary focus. These men were quite successful in developing other leaders to follow their model. The combination of Muslim rule and Sufi preaching led many Dalits and Hindus to convert to Islam.
The syncretized nature of the preaching of these Sufis is one reason folk Islam is so dominant in South Asia (more on folk Islam here – there are 12 linked articles on folk Islam). It was not until the reform movements of the 1800s that widespread efforts emerged to convert folk Muslims to a more orthodox brand of their faith. In fact, Maulana Muhammad Ilyas, the founder of the Tablighi Jamaat movement, is known for his rallying cry, “O Muslims, become Muslims!” By this, Ilyas meant that Muslims should abandon folk religion, study the Qur’an and Hadith, and practice Islam according to Hanafi tradition. Dr. Zakir Naik, a famous South Asian Muslim apologist, is likewise known for his attacks on folk Islam. However, his brand of Islam (Salafi) is also at odds with the Hanafi traditions of Tablighi Jamaat.
While most Muslims in South Asia gravitate towards folk Islam, the percentages are changing. Every year, more and more folk Muslims begin reading the Qur’an and reject South Asian traditional Islam. This conflict is famously described in the disputes between the Bareilvi and Deobandi reform movements.
However, my point in this blog post is that vast areas exist today, especially in rural South Asia, where most Muslims are Arzal-background folk Muslims with little knowledge of the Qur’an and Hadith. Instead, they continue to practice Islam according to the folk Islamic traditions passed down.
The phenomenon of Dalits leaving Hinduism has been widely studied. These people are considered to be even below the caste system, being “untouchable.” Being untouchable meant Dalits have no hope or future in their religion. B.R. Ambedkar (d. 1956) was a Dalit political leader who wrote and argued along these lines. Shortly before his death, Ambedkar converted to Buddhism with 500,000 supporters. Throughout South Asian history, Dalits have left Hinduism for every other religion, hoping to find a better hope and a future elsewhere.
Dalit form a large portion of South Asian populations. In India, Dalits are called “scheduled castes” and formed 16.6% of the population in the 2011 Census. However, the number should be considered higher because this 16.6% does not include Dalits who have left Hinduism to become Buddhist, Muslim Christian, or Sikh. The percentage of Dalits in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and other South Asian countries is hard to determine.
Returning to the point that many South Asian Christians are from Dalit backgrounds, Pakistan is a good case study. The vast majority of Pakistan’s more than four million Christians descend from the “Sialkot movement” that began in 1874 and swept through the Chamar caste, which is considered Dalit. Likewise, many “people movements” to Christ in South Asia have a high Dalit background.
The result is that there are many places in South Asia where significant portions of Dalit-background Christians and Dalit-background Muslims live nearby. Culturally and linguistically, there are very few barriers between these communities. It seems likely that as these Christians grow strong in their faith that they will be evangelistically effective in impacting the Dalit-background Muslims in their proximity. Likewise, suppose the Muslim populations were to grow strong in Islam through the efforts of groups like Tablighi Jamaat. In that case, it seems likely that the Muslim people would effectively bring many of these Christians into the fold of Islam.
To my mind, circumstances where large numbers of Dalit-background Christians and Dalit-background Muslims live in proximity provide the greatest evangelistic opportunity among Muslims in South Asia today. Opportunities like these abound. One goal should be to identify these opportunities and take advantage of them. Significant effort will be required, but significant potential exists. In these circumstances, it seems likely that Muslims will readily accept the gospel. Still, the most essential difficulties will be providing discipleship and church formation opportunities.
While pursuing opportunities like these, we must acknowledge that these issues will be sensitive. Many Christians do not like discussing their Dalit history for good reasons! They left those things behind and were made royal priests in the kingdom of God. In our faith, we do not have a distinction of castes. We are all one. Therefore, some consider any discussion of these caste issues and dynamics a regression. While I agree with those concerns, an opportunity remains.
The question is: How can we train movements to Christ in proximity to large groups of Muslims to cross over to their Muslim neighbors?
Recent research indicates that the Qur’an has thousands of textual variants and changes. In fact, the Qur’an that is used today around the world does not seem to be based on the ancient manuscripts, but rather on oral transmission through Hafiz. The result is that the Qur’an that is used today has faced changes. If you want a primer on textual criticism of the Qur’an, I suggest this 21-minute video of Dr. Jay Smith discussing these issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52PEVUpJBtk
I have extensively studied New Testament textual criticism, which is a study and comparison of New Testament manuscripts. These studies have led me to have a curiosity about the ancient manuscripts of the Qur’an. Since I know Greek, I can easily access ancient copies of the New Testament, especially through the online portal of the Center for the Study of New Testament manuscripts. However, I am not aware of any such portal that exists for ancient copies of the Qur’an.
Today, I asked Google’s Bard AI program to develop a table of the fifty oldest manuscripts of the Qur’an. Bard was able to provide a table of ten such manuscripts. In contrast, we have details of thousands of ancient manuscripts of the New Testament. This contrast clearly demonstrates the differences in relative values of studying the most ancient copies of their holy books between the Muslim community and the Christian community.
Here is the table that Bard developed:
Manuscript
Location
Date
Features
Birmingham Quran Manuscript
Birmingham University Library, UK
568-645 AD
Written in Hijazi script, one of the oldest forms of Arabic script.
Sana’a Manuscript
National Library of Yemen, Sana’a
650-670 AD
Contains the oldest known variant readings of the Quran.
Leningrad Quran Manuscript
Russian National Library, Saint Petersburg
700-750 AD
One of the most complete Quranic manuscripts.
Topkapi Quran Manuscript
Topkapi Palace Museum, Istanbul
800-850 AD
Decorated with gold and silver calligraphy.
Samarkand Kufic Quran Manuscript
State Museum of Oriental Art, Moscow
900-950 AD
Written in Kufic script, an early form of Arabic calligraphy.
Gotthelf Bergsträßer Archive
University of Münster, Germany
1000-1050 AD
Contains a variety of Quranic manuscripts, including fragments, codices, and amulets.
Mingana Quran Manuscript
Chester Beatty Library, Dublin
1100-1150 AD
Written on parchment, which is made from animal skin.
Dublin Quran Manuscript
Chester Beatty Library, Dublin
1200-1250 AD
One of the most complete Quranic manuscripts.
Mosque of the Prophet Quran Manuscript
Masjid al-Nabawi, Medina
1300-1350 AD
Written on parchment, which is made from animal skin.
Mosque of Omar Quran Manuscript
Al-Aqsa Mosque, Jerusalem
1400-1450 AD
Written on parchment, which is made from animal skin.
The ten most ancient copies of the Qur’an with details (developed by Bard)
Here are a few reflections on these manuscripts before delving in more fully.
The lack of a more developed list shows the lack of value among Muslim scholars in studying ancient copies of the Qur’an. Instead, most Muslims depend on Hafiz (students who have memorized the Qur’an) to provide an accurate transmission of the Qur’an. Therefore, Muslims prefer to depend on oral, rather than written, transmission of the Qur’an.
It is almost impossible to have intelligent conversations about Quranic textual criticism. Most Muslim scholars have chosen not to explore this data. Instead, they simply say, “The Qur’an has never changed.” The feeling is that if they repeat that mantra, and ignore any evidence, that the problem will go away.
More and more people are looking at Quranic textual criticism. People are completing PhDs on this topic and books are being published, mostly by non-Muslims. In fact, it seems that a number of Christians are studying in this field because they have skill regarding textual criticism because of their studies of the Bible using this approach. However, it seems to me that most Muslims simply see that as an attack on their religion by outsiders rather than a genuine engagement with data.
I believe that the narrative will change over the next 20 years and that it will be generally acknowledged soon that the Qur’an has a textual history. After all, even Sahih al-Bukhari acknowledges the textual history of the Qur’an by telling the story of Caliph Uthman having the Hafiz of his time make an authoritative version of the Qur’an, burning the ancient copies, and sending his authoritative version to each of the Muslim provinces. Many Muslims still argue that the Topkapi and Samarkand manuscripts are Uthmanic recensions, even though the field of Quranic textual criticism has not only debunked that statement but also shown that there are a great deal of textual variants between those two manuscripts.
In summary, the Qur’an has a textual history. While Muslim leaders continue to push their narrative that the Qur’an has been faithfully transmitted without any change of any kind, the evidence is clearly against them. It seems like that a generation of Muslim youth will be confronted with this data and begin to ask intelligent questions. It will be interesting to see how the Muslim world responds to widespread doubt about the origins of the Qur’an.
Details about a Few of these Quranic Manuscripts
Birmingham Quran Manuscript. The oldest manuscript of the Qur’an indicates many textual variants in the Qur’an. The Birmingham Quran Manuscript, also known as the Mingana Quran, is believed to be one of the oldest surviving copies of the Quran. The manuscript was discovered in 1932 by Alphonse Mingana, an Iraqi scholar, during his visit to the University of Birmingham’s Mingana Collection of Middle Eastern Manuscripts. It consists of two leaves of parchment, written in an early form of the Arabic script known as Hijazi. Radiocarbon dating conducted in 2015 placed its origin between 568 and 645 AD, making it potentially older than any other known Quranic manuscript (click here for data on this dating this manuscript). The online portal to the Birmingham Qur’an manuscript is available here. Dr. Alba Fedeli is one of the foremost scholars on this manuscript. Her conclusions are available here: https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/5864/ A cursory scan of Dr. Fedeli’s work shows that she spent well over a hundred pages of this work detailing textual variants in early manuscripts of the Qur’an.
The Sana’a Manuscript. The second oldest manuscript of the Qur’an indicates even more textual variants. The Sana’a Manuscript, also known as the Sana’a Palimpsest, is a significant collection of ancient Quranic fragments discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a, Yemen, in the 1970s. The Sana’a Manuscript consists of parchment sheets reused for writing purposes, resulting in a palimpsest. Underneath the visible text, scholars discovered a previous layer of text that had been erased and overwritten. This discovery has allowed researchers to study the evolution and variation of the Quranic text. The manuscript’s textual variants and orthographic features suggest that the Quranic text underwent changes and revisions during its early transmission. These variations challenge the traditional Islamic belief in the Quran’s textual preservation and the absence of any changes over time. There have been many videos made to help people understand that the Sana’a manuscript very clearly demonstrates that many textual variants in the ancient Qur’an. Here is one video that I have enjoyed on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvPMDyBlUPA
The Leningrad Qur’an Manuscript. The Leningrad Qur’an Manuscript, also known as the Leningrad Codex, is an important manuscript that contains the complete text of the Qur’an. It was probably copied in Cairo in the 9th century AD, during the Abbasid period of Islamic history. The manuscript was written in Arabic and is currently in Saint Petersburg, Russia. It seems that this manuscript has not been well studied since data on it is difficult to find.
The Topkapi Manuscript. The Topkapi Manuscript, also referred to as the Topkapi Codex, is believed to date back to the early 9th century AD, making it one of the oldest known Quranic manuscripts. The Topkapi Manuscript consists of 99 leaves and contains Surahs 17 to 36 of the Qur’an. It is written on parchment and utilizes the Kufic script, which was prevalent during that period. The manuscript’s text lacks diacritical marks and vowel indicators, typical of early Quranic manuscripts. One distinctive feature of the Topkapi Manuscript is that it includes various annotations and corrections, demonstrating the scribal practices and textual development of the Quran during that era. These annotations provide valuable insights into the early transmission and recording of the Quranic text. Many Muslims argue that this is the best and earliest of the Quranic texts. While a book has been written detailing the textual variants of this manuscript, most find the cost of that book prohibitive from purchasing it: https://www.ircica.org/publications/studies-on-the-holy-quran/al-mushaf-al-sharif-topkapi-palace-museum-library-madina-nr-1
The Samarkand Manuscript. The Samarkand Manuscript, also known as the Samarqand Mushaf, is named after the city of Samarkand in present-day Uzbekistan, where it is currently housed.The manuscript is believed to have been written in the 8th century CE and is attributed to the Umayyad period of Islamic history. It consists of two volumes, with Volume 1 containing 282 parchment leaves and Volume 2 containing 268 leaves. The Samarkand Manuscript is written in the Kufic script, which was a prevalent style of Arabic calligraphy during that time. Recent studies indicate that the Samarkand Manuscript has many more variants than the Topkapi manuscript.
This blog post is a strange one! It is my first blog post that is me simply reporting a Chat GPT conversation. Lately, I have been using Chat GPT as one research tool. It can synthesize a great deal of information in a short period of time. Today, I asked Chat GPT a question, and I thought you all might appreciate the response.
My Question to Chat GPT: “I am trying to understand a new dialect of English that I call Muselmani English. My experience is that many Muslims insert a great deal of Arabic terms into English, especially when they are speaking about religious things. Could you provide a list of the 100 most common Arabic terms that English-speaking Muslims tend to insert into English?”
Chat GPT’s response is the rest of this blog post: Certainly! It’s important to note that the usage of Arabic terms in English can vary among English-speaking Muslims, and not all Muslims use these terms in their everyday conversations. However, I can provide you with a list of commonly used Arabic terms that some English-speaking Muslims may incorporate into their speech, particularly when discussing religious matters. Here are 100 such terms:
Allah (God)
Alhamdulillah (Praise be to Allah)
InshaAllah (If Allah wills)
SubhanAllah (Glory be to Allah)
MashAllah (What Allah has willed)
Astaghfirullah (I seek forgiveness from Allah)
Salam (Peace)
Assalamu Alaikum (Peace be upon you)
JazakAllah Khair (May Allah reward you with goodness)
MashaAllah (What Allah has willed)
Allahu Akbar (Allah is the Greatest)
Bismillah (In the name of Allah)
Hadith (Sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad)
Sunnah (Prophetic tradition)
Quran (The Islamic holy book)
Sadaqah (Voluntary charity)
Zakat (Obligatory charity)
Fajr (Dawn prayer)
Dhuhr (Midday prayer)
Asr (Afternoon prayer)
Maghrib (Evening prayer)
Isha (Night prayer)
Taraweeh (Nightly Ramadan prayer)
Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca)
Umrah (Minor pilgrimage)
Eid (Religious festival)
Shahada (Testimony of faith)
Halal (Permissible according to Islamic law)
Haram (Prohibited according to Islamic law)
Wudu (Ablution)
Sadaqah al-Fitr (Charity given at the end of Ramadan)
Taqwa (God-consciousness)
Tawhid (Monotheism)
Shirk (Associating partners with Allah)
Barakah (Divine blessing)
Dua (Supplication)
Imam (Religious leader)
Madrasah (Islamic school)
Muezzin (Person who calls to prayer)
Qibla (Direction of the Kaaba in Mecca)
Sira (Biography of Prophet Muhammad)
Tafsir (Quranic interpretation)
Hijab (Head covering)
Niqab (Face covering)
Ramadan (Islamic month of fasting)
Iftar (Breaking the fast)
Suhoor (Pre-dawn meal)
Laylat al-Qadr (Night of Power)
Qiyamah (Resurrection)
Jannah (Paradise)
Jahannam (Hell)
Mahr (Dowry)
Ameen (Amen)
Fitnah (Trial or tribulation)
Itikaf (Seclusion in the mosque)
Khutbah (Sermon)
Sadaqah Jariyah (Continuous charity)
Taubah (Repentance)
Zikr (Remembrance of Allah)
Mufti (Islamic scholar)
Ummah (Muslim community)
Wali (Guardian or saint)
Dawah (Propagation of Islam)
Fatwa (Legal ruling)
Halaqah (Religious study circle)
Iman
(Faith) 67. Ihsan (Excellence in worship)
Istikhara (Seeking guidance from Allah)
Masjid (Mosque)
Mubah (Permissible)
Qadr (Divine decree)
Sajdah (Prostration)
Shura (Consultation)
Tawakkul (Reliance on Allah)
Ummi (Illiterate)
Witr (Odd-numbered prayer)
Ta’ala (Exalted)
Sahaba (Companions of the Prophet)
Sahih (Authentic)
Bid’ah (Innovation)
Khutbah (Friday sermon)
Waliullah (Friend of Allah)
Fard (Obligatory)
Tawbah (Repentance)
Azan (Call to prayer)
Fitra (Charity given on Eid)
[Note that ChatGPT could only provide 86 terms, even though I asked for 100! Do you know of anything else that belongs on the list?]
I recently encountered the Urdu Common Version translation by Biblica. You can find it here in the Apple store and here in the Google Play store. So, I distributed the app to a few friends and colleagues to begin getting feedback. Of course, people started asking for my feedback almost immediately. Unfortunately, I have only read Matthew 1-3 and flipped through other verses. As I read more, I may come and write another blog post as my understanding of this translation grows.
Please note that I am transliterating phrases from the UCV into Roman Urdu here (with English glosses in parentheses). Some readers understand Urdu in the Nastaliq script, and others can only read it in Devnagri. Thankfully, the UCV is in both Nastaliq and Devnagri scripts! But I know that all the readers here understand Roman Urdu.
So, I am writing to move the conversation forward. I honestly believe the UCV might become my translation of choice for work among South Asian Muslims.
I have six initial reflections on this new translation.
First, I like the contextualization of this translation. For example, here are a few of the translation decisions in the UCV.
“Isa” for “Jesus.” The name of Jesus usually has the tag “Hazoor” (Persian term for honor) attached, but sometimes “Hazrat” (another Persian term for honor) is used (See my note below on the inconsistent use of Hazrat in this translation). The translators of the UCV generally prefer Hazoor for Jesus over Hazrat to indicate that Jesus is worthy of more honor than any other prophet. I love that translation decision. It is something small, but I like the implications.
“Al-Maseeh” for “Christ.” Many Urdu translations use “Maseeh,” which has a more Christian sound. Most of my Muslim friends prefer to add the prefix “al,” which is simply the Arabic for “the.” There is no shift in meaning, but this small change gives this a better contextualization flavor.
“Khuda” for “God.” Khuda is a Persian word for the almighty. Traditionally, most Urdu translations have used this term for God. Another Muselmani Urdu translation primarily uses Allah for God, which also has strengths. The only issue is that more and more Muslims in South Asia are switching from using Khuda to Allah. Some Muslims have come to believe that Khuda is now a Christianese term (a term that Christians rather than Muslims use). Therefore, many Muslims might find the word “Khuda” a foreign-sounding term.
“Khudawand” is used for “Lord.” This choice is faithful to the intent of the original authors of the New Testament in the implications of the Lordship of Jesus. For example, in Romans 1:1, Khudawand Isa al-Maseeh is used for “Lord Jesus Christ.” I enjoy that this translation uses a term as strong as Khudawand for the Lordship of Jesus since this term implies His deity.
The tag Hazrat is applied to various prophets/leaders of the Old Testament. In South Asia, most Muslims attach “Hazrat” before the name of a prophet and “alayhi salaam” (may the peace of Allah be upon him) after the name of the prophet. Many Muslims find it disrespectful of the prophets when we do not follow this custom. The translators of the UCV seem to have found a good balance here by using the “Hazrat” and omitting the “alayhi salaam.” I believe this will cause most Muslim readers to see that the prophets are being respected while not inserting too much into the text. From a contextualization standpoint, I love the insertion of “Hazrat” in this translation. However, my biblicist side hates seeing an extra term repeatedly inserted into the text. The UCV translators have done as well as can be expected to find a middle ground on these two poles.
“Pak-Gusl” for “baptism.” Traditional Urdu translations transliterate the Greek word “baptismos” into Urdu as “baptisma” rather than translating this term. But “Baptisma” is an entirely foreign term and concept for Muslims. However, the ritual washings of gusl and wudu are common among Muslims. A “pak-gusl” (holy bath) clarifies that the text does not refer to the normal gusl used in Islam but something distinct. Therefore, “pak-gusl” is a great term to use for baptism.
“Yahya” for John the Baptist’s name. The UCV does a great job of using the Arabic names of prophets that will be familiar to Muslims. I was recently reading Matthew 3 with a Muslim-background believer. That translation used “Yahunna baptisma denewala.” This phrase meant nothing to my MBB friend. But my friend understood when I explained that it was about Hazrat Yahya, who gave a special pak-gusl for repentance.
“Khuda ka beta” is used for “Son of God.” Muslim-friendly translations sometimes seek to obscure fundamental biblical truths, such as the fatherhood of God and the Sonship of Jesus. I am very thankful that the UCV provides the most precise and straightforward translation calling Jesus the Son of God.
Second, there are a few areas where the contextualization of the UCV translation needs to be improved. Please note that the positives on contextualization are much higher than the negatives! Here are two areas I have noticed so far.
Naya Ahadnama instead of Injeel Shareef. I have only seen one paper copy of the New Testament UCV. On the cover, they used the term “Naya Ahadnama,” meaning “New Testament.” The issue with this term is that it bears no significance or meaning to a Muslim audience. If a Muslim sees a Naya Ahadnama, they see a book about which there is no meaning. If they know the term Naya Ahadnama, they understand it is a book for Christians rather than Muslims. Instead, Injeel Shareef is the common term Muslims use for the book of Jesus. When Muslims see the Injeel Shareef, they understand that this book is significant for their community. Therefore, it would be a better contextualization practice to use that term.
Allah for God. I understand that there are significant controversies around the word Allah. Half of me thinks that Khuda is the best term to use in a translation like this, and half think Allah is the best. In many contexts, especially in Muslim-majority areas, I fear this translation will fail to gain traction because of the use of Khuda over Allah. In South Asia, Muslims are beginning to trend away from using Khuda and towards Allah in their regular use.
Third, I am overall pleased with the readability of the UCV, but I have noticed some Christianese remaining. By Christianese, I mean terms that Muslims will not understand but that Christians easily understand. In those cases, there are often better terms to utilize in the Muslim context. While I have found the UCV easy to read overall, here are a few areas where I would have appreciated improvement.
Use of the term rastabaz for righteous. This term occurs in Mathew 1:19 as a description of Yusef/Joseph and in Matthew 3:15, when Jesus asked Yahya/John to baptize him to fulfill all righteousness. In my experience, Urdu-speaking Christians understand the term rastabaz Urdu-speaking Muslims do not. Other terms could be utilized, depending on how the term “righteous” is being used in context, such as the Urdu “nek” or “sadiq.”
Use of “Aap.” An uncommon usage of the Urdu “aap” is to use it in a very respectful way in place of “us” or “un.” The issue is that this is not a very common way to use “aap.” Those who are educated will understand, while those with less education may have difficulty with this term. Let me give on example of how the UCV uses “Aap” in this way. In Matthew 1:6, “Hazrat Daud se Hazrat Suleiman paida hue, aap ki maa pehle Uriyah ki bivi ti.” While this usage is technically correct and highly respectful language, it slightly obscures the meaning. If we obscure too much in a text, the meaning becomes harder and harder for those of low education to understand. A perennial issue in translations in South Asia is a preference towards high language that many need help understanding. Translators should avoid high Urdu terms to make the text more accessible.
Fourth, I always see weaknesses in the biblical accuracy of translations not done from the original language. Let me give a few indications that the translators did not do this translation from Greek.
The insertion of police in Matthew 2:16. The UCV reads that Herod “sipahi bhej kar” (sent police/constables) to kill the children two and under. The Greek text does not mention who was sent, just that Herod sent unnamed people to kill the children. However, the BSI/PBS translations say that Herod sent “admi” (men) to kill the children. While it cannot be conclusively shown from one or two examples, it appears likely that the translators of the UCV leaned heavily on other translations rather than going to the original Greek.
BSI means the Bible Society of India; PBS means the Pakistan Bible Society.
The obliqueness of Matthew 1:6. The Greek text boldly declares that “David fathered Solomon by Uriah’s wife.” The Greek text seems to point out the offense of what had happened and the greatness of God that He worked through such a genealogy to bring for Jesus. However, the BSI/PBS translations sought to dull the offense of this passage by saying, “aur Daud se Suleman us aurat se paida hua jo pehle Uriyah ki bivi thi” (and David begot Solomon by that woman who was previously the wife of Uriah). The UCV follows the BSI/PBS very closely, while staying far from the clear Greek text. The UCV translates this as “Hazrat Daud se hazrat Suleiman paida hua, aap ki maa pehle Uriyah ki bivi thi” (Hazrat David fathered hazrat Solomon, whose mother was previously the wife of Uriah”). When I read these texts in parallel, it seems to me that the translators had the PBS and BSI translations in their hands rather than the Greek New Testament.
However, I have always been something of a biblicist. So, I may be too strict here. I dislike it when people obscure the Word of God. It is one of the reasons that I learned Greek because I wanted to see the Word of God without looking through the lens of a translator. Neither of these two examples changes the meaning of the text much. However, there is a danger of simply building new translations on top of old ones rather than returning to the sources.
Fifth, I am still trying to figure out the inconsistent uses of Hazrat and Hazoor in the UCV. They may include an explanation somewhere. Here are a few of the most interesting examples for me:
It was odd that they use Hazrat al-Maseeh about Jesus in Matthew 2:4, when they consistently use Hazoor Isa elsewhere. They want to show the distinctiveness of Jesus by using a different term for him, so why the change in Matthew 2:4?
They call the following unlikely people Hazrat in the genealogy of Matthew 1:2-17: Boaz (1:5), Obed (1:5), Jesse (1:6), Zerubabbel (1:13), Azor (1:14), and Jacob, the father of Joseph (1:16). By affixing Hazrat to these men, they are ascribing them as spiritual leaders or prophets of some type. Of these, I was most perplexed by Azor, about whom we know nothing. Why did they randomly ascribe this title to him? What was the reasoning?
At the same time, consider the omission of Hazrat before the following people: Jeremiah (Matt 2:17), Isaiah (Matt 3:3), the Twelve Apostles (Matt 10:2-4), Paul (Acts 13:13), and the Old Testament kings after Solomon (Matt 1:7-11). If the translators used the term Hazrat to show the prophetic nature of a person, surely Jeremiah and Isaiah deserve inclusion, right? The exclusion of the apostles is also striking since it reduces them below Old Testament figures.
But think for a moment, Hazrat Azor (Matt 1:14), but not Hazrat Isaiah? Hazrat Zerubabbel but not Hazrat Paul? It’s just strange to me.
Another strange example is that Joseph, Mary’s husband, is called Hazrat Yusef/Joseph (Matthew 1:18-25; 2:13, 19, 21). He heard directly from angels and from God in dreams in Matthew 1-2, which would make him a prophet according to Islam… but I have never heard a biblical teaching trying to defend him as a prophet.
In the end, I would like to re-evaluate how the translators have chosen to utilize the term Hazrat or at least hear a better rationale for their usage of this term.
Sixth, I appreciate the footnotes of the UCV that provide helpful explanations of terms that Muslims would not understand. For example, Matthew 3:7 introduces the Pharisees. A footnote says, “Pharisi yaani yahudiyon ka ek tabka jo shariat ke aleem aur ustad the,” which accurately describes Pharisees as teachings and experts of the Law. It would have been helpful to say that they were experts of the Law of Moses. However, I am thankful for the inclusion of such footnotes. I am also grateful that the translators did not attempt to insert all their comments inside the text. They understood a healthy separation between translating the text and including helpful information in footnotes.
Overall, I am pleased with the UCV translation. As I said, I need to read further, but it may become my translation of choice. If you want to discuss this translation further, please write to me at nocousinsleft@protonmail.com.
God is at work among Muslims around the world in unprecedented ways. I often hear stories about hundreds or thousands of Muslims following Jesus in baptism.
There are three reasons that we need to keep talking about these stories.
First, stories about God’s work among Muslims build hope in the church. One primary barrier that keeps God’s people from sharing Jesus with Muslims is the belief that it is hopeless. Many believe that Muslims can’t leave Islam and follow Jesus. This barrier is dispelled when we share stories about God’s extraordinary work among Muslims.
Second, stories about God’s work among Muslims give hope to Muslim seekers. Many Muslim seekers believe that if they follow Jesus that they will be alone in their new faith. They realize that they will have a community. When they hear that millions of others from Muslim backgrounds follow Jesus, the barriers keeping them from following Jesus are reduced.
Third, stories about God’s work among Muslims give hope to Muslim-background believers. A day is coming when millions of Muslim-background believers will publicly stand in solidarity. The amazing work among Muslims will then become increasingly public. Talking about stories of Muslims turning to Christ in large numbers emboldens the minds of Muslim-background believers toward such a future reality.
With these things in mind, I recently began reading Motus Dei: The Movement of God to Disciple the Nations (William Carey Publishing, 2021). I have been provoked by a handful of articles, but perhaps more than any others, I have been provoked by Gene Daniel’s “How Exactly Do We Know What We Know about Kingdom Movements?” (pages 58-67).
Here are five reflections on the veracity of the statistic that there are 25 million MBBs today.
If there are more than 25 million MBBs today, then over 1% of Muslims in the world have become followers of Jesus. We may see significant portions of the global Muslim community repent and follow Jesus in the coming decades. Whatever the actual number, more Muslims are coming to Christ today than at any other time in the history of the world. If 1% of global Muslims are secret followers of Jesus, it will not be many years before the number becomes 2% or 5%.
It is difficult to verify such a number because the MBB population is inherently hidden. Because of security issues, MBBs must be cautious in how public they are with their faith. It is challenging to census individuals who want to remain hidden! In addition, it is often difficult to determine whether an individual should be considered an MBB. For example, I have a friend who confessed Jesus, took baptism, and began proclaiming Jesus to his community. However, his community then gave significant pushback. Under threat of substantial consequences, he publicly reverted to Islam. Privately, he tells me he is a follower of Jesus while outwardly conforming to Islam. In my experience, many such people have blurred the lines between their faith in Christ and Islam. The question is whether we should count such individuals as MBBs. Insider movement practitioners would likely count such individuals, while those who believe MBBS must leave Islam might not count them.
Because more of the research is accessible, evidence that there were 10 million MBBs in 2010 is more easily discussed and evaluated. In 2015, Duane Miller and Patrick Johnstone published a census of the global MBB population in 2010 (D.A. Miller and Patrick Johnstone, “Believers in Christ from a Muslim Background: A Global Census,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion (2015)). In that article, they estimated 10 million global MBBs in 2010. They also broke down their estimates by country and used the MBB population of the United States as an example. They estimated 477,000 MBBs in the US in 2010 as a “key destination of [MBBs] fleeing persecution” (8). Their breakdown is as follows, “There are five million Arabs in the United States, two-thirds of them Christian in background and possibly 180,000 [MBBs]. These come especially from Egypt and Palestine and increasingly from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Syria. There are one to two million Iranians in the United States, of whom we estimate about 130,000 to be [MBBs]… Other Muslim peoples (50+) yield a further 67,000 [MBBs]. We can make only a rough estimate of 60,000 Catholic [MBBs]. We estimate 40,000 Orthodox Christians. This yields a total of possibly 477,000 MBBs, plus or minus 100,000, in the United States” (8). Miller and Johnstone estimate that 6.5 million of the 10 million MBBs in 2010 were from Indonesia (16). A further 2.44 million come from just eight countries in their survey. Therefore, according to their survey, the remaining countries had an MBB population of about a million in 2010. To fact-check, I contacted Muslim-focused workers in a handful of these countries and asked them to reflect on the numbers that were given in this study for their countries. Most said that they agree that the estimates are within reason. However, I have yet to check with anyone focused on Indonesia.
The numbers 10 million MBBs in 2010 and 25 million MBBs in 2023 assume a 7.3% growth rate, which is believable. It is entirely plausible that the current global movement of Muslims coming to Christ is growing at 7.3%. Indeed, there are places where it is growing much faster and other areas where little to no growth is happening. However, it is very plausible that 73 Muslims repent and follow Jesus every year for every thousand Muslims alive.
If the 7.3% growth rate continues, the percentage of MBBs in the global Muslim population will grow substantially. The global Muslim population is growing at 1.84%. If these rates were to hold, the number of Muslims who follow Jesus would grow as a percentage of the global Muslim population as follows (see the graph below):
By 2032, 2% of Muslims globally would follow Jesus.
By 2040, 3% of Muslims globally would follow Jesus.
By 2046, 4% of Muslims globally would follow Jesus.
By 2050, 5% of Muslims globally would follow Jesus.
By 2063, 10% of Muslims globally would follow Jesus.
It isn’t very likely that the above trends will hold. There may be a tipping point or a significant global rise of persecution against MBBs. However, because God is seated on His throne. He has promised a great multitude will come into His kingdom from every Muslim tongue and tribe and people and nation. Therefore, we can expect significant future growth among Muslims. At the same time, the number of Muslims who leave Islam to become atheists or agnostics will likely outpace the number of Muslims who leave Islam to follow Jesus. The result may be that in the coming decades, the strength of global Islam will be significantly weakened. Likewise, its ability to persecute and control its population will decrease.
Projected Growth Rate of Global MBBs as a Percent of Total Muslims. This graph is built on the extrapolated data as described above.
Since this blog post has already run long, I will pause here. However, I plan to write a future blog post about the implications of this recent rise in global MBBs. I also want to write about the uneven rise of global MBBs. For example, according to Miller’s 2010 study, only 176,500 of the global Muslim population lived in South Asia, despite South Asia being home to about a third of the worldwide population. In other words, South Asia was estimated to be home to about 1.8% of global MBBs despite having a third of the global Muslim population (see here for an article on the South Asian Muslim Population).
Lastly, as the author, I have to say that this blog post feels a bit like a deck of cards to me. It is built on extrapolations of data that are built on somewhat flimsy data. So, please do better research before trying to quote this article. The reason for the flimsiness of the data is that it is virtually impossible to count the global MBB population today. However, it is a reasoned look at what God is doing around the world.
If you want to discuss this blog post, don’t hesitate to contact me at nocousinsleft@protonmail.com. Or subscribe to No Cousins Left below.
This blog post is the ninth in a series on South Asian folk Islam and its rituals. Click here to go to the first of these articles. Understanding the rituals of Folk Islam provides insight into the beliefs and practices of folk Muslims. This understanding helps us to make disciples of folk Muslims.
A devotional imagine in honor of the Sufi mystic Kwaja Gharib Nawaz. In the upper right corner, Kwaja Gharib Nawaz is written. Kwaja Gharib Nawaz is one title of the famous Kwaja Moiunuddin Chishti (d. 1236). He is considered the most famous of the Sufis of South Asia, Many venerate him at his tomb in Ajmer, Rajasthan in India.
I had a wild experience with Islamic devotional images when a Muslim family decided to follow Jesus. Before taking baptism, they asked for help in removing a room full of Islamic idols and devotional images. Most prominent was a miniature dargah. This family had received a sacred object from a dargah (read here about dargahs), brought it home, and built a miniature dargah to house that item. They believed the dargah was a conduit of the barkat of the dargah from which they had brought the sacred object. Now, they were afraid to remove the dargah for fear of the spirits associated with it. Despite their fear, they arranged for the shrine to be demolished and removed. The images and relics were then burned. To these new believers, their continued health demonstrated Jesus’ authority over the shrine’s spirits.
Devotional images generally represent Sufi saints, Shia leaders, or relics of Muhammad. Pilgrims purchase devotional images during pilgrimages to dargahs or other religious sites. They hope that some of the spiritual power or blessing from the dargah or pir persists in the devotional image. In the mind of many folk Muslims, barkat (Urdu for blessing; baraka in Arabic) exists as a form of impersonal spiritual power that dwells in people and objects. Through their connection with Allah, pirs become conduits of this barkat. Certain holy places, especially dargahs, are places imbued with great barkat. The accumulation of barkat provides many practical blessings. An individual with a significant amount of barkat might have the power to heal the sick or divine the future. Lesser amounts of barkat still provide spiritual protection from demons, jinn, and the evil eye. The more barkat an individual has, the more powerful their prayers.
Many relics in South Asian Islam are items imbued with great barkat. For example, in various places across South Asia are the hairs of Muhammad. For instance, Jama Masjid in Old Delhi is said to have some of Muhammad’s beard hairs. In Srinagar, India, a dargah called Hazratbal (i.e., “Honored Hair ” houses more hairs of Muhammad. Many folk Muslims understand that these kinds of relics contain barkat. Therefore, they go to these places seeking some of this spiritual power to rub off on them. At Hazratbal, when they bring out the relic containing Muhammad’s hairs, those present often prostrate themselves in honor of the prophet. Those devotees undoubtedly hope to gain some barkat from Muhammad through his beard hairs.
Devotional images are more affordable and available than relics. It is common to have a smaller inset image of the Kaaba in Mecca in devotional images. Among both Deobandi and Barelvi Muslims, pictures depicting the Qur’an, the Kaaba, and calligraphy of verses of the Qur’an in Arabic are ordinary. Through devotional images, Sunni and Shia folk Muslims can easily be identified. Shia folk Muslims generally include images of saints riding on white horses, while Sunni images do not have white horses. The variety of devotional images in Islam is a testimony to the range of opinions among South Asian Muslims about who or what is the most significant source of barkat.
One Christian response to the Muslim concept of barkat is to demonstrate what true blessing is from Scripture. One of the most powerful sections of Scripture to do this are the Beatitudes of Matthew 5. “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of God… Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied.” These verses meet many Muslims at a felt need for blessing and then redirect them from their folk beliefs about barkat to a discussion about finding true blessing in the Lord Jesus.
I once attended a Holy Spirit revival in South Asia. The prosperity gospel was the focus of that meeting. The teacher kept saying, “Give your best seed to God, and He will give you the desires of your heart!” By “best seed,” he meant that we should give him lots of money. He said things like, “If you need a house, go and clean out your bank account. Give it to God! Then God will give you a house.” The teaching often broke for Holy Spirit times. The teacher would command the Spirit to come as a fire, lay hands on people, or speak a prophecy. Over 1,000 followers of Jesus gathered and made a great deal of noise as they writhed, fell down, and did all sorts of things, purportedly under the influence of the Holy Spirit. It was by far the most charismatic meeting I have ever witnessed in my life. Probably 50 pastors from our city participated in all of these things.
Later, many of those pastors came to me and asked, “Do you think that the things in that meeting were from the Holy Spirit or not?” I loved it when these pastors came and asked this question. It gave an excellent opportunity to talk to them about what the Bible teaches about the Holy Spirit.
When they asked, I responded by asking, “What do you think? What does the Bible say about the Holy Spirit?” I was genuinely surprised when most of these pastors confessed that they did not really know what the Bible teaches about the Holy Spirit. So, we would open up the Scripture and talk about what the Holy Spirit does. Out of those discussions, I developed this teaching that I call the Seven Works of the Holy Spirit. I often teach believers this tool to help them understand the Holy Spirit. Muslim-background believers have found this teaching informative as they interact with local Christians.
#1 The Holy Spirit Transforms our Lives
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. The law is not against such things.” Galatians 5:22-23
Galatians 5:16-25 teaches us that if we walk by the Spirit, we will be transformed by His power. First, “the works of the flesh” will diminish in our lives. These are things like sexual immorality, moral impurity, envy, and drunkenness (Gal 5:19-21). Second, the fruit of the Spirit will automatically emerge. Therefore, when the Holy Spirit works in our lives, our character changes. We are filled with love, joy, peace, and patience. Another way to say this is that the power of the Holy Spirit sanctifies us to make us more and more holy. If you claim to walk by the Spirit but are not characterized by the fruit of the Spirit, ask the Lord to transform your life. Jesus told His disciples to pray, saying “How much more will the Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?” (Luke 11:13) In the same way, we should ask the Father to transform our lives and character by His Spirit.
#2 The Holy Spirit Convicts Us of Sin
“Nevertheless, I am telling you the truth. It is for your benefit that I go away, because if I don’t go away the Counselor will not come to you. If I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will convict the world about sin, righteousness, and judgment: About sin, because they do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will no longer see me; and about judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.” John 16:7-11
If we have been saved and given the gift of the Spirit, we cannot be comfortable with sin in our lives. The Spirit will constantly convict our hearts. Some actively ignore the Spirit until that conviction begins to fade. But that is a perilous place to be! If we suppress the work of the Spirit in our lives until He no longer convicts our hearts of our sin, it means that we have grown to be quite far from God. Suppose the Spirit is genuinely moving in our lives. In that case, we are often led to repentance, turning from our sin to walk more closely with our heavenly Father. The convicting power of the Spirit is a gift from God to help us from wandering from our heavenly Father. We should be holy as the Lord our God is holy.
#3 The Holy Spirit Guides Us to the Truth
“I have spoken these things to you while I remain with you. But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you.” John 14:25-26
Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would remind us of the teachings of Jesus. In the same teaching, Jesus said, “I still have many things to tell you, but you can’t bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth” (John 16:12-13a). If the Holy Spirit is truly working in your life, you will be driven to study the Scriptures. The Spirit will reveal His Word to us. As a result, we naturally move away from wrong beliefs to having better and better theology because of the power of the Spirit.
#4 The Holy Spirit Empowers us to Proclaim Christ
“When they had prayed, the place where they were assembled was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak the word of God boldly.” Acts 4:31
In the book of Acts, the Spirit constantly empowered God’s people to proclaim the gospel. In Acts 2:4, the Spirit fell, and 120 followers of Jesus began to proclaim “the magnificent acts of God” in the languages of all the pilgrims to Jerusalem (Acts 2:5-11). Then Peter stood up, empowered by the Spirit, and preached the gospel so powerfully that 3,000 took baptism (Acts 2:14-41)! In Acts 4:8, Peter and John were filled with the Spirit while on trial (as Jesus promised in Matthew 10:19). The Spirit gave Peter and John bold words to proclaim to the religious leaders of Jerusalem. After they were released, a group of believers prayed again until they were filled with the Spirit. The result was that they “began to speak the word of God boldly” (Acts 4:31). If you are filled with the Spirit, you will proclaim the gospel. The Holy Spirit guides us to proclaim the life-saving message of the gospel!
#5 The Holy Spirit Gives Us Spiritual Gifts
“Now there are different gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different ministries, but the same Lord. And there are different activities, but the same God works all of them in each person. A manifestation of the Spirit is given to each person for the common good: to one is given a message of wisdom through the Spirit, to another, a message of knowledge by the same Spirit, to another, faith by the same Spirit, to another, gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another, the performing of miracles, to another, prophecy, to another, distinguishing between spirits, to another, different kinds of tongues, to another, interpretation of tongues. One and the same Spirit is active in all these, distributing to each person as he wills.” 1 Corinthians 12:4-11
The Holy Spirit gives gifts to every believer. The purpose of these gifts is to serve the body and advance the gospel. There are two opposite errors that people make regarding spiritual gifts. Some emphasize spiritual gifts too much. When we listen to these individuals, it is as if the only purpose of the Holy Spirit is to give us these gifts. They deemphasize everything else the Spirit does to emphasize this one part. On the other side, some devalue spiritual gifts, usually in response to those who overemphasize them! We should aim somewhere between these two extremes by valuing spiritual gifts but not overly emphasizing them.
#6 The Holy Spirit Empowers Us to Worship
“And don’t get drunk with wine, which leads to reckless living, but be filled by the Spirit: speaking to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making music with your heart to the Lord, giving thanks always for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another in the fear of Christ.” Ephesians 5:18-21
The Greek structure of Ephesians 5:18-21 is interesting. The central command is “be filled by the Spirit.” This command is modified by five participles, “speaking to one another,” “singing and making music,” “giving thanks always,” and “submitting to one another.” These five participles are either (1) how we become filled with the Spirit or (2) what happens when we are filled by the Spirit. In fact, I believe it is both of these. These five participles all refer to actions that occur in corporate worship at church. If you find yourself far from the Spirit, repent of your sins (you cannot be filled with the Spirit if you are filled with sin!) and join in other believers in worship and body life. As you do, you put yourself in a position to be filled with the Spirit. At the same time, when you are filled with the Spirit, you automatically speak to others in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs while giving thanks to God! In reality, this passage describes the ideal working of the Holy Spirit in the corporate body. These actions are not done individually but are done together as a church. The Holy Spirit fills his people as we worship together.
#7 The Holy Spirit Leads Us
“They went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia; they had been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia. When they came to Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them. Passing by Mysia they went down to Troas. During the night Paul had a vision in which a Macedonian man was standing and pleading with him, “Cross over to Macedonia and help us!” After he had seen the vision, we immediately made efforts to set out for Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them.” Acts 16:6-10
The Holy Spirit often spoke to and directed His people in the New Testament. In Matthew 4:1, our Lord Jesus was “led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.” in Acts 16, Paul and Barnabas were clearly led by the Spirit to go to Macedonia when they had no intention of going there. The point is that God often leads His people by His Spirit. We should be open to the gentle nudges and direction of the Spirit.
After sharing these seven works of the Holy Spirit with the pastors who attended the Holy Spirit meeting, I would ask, “You have seen what the Bible teaches about the Holy Spirit. Now I want to ask you a question. Did you see evidence of these works of the Spirit in the lives of those believers after the meeting?” I had this conversation with more than a dozen pastors. Every pastor simply confessed, “No.”
I feel that a point of clarity is necessary here. We should not necessarily expect that all seven of these works of the Spirit must be observed to say that something was from the Spirit. In fact, it is common to see one or two of these works present when the Spirit moves in an individual’s life. However, absence of all of these works of the Spirit should cause doubt of whether something was genuinely from the Spirit.
The next question each pastor asked was, “What does the Bible say about how to be filled with the Holy Spirit?”This is a question of extreme importance in the Christian life. Perhaps I will write a future blog on how I answer that question.
Subscribe here to get all the No Cousins Left updates!
Here are a few extra notes on the Greek text of Ephesians 5:18-21. In Greek, these five participles can either be participles of means or participles of result. They are present active participles modifying an imperative. See Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 639. Footnote: In Greek, the command “be filled by the Spirit” is a plural command, implying that it is not accomplished individually. Additionally, all five of the participles are plural, indicating the same. Last, the text is clear, even in English, that these are not individualistic actions. Speaking is done “to one another.” Believers also submit “to one another.” In Ephesians 5:18-21, being filled with the Spirit is a corporate activity.
This blog post is the fifth in a series on South Asian folk Islam and its rituals. Click here to go to the first of these articles. Understanding the rituals of Folk Islam provides insight into the beliefs and practices of folk Muslims.
For some, it is strange to explore the worldview of folk Muslims. Many people think of Muslims as being stoic orthodox people who study and obey the Qur’an similarly to how evangelical Christians study and obey the Bible. Within Islam, there are vast numbers of Muslims who do follow orthodox Islam (click here for a discussion on three poles of South Asian Islam). However, the influence of Islamic folk practices on ordinary Muslims is profound and often overlooked. This lesson continues a look at folk Islamic practices by looking at tawiz (sometimes pronounced tabiz).
Tawiz are amulets that are commonly worn by Muslims in South Asia. Tawiz are black boxes on a black string that contain either written verses of the Qur’an, names of Allah, or prayers (Urdu dua). Similar amulets were used in Judaism, as seen in Matthew 23:5, where Jesus accused the scribes and Pharisees of enlarging their phylacteries to be seen by others. As with Muslims, the Pharisees used these as protective amulets that contained verses from Scripture or prayers. Making tawiz is a crucial function of spiritual leaders among folk Muslims.
A Hadith reports that Muhammad offered short prayers or recited verses from the Qur’an and then breathed on those for whom he recited these prayers. His companions did the same and begin writing these prayers or verses on paper and making tawiz. Now, tawiz exist for almost every purpose. For example, when my friend Muhammad began to follow Jesus, he did not have a job. So, his mother went to a dargah and had a tawiz made by her pir (click here to learn about Pirs and dargahs). Muhammad did not know what to do because he had not told his parents about his decision to follow Jesus. His mother was seeking a meeting with him to tie the tawiz on him, but he knew that he could not do this as a follower of Jesus. For Muhammad’s mother, the tawiz was a practical and powerful expression of her Islamic faith.
It is helpful to see how the tawiz relates to ordinary Muslims’ understanding of how the world works. There is a famous article by Paul Hiebert called “The Flaw of the Excluded Middle.” Hiebert’s premise was that many Westerners have a hard time understanding animistic or folk cultures. Westerners have a low perception of invisible spiritual forces and powers that are at work all around us. South Asian folk Muslims tend to have a heightened focus on spiritual forces and powers that are all around us. Westerners tend to focus on science and scientific answers to issues and problems. Folk Muslims often believe spiritual forces are at work in situations where a Westerner would apply scientific principles. Hiebert said that evangelical Christians often focus on the scientific and the eternal, such as heaven and hell while excluding the present spiritual forces at work in our day to day lives, thus the flaw of the excluded middle.
In The Unseen Face of Islam, Bill Musk applied Hiebert’s principle to folk Islam and developed the following chart.[1]
Cosmology of Popular Islam. Scan from Bill Musk, The Unseen Face of Islam: Sharing the Gospel with Ordinary Muslims at Street Level (Oxford: Monarch Books, 2003), 174.
Studying this chart helps us understand how folk Muslims perceive the world around them. On the left side are the words “this-worldly realm” and “other-worldly realm.” This-worldly realm means those being and powers that are around us at all times. In contrast, the other-worldly realm is distant and separate from us. On the right side are the terms “empirical phenomena” and “trans-empirical phenomena.” By empirical, Musk means what can and cannot be scientifically measured or observed. Animals, plants, and drugs can be scientifically observed and measured. Magic, curses, and spiritual beings cannot be scientifically observed and measured. For many folk Muslims, those things that are “this-worldly” and “trans-empirical” are the actual controlling forces in the world. These powers and beings exist in what Hiebert calls “the forgotten middle.”
The use of tawiz in South Asia is one example of a spiritual cure. It is an attempt by “living holy men” called pirs to provide spiritual power to their followers in the form of an object to ward of unseen spiritual forces, such as the evil eye, jinn, or magic. Often when a folk Muslim is sick, has a bad crop, has an accident, or loses their job, the source of their bad fortune is assumed to be unseen spiritual forces rather than scientifically observable causes.
Therefore, when ministering to folk Muslims, the “excluded middle” cannot be neglected. One of the most practical ways that Christians can minister is to seek for specific prayer requests from Muslim seekers and to pray for those requests. A folk Muslim will rarely refuse prayer from a Christian. As we pray, we demonstrate to Muslims the kind of relationship that we have with God. Often after praying for a Muslim, they are startled and tell me that they can see that I actually know God. As we continue to pray, we hope that God will show His power in the life of folk Muslims and answer these requests as a way of opening their hearts to the gospel.
There is some controversy about how to pray for Muslims. Some argue that we should follow the formulaic bismillah approach in prayer that Muslims often use. These prayers begin with the formulaic “In the name of Allah, most gracious, most merciful” that starts almost every Surah of the Qur’an. In contrast, I want to pray for my Muslim friends in the name of Jesus. To do this, I usually inform a Muslim that I am about to pray for that I am a disciple of Jesus. Therefore, I will pray for them in the way that Jesus taught His disciples. Then I begin with something like, “Our Father who lives in heaven” or “Father God.” I generally finish my prayers by saying, “I pray this through (Urdu ke vasile se) Hazrat Isa al-Masih. Amen.”
When Islam first spread to South Asia, it spread through Shia Muslims, first to the Sindh and then to the area around Lucknow. The father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was a secular Shia.[1] Today, Pakistan and India have significant Shia populations of at least 20 million per country.[2] Despite this large population, there are almost no gospel workers focused on South Asian Shias.
The purpose of this blog post is to help readers understand South Asia Shia Muslims to better share the good news of Jesus with them.
An artistic rendering of the Panchtan Pak. At the center is Allah. Top center is Muhammad then clockwise, the names Ali, Hasan, Husayn, and Fatimah (in Arabic). Symbols like this for the Panchtan Pak are common among Shia Muslims.
The Panchtan Pak[3]: Muhammad, Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Husayn
Go to an imambara (a South Asian Shia house of worship). You will see five names written in Arabic script, often in various banners, around the imambara. Those five names are Muhammad, Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Husayn. The significance of these five figures cannot be underestimated for Shias. Here are some brief details about each of the five:
Muhammad (570-632 AD). The prophet of Islam.
Fatimah (d. 632 AD). Daughter of Muhammad, wife of Ali, and mother of Hasan and Husayn. Often considered the ultimate Muslim woman, especially among Shias. Shias view Fatimah with a similar reverence that Catholics have for Mary.
Ali (d. 661 AD). Cousin of Muhammad, husband of Fatimah, father of Hasan and Husayn. Served as the fourth rightly guided Caliph from 656-661 AD. Ali is considered the first Imam by Shia Muslims. The teachings and writings of Ali are collected in the Nahjul Balaghah, which is a book of significance for Shia. When Ali became Caliph, a civil work broke out among Muslims, during which Ali was killed. The death of Ali signified a decisive split between Sunnis and Shias in 661 AD.
The first three rightly guided Caliphs were (1) Abu Bakr (632-634 AD), (2) Umar (634-644 AD), and (3) Uthman (644-656 AD). Most Shias believe that Ali should have been the leader of Islam during the period these other men led.
Hasan (d. 670 AD). Grandson of Muhammad, eldest son of Ali and Fatimah. Shias consider Hasan to be the second Imam. Most believe Hasan was poisoned at the direction of Mu’awiya. Mu’awiya became the Caliph of the Umayyad Caliphate, which was formed after the death of Ali.
Husayn (d. 680 AD). Grandson of Muhammad, second son of Ali and Fatimah. Shias consider Husayn to be the third Imam. Husayn was one of 70 men attacked by 4,000 Umayyad troops in the Battle of Karbala. The Umayyads attacked when Husayn refused to submit to Mu’awiya’s authority. Husayn’s death is considered sacrificial by the Shia community and is remembered in the annual Muhurram celebrations. Husayn’s tomb at Karbala is Shias’s most important pilgrimage site today.
Adoration of the Panchtan Pak is central to Shia thought.[4] For example:
Shias believe that the Panchtan Pak were without sin and infallible in their teaching.
Many Shias believe that the Panchtan Pak were created before Adam before the foundation of the world. The five are often considered the hand of Allah, through whom Allah made the world. In this view, they existed as mystical lights and later came into the world.
For Shias, Muhammad was the last and greatest prophet, and therefore, Muhammad’s life and teaching are central. However, a common phrase among Shias is, “Live like Ali; die like Husayn.” As a result, the lives and teaching of all the Panchtan Pak are of central importance. Shias find great importance in reading the Nahjul Balaghah, which contains the teachings and writings of Ali.
Fatimah is considered the ideal Muslim woman who connects the rest of the Panchtan Pak.
Husayn’s death is the focus of Muhurram, which is the most important Shia celebration., Husayn’s tomb in Karbala is a focus of worship and pilgrimage among Shias.
The Imamate
Most Shias in South Asia are Twelvers, although the Nazari’s of Pakistan are also a significant community. Twelvers believe in Twelve Imams. The Twelve Imams are:
Muhammad, son of Hasan (b. 870 AD). Called al-Mahdi by Shias and considered still alive in hiding until the end times, when he will come with Jesus as the deliverer of Shia Islam and bring justice to the world. The al-Mahdi disappeared in 878 AD and has communicated through intermediaries since.
Waiting for the al-Mahdi to come in the last days is central to religious Shia Muslims. Their end-time view of the al-Mahdi coming to bring justice is like the Christian view about the second coming of Jesus. In the Shia view, Jesus will also come in submission to the al-Mahdi.
In remembrance of the Imams, Shias in South Asia gather in imambaras, especially during Muhurram.[6]Imambara derives from a Persian term for “house of the Imams” and is a place to revere the Panchtan and the Twelve Imams. Imambaras generally house replicas of the tomb of Husayn that are called Taziah.[7] In Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, two famous Imambaras are now tourist attractions.
Orthodox Shia Islam. Most Orthodox Shias focus primarily on Muhammad and the Qur’an. Many Christians will not even realize that they are talking to a Shia until later since many beliefs of Shias and Sunnis are similar. Orthodox Shias tend not to want to talk about the Panchtan and other issues until the question of Muhammad and the Qur’an is settled.
Folk Shias and Sufis. Historically, many Sufis in South Asia were Shia. Kwaja Moinuddin Chishti, whose tomb is in Ajmer, Rajasthan, India, was a Shia. The reason is that Shias give great respect to the family lineage of Muhammad. There is a caste of Muslims called the Sayyid in South Asia that claim to descend from the tribe of Muhammad. Most of the original Sufis that preached Islam in South Asia were Sayyid and claimed descent from Muhammad as part of their authority. In Sufi Islam, a silsila that traces a spiritual ancestry from Muhammad through Ali is essential. As a result, folk Islam is strong in Shia Islam in South Asia and has many expressions. Many folk Shia give great respect to the Panchtan.
Secularism and Shias. At the same time, many Shias are hard-working and secular-minded. Shias have put a significant emphasis on secular education with the result that many Shias are intelligent and open-minded. Because of their education and open-mindedness, many Shias are happy to read the Injeel (New Testament) and have open conversations about the gospel.
Tips for Evangelism
Muhurram as an open door for friendship. Shias love outsiders to come and learn about their faith, especially during Muhurram. If you want to build inroads among Shias, find when Muhurram is and make plans to visit your local Shia community. Go ready to learn and listen, but also to appropriately share about your own faith. Muhurram is an excellent opportunity for building friendships.
The martyrdom of Husayn and the death of Jesus. The centrality of Husayn’s martyrdom is mirrored in our faith with the death of Jesus. Do not be surprised if a Shia interjects with this story when you share the gospel. Likewise, suppose your Shia friend shares about the death of Husayn. In that case, it is an appropriate time for you to ask if you can share about the sacrificial death of Jesus and what it means for you. In my experience, our gospel presentation also functions well among Shias. Click here for a blog post on that tool.
The Panchtan Pak and the preeminence of Jesus. The Panchtan Pak are a significant barrier to Shias understanding the gospel. Their minds will automatically compare Jesus with these five as you share. The Five Special Things about Jesus are a great tool to use with Shias to demonstrate the uniqueness and greatness of Jesus. The Five Special Things are: (1) His birth, (2) His miracles, (3) His teaching, (4) Hiss death, and (5) His resurrection. These five things are part of our gospel tool (click here).
Because Shias are a smaller community, they tend to be non-violent. Shias in South Asia are often the victims of attacks by Sunnis but rarely attack other communities. They want peace with others and are very open to religious discussions.
Last, pray for your Shia friends!
Subscribe to No Cousins Left to receive updates from each our blog posts!
[1] Jinnah famously converted from Ismaili Shia Islam to being a Twelver Shia to avoid conflict control by the Aga Khan.
[2] Research on the number of Shia per country is weak. After Iran, Pakistan and India may have the second and third largest Shia populations. However, the Shia population in Iraq is similar. Iran has the largest Shia population in the world.
[3] Panjtan Pak is the South Asian name for these five figures and derives from Persian. In Arabic, they are called Ahl al-Kisa.
[4] Note that multiple Shia Islam schools do not agree about their nature. What is written here is from my experiences interacting with South Asian Shias.
[5] Another Shia Muslim sect called Ishmailis holds that Ishmael, son of Ja’far (d. 775 AD), was the seventh and last imam.
[6] Shias build imambaras in South Asia, but most Shias globally do not use them.
[7] Taziah is also used in reference to plays about the martyrdom of Husayn that are common during Muhurram.
A pulpit inside of an imambara, a Shia place of worship.
In 1791, William Carey published An Enquiry, effectively launching the modern missions movement. His argument was that Christians needed to take up the Great Commission by forming mission boards to launch missionaries to the nations. Carey led the charge by going to India in 1792. In An Enquiry, Carey detailed the greatest centers of lostness in the world, making special note of a sizeable Muslim population that had not heard the gospel of our Lord Jesus (Carey, 62, 64).
The barriers that stop Christians from loving their Muslim neighbors are less about issues within the Muslim community and more about our hearts. The most significant obstacles preventing Christians from ministering to Muslims are heart issues. Until these heart issues are appropriately addressed, there is no benefit in training them to share the gospel with Muslims. Therefore, the purpose of this blog post is to help Christians identify and address the heart issues that inhibit them from being used by God to reach Muslims.
The first three barriers (Fear, Anger, and Hopelessness) are heart issues. The last two barriers (language/culture and lack of ministry tools) are what training can provide.
Heart Barrier #1 – Fear. Many Christians are afraid of Muslims, and therefore, they will not go to them to share the gospel.
Let me share a common experience that I have had. It is common that when I train a group of people how to share the gospel with Muslims, I can see their hearts close as I teach. Smiles turn into frowns, and arms become defensively crossed.
Inside the minds of my listeners, there is often a dialogue that goes something like this: “Doesn’t this guy know that Muslims are dangerous? If we go and try to do what this guy says, we’re going to get killed! We can’t go talk to Muslims about Jesus!”
I call this inner dialogue the fear barrier. Fear is the strongest barrier that keeps Christians from talking to Muslims about Jesus. Here are four ways that the fear barrier can be dispelled.
Trusting in God to protect us. My favorite verse on this subject is “Do not fear, for I am with you; do not be afraid, for I am your God. I will strengthen you; I will help you; I will hold on to you with my righteous right hand” (Isaiah 41:10). In fact, the most common command in Scripture is, “Do not fear.” Ultimately, we do not need to fear when doing God’s will because He is our defender. He will protect us.
Remember that “to live is Christ and to die is gain” (Philippians 1:21). Even though God is our defender, it does not mean that we will not die while doing His work. Jesus was crucified while teaching God’s Word. Likewise, almost all His apostles died violent deaths for proclaiming the gospel. While Paul awaited execution in Rome, he wrote, “The Lord will rescue me from every evil work and will bring me safely into His heavenly kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:18). While expecting to die physically, Paul trusted God to safely bring him into His kingdom. The gospel means that we have no fear of death. Even if we were to die while proclaiming the gospel, we are taken immediately into the presence of our God.
Knowing that Muslims are without eternal hope. In contrast to our hope, if our Muslim neighbor dies today, then they go before the judgment seat of Christ (Heb 9:27). They are without hope in His judgment. If we truly believe the gospel, our eternal future is secure in Christ! How we can withhold this message that brings eternal hope from those who have never heard (Rom 10:9-15).
Realizing that most Muslims are peaceful people. While many Christians believe that Muslims are violent people, the reality is that most Muslims simply want to live peaceful and quiet lives. In fact, the number of Muslims who seek to express their religion violently is minimal when we consider Muslims in South Asia. For this point, the Muslim Triangle is helpful. Secular and folk Muslims, as a rule, are not violent in their faith. Since folk Islam is the most common expression of Islam in South Asia, we know that ordinary Muslims in South Asia tend to be non-violent. In addition, most of the major orthodox Muslim groups in South Asia reject violence in the name of Islam.[1] Therefore, we can have confidence that most South Asian Muslims desire to live peaceful lives.[2]
To learn more about the Muslim triangle, click here!
Heart Barrier #2 – Anger. Many Christians are angry with Muslims, and therefore, they do not want to share the gospel with them. For some, anger is not the right word. Instead, bitterness or animosity would be more appropriate. What I mean is that many Christians see Muslims as other than themselves and do not have a love for their Muslim neighbors. One good biblical picture of this animosity is the prophet Jonah. God sent him to proclaim a message of repentance and forgiveness to Nineveh, who were the enemy of his people. Because Jonah hated the people of Nineveh, he sought to disobey by traveling the opposite direction from Nineveh. Likewise, many Christians are not ready to share the gospel with Muslims because they do not have the love of Christ for Muslims.
However, Jesus died for Muslims, just like He did for everyone else. Revelation 5:9 praises Jesus, saying, “You purchased people for God by Your blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.” It is clear, from this verse, that Jesus died for every type of person on the planet, including every Muslim people group. Therefore, God loves Muslims!
If God loves Muslims and we do not, our hearts are not like God’s. So, we need to ask God to transform our lives, and we should ask God to give us His love for Muslim peoples!
Jesus taught us that there is no benefit of only loving people like us. In fact, He taught us to love our enemies (Matthew 5:43-47). Therefore, if you feel in your heart that Muslims are your enemy, then your biblical obligation is to love them. Let me suggest that you pick a Muslim group or country and pray daily for that group to begin loving them. As you pray for them, God will undoubtedly change your life and help you love them as He loves them.
Finally, Jesus provided the best model of loving those who did not love Him. When He was being crucified, He said, “Father, forgive them because they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34). To be like Jesus means to have a heart ready to forgive others, even if they were killing you. In fact, Stephen followed the same example when he died for proclaiming the gospel and was the first martyr in the book of Acts. As he died, he said, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” (Acts 7:60)
Heart Barrier #3 – Hopelessness. Many Christians do not believe Muslims can come to Christ, and therefore, they do not think it is worth it to minister among them. Perhaps my favorite story about this issue is a friend whose father was a Muslim-background believer. He was unwilling to share the gospel with his Muslim neighbors despite his background. He would tell me, “It is impossible for a Muslim to come to Christ!” I kept reminding him about how the Lord drew his father to Christ, so he said, “It is very difficult for Muslims to come to Christ.”
So, I asked him how long it had been since he had shared the gospel with a Muslim, and he admitted that it had been more than ten years. So, finally – perhaps even just to make me quiet – he agreed to try. A few weeks later, this same man excitedly told me how he had shared the gospel with one Muslim man and how that man had repented and believed!
Sometimes, Muslim ministry is slow. However, the Lord is in control. If we say that Muslims can’t come to Christ, we are really saying that Muslims are the one people group on earth strong enough to resist God’s will! Our God made the heavens and the earth. He brought His people out of Egypt through Moses. He raised Jesus from the dead. Our God can do all things! Perhaps the greatest antidote to the hopelessness barrier is to meet Muslims who have come to Christ and hear their stories. In fact, more Muslims are coming to Christ now than at any other time in history. Across South Asia, many thousands of Muslims are coming to Christ. Also, significant movements of Muslims to Christ have happened in countries like Indonesia, Ethiopia, Algeria, and Iran. If you want to learn more about Muslims coming to Christ, I recommend reading David Garrison’s A Wind in the House of Islam.
Summarizing the Heart Barriers
Suppose the three heart barriers of Fear, Anger, and Hopelessness are not addressed. In that case, no amount of training about reaching Muslims with the gospel will be effective. The question is, are you ready to let God change your heart? Are you prepared to love Muslims and work among them? Our God has a great desire to bring Muslims into His kingdom, and he is ready to use you if your heart is ready to be soft towards Him. Please stop now and pray that God will take away your Fear, Anger, and Hopeless. Ask that He will replace it with His love for Muslim peoples.
Now that we have addressed the three heart barriers, we can briefly discuss the last two barriers. These are practical barriers that can be given in training settings.
Barrier #4 – Language and Culture. To communicate the gospel with Muslims, we should learn some language and culture. I am going to give advice for multiple settings here.
For those serving among Muslims in the West. To start your work, you don’t have to learn a Muslim language (but you may want to after some time!). In fact, you probably serve among Muslims who speak multiple languages. It is not practical or possible for you to learn all these languages. However, it will be helpful for you to learn some critical Arabic phrases and some Muslim culture. A great first step would be to read Nabeel Qureshi’s Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus. You will discover how a Muslim in the West perceives the West and some key Arabic phrases that most Muslims use. Also, begin by learning one Arabic term, assalamu alaikum. This is the most common greeting for Muslims around the world. Whenever you see someone you think might be a Muslim, simply say this phrase with a smile. No doubt, you will build many relationships!
For expatriate workers in South Asia. Work diligently to master at least one local language! One of my most joyful tasks is to disciple Muslim-background believers in Urdu, digging through the Bible with them. As my ability to speak Urdu increases, my usefulness to local believers increases. Please do not disregard language study!
For South Asian Christians. Many Christians speak in Hindustani (India) or Urdu (Pakistan) that is very different from the Urdu that Muslims use. Therefore, the gospel is misunderstood when they share it with Muslims. South Asian Christians can learn how to speak in a Muselmani version of their language with minimal effort.
Barrier #5 – Lack of Ministry Tools. Many Christians do not know how to communicate the gospel with Muslims or disciple those ready to believe. Thankfully, we are beginning to add more and more tools for this to our blog!
We will continue to blog more and more of our tools on sharing the gospel with Muslims, disciple Muslim-background believers, and plant churches among Muslims. Subscribe below to No Cousins Left to get these updates!
[1] For example, Deobandis and Tablighi Jamaat tend towards non-violence and are two of the largest orthodox schools of Islam in South Asia. However, it has been noted that those few Muslims who have become extremists first became orthodox, often through the Deobandis and Tablighi Jamaat movements. They then take the next step into violent extremism. In fact, some have mistaken these two movements as advocating extremism because most terrorists from Muslim backgrounds in South Asia have been influenced by one or both schools.
[2] In South Asia, sectarian violence between religious communities can sometimes make whole communities appear violent. The prime example was the violence between Hindus and Muslims during Partition. During that period, both communities killed large numbers of the other community. This sectarian violence between religious communities is different from Muslims, who are violent for pursuing religious goals. In fact, a significant amount of this religious violence is because something disturbs the communal peace, resulting in violence from both communities.
This blogpost was written for a training manual.Therefore, it is in a bullet point style. This blog post is a continuation of special issues in discipling Muslim-background believers (MBBs).
Persecution is normal for MBBs. The Bible describes persecution as a normal experience for followers of Jesus. Therefore, MBBs should be taught that persecution is normal as they begin to follow Jesus. Efforts to completely eliminate persecution lead to unbiblical compromise. Jesus told His disciples, “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves” (Matt 10:16a). When He sent them, He knew that most of His closest disciples would die for obeying His commands. But our Lord sent them anyways. Persecution is a normal part of the Christian life. Paul told Timothy, “all who want to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim 3:12). There are a few ways we need to apply this to our lives.
First, if we share the gospel with Muslims, we must know that the people we share could face persecution – even death – because of the gospel we brought to them. However, if the gospel is true (and it is!), then it is the only hope for Muslims to be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ. To share the gospel with Muslims, we must fully believe that it is better to have eternal life with Christ than have a long life on earth.
Second, if we want to call Muslims to follow Jesus, we need to be ready to stand with them and face persecution.
Persecution should be avoided and reduced when possible. While persecution is a normal experience for MBBs, not all persecution is necessary or helpful. While Jesus told His disciples that He was sending them as lambs among wolves, He finished that verse by saying, “be shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves” (Matt 10:16b). Sometimes, foolish actions by MBBs or those working with them lead to excess persecution. We need to be shrewd and innocent as we disciple MBBBs in the early stages. Here are five activities that can invite undue persecution:
Unforgiveness or bitterness in MBBs. Some MBBs are angry with Islam when they first follow Jesus. I was introduced to one young believer who was facing significant persecution as a new believer in Jesus. As I talked to him, I realized that he had considerable anger in his heart towards his father and the whole Muslim community for deceiving him. As a result, he had significant bitterness that led him to disrespect his father and the leaders of his childhood mosque. The young man asked me to help him flee from his family and community. Instead, I mentored him to help him walk through his bitterness. When he forgave his father, he was able to confess his own shortcomings to his father. The result was that he was restored in fellowship with his family and lived publicly as a follower of Jesus in his family’s home. As the character of MBBs is transformed, their family will notice. As they live holier and holier lives, their society is less likely to attack them.
Changes in behavior that move MBBs outside of cultural norms. Many years ago, I was in Central Asia when some young Muslim college students repented and believed in Jesus. In our foolishness, we did not adequately think through cultural issues. Within a few weeks, these young men began wearing Western clothes, even shorts, to class. They took on not only Christ but also many aspects of our Western culture. When it became known that these young men had been baptized in Jesus’ name, a significant part of the offense was how Westernized the young men had become. Instead, MBBs should retain their culture while separating from Islam religiously.
MBBs attacking Islam, the Qur’an, or Muhammad. The brother above, with the unforgiveness issues, took out his anger by sending an article to his Muslim friends that Muhammad was demon-possessed and an immoral man. His friends passed that article to their imam, which eventually led to a fatwa being written against the young man. If the young man had been trained in better ways to proclaim Jesus to his friends, the offense would have been reduced. The persecution would likely have also been reduced, or perhaps not have occurred.
Financial help, especially from foreigners. Years ago, my MBB friend was attacked by others in his village, resulting in a broken arm. Unfortunately, there was no medical care available in that brother’s village. His fellow villagers told him that he should ask Jesus to help him, and they refused to help him go to the hospital. I offered to go pick up this MBB brother and get him appropriate medical care. But this MBB brother was wiser than me. He said, “If you come to pick me up from my village, I will never be able to come back. Then who will bring the gospel to my people?” I prayed with grief for this brother daily for about a week. Then, this MBB brother called me and told me, “The village elders made a decision. They said that I was living like a better Muslim than the rest of the village. They made the men who beat me publicly apologize, take me to the hospital, and even pay for my medical care!” If I had swooped in and helped, then this brother might not be a witness to his own people today.
Being baptized by outsiders. In some contexts, outsiders, especially foreigners, baptizing MBBs has led to MBBs being rejected by their community. Ideally, MBBs or near culture workers baptize MBBs.
Persecution and MBB evangelism. MBBs often face persecution as they go public in their faith and proclaim Jesus as Lord (read here about MBBs going public in their faith). This persecution of MBBs can be reduced as they are trained in ways to share the gospel that are culturally sensitive (here is how we train MBBs to share the gospel). However, the gospel is ultimately offensive to many Muslims! If an MBB is genuinely transformed by the power of Christ, they will also want their families to follow Jesus. Evangelism should not be discouraged by new MBBs to avoid persecution. Instead, efforts should be taken to prepare MBBs to stand in the persecution that comes from sharing Christ.
Levels of persecution against MBBs through analysis of persecution in Pakistan. In 2005, Edward Evans wrote a study about 70 Pakistani Muslims (63 men; 7 women) who came to Christ in Pakistan from 1947-1998 whose decision to follow Jesus became public to their families (buy the Kindle book here). The two tables below provide a snapshot of the severity of persecution during a particular period in one context. Table 1 rates the severity of persecution of those 70 MBBs. Table 2 describes the eventual outcome of the faith of those MBBs in relationship to their families.
A few reflections on Table 1:
Only one of 63 male MBBs in this study died for their faith. In contrast, 42% of women were killed. Women in Pakistan faced great difficulty being the first in their families to follow Jesus.
50% of MBBs in this study faced only moderate persecution or less, and 33% faced severe persecution. This means that 17% faced death or life-threatening persecution for their faith.
A few reflections on Table 2:
The ideal is that the first believer will result in others from their family repenting and believing. However, this only occurred in 23% of cases.
An additional 49% of MBBs either fully reconciled with their family or developed a truce with them. Adding this to the 23% who were evangelistically effective in their families, 72% of MBBs were able to live in their community after faith.
Only 8% had families that remained antagonistic.
Since 50% of cases were severe, life-threatening, or resulted in murder, many who initially faced significant persecution were able to eventually reconcile with their families.
Severity of Persecution
Number of Cases
% of Cases
Description
Murder
4
6%
Killed for their faith in Christ. 3 of 7 women were killed for their faith.
Life-threatening
8
11%
Attempt made to kill believer, usually by male family member(s)
Severe
23
33%
Range of issues, such as physical beatings, deprived of food/needs, lost job, expelled from family, etc.
Moderate
24
34%
Intense emotional pressure from close family members and boycott from the wider circle of relatives
Mild
6
9%
Family disapproval
Neutral
5
7%
No reaction. All five were Sindhis
Positive
0
0%
No positive reactions were recorded
TOTAL
70
Table 1. Severity of Persecution of 70 MBBs in Pakistan from 1947-1998.[1]Table 1. Severity of Persecution of 70 MBBs in Pakistan from 1947-1998.[1]
Eventual Relationship with Family
Number of Cases
% of Cases
Some family members became followers of Jesus
11
23%
Follower of Jesus was fully reconciled to family, but family remained Muslim
8
16%
Family maintained a “truce” with neither hostility nor full acceptance
16
33%
Family remained antagonistic towards the follower of Jesus
4
8%
Follower of Jesus reverted to Islam or at least outwardly conformed to Islam
10
20%
TOTAL
49
Table 2. Eventual outcomes of family relationships off MBBs with their families in Pakistan from 1947-1998.[2]
Practical steps for dealing with persecution. Evan’s described seven levels of intensity of persecution. Our response to the persecution of MBBs should be different based on the level of persecution.
Murder. When an MBB is murdered for their faith, the results are often significant. Murder often leads to government investigations, more widespread persecution, and believers retreating in fear. There are two prominent martyrdoms in Acts, Stephen (Acts 7:57-60) and James (Acts 12:1-2). Stephen’s persecution led to “a severe persecution” against the church in Jerusalem, leading to believers being scattered in many areas (Acts 8:1). As they went to new locations, they shared the gospel, and the kingdom of God advanced (Acts 8:4-5; 11:19-21). However, the fear of the believers was significant enough that they were not ready at first to accept Paul as a believer after his encounter with Jesus (Acts 9:26). The murder of James led to Peter being arrested (Acts 12:3). After God delivered Peter, he hid so that Herod could not find him (Acts 12:19). Even when believers, like Stephen, were murdered in Acts, God used these circumstances for kingdom advance.
For those facing life-threatening or severe persecution, there is a biblical precedent for temporarily leaving the circumstance. Paul was lowered by a basket from the walls of Damascus (Acts 9:25). Peter went into hiding (Acts 12:19). Paul often fled from persecution. The ideal is that MBBs do not permanently flee from their homes. In the Pakistan study, many were able to reconcile with their families after significant persecution. In those circumstances, families were initially upset. Still, MBBs were eventually able to reconcile or build a truce with their families. An MBB fleeing from their family should be considered an extreme response and avoided in all but urgent cases. However, we need to be ready for when MBBs need to flee from a dangerous situation. I have personally told a few MBBs that if they face a circumstance where they feel significantly threatened to get out immediately and call me to help them. Even though none have taken me up on the offer, knowing that they are not alone is a great help to these believers.
MBBs facing mild to severe persecution need support from followers of Jesus. In Evans’ study, 67% of MBBs faced persecution ranging from family disapproval (mild) to being boycotted by their family (moderate) to severe forms of persecution, like beatings or losing their job. In most cases, MBBs will face difficulties for their new lives in Christ, and we need to be ready to be their family as we lead them to Christ.
Persecution and the family of MBBs. Jesus said, “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt 10:34). He then went on to describe how the gospel would divide families in such a way that “a man’s enemies will be the members of his household” (Matt 10:36). MBBs should follow Jesus’ commands to love their enemies and pray for those persecuting them (Matt 5:44). These commands should first and foremost be followed in the family. In this way, MBBs are “innocent as doves” (Matt 10:16) regarding their families.
Facing persecution with love. Turning the other cheek (Matt 5:39) is not a position of weakness. Instead, it is a position of strength to be able to face persecution with love. After all, Jesus gave the greatest model, saying, “Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34. Of course, He made that statement as He was being killed. While the bar is high, the Holy Spirit is powerful and can empower us also to love our persecutors. MBBs who have the honor of joining with Christ in His sufferings in this way perhaps have an opportunity to understand the gospel that is greater than most Westerners ever have a chance.
Please subscribe to No Cousins Left to receive each of our blogposts!
[1] For complete details, see Edward Evans, “’Coming to Faith’ in Pakistan,” in From the Straight Path to the Narrow Way: Journeys of Faith, ed. by David Greenlee (Waynesboro, GA: Authentic, 2005), Kindle locations 1621-1635.
We use this diagram in our trainings to help South Asian Christians understand the diversity of Islam in South Asia. Discussing this diagram helps us to have clear conversations about the different types of Muslims they are likely to meet.
South Asia contain the greatest concentration of Muslim lostness on the planet (read here). South Asia also has the greatest diversity of Islam in the world.
The Muslim Triangle is a simple training tool for helping people understand the diversity of South Asian Islam. Those with significant experiences will realize that this diagram is insufficient to capture the complexities of South Asian Islam. However, it is a helpful tool for understanding the broad strokes of diversity among Muslims in South Asia.
The Muslim Triangle has three poles: (1) orthodox, (2) folk, (3) secular. By far, the folk Muslim pole is dominant in South Asia. Here is a brief description of each pole.
Orthodox Islam is the view that Islamic belief and practice should be derived by reading the Qur’an and Hadith and obeying those texts. Orthodox Muslims focus on proper Islamic theology and practice. Usually, when people think about Islam, orthodox Islam is the picture that comes to their mind. However, in South Asia, orthodox Muslims are in the minority.
Folk Islam is a local variety of Islam that blends Sufism, local traditions, and other elements to develop a practical Islam to address their particular “needs.” The primary focus of folk Islam is to develop a spirituality that can provide practitioners blessing (answered prayers, good crops, high test scores, etc.) and protection (from accidents, evil spirits, etc.). Folk Islam usually looks very different than orthodox Islam. However, sometimes folk Islam looks like orthodox Islam but has a significant amount of folk Islamic belief just below the surface. The easiest way to understand South Asian folk Islam is to study its rituals. Click here to go to the first of a series of articles about folk Islamic rituals in South Asia. For those familiar with the prosperity gospel, folk Islam can be understood as “prosperity Islam.”
Secular Islam is familiar to most Westerners. Secular Muslims blend secular thought and materialism with Islam. Secular Islam has different flavors in South Asia but tends to focus on education, career advancement, and/or politics.
When training on the Muslim triangle, seek to find a local sect or place to use for each of the three poles. For example, in some areas of South Asia, many people understand Deoband, Ajmer, and Aligarh as places for these three poles. However, in other areas of South Asia, these three areas are relatively unknown. Discuss this triangle with a few people and discover the best ways to describe this tool in your area.
Let me describe these three places that we use to describe the poles of the Muslim Triangle.
Deoband (Orthodox Islam pole). Deoband is a small city in the Saharanpur District of Uttar Pradesh in North India. Deoband is home to Darul Uloom, which many consider to be the second most prominent madrassa in the global Muslim movement (with Al Azhar in Cairo being the most prominent). Darul Uloom was founded in 1866 as part of Islamic reform movements in the subcontinent. Its formation was partially in protest of British rule in India. At present, Darul Uloom has an impressive campus with more than 5,000 students in residence. This seminary has spawned a series of Deobandi madrassas across the subcontinent and the world. Many mosques and madrassas across South Asia are led by graduates of Darul Uloom or one of the many other madrassas that spun off this institute.
Ajmer (Folk Islam pole). Ajmer is a city in Rajasthan in North India. Ajmer is home to the tomb of a Sufi saint who is commonly known as Kwaja Garib Nawaz (meaning “the benefactor of the poor”). Kwaja Garib Nawaz is the first of the four great Sufi mystics who spread Islam across South Asia. The tombs of these four remain important places of pilgrimage for Folk Muslims until today. It is common that Muslims (or others!) will go on pilgrimages to these tombs in search of help. Perhaps a family member is sick, or demon possessed, or there is a financial problem in the family. They believe that these mystical saints can help them from their tombs. The four most prominent mystics in South Asia are:
Kwaja Garib Nawaz (d. 1236 AD), buried in Ajmer, Rajasthan, India.
Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki (d. 1235 AD), buried in Mehrauli, Delhi, Inda. He was the primary disciple of Kwaja Garib Nawaz.
Baba Farid (d. 1266 AD), buried in Pakpattan, Punjab, Pakistan. He was the primary disciple of Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki.
Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia (d. 1325 AD), buried in Nizamuddin, Delhi, India. He was the primary disciple of Baba Farid.
Aligarh (Secular Islam pole). Aligarh is a city in Western Uttar Pradesh in India and home to the famous Aligarh Muslim University (AMU). AMU was started in 1875 by Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan (d. 1898). Sir Sayyid believe that Muslims in South Asia had fallen behind in society because of a lack of education. Therefore, he started AMU to develop Muslim doctors, lawyers, teachers, and other professionals. AMU continues to be a prominent university in South Asia for developing Muslim professionals.
The purpose of this training is to help Christians understand folk Islam and to see that these kinds of Muslims should be the focus of our ministry. Here are a few things to keep in mind:
In the middle of the diagram is the Ordinary Muslim. What I mean is that the ordinary Muslim is pulled by all three poles in South Asia, however the common Muslim is closest to the pole of folk Islam. For example, a young Muslim man desires to get a good education so that he can get a good job to have a good life. These goals sound like secular Islam. However, he goes to the dargah to ask the blessing of a saint to help him in his studies and gets an amulet there to help him have the saint’s blessing to achieve his goals. At the same time, he watches the videos of Zakir Naik, an orthodox Muslim, on YouTube. This ordinary Muslim is affected by all three types of Islam.
Many ministries seeking to engage Muslims in South Asia focus on reaching orthodox Muslims. They focus on learning the Qur’an and Hadith, learning apologetics, etc. This triangle allows us to celebrate the work of those ministries and show that they are reaching orthodox Muslims, which are a significant group of South Asian Muslims.
However, folk Islam is the dominant pole in almost every area of South Asia (you must determine if this is true for your context). Phil Parshall asserted that 70% of Muslims globally are Folk Muslims (Bridges to Islam, 2). In South Asia, my experience is that this is true here as well. However, a major shift is occurring causing more Folk Muslims to become orthodox or secular. Therefore, more laborers need to be trained to engage folk Muslims.
Near-culture workers (i.e., Christians in South Asia who are trying to reach South Asian Muslims – click here for more) often struggle to reach orthodox Muslims in South Asia. They are often much more adept at reaching folk Muslims. The reason is that Hindus and folk Muslims share a similar underlying worldview. Reaching folk Muslims requires much less knowledge about Islam and the Qur’an, making the barrier less for equipping near-culture workers.
Please subscribe to our blog to get updated whenever we post!
If you are on social media, you have undoubtedly heard numerous appeals to freedom and personal conscience regarding being vaccinated from Covid-19. Many argue that freedom means that they, not the government, should choose whether they should take these vaccines. More than once, I have seen Galatians 5:1 invoked in this context,
“For freedom, Christ set us free. Stand firm then and don’t submit again to a yoke of slavery.”
I am not writing to evaluate whether those arguing for such freedom are right or wrong in the Western context. I will leave that for leaders serving in the Western church to discuss. Instead, I am writing to discuss covid vaccines and personal freedom in the context of frontier missions. One missions leader recently tweeted that 23 countries now require vaccinations for entry and 29 countries place additional restrictions for entry on those unvaccinated. It appears that the number of countries requiring vaccines for entry will continue to increase. Last week, I heard a story of a missionary being refused entry to their country of service because they were not vaccinated.
In this blog post, I am also not writing about missionaries who voluntarily choose vaccination. Many missionaries have chosen vaccination, believing it to be the best health decision for themselves and their family. Some countries have inadequate medical facilities, so missionaries have taken the vaccine pre-emptively to avoid significant medical issues. To be honest, I am one of those who voluntarily took the vaccine for these reasons. Instead, I am talking about those missionaries who desire not to be vaccinated.
In light of these global realities, some are debating whether missionaries should take Covid vaccines if it is required to maintain access to their country of service. I have heard of a few missionaries who returned to their passport countries rather than taking the Covid vaccine. Missions agencies are beginning to either require their missionaries to be vaccinated or strongly encouraging vaccination. Facing the pressure to vaccinate, some missionaries wonder whether they should leave the field or take the shot.
My question in this blog post is how Christian missionaries should consider their freedom regarding vaccination.
In short, my answer is that we should imitate Paul in giving up our freedom for the gospel.[1] Paul modeled becoming all things to all people so that by every possible means he might save some (1 Cor 9:22). Therefore, missionaries today should follow Paul in giving up their freedom for the advancement of the gospel.
Regarding Covid vaccines, this means that Christian missionaries should give up their personal freedom, as Paul did, and take the shot.
Meat Sacrificed to Idols and Christian Freedom
When Paul wrote First Corinthians, the saints in Corinth were very interested in a matter of personal freedom. In particular, their question was whether it is permissible for Christians to eat meat sacrificed to idols? (1 Cor 8:1)
Paul gave two answers to this question. First, Paul said that the Corinthian believers could eat the meat or not eat it. This decision was a matter of personal conscience. He wrote, “Food will not bring us close to God. We are not worse off if we don’t eat, and we are not better if we do eat” (1 Cor 8:8). In other words, Paul’s first answer was that whether to eat meat or not was a matter of personal freedom.
Second, Paul said that the Corinthian saints needed to stop looking to their own desires and look to the needs of their brothers and sisters in Christ instead. Some fell into idolatry because their brother or sister in Christ flaunted their freedom in front of them. Paul wrote, “if food causes my brother or sister to fall, I will never again eat meat, so that I won’t cause my brother or sister to fall” (1 Cor 8:13).
Paul said that his desire to not cause his neighbor to stumble was greater than his desire to exercise his personal freedom. Therefore, he was willing to lay aside personal rights (i.e., the right to eat meat) to advance the gospel. Personally, I would rather take a vaccine than give up meat.
Paul’s Example of Giving up Freedom
In 1 Corinthians 9:1, Paul asked, “Am I not free?” He then advanced his argument about giving up freedom for the gospel by providing examples of how he gave up his freedom personally.
Here are a few examples of freedoms that Paul gave up for the gospel:
The right to eat and drink what he chose (9:4)
The right to marry and take along a family (9:5)
The right to take support for his ministry (9:6-14)
The right to live according to his cultural preferences (9:19-23)
Paul wrote, “I have used none of these rights” (1 Cor 9:15). He said, “Although I am free from all and not anyone’s slave, I have made myself a slave to everyone in order to win more people” (1 Cor 9:19). A free man making himself a slave would have been a graphic picture to the believers at Corinth. There was no greater picture in their context of loss of rights than being sold into slavery.
In summary, Paul willingly and consciously gave up his rights for the advancement of the gospel. In this context of discussing giving up freedom for the advance of the gospel, Paul commanded, “Imitate me, as I also imitate Christ” (1 Cor 11:1).
So, Paul said he was imitating Jesus’ example of giving up personal freedoms. How did Jesus give up His personal liberties? To start, Jesus left his place of authority in heaven to live as a child on earth. Jesus gave up the right to an easy life. For example, He said, “foxes have dens, and birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head” (Matt 8:20). The King of Kings and Lord of Lords gave up His freedom for us. Lastly, Jesus gave up His right to life, dying a horrible death as a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. Paul said that he saw himself following Jesus’ example of giving up freedom.
Missionaries and Personal Freedom
Many missionaries exemplify Paul’s statement, “I have become all things to all people, so that I may by every possible means save some” (1 Cor 9:22).
Here is a partial list of freedoms that my family has given up for the advancement of the gospel:
The right to clean air.
The right to access to American healthcare.
The right to have our kids live near their grandparents.
The right to our personal preferences in language, food, clothes, and a host of cultural preferences.
Our personal preferences have shifted as a result of living abroad. We have taken on more and more of our host culture. In some ways, we are less American now than before being sent. Our personal desires have shifted closer to Jesus’ plans for our life. However, it is not our preference to live in a megacity with significant pollution and congestion. I prefer a cooler climate to the extreme heat we often face here. My wife loves wearing her American clothes on vacations. Still, she chooses to wear local clothes to advance the gospel while in our country of service.
My point is that it is normal for missionaries to give up personal freedom to advance the gospel. It is part of our calling. I am not saying that we have done anything extraordinary. Indeed, Jesus and Paul gave up far more freedoms than we have. In fact, it is with great joy that we serve in the role that Christ has called us. To summarize, missionaries are called to give up their personal freedoms and preferences in order to win more people (1 Cor 9:19-23).
Considering Paul’s example and the standard expectation of missionaries to give up their freedom for gospel advance, how should we view the Covid vaccine?
I believe that the answer is self-evident. Just as we missionaries have given up many other freedoms to advance the gospel, we must also be willing to give up any liberty regarding our preferences about the vaccines.[2] As many more countries require Covid vaccines, missionaries should vaccinate before non-vaccination becomes an inhibition to their ministry.
Please subscribe to the No Cousins Left blog to get an update whenever I post!
[1] It is my conviction that God has provided Paul as the ideal missionary model in the New Testament. Therefore, modern missionaries should study his life and emulate his missionary model.
[2] I know some will ask “What about…” type questions when reading a blogpost like this one. So, I thought I should respond to the question, “What about those with medical issues that make taking the vaccine unwise?”First, I am not a medical doctor. If someone has a complication making vaccination higher risk, my thoughts in this post are still valid. However, medical complications should also be considered. The reality is that most missionaries struggle with the fact that living in their contexts is not the best decision for their health and the health of their children. For example, most workers in South Asia face much higher pollution than they do in their passport countries. Also, various tropical diseases and parasites are much more common in South Asia than in the West. Health risks are part of the job of being a missionary. Therefore, a slightly higher risk in an individual who might take the vaccine does not mean that they should not take it. It is simply one more factor to consider, and their consideration should be taken with medical advice.
A few months ago, a South Asia Christian told me that before we trained him to share the gospel with Muslims, every Muslim rejected his message. In reality, those Muslims did not reject his message; instead, they rejected the language and culture he used to present the gospel. So, we helped this brother learn some spiritual words in Urdu. We then taught him to share the gospel in a contextual way that was meaningful to Muslims (click here for our method in sharing the gospel).
After training, the same brother told me that 90% of the Muslims he told about Jesus listened to the gospel and wanted to hear more. However, this brother did not know what to teach these Muslim seekers next. It is helpful to use the analogy of a stoplight to talk about three types of responses we hear to the gospel. Even in the villages of South Asia, more and more people are familiar with stoplights.
The three colors of the light represent three responses to the gospel.
Red light means stop. A red light is someone whose heart is closed to the gospel. They are not interested. So, what should we do? We should be kind and respectful to them and leave to find someone else whose heart is open. If you get a lot of red lights, you should evaluate how you are sharing the gospel! Perhaps you need to learn the language more or find a better way to share (click here for our method in sharing the gospel).
Green light means go! A green light is ready to repent, believe, and follow Jesus. When you find a green light, stop everything else and give them as much time as you can for a few days to teach them how to follow Jesus. It is ideal if you can teach them your whole basic discipleship package their first few days of faith so that they can stand in Jesus.
Yellow light means to look. A yellow light is interested in the gospel but not ready to follow Jesus. What should we do with yellow lights? We should begin meeting with them to explain the gospel more and help them become followers of Jesus.
Think about Muslims you have told about Jesus. Were they red, yellow, or green lights?
In my experience, a yellow light strategy is necessary for Muslim ministry. When evangelists become skilled at sharing the gospel with Muslims, usually more than 50% of Muslims who hear are yellow lights. Muslims often take more than one visit to comprehend the gospel, repent, and believe. More Muslims are coming to Christ in areas where more follow-up occurs with yellow lights. When follow-up to yellow lights is neglected, fewer Muslims come to Christ.
Our Yellow Light Strategy
Most rural folk Muslims are yellow lights when they first hear the gospel. They are curious and open but have questions. In Muslim ministry, it is essential to continue to follow up with those Muslims who are curious about the gospel. Over time, these Yellow Lights will become either Red or Green. If they become Red, then we move on. However, we should pray and expect that some will become Green.
Our yellow-light strategy centers on using five stories from the Gospel of Matthew that show the uniqueness of Jesus. We call these stories the Five Unique Things about Hazrat Isa al-Masih.
Five Unique Things about Hazrat Isa al-Masih
1. Birth: Matthew 1:18-25
2. Miracles: Matthew 9:1-8
3. Word: Matthew 7:24-27
4. Death: Matthew 27:32-54
5. Resurrection: Matthew 28:1-10
We use these five stories for follow-up with Muslim seekers who are not ready to follow Jesus but are interested in learning more. Here is more of our method.
• If they are literate, read the story from the Injeel Shareef (i.e., New Testament) with them. If they are illiterate, either tell them the story or read it from the Injeel.
• Repeat and re-tell the story until they understand and remember the story.
• Ask – What do we learn about Hazrat Isa al-Masih from this story?
• The purpose of this tool is to help Muslims understand Jesus and the gospel. So, make sure to share the gospel each time you meet.
Another way that I use these five stories is when I meet a Muslim seeker, I will continue in these Bible studies by WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. I ask them if they are willing to study the Injeel Sharif with me. If they say yes, I copy and paste the Bible passage for the first story into our chat. Then by text or voice message, we discuss what we should learn about Jesus from that story. After answering their questions, we move on to the next story. Then when we meet face-to-face, we discuss these things in more depth. In this way, I can determine if their hearts are open to learning from the Injeel Sharif about following Hazrat Isa al-Masih!
Even as I write this blog, I am working through this process with two men I met last week. One seeker and I are discussing Matthew 7:24-27, and the other is on Matthew 1:18-25. Both are asking questions and are open to learning more. The man studying Matthew 7:24-27 is so open to the gospel that I introduced him to a mature Muslim background believer. That introduction was also by phone to hear the MBBs testimony of what it means to follow Jesus. One of these men lives about 1.5 hours from me; the other lives about 5 hours away. Conduct follow-up virtually helps me to expand my reach in follow-up.
What is your plan for following up with Muslim yellow lights? In Muslim ministry, it is essential to have a plan for working with seekers like these!
Please subscribe to No Cousins Left to receive updates whenever we post!
Understanding folk Muslim rituals help us to understand the worldview of ordinary Muslims in South Asia. Understanding the worldview of ordinary Muslims helps us more effectively make disciples of folk Muslims. However, not all folk Muslims adhere to the same folk rituals. Therefore, these readings on folk Islamic rituals should act as a guide to explore folk Islam rather than as concrete rules for folk Islam. There are no concrete rules in folk Islam! Previously, we looked at pirs and dargahs. This lesson will build on those by describing Urs festivals.
Urs festivals commemorate the “marriage” of a Sufi with Allah upon the Sufi’s death. One of the goals of Sufi Islam is to seek spiritual union with Allah. Thus, when these individuals die, they entered into a marriage (Persian “Urs”) with Allah. Urs festivals occur annually to respect and seek barkat from prominent Sufis. Depending on the prominence of the pir, a Urs festival may last a day, or it may last a month. Urs festivals are the largest Muslim gatherings that occur in South Asia. Every year, about 400,000 people attend the six-day Urs festival for Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti in Ajmer, India.
It is common in folk Islam for those in need to travel from dargah to dargah seeking spiritual blessing and prayer. Some coming believe that these saints are the way to come close to Allah. However, others come out of desperation for help for a sick or demon-possessed relative. During these pilgrimages, many Muslims are very open to hearing the stories of Jesus, who healed the sick and raised the dead. They are happy to receive prayer in Jesus’ name for their family needs. These individuals can be open doors for the gospel as we minister to them and pray for them and their families.
Both women and men participate in Urs festivals. These festivals tend to have teaching, dance, and music, as well as rituals for receiving barkat. The ceremonies at some Urs festivals are unique. For example, in Pakpattan, Pakistan, there is a structure near the tomb of Babu Farid called “The Door to Paradise” (Bahishti Darwaza). Walking through this gate is said to assure the individuals of entrance into heaven. During the Urs festivals for Babu Farid, tens of thousands throng to Pakpattan for the opportunity to walk through Bahishti Darwaza. At some Urs festivals, hijra (third-gender women) participate in dancing as conduits of power and blessing. At one Urs festival, I observed horse races, cricket and soccer tournaments, and carnival rides.
At the core of all of these activities is a belief that these Sufi pirs are mediators for ordinary Muslims to obtain barkat from Allah. Within the folk Muslim mind, these mediators (Urdu vasila) are necessary to have their prayers heard and get spiritual blessing from Allah.
One of the most powerful ways to minister to folk Muslims is through prayer. When I pray for folk Muslims, I explain that I am a disciple of Jesus and that I pray in the manner that He taught. I usually begin my prayers with something like, “Our Father who lives in heaven” and make a personal prayer for the person to whom I am ministering. At the end, I pray through Jesus (Urdu main is dua Hazrat Isa al-Masih ke vasile se manta hun. Amen). Since most folk Muslims are of a lower educational level, it is rare to find folk Muslims who speak English well. It is most effective when we can pray for them in Urdu, or even better, in their heart language. Often, when we pray for folk Muslims, they are surprised to see the kind of relationship with have with God that we can approach Him so simply. Many Muslims in South Asia have come to Christ when Christians have prayed for them and seen God answer.
Excursus on the Orthodox Pole
Until now, we have completed four studies on the worldview of South Asian folk Muslims. The reason that we have focused on the influence of folk Islam in the life of ordinary Muslims is that the folk Islamic pole is the strongest of the three between orthodox, secular, and folk. However, it would be a mistake to believe that the orthodox pole does not also significantly influence the worldview of ordinary Muslims. Another reason that we have focused less on the orthodox pole is that this is the kind of Islam that most in the West understand best about Islam.
There are many ways that orthodox Islam affects ordinary Muslims in South Asia. One of them is the “point system” of Islam. For example, here is one passage from the Qur’an:
The balance that day will be true (to a nicety): those whose scale (of good) will be heavy, will prosper. Those whose scale will be light, will find their souls in perdition. (Qur’an 7:8, Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation).
Simply put, Islam teaches that scales will be used on the day of judgment to measure the good and bad works of individuals. If someone’s good works outweigh their bad, then they will be permitted into heaven. The Qur’an indicates that two recording angels are appointed to write down the good and evil works of a person.
But verily over you (are appointed angels) to protect you, kind and honorable, writing down (your deeds). They know all that you do. (Qur’an 82:10-12, Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation)
The result is that many folk Muslims are also conscious of this “point system.” The point system is also sometimes very complex in orthodox Islam. For example, prayers have differing “point” values. Praying namaz (Arabic salaat, Muslim ritual prayers) in a mosque is worth more than praying the same outside of a mosque. Namaz is of more value at larger mosques than at smaller mosques. The larger the congregation praying, the more points are received by each. Namaz is of more value during Ramadan (i.e., the month of fasting). Most Muslims become far more devoted to their prayers (and other religious duties) during Ramadan, knowing that they can catch up on their points for a year of prayerlessness during this time. Even within orthodox Islam, there are aspects of Muslim belief that orient towards power. For example, one night of Ramadan is called “the Night of Power” (Laylat al-Qadr), when Muslims remember Muhammad receiving the Qur’an. According to Qur’an 97:3, “The Night of Power is better than a thousand months.” This means that during this one night, Muslims believe that they have more ability to come close to Allah than any other day of the year. Because of this belief, the Night of Power is central to many Muslim’s pursuit of God and his blessings.
Many Muslims approach the five pillars of Islam through this lens of acquiring points for the day of judgment. The five pillars are:
Shahadah – the confession, “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet.”
Namaz – ritual prayers
Hajj – once in a lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina
Zakat – almsgiving to the poor
Ramadan – the annual month of fasting
One complication created by these issues is a difference in understanding of sin. Often, Muslims perceive themselves in a lifetime of struggle to gain more good points than bad, while also trusting in the mercy of Allah. There is not the same concept in Islam that one sin has such great consequences. The point of this all is that folk Islam heavily influences the average Muslim in South Asia, but orthodox Islam significantly affects them as well. Most Muslims mix these approaches and beliefs. While the folk Muslim worldview requires exploration, those ministering to South Asian Muslims must also gain basic familiarity with orthodox practices and beliefs.
Islamic folk practices reveal the worldview of folk Muslims. Understanding the worldview of folk Muslims empowers us to make disciples among them. I want to begin this discussion with my first experience of Eid Milad-un-Nabi (also known as Mawlid). My wife and I had recently moved to South Asia and lived across the street from a mosque. One morning, we woke up to a large group chanting “Allahu akbar!” (Arabic for “God is great”). To be honest, we were a little alarmed. We peered through the gate and saw a crowd of men in white clothes. There were dozens of people waving green flags and lots of guns. We could not understand what was happening, but it was shocking to us as new arrivals.
So, we went on the roof of our home to see what was going on. In our very broken Urdu, our neighbor explained that this was a celebration of Muhammad’s birthday. A large crowd was gathering to start a parade in honor of their prophet. The mosque by our house was the preferred gathering point. Thankfully, the guns were in the hands of police who were there to keep the peace. At the time, I did not realize that Eid Milad-un-Nabi is a controversial holiday in the Muslim calendar. It is one of the points of contention between the Barelvi and Deobandi movements. The Deobandis attack this holiday while Barelvis defend it. Deobandis attack Eid Milad-un-Nabi is because of the folk beliefs and practices attached to it. Despite this opposition, Eid Milad-un-Nabi is a national holiday in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. Throughout the Islamic world, Muslims celebrate this holiday, except in conservative Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Conservative Muslims object to this veneration of Muhammad, saying that it is shirk, which is the sin of associating partners to Allah. In Islam, there is no sin greater than shirk.
To understand the controversy about Muhammad’s birthday, consider Ahmad Raza Khan’s teachings about Muhammad. Khan was instrumental in developing the Barelvi school of Islam in India.
“Only the Prophet can reach God without intermediaries. This is why on the Day of Resurrection, all the prophets, saints, and ‘ulama will gather in the prophet’s presence and beg him to intercede for them with God… The prophet cannot have an intermediary because he is perfect.”
“God made Muhammad from His light before He made anything else. Everything begins with the prophet, even existence. He was the first prophet, as God made him before He made anything else, and he was the last as well, being the final prophet. Being the first light, the sun and all light originates from the prophet. All the atoms, stones, trees, and birds recognized Muhammad as prophet, as did Gabriel, and all the other prophets.”
Or consider the following poem by Khan regarding Muhammad:
“I am tired, you are my sanctuary.
I am bound, you are my refuge.
My future is in your hands.
Upon you be millions of blessings.
My sins are limitless,
But you are forgiving and merciful.
Forgive me my faults and offenses,
Upon you be millions of blessings.
I will call you, “Lord,” for you are the beloved of the Lord.
There is no “yours” and “mine” between the beloved and the lover.”[1]
In the minds of many folk Muslims, the need for a mediator is clear. Khan argued that Muhammad was the greatest mediator between God and man. In many ways, the beliefs that Khan held about Muhammad are similar to Christian views about Jesus. In Khan’s mind, Muhammad was created before the foundation of the world. Allah made the world through Muhammad. All of creation recognizes the greatness of Muhammad. Muhammad forgives sins. Muhammad is in perfect union with Allah. Muhammad is perfect. Khan’s view of Muhammad is very different than in orthodox Islam.
For ministry to folk Muslims, this highlights two areas of concern. First, most folk Muslims have a deep sense of need for a mediator. Some look primarily to Muhammad, while others look to other Muslim spiritual leaders for this need. Most folk Muslims believe that Muhammad was so great that they need a mediator to approach him before he can mediate between them and Allah. Second, many folk Muslims have stories and beliefs about Muhammad and other mediators (Urdu vasila) that can be bewildering. I remember sharing about the miracles of Jesus with one folk Muslim. Every time I told a story, he would say, “My vasila did the same thing!” Just like Jesus, this man claimed that his vasila raised the dead, walked on water, healed the sick, and multiplied food for his disciples. In the end, I could only find one thing that Jesus did that this man did not claim his vasila had done. Jesus died on a cross for the sins of the world. His vasila had not done that for him.
[1] All of these quotes from Ahmad Raza Khan are taken from Usha Sanyal, Ahmad Riza Khan Barelwi: In the Path of the Prophet (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006), 97-99.
This is the relatively unknown Dargah of a Pir known as Hazrat Mohammad Shakil Shah in Mussoorie in Uttarkhand, India. The tiled structure between the two tree trunks is the grave. This tomb has been there long enough that these this tree has grown through the structure. Despite its age, the tomb is well maintained. The box is for devotees of this Pir to give financial offerings. No living Pir sits at this tomb. There are many thousands of small dargahs like this one throughout the Indian subcontinent.
Dargahs are shrines that contain tombs (Urdu kabr or mazhar) of deceased Sufi mystics known as pirs. Pirs are spiritual leaders in folk Islam that often wield enormous political and social power. In most sects, pirs are Sayyid, meaning that they claim to be descendants of the tribe of Muhammad. Pirs are Sufis who seek spiritual union with Allah and function as conduits of power (Urdu karamat) and blessing (Urdu barkat) from Allah. Pirs are known to provide spiritual guidance to their followers. Followers obey their pir’s direction absolutely.
There are two general approaches to the veneration of saints at dargahs. One is through a formal piri-muridi relationship, while the other is a simple petition of the saints. Piri-muridi refers to a solemn devotion of a disciple (Urdu for murid) to a Sufi pir involving some kind of initiation rite. The murid pledges obedience, and the pir bestows a spiritual barkat or empowerment on the murid. Phil Parshall wrote about an experience with a Naqshbandi pir who would initiate “his disciples by pressing his finger into their chests just over the heart. At that time, the devotee becomes filled with God and actually hears the voice of Allah within his body.”[1]
Most devotees at dargahs never enter this kind of formal relationship. Instead, they go (or are brought to dargahs) to ask for help for practical needs in their lives.[2] Different dargahs are reputed to have barkat for different needs. For example, Pir Kaliyar Sharif in Uttarakhand is known to free visitors from demonic spirits. In visits to this dargah, I have seen individuals chained to trees and buildings outside the dargah complex by their families as they wait for deliverance from evil spirits. Inside the dargah, I was once almost knocked over as demon-possessed individuals writhed on the ground as Sufi leaders tried to cast demons out of them (apparently unsuccessfully). Pir Budhan Ali Shah in Jammu is known to help women become pregnant.[3] One missionary I know told a Muslim friend that he and his wife were having trouble becoming pregnant. His Muslim friend brought the missionary and his wife to this shrine to try to help them. There are thousands of dargahs across South Asia. In particular, the Punjab province in Pakistan contains a high concentration of dargahs.
Visitors to dargahs undertake acts of veneration.[4] They never turn their back on the tomb and wear topis (Urdu for “skullcap”) to give respect. Most visitors offer money, flower, or light clay lanterns in veneration of the Sufi. Devotees prostrate (Urdu sijda) themselves as an act of homage to the saint. All of these acts accompany the supplication of the visitor who believes that the saint can provide barkat as a conduit of Allah’s power. Sufis are renowned for supernatural ability to do things like teleport, walk on water, or fly.[5] In India, it is reasonably common for Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others to go to dargahs for barkat. In larger dargahs, there are generally pirs and other Muslim holy men who can create magical amulets, cast out demons, prophesy, and otherwise aid visitors in their spiritual needs. There is perhaps no more controversial question in Islam in South Asia than the role of pirs and dargahs in Islam. Many sects of Islam embrace these practices, and many others decry them. However, for the majority of Muslims in South Asia, the power of the dargah is more important in their lives than the mosque.
Because of the amount of respect pirs hold among folk Muslims, it can be helpful for Christian ministers to Muslims to adopt some of their habits. For example, pirs tend to live simple lives, wear shalwar kameez, and act as spiritual leaders. Christian’s can emulate these practices to be viewed more as spiritual leaders by folk Muslims. Additionally, pirs should ideally seek for union with Allah. Christians ministering to folk Muslims need to pursue a genuine spirituality with Christ, abiding in Him. Many Muslim leaders act more like the Pharisees and Sadducees of Scripture and long for spiritual leaders that genuinely know God. Additionally, Christian ministers to folk Muslims should act as spiritual leaders by praying for folk Muslims, providing spiritual guidance from the Bible, and following a defined path for disciples.
[1] Phil Parshall, Bridges to Islam: A Christian Perspective on Folk Islam (Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2006), 33.
[2] Usha Sanyal, Ahmad Riza Khan Barelwi: In the Path of the Prophet. Makers of the Muslim World (Oxford: OneWorld Publications, 2006), 92-93.
[3] In Pakistan, similar shrines exist to Aban Shah that would have been very close to this shrine before partition. The shrines in Pakistan derive some of their practices from Shiva worship which is the primary Hindu god of the Jammu region. Khalid, 9-38.
Many people struggle with how to begin gospel conversations. Holidays can be used as a great bridge to open doors to share the good news about Jesus. In particular, Christmas is a great gospel bridge for conversations with Muslims.
In many countries around the world, Christmas is celebrated or at least known. In Pakistan and India, Christmas is a national holiday. For those living in the West, Muslim immigrants see “Seasons Greetings” and “Merry Christmas” everywhere they go. Many Muslims are curious about our holiday. At the least, they are open to learning more about our traditions, which can be used as a door for the gospel.
Before jumping into how to use Christmas as an open door for the gospel, we need to talk about some common misunderstandings that Muslims might have when we talk about Christmas.
Misunderstanding #1. Christmas is about Santa or Christmas Trees. Several years ago, I attended a Christmas parade in a South Asian city. This city was about 20% Muslim with a Hindu majority. A few thousand Christians gathered. The parade was led by men dressed as Roman soldiers on horses and Herod the Great in a chariot. Following them were real camels with the three wise men. Then there were fifty or so trucks in the parade. The first truck was a host of young ladies dressed as angels. The second truck was a worship band with speakers playing worship songs. The third truck had a handful of pastors taking turns doing open-air preaching. The noise of all the worship bands and pastors melded together into an unidentifiable noise. This same rotation of three types of trucks was repeated for all fifty trucks. Around the trucks were a few hundred young men, dressed as Santa, handing out candy and New Testaments.
As I watched the parade, I wondered, “What do Muslims think when they see this parade.” So, I waited until the procession passed and walked up to some Muslim men to ask them what was happening. They knew it was a Christmas parade. When I asked them who the parade was about, they said it must have been the king who was in the chariot. That’s right, these Muslim men thought the Christmas parade was about Herod the Great!
Misunderstanding #2. Christmas is about Mary. In many South Asian cities, churches hold celebrations for Christmas. I remember one Catholic church that had a prominent shrine to Mary in front of it. Every Christmas, tens of thousands of Muslims and Hindus would pass through this shrine and church to respect their Christian neighbors. What they experienced was a shrine to Mary and a nun giving them a blessing. Because of the crowds, there was no opportunity to make the gospel clear. The confusion is increased because many Muslims think that the Trinity is the Father, the Son, and Mary![1]
Please know that the two misunderstandings above are not comprehensive. My point is that when we talk to Muslims about the Christmas story, we need to intentionally bring the focus back to Jesus.
How to Use Christmas as a Gospel Bridge
Let me share how I use Christmas as a gospel bridge with Muslims. First, I bring up Christmas in conversation. I will say something like, “I am really excited about our Christmas plans for this year!” Or “Christmas is my favorite time of the year.” Really, anytime you see a Christmas tree, or a wreath, or anything Christmas related, it is easy to bring up Christmas.
Second, I ask my Muslim friend if they know the Christmas story. Sometimes they know the story, and sometimes they do not. If they know the story, use it as a chance to share your testimony of how God changed your life through Jesus. If they do not know the Christmas story, then you have a great opportunity to tell it to them!
Third, ask your Muslim friend if you can share the Christmas story with them. I like to share the story from the book of Matthew 1:18-25. If I have a New Testament, I read the Christmas story with them. If not, I simply tell the story to them. I prefer to open up the Bible with them since this is usually the first time my Muslim friend has ever encountered the Bible. We use Matthew 1:18-25 as our first of five gospel stories to share with Muslim seekers. Matthew 1:18-25 is the first of those five stories. If they are interested, keep going back and share the other four! Click here to learn here how to use these stories with Muslim seekers.
Fourth, ask your friend what this story means about Jesus. Very often, after hearing this story, my Muslim friends will tell me, “That is the same story we have in the Qur’an!” While there are some small differences between the story in the Qur’an and the Bible, there are many similarities. If you want to prepare, simply read Qur’an 3:45-55 and 19:16-28.
Fifth, point out what the Christmas story shows us about Jesus. There are at least three unique things about Jesus that this story emphasizes.
Jesus’ birth was prophesied hundreds of years in advance.
Jesus was the only person to be born of a virgin.
Jesus’ birth was announced by angels.
From this point, I begin sharing about the other aspects of Jesus’ life that were miraculous and unique. I share about how He raised the dead and healed the sick. I talk about His other miracles, like walking on water or feeding the five thousand. I continue following this discussion of Jesus’ unique works until we arrive at his death, burial, and resurrection.
Perhaps your Muslim friend will not agree with you on every point when you first share. A significant next step is to give them a copy of the New Testament and encourage them to read and learn for themselves. Some hearts will open to the Word of God, and others will not. However, this is a straightforward way to use the Christmas story to begin gospel conversations with your Muslim friends or neighbors.
If your Muslim friend is interested to hear about the birth of Jesus, use the opportunity to share the rest of the gospel story with them. Click here to read our blogpost on how to share the gospel with Muslims! This blog post will give you a roadmap about how to share the uniqueness of Jesus with your Muslim friend.
Subscribe to our blog to get all of our updates!
[1] The primary reason for this confusion is a verse from the Qur’an that says, “And behold! Allah will say: ‘O Jesus the son of Mary! Did you say unto men, ‘Worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah?’” (Qur’an 5:116).
McGavran, Donald A., Ethnic Realities and the Church: Lessons from India. Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1979.
This blog post was originally submitted as a class assignment for my doctoral studies. However, this book often comes up in conversations as a relevant book for understanding the Indian church. Understanding the Indian church is key for mobilizing the Indian church! (For more on mobilizing South Asian Christians to South Asian Muslims, click here) I am hopeful to have future blogposts that cover books and dissertations that provide insight about the churches of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other South Asian churches.
Biographical Sketch of the Author
Donald McGavran (1897-1990) was a missionary to India. He was also the founding Dean of the School of Missions, Church Growth, and South Asian Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary in 1965. McGavran was born and raised in India by missionary parents before returning to spend thirty-eight years as a missionary in South India (1923-1961). During this time, McGavran was mentored by J. Waksom Pickett, the author of Christian Mass Movements in India (1933). McGavran and Pickett co-wrote on the dynamics which led to people movements.
During his time in India, McGavran noticed that the church was growing at extraordinary rates in some areas and not at all in others. In his words,
“In the section of India where I worked, 145 areas were scenes of missionary effort… in 134 of these areas the church… had grown at only 11 percent a decade… But in the other eleven areas the church was growing by 100 percent, 150 percent, or even 200 percent a decade. Why was this happening? A vast curiosity arose within my breast. There must be a key to Great Commission mission, and I resolved to find it.“[1]
As a result, McGavran wrote Bridges of God in 1955, trying to describe how people movements were occurring in India where large numbers of a single people group came to Christ in a short period of time. In 1970, McGavran wrote Understanding Church Growth in which he more carefully delineated his teachings on the homogeneous unit principle (HUP).
Summary of Contents
Ethnic Realities and the Church: Lessons from India describes nine church types in India to describe the challenges and opportunities that these church types present for the Great Commission. This book is primarily a sociological description of the various church structures observed by McGavran and his colleagues[2] in India.
McGavran said “in only twenty-one of the more than three thousand ethnic groups of India do Christians form any considerable proportion of the total population… In more than 2900 castes and tribes there are practically no Christians at all” (28). Likewise, McGavran noted that there were a few dominantly Christian districts in India, but most districts were less than 0.5 percent Christian (25-27). The uneven spread of Christianity among certain ethnic groups and in certain areas was due to past people movements. According to McGavran, “Nine-tenths of all future conversion growth of the Church in India will come by people movements to Christ” (36).
McGavran distinguished nine church types in India, five basic types and four secondary types. Those nine types are (41):
The Five Basic Types
Type 1. Fully Monoethnic Syrian Churches
Type 2. Fully Conglomerate or Multiethnic Churches
Type 3. People Movement or Monoethnic Churches from Caste
Type 4. People Movement or Monoethnic Churches from Tribe
Type 5. Modified Conglomerate or Multiethnic Churches
The Four Secondary Types
Type 6: Urban Conglomerates or Multiethnic Churches
Type 7: Urban Monoethnic Churches
Type 8: The Great Conglomerates
Type 9: The Indigenous Churches
Ethnic Realities and the Church describes these nine church types and discusses Great Commission barriers and opportunities of each church types. This book concludes with two appendices where McGavran defended his views on ecclesiology and the HUP.
The Syrian churches (Type 1) of Kerala are Catholic and monophysite fellowships that read their liturgy in Syriac (51). These are the oldest churches of India, perhaps being founded by the apostle Thomas. Syrian Christians dominate much of the Christian religious leadership of India with over half of Catholic priests in India being from Kerala (55). While Syrian Christians are “immovable” in their faith, most Protestants would consider them “doctrinally corrupt” (55). Moreover, “For nineteen hundred years, because they did not want to mix their blood[3] with that of other ethnic units, they ceased to propagate the faith” (57). While historically the Syrian church has been “stolidly nonevangelistic,” two spin off denominations, the Mar Thoma Church and the St. Thomas Evangelical Church of India, have been evangelistic (61ff). Since these two denominations worship in Malayali,[4] their evangelistic effectiveness has been limited to Malayali speakers. Therefore, McGavran’s suggested Syrian Christians to form apostolic bands that can learn the language and culture of other people groups and plant churches among them (66).
Fully Conglomerate churches (Type 2) are “the most typical of all Indian congregations and denominations” (68). These churches are composed of members from various castes and tribes. “Each convert has to come to Christ alone, out of the caste in which he was born” (68). McGavran describes,
“The process is entirely natural. Given the fact that no community wants its members to defect to any other caste, given the intense communal loyalty which is an essential part of the Indian system, there are only two ways in which men of caste can become Christian. (1) They can come as individuals – one-by-one-against-the current, against the family, against the jati[5] or homogeneous ethnic unit in which they were born… (b) They can come out group by group.” (69-70)
Fully conglomerate churches are primarily composed of individuals coming to Christ, while church types 3 and 4 are composed of groups coming to Christ.
Many fully conglomerate churches developed around mission stations where one-by-one individuals were brought into the church. The message of these churches was “leave your caste and join our community” (83). Fully conglomerate churches often resisted people movements because “To be good, it had to be slow” (77). Therefore, monoethnic churches were seen as less Christian. The Great Commission potential of fully conglomerate churches is twofold. First, they have a high potential of reaching those who are at the fringe of society, such as those who move to distant cities for work or who are not in a good relationship with their caste (89ff). Second, McGavran argued that the highest evangelistic potential of Type 2 churches is to start Type 3 and 4 people movements. In his words,
“Historically most great people movements have risen as existing Christians of conglomerate congregations have led someone to Jesus Christ, and then he… has led his own people – in India his own caste or tribe fellows – to Christ.” (91)
Monoethnic churches from caste (Type 3) and tribe (Type 4) occur when large numbers of a caste or tribe come to Christ and continue in their “normal social organism” (93). Generally, monoethnic churches form when men and women hear the gospel and discuss their decision as a group until a consensus is formed at which time they make a group decision and are baptized together (96). Because of the close relationships within castes and tribes, this message naturally travels through their relational networks. As more and more groups in a relational network take baptism, the social pressure becomes less for the next group to do so. Thus, people movements can sweep across an ethnic group. It is important to note that historically, people movements have generally occurred among lower castes.
“In about 2,000 Shudra, Vaishya, Kshatriya, and Brahman castes, substantial and lasting people movements have developed in only 5 – that is in only 0.0025 percent of these castes. On the other hand in about 600 Scheduled Castes, substantial and lasting people movements have developed in 21 – that is in about 3 percent of these castes” (100).
According to McGavran, no great monoethnic movements by caste had taken place in North and Central India (110).[6] Since the publication of McGavran’s book in 1979, such monotonic movements by caste are occurring in North and Central India.
Monoethnic churches have great evangelistic potential not only for their own ethnic group, but also to affect other ethnic groups on their fringes. For example, the Presbyterian movement in the Punjab around 1900 “won far more converts from the Muslims than all the specialized and scholarly missionaries to the Muslims put together” (113).
Tribes and castes differ in that castes share “a region with many other castes” while tribes are “the sole or the main ethnic group” in a given area. Each tribe has “a language or dialect of its own” (123). Evangelistically, monoethnic churches by tribe often “suffer from limited vision” since they do not feel responsible to share the gospel outside of their tribe (132). Per McGavran, there should be intentional attempts among any tribal people movement to make sure that the entire tribe is evangelized before deep separation occurs between Christians and non-Christians within a tribe (137).
Modified multiethnic churches (Type 5) are a blend of Type 2 and Type 3 or 4 churches. Modified multiethnic churches attempt to be multiethnic, but their proximity to a people movement causes at least half and maybe as much as ninety percent of the church to be of a single caste or tribe (144). Therefore, the culture of that caste or tribe dominates the church culture. Modified multiethnic churches tend to be large and tend to have great evangelistic potential to reach more of the primary caste or tribe (148-150). However, these churches tend to be divided since church leaders, being from people groups that are more historically anchored in Christ, are almost never from the ethnic group that forms the modified multiethnic church’s majority (145ff).
McGavran’s four secondary church types were peripheral to his five basic types. Thus, they will be dealt with in less detail. Urban conglomerate churches (Type 6) are types of multiethnic churches that occur in big cities as a result of transfer growth (158). “So far big-city conglomerates… have not shown much evangelistic potential… The English-speaking multiethnics were the least potent” (165-6). Urban monoethnic churches (Type 7) occur as believers from rural people movements relocate to urban areas and form monoethnic congregations (170ff). The great conglomerates (Type 8) are eight denominations that composed 83 percent of Christians in India in McGavran’s day: Roman Catholic, Church of South India, Council of Baptist Churches of Northeast India, Methodist Church of Southern Asia, Federation of Evangelical Lutheran Churches in India, Church of North India, Presbyterian Church of Northeast India, Federation of Evangelical Churches of India (186). Indigenous churches (Type 9) are denominations and associations that are indigenous from their beginning, meaning that they are derived from Indian leadership (214). McGavran concluded by stating that the greatest potential for the church of India was the untapped reservoir of potential missionaries from within the Indian Church (237).
Ethnic Realities and the Church concludes with two theological essays. The first reminds the reader that Ethnic Realities and the Church is written phenomenologically rather than prescriptively in describing the various church types of India. Therefore, McGavran asks the reader not to criticize his ecclesiology but rather use this book as a look at the various ecclesiologies present in India (246). The second essay defends that caste issues are deeply rooted in Indian society and that the resultant ecclesiological issues must be addressed (250ff). Practically, McGavran reiterates his call for monoethnic churches, while advocating that Indian Christians overcome racial prejudice in Christ (257).
Critical Evaluation
McGavran’s Ethnic Realities and the Church is an invaluable description of the Indian church through a missiological lens. While this book is almost forty years old, most of McGavran’s descriptions ring true today, especially regarding his five basic categories. McGavran’s five basic church types provide an accurate framework around which to describe what is happening in the Indian church. As with anything written by McGavran, most critiques of Ethnic Realities and the Church center around the HUP.
One major shift in the Indian church from the time of McGavran is the rise of indigenous missionaries and resultant indigenous churches and denominations. McGavran stated that these groups showed great potential but had often not flourished since pastors were moved towards denominations with greater resources (218). Since 1979, indigenous missions, such as Vishawani, Uttar Pradesh Mission, Believer’s Church of India (i.e. Gospel for Asia), have grown dramatically. These are organizations started and lead by Indian leadership who are funding indigenous workers to plant indigenous churches. These indigenous movements still tend to be dependent on outside funding as in McGavran’s day (16). As a result, there has been a dramatic shift away from Christians in India being formed into only a few denominations. Most of the eight great conglomerate denominations have decreased in influence, while indigenous denominations have drastically increased.
Another shift from McGavran’s time is that the Syriac churches have continued to lose their distinct character with multitudes leaving these monoethnic churches to join conglomerates. Likewise, many of the new church movements being birthed by indigenous missions cannot be described as purely monoethnic, but also have a distinctly different character than the fully conglomerate churches. These churches are similar to the modified multiethnic churches but differ in that they began as monoethnic churches which begin to bring in other castes. Generally, these semi-multiethnic churches are over fifty percent of a particular caste, while successfully reaching out to other castes and integrating believers from castes that have a similar status.
As noted by McGavran, most Christian growth in India has taken place among various Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes (i.e. low caste ethnic groups), however it is no longer correct that people movements have occurred among only twenty-one ethnic groups in India (28). As in McGavran’s time, there has been substantially less Christian growth among forward castes, Muslims, and other peoples, although progress is occurring among these groups as well. Because of these realities, probably the greatest weakness of Ethnic Realities and the Church is its age. Missions efforts in the subcontinent would be greatly helped by a fresh and thorough phenomenological analysis such as McGavran’s. McGavran was only ready to write this book after thirty-eight years in India and significant academic experience. Likewise, an updated version would be of greatest value if written by someone with substantial experience, like McGavran.
The most controversial statements in Ethnic Realities and the Church revolve around McGavran’s statements regarding the HUP. For example,
“Nine-tenths of all future conversion growth of the Church in India will come by people movements to Christ; but since the congregations and denominations of most leaders of the Indian Church are conglomerate and not people movement by nature, these leaders neither know nor teach the monoethnic way of becoming Christian. Indeed, in most seminaries and Bible schools in India people movements are seldom mentioned. The very concept is often disapproved.” (36)
These statements move beyond phenomenological description to active advocacy of “the monoethnic way of becoming Christian.” The controversial nature of this kind of statement can be seen in a 2016 Southern Baptist Journal of Evangelism and Missions. In that journal, Aubrey Sequeira blasted McGavran with the following five critiques:
(1) Missiology characterized by church growth principles underestimates the diabolical nature of the caste system; (2) The church growth model fosters nominal Christianity and perpetuates a deeply entrenched ethnocentrism in the church of Jesus Christ; (3) McGavran’s theology does not sufficiently reflect a biblical understanding of conversion, particularly of repentance; (4) McGavran’s church growth principles have not adequately taken into account the New Testament call to embrace Christ at the expense of being excluded and ostracized by society; and finally, (5) Church growth missiology exalts pragmatic considerations over biblical faithfulness.[7]
In the same journal, John Michael Morris[8] and Troy Bush[9] wrote in defense of utilizing HUP based missionary methods. Indeed, McGavran’s HUP has been debated and examined since he introduced this concept in Bridges of God in 1955.
The question at hand is whether McGavran’s advocacy of HUP based missionary methods is appropriate or if it breaks the biblical injunctions regarding the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ (Eph. 2:11ff). McGavran offers a reasoned response to this question in Ethnic Realities in the Church. By the time McGavran wrote this book, controversy had raged about the HUP for twenty-five years. Therefore, McGavran’s later writings had been refined by the fire of criticism on his teachings. McGavran wrote four considerations:
“the Church in India faces a Hindu social order which believes that men and women are made in different molds by God Himself, and that some are forever superior and other forever inferior.”
“Christians are indeed called to participate in the struggle for a new society… Before the Throne we all stand equal.”
“the practice of full brotherhood… ought [not] to be made a condition for a person becoming a Christian.” Therefore, “as a matter of convenience to the ‘yet to believe’… homogenous-unit congregations may be started.”
“Christ will indeed break down the middle wall of partition… but he will do it for those who through faith become parts of His Body” (256-257).
In other terms, McGavran acknowledged that the caste system is evil, but understood it as an inevitability among unbelievers in India. His concern was to create churches in which unbelievers could come to Christ. Once in Christ, the walls of division between castes and ethnic groups could be broken down. In other words, for McGavran the focus was on bringing people to Christ so that their views on caste could be reformed.
In response to Sequeira, a few considerations are required. First, McGavran and Sequeira are united in a disdain for the caste system. However, their views on how to overcome the caste system are different. McGavran sought to bring people to Christ so that Christ could transform believers so as to overcome casteism. While Sequeira seems to advocate that unbelievers need to reject the caste system as part of their repentance unto Christ. Second, Sequeira said that McGavran did not sufficiently explore the idea that believers face ostracism in coming to Christ. However, even a cursory reading of McGavran shows how often he appealed to believers facing ostracism and persecution for Christ. For example, McGavran’s Founders of the Indian Church details multiple stories of the first converts in people movements across India. McGavran clearly describes their transformed lives and the difficulties they faced in coming to Christ. In conclusion, South Asian missiology will continue to be divided over the issue of whether monoethnic churches are ethical or not. But, all can agree that casteism is both sinful and ever present in Indian society, although hopefully on the decline.
[1] Donald A. McGavran, “My Pilgrimage in Mission,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 10.2 (1986): 54.
[2] Especially, “George Samuel of Bombay, Amirtharaj Nelson of Madras, and T.C. George of Bangalore” who helped McGavran develop his last four church types (39ff).
[3] McGavran was describing the endogamous nature of the Syrian churches of India.
[6] Since 1979, people movements have occurred in North and Central India.
[7] Aubrey M. Sequeira, Harry Kumar, and Venkatesh Gopalakrishnan, “McGavran’s Church Growth Principles from an Indian Perspective,” SBJME 2 (2016): 94.
[8] John Michael Morris, “McGavran on McGavran: What Did He Really Teach?” SBJME 2 (2016): 9-23.
[9] Troy L. Bush, “The Homogenous Unit Principle and the American Mosaic,” SBJME 2 (2016): 24-46.
One of the questions of this blog is to answer the question, “How can a billion South Asian Muslims be reached with the gospel?” One of the realities of this question is that the harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few (Luke 10:2). One of the greatest needs to reach the Muslims of South Asia is to mobilize a missionary force capable of bringing the gospel to the greatest concentration of Muslim lostness on the planet.
A Christian worship service in South Asia.
Let us begin by looking at the problem. In 2010, Todd Johnson showed that South Asian received the least missionaries of any area globally.[1] Johnson reported that in 2010, South Asia received eight foreign missionaries per million population versus the global average of 58 foreign missionaries per million. In contrast, Latin America received 172 missionaries per million people.[2] Therefore, Latin America receives over twenty times as many missionaries per capita as India and Pakistan. Here is what that looks like on a graph.
In positive news, Johnson reported that South Asia has 734,000 national Christian workers.[3] These are pastors, evangelists, or other Christian workers who are from South Asia. While some foreign missionaries focus on Muslims, most national workers in South Asia are focused on Hindus and Christians rather than the Muslim population. Many anecdotes express this reality. For example, I was once at a Christian meeting in Lahore, Pakistan. Although two hundred Christian leaders attended the meeting, only a handful had real experience in evangelizing Muslims, even though Lahore is 94.5% Muslim. The vast majority of Christians in Pakistan are either unwilling to share the gospel with Muslims or have no idea how to do so.
Here is more positive news. Low-caste Hindus in both Pakistan and India are highly receptive to the gospel. Since there are more Hindus in India than in Pakistan, widespread church planting has occurred more in India than in Pakistan.[4] David Garrison’s Church Planting Movements contains one study of the incredible growth rate of the Indian church. Garrison gave data on a handful of movements where tens or hundreds of thousands of Hindus came to Christ in a relatively short time.[5]
The Indian Census places the Christian population at 2.30%, or approximately 31.7 million in 2020.[6] However, the number of Christians is substantially higher than this figure due to Hindu movements to Christ. Believers from Hindu backgrounds are generally counted as Hindus under the census since officially changing one’s religion in India requires a court process that results in loss of rights for those in scheduled and backward castes and invites undesired scrutiny. Therefore, a very conservative estimate would place the number of Christians in India at more than 50 million (3.6%).[7]Many are Christian only by heritage, while others have a fresh vitality in their faith.
Mobilizing near-culture Christians to reach unreached peoples is a long-standing strategy in world missions. However, mobilizing near-culture Christians to reach Muslims has not been a heavily adopted strategy. Historically, the most famous failure in mobilizing near-culture Christians to reach Muslims relates to the Coptic church of Egypt. Famous missionaries, such as Samuel Zwemer and Temple Gairdner, gave lifetimes of service in Egypt and had no measurable success in mobilizing Coptic Christians to reach Muslims.[8] The primary reasons for this limited success have been assumed to be ongoing persecution and ostracism of Egyptian Christians, a lack of spiritual vitality in Coptic Christianity, and historical barriers between Muslims and Christians in Egypt because of centuries of violence.[9] The historical failure to mobilize Copts to reach Egyptian Muslims has led some to shy away from mobilizing near-culture Christians to reach Muslims.
However, the situation of South Asia is significantly different than the case study of Coptic Christianity. First and foremost, South Asia churches have been experiencing substantial growth for many years, especially among Hindus. This growth has also led to a great vitality among many Christians, especially first-generation believers. Therefore, the churches of South Asia are in a very different place than the Coptic Church of Egypt. Additionally, India is one place where Muslims are a minority. Instead of persecuting Christians, both Christians and Muslims are being persecuted together by the Hindu majority. This dynamic also marks a stark difference between the situations of India and Egypt. However, the Christians of Pakistan have been persecuted by the Muslim majority in a way that mirrors Egypt. Persecution will likely remain a significant barrier to mobilizing Pakistani Christians to reach Pakistani Muslims with the gospel. However, there are segments of the Pakistani church with a high degree of vitality in Christ. Many of these Christians are ready to engage the Muslims around them with the gospel.
More has been written on mobilizing Pakistani Christians to reach Muslims than mobilizing Indian Christians to reach Muslims. Frederick Stock’s People Movements of the Punjab details the early spread of the gospel through Presbyterian missionaries in what is now known as Pakistan. He reports how the conversion of an illiterate low-caste Hindu man named Som Ditt in 1873 sparked significant growth. From 1881 to 1891 the Christian community in the Punjab grew from 660 believers to 10,165.[10] By 1930, over 100,000 believers were reported in multiple denominations in Pakistan.[11] The results of this movement today are seen in the strength of the Punjabi church in both India and Pakistan. However, this movement has had little impact on the majority Muslim population of Punjab.[12] While Stock asserted that some Christians “proved gifted” in ministry to Muslims,[13] he provided no information on Muslims coming to Christ.
In 1999, Samuel Namaan wrote a dissertation asking, “what are the obstacles that prevent the Church of Pakistan in Sindh[14] from evangelizing Muslims in Sindh?” and “How can the Church of Pakistan in Sindh develop an effective strategy to evangelize Muslims?”[15] For his research, Namaan could only identify ten Muslim background believers (MBBs) in Sindh province.[16] An attempt to circulate a survey among MBBs yielded “no response as none of the Church of Pakistan workers were directly involved in Sindhi Muslim evangelism.”[17] According to Namaan, the barriers inhibiting Pakistani Christians from evangelizing Sindhi Muslims included:[18]
Muslim hostility to the British. Atrocities committed during British rule in South Asia created deep wounds. The British built the historic churches in most Pakistani cities, creating a permanent link in Pakistanis’ minds between the British and Christianity.
Sindhi hostility to the Punjabi majority. Punjabis dominate Pakistani politics, causing animosity between Punjabis and Sindhis. Since most Pakistani Christians are Punjabi, additional cultural tension exists.
Pakistani hostility to the West. Western military action in the Middle East is perceived as Western Christian military action against Muslims.[19]
Pakistani and Indian cultures have remarkable similarities, having been a common territory until partition in 1947. However, according to current census reports, Pakistan has a 96.4% Muslim population, while India is only 14.2% Muslim. Because of a difference in each country’s relative population, they have roughly the same number of Muslims at about 200 million each. The dynamics of reaching Muslims in India versus Pakistan are substantially affected by majority versus minority dynamics. For example, in Pakistan, Christians are burdened by blasphemy laws, prejudicial legal systems, and terrorist attacks. In India, Muslim angst is generally against the Hindu majority.
The millions of Christians in South Asia comprise a major workforce that can be mobilized to reach the Muslim minority. The most remarkable growth and vitality in the South Asian church is occurring among Hindus. Hindus are coming to Christ in large numbers in Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. Therefore, these Hindu background movements are the most significant opportunity for mobilization. Recent years have also seen an increased desire among South Asian Christians to engage Muslims with the gospel.
Considering our question, “What is it going to take to reach a billion Muslims in South Asia?” One need is to mobilize the South Asian church to reach Muslims. It is unlikely that enough foreign missionaries can be mustered to reach 600 million Muslims in South Asia. However, suppose even a small fraction of South Asian Christians can be mobilized for this task. In that case, the number of indigenous missionaries will dwarf the potential of foreign workers.
[1] Johnson, Todd M., David B. Barrett, and Peter F. Crossing, “Christianity 2010: A View from the New Atlas of Global Christianity,” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 34.1(January 2010): 29-36.
[3] Ibid., 31. This number is undoubtedly higher in 2020 than it was in 2010.
[4] Extrapolating from Census estimates for 2020, India has about 1.1 billion Hindus while Pakistan has about 3.6 million Hindus.
[5] Garrison, David, Church Planting Movements: How God is Redeeming a Lost World. Arkadelphia, AR: WIGTake Resources, 2004, 35-48. See also Garrison’s book, A Wind in the House of Islam.
[6] Extrapolating from the 2011 Indian Census data based upon the 1.87% anticipated growth rate in India. This figure includes all Christian groups, including Catholics, Mormons, Protestants, and others.
[7] Author’s estimate. However, some put the number at 5% or even higher. The highest estimate that the author has heard is 12%.
[8] Tucker, Ruth A., From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya: A Biographical History of Christian Missions. Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004, 241, 245.
[9] Hassan, S.S., Christians Versus Muslims in Modern Egypt: The Century-Long Struggle for Coptic Equality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 17-53. Rowe, Paul S., “Christian-Muslim Relations in Egypt in the Wake of the Arab Spring,” Digest of Middle East Studies 22.2(2013): 262-275.
[10] Stock, Frederick and Margaret, People Movements in the Punjab. Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1975, 64-68.
[14] The Church of Pakistan is a denomination in Pakistan with Anglican heritage. Sindh province is a province in southeast Pakistan with a population of approximately 48 million.
[15] Naaman, Samuel E. “Revisioning Outreach to Sindhi Muslims: Proposals for Christians in Pakistan.” (DMiss diss., Asbury Theological Seminary, 1999), i.
[19] Naaman’s study was completed before 9/11 and the United States’ subsequent military action in Pakistan and Afghanistan. These tensions are more pronounced now than at the time of Naaman’s writing.
When we look at the New Testament, almost every book has a clear purpose. The Gospels present the life of Jesus. Acts shows the power of the Holy Spirit working through the early believers. Romans presents the gospel in depth. Hebrews demonstrates that Jesus is better.
There are a few New Testament books whose purpose is less clear. Philemon is one of those books. In His sovereignty, God included this little book in the canon of Scripture. Therefore, this little book has something to add. It is essential in some way. There is a unique point that this book is supposed to make for us.
The main point of the book of Philemon can be found in the story of this letter.
In Acts 19, the apostle Paul spent three years in Ephesus (55-57 AD). For two years, he trained leaders at Tyrannus, who in turn shared the gospel, made disciples, and planted churches across Asia Minor. The result was that “all the residents of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the word of the Lord” (Acts 19:10).
One of the men who was trained during this time was Epaphras. Epaphras pioneered the gospel work in Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis (Col 1:8; 4:12-16). Although Paul had never visited Colossae, his disciple, Epaphras planted a church in that city.
A few years after he left Ephesus, Paul was under house arrest in Rome for two years (60-62 AD). During that time, he was reunited with Epaphras, who was also in prison (Philem 23). From the time of his imprisonment, Epaphras labored in prayer for his churches that were left behind. In fact, one of the purposes of Paul’s letter to the Colossians was to establish Archippus in his ministry, likely to replace the role left by the arrest of Epaphras (Col 4:17). It seems that Epaphras encouraged Paul to write the letter to the Colossians to continue to help that church to grow despite the adversity occurring that led to Epaphras’ arrest.
Paul’s letter to Philemon was sent simultaneously as Paul’s letter to Colossians and is something of a subplot of what happened in that letter (click here for a Missionary’s Reflection on Paul’s Letter to the Colossians). We can tell that they were written at the same time because the two letters have the same circumstances. In both letters, Paul was in jail with Epaphras (Col 4:12-16; Philem 23). In both letters, Paul sent Onesimus back to Colossae (Col 4:9; Philem 12). In both letters, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke were with Paul (Col 4:10, 14; Philem 24). Also, the same Archippus who was to take leadership in Colossae was one of the three recipients of Paul’s letter to Philemon. Lastly, in Colossians 4:9, Onesimus was described as “one of you,” meaning that he was from Colossae. As an aside, Paul described ten of his coworkers in this short letter, which is a picture of the need of modern missionaries to develop more coworkers for the gospel!
The main point of Paul’s letter to Philemon has to do with the slave, Onesimus, and his relation to Philemon and Paul. Philemon is described as a coworker of Paul, meaning that he was involved in missionary activity (Philem 1). Onesimus was a slave of Philemon who had come to be with Paul and Epaphras during their time in Rome. Many have assumed that Onesimus was a runaway slave, although the text does not say that he was a runaway. In fact, it is implausible that Onesimus, as a runaway slave, would have randomly come into Paul and Epaphras’ contact while they were in prison. They could not have been in the same jail since Paul was a Roman citizen under house arrest. A slave would have been kept in far worse conditions.
Instead, it is most likely that Philemon sent Onesimus to Paul and Epaphras to care for them during their imprisonment. Similarly, the Philippian church had sent Epaphroditus to Paul (Phil 2:19-30). Philemon and the church meeting in his home had likely sent a financial gift by the hand of Onesimus.
During his time with Paul, Onesimus had a life-changing encounter with Jesus. Paul now described Onesimus as “my son,” saying that “I became his father while I was in chains” (Philem 10). Paul described Onesimus as “my very own heart” (Philem 12). In a wordplay on Onesimus’ name, Paul said he was formerly useless (Gr. achreston) to Onesimus, but now had become useful (Gr. euchreston) to both Paul and Onesimus.
Now Paul asserted that Onesimus’ status had changed. He sent Onesimus back to Philemon, although he wanted Onesimus to remain with him (Philem 13). Paul shares an expectation that Philemon will consent to do a “good deed,” without explicitly stating what this good deed was (Philem 14). In the context, it seems that Paul’s expectation was that Philemon was releasing Onesimus from his slavery and send him to Paul to join Paul’s missionary team. As a Pauline coworker, Onesimus was to be treated “as a dearly loved brother” (Philem 16). In fact, Paul commanded Philemon to “welcome [Onesimus] as if you would me” (Philem 17).
Therefore, Onesimus returned to Colossae with Tychicus, the letter carrier of Paul’s letters to Ephesus and Colossae (Eph 6:21-22; Col 7-9). He may have been the same Onesimus described by Ignatius of Antioch as the leader of the church of Ephesus in c. 107 AD.[1]
The Purpose of Paul’s Letter to Philemon
Having reviewed the story of Paul’s letter to Philemon, we can now return to this short letter’s purpose. Paul’s purpose in writing this letter was to gain permission for Onesimus to join his missionary team. Paul was careful to do this so as not to offend another missionary coworker, Philemon. Therefore, Paul’s entire purpose in writing his letter to Philemon was to establish another coworker for the gospel.
This means that God, in His sovereignty, included a whole New Testament book whose primary purpose was for a missionary leader to add another member to their missionary team. This little book, then, becomes one more indication in the New Testament of the value of missionary teams. It also provides a picture of how a missionary leader appealed to a local church’s leadership to send one of their members to join Paul in his missionary activity.
From Slave to Missionary
Paul’s Letter to Philemon is also a picture of the life-changing power of the gospel. Onesimus was a slave, described as “useless” to his master (Philem 11). As a slave, he owed a debt to his master (Philem 18). Since Philemon was not only a follower of Jesus but also a Pauline coworker, we should assume that he treated Onesimus well. However, when Onesimus encountered Jesus through Paul, his life was transformed. He became Paul’s spiritual son and useful for the gospel ministry. Onesimus was manumitted from slavery and launched directly into ministry as Paul’s apprentice and helper.
This story provides insight into how the apostle Paul viewed those around him. While others saw a slave at the bottom of society, Paul saw a potential leader. Imagine how easy it would have been for Paul to overlook Onesimus. As a leader, it would have been easy for Paul to see Onesimus’ only value as serving him. After all, Onesimus was “only a slave.” However, Paul, like Jesus, saw the people who were around him. He saw potential in Onesimus and was ready to tap his potential.
At the same time, Paul knew that if he took Onesimus as his coworker without Philemon’s willing agreement that he could break relationships in Colossae. In this letter, Paul masterfully appealed to Philemon for Onesimus in such a way that Philemon could not say no while being sure to give Philemon credit for his generosity. For example, Paul wrote,
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.” Philemon 14
“And if he has wronged you in any way, or owes you anything, charge that to my account. I, Paul, write this with my own hand: I will repay it – not to mention to you that you owe me even your very self.” Philemon 18-19
Here is the point. If a slave can become a missionary coworker of Paul, then so can anyone. As Paul wrote somewhere else,
“Brothers and sisters, consider your calling: Not many were wise from a human perspective, not many powerful, not many of noble birth. Instead, God has chosen what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen what is weak in the world to shame the strong. God has chosen what is insignificant and despised in the world – what is viewed as nothing – to bring to nothing what is viewed as something.” 1 Corinthians 1:26-28
The book of Philemon is ultimately about the life-changing power of the gospel. The gospel is so powerful that it can transform the lowest in society into men and women worthy of taking the gospel to the ends of the earth.
South Asia is home to the greatest concentration of Muslim lostness on the planet. Amazingly, compared to the Middle East, there are very few expatriate missionaries working among these massive Muslim populations. Where will the labor force come from to engage the almost 600 million Muslims of South Asia?
The largest missionary force to be mobilized to reach the Muslims of South Asia are the proximal Christians of Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. Each of these countries has millions of followers of Jesus. While there are some Muslim background believers (MBBs), most believers come from Christian or Hindu families. While most Christians in South Asia are not interested in reaching their Muslim neighbors, there are increasing numbers willing to be trained and equipped. Mobilizing even a small portion of the Christians of South Asia will result in a missionary force that will dwarf the potential of expatriate missionaries.
This article aims to describe an idealized process of leadership development for near-culture missionaries to South Asian Muslims. Near culture means Christians who speak similar languages and share many cultural elements with Muslims. For example, Bhojpuri-speaking Hindus, Christians, and Muslims share many aspects of their cultures, while also having many differences.
This article builds on two paradigms for leadership development. Nathan Shank’s five levels of movement leadership have been instrumental in shaping practices for developing leaders for gospel movements in South Asia. However, Shank’s paradigm is primarily for leaders who serve among their own people group or similar people groups. Those developing near culture missionaries to Muslims have experienced a need for a new paradigm to describe this process. Ralph Winter developed an E-scale of witnesses that defines witnesses in relation to the culture in which they bring the gospel. Integrating Shank and Winter’s paradigms provides a useful foundation for cross-cultural workers’ progression to South Asian Muslims. The model presented here is a series of five markers for understanding and evaluating indigenous, near culture missionaries to South Asian Muslims.
Winter’s E-Scale of Witnesses
Winter’s paradigm is about the witnesses’ relationship with the recipient culture. His purpose in describing this paradigm was the demonstrate the potential of tapping proximal Christians to engage unreached peoples and places. His paradigm is especially helpful in South Asia, where large national harvest forces of mobilizable Christians are juxtaposed with a multitude of unreached people groups. In South Asia, the most apparent need is to mobilize proximal believers to engage Muslim peoples.
Applying Winter’s paradigm to developing indigenous, cross-cultural missionaries in South Asia provides a helpful distinction of potential workforces. E0 refers to the evangelism of Christians from the same culture. E0 witnesses do not apply in Muslim cultures as there are no Christians to evangelize.
E1 witnesses are MBBs evangelizing within their own culture. For example, a Punjabi-speaking MBB in Pakistan evangelizing other Punjabi-speaking Muslims. There are few E1 workers in the context of South Asian Muslims, but they have the highest evangelistic potential. Whenever possible, it is better to train and mobilize E1 workers than E2 or E3. However, in many places in South Asia, there are few or no MBBs to mobilize, necessitating E2 and E3 workers. Shank’s five levels of leadership apply without modification to E1 workers who serve among their own people group.
E2 missionaries evangelize Muslims from a similar but different culture. There are multiple possibilities of E2 workers in South Asia. For example, Punjabi Christians in Pakistan seeking to reach Sindhi-speaking Muslims are E2 witnesses. Bangla-speaking MBBs engaging Urdu-speaking Muslims in north India would likewise be E2 workers. In these instances, the cultural gap is significant, while being much less than E3 workers coming to serve among these people groups. In this paradigm, it would be a mistake to minimize the cultural gap that E2 witnesses must overcome to be effective. As E2 witnesses develop, they must grow in linguistic and cultural adaptation of the people they serve.
Within the scope of E2 missionaries, there are varying degrees of cultural gaps that the witnesses must overcome. For example, a Bhojpuri-speaking believer from a Hindu family seeking to evangelize Bhojpuri-speaking Muslims has a relatively small difference to overcome. In this instance, Bhojpuri-speaking Muslims and Hindus both often identify as Bhojpuri first and by their religion second. However, the gap between Punjabi-speaking Christians and Sindhi-speaking Muslims in Pakistan is relatively much higher.[2] Where the cultural gap is smaller, E2 missionaries require less training and equipping. When the cultural gap widens, the skills and training required are much more significant.
One common pitfall of E2 workers is their failure to release authority and responsibility to E1 workers. Competent E2 workers realize that E1 workers will generally be more effective than they are in engaging Muslim peoples. Therefore, E2 workers should seek to be shadow leaders to E1 workers. E2 workers understand the necessity of their role in developing and coaching leaders while recognizing that the E1 workers must become the primary leaders for movements to emerge.
E3 missionaries evangelize Muslims from a completely different culture than their home cultures. For example, expatriate missionaries serving among South Asian Muslims are E3 workers. The cultural and linguistic differences are significant. However, E3 witnesses tend to be highly theologically educated, be highly trained, and have substantial levels of support. As a result, E3 missionaries to South Asian Muslims remain highly focused and dedicated. In contrast, most E2 missionaries have significantly less education, training, and support. Support meaning both financial support as well as other aspects of personnel support that missionary organizations provide to their workers. Often this lack of training and support makes it difficult for E2 missionaries to maintain a long-term focus.
E3 missionaries are generally less effective in evangelistic effectiveness than E2 workers. When possible, E3 missionaries should seek to work with E1 MBB workers and develop them. However, there are many places where there are little to no MBBs to train in South Asia. In those instances, a critical activity of E3 witnesses is to develop E2 partners to grow the work among Muslims. In this way, E2 and E3 missionaries form teams that evangelize Muslims intending to develop E1 workers within those communities.
Shank’s Five Levels of Movement Leadership
Shank’s five levels of movement leadership provide a paradigm for developing leaders to fuel gospel movements. He developed his model in the context of ministry in South Asia. These are five idealized levels to evaluate believers within a church or network to help them move to the next level in this process. L1-L5 are utilized as shorthand to designate L1-L5 leaders.
Figure 2. Shank’s Five Levels of Movement Leadership.[3]
As noted earlier, Shank’s paradigm applies to E1 workers. Ideally, MBBs begin as faithful seed sowers among other Muslims. They then grow into being church planters as they lead Muslims to Christ and form them into new congregations. The move from L2 to L3 leaders as they develop other leaders and release authority to them. Shank’s paradigm focuses on developing apostolic leaders rather than pastors. L3 leaders develop both pastors and other apostolic leaders. The difference between the two is that pastors remain as shepherds of local churches while apostolic leaders function in a Pauline role of planting churches with local leadership and then leave those areas to plant more churches in pioneer fields.
When developing E2 missionaries to South Asian Muslims, Shank’s paradigm helps identify the ideal candidates for training as cross-cultural witnesses. For example, if someone does not evangelize in their own culture, they will likely be ineffective in cross-cultural evangelism. Therefore, those who are not functioning as L1 leaders should not be considered for training to be E2 missionaries. At the same time, L1 leaders lack many of the skills necessary to be effective E2 missionaries. For example, they may be strong in evangelism while lacking skills required in church planting and leadership development. The ideal trainees to develop as E2 missionaries are those functioning as L2/L3 leaders. Ideally, they should have experience in evangelism, disciple-making, church planting, and leadership development in their own culture before undertaking these tasks in a different culture.
However, L2/L3 workers depart from Shank’s paradigm when they become E2 witnesses. They move from being successful church planters to being novices in evangelism in a new culture and situation. Months or years are often required for them to grow back to the same proficiency in the same tasks of evangelism, disciple-making, church planting, and leadership development cross-culturally that they once experienced in their own culture.
Five Markers for Developing E2 Missionaries
The paradigm presented here is an idealized path for developing L2/L3 leaders into successful E2 missionaries. This idealized path has five markers that E2 missionaries must overcome, each with different challenges. This path culminates with E2 missionaries developing L3 E1 workers who are multiplying churches and leaders among their Muslim people group. Leaders along this path are referred to as M1-M5 leaders, corresponding to which marker they have crossed along this path. Some Muslim peoples are more challenging to reach than others. Progress requires not only the diligence of the E2 missionary but also a move of the Spirit of God.
Figure 3. Five Markers for developing E2 missionaries.
M1 leaders have begun the process of seed sowing among Muslims and are growing in effectiveness as cross-cultural witnesses to Muslims. M1 leaders have overcome significant barriers to start their work, such as fear of Muslims and bitterness towards Muslims. They have learned enough of Muslim language and culture to begin sharing the gospel but require significantly more training in these areas. They know essential gospel tools about how to share the gospel with Muslims. M1 leaders are often amazed at how open Muslims are to hearing the gospel. The training required to develop L2/L3 leaders into M1 workers is minimal.
At some point, M1 leaders realize that most Muslims require more than one or two gospel conversations before coming to Christ. M2 leaders are those that count the cost of this dedication to reach Muslims. M2 witnesses often grow quickly in speaking Urdu or other Muslim languages and understanding Muslim culture and belief. Usually, it takes only 2-3 months for Hindi-speaking M2 workers to become almost fluent in Urdu if they diligently apply themselves to Muslim ministry.[4] M2 workers also begin to identify more and more with Muslims around them, often “becoming a Muslim to save Muslims” (1 Cor. 9:19-23). M2 witnesses learn the cultural preferences of Muslims and adjust their behavior and cultural preferences to be more effective in witness. Some M2 witnesses give up eating pork, wear traditional shalwar kameez, or grow beards so that Muslims can identify with them better. M2 witnesses also become experts at answering the basic objections of Muslims to Christianity. M1 and M2 leaders’ primary difference is that M2 leaders are committed to significant follow-up among Muslim “yellow lights.” Yellow lights are those who continue to listen to the gospel but are not ready to respond. Most M2 leaders are natural evangelists. A significant barrier for progress for them is to keep their focus on following-up with yellow lights rather than preferring to evangelize new contacts.
M3 leaders are those who have baptized their first MBBs and are discipling them. A common pitfall is that MBBs are often extracted from their community as MBBs take on the culture of the E2 witnesses. When MBBs are extracted, it cuts off the potential for a continued witness to their community.[5] When families take baptism together, they can stand against the persecution that will inevitably follow. When MBBs take baptism, it is common for religious leaders (such as Tablighi Jamaat or mosque leaders) to urge them to return to Islam and forsake Christ. In many contexts, the pressure placed on new followers of Jesus is intense.[6] In South Asia, most MBB churches have developed as entire families have come to Christ and begun fellowshipping together. Experience has shown that it is complicated to form MBB churches from MBBs that have been extracted from their communities.
Some M3 leaders fail to form MBB churches and leaders while being highly effective in baptizing Muslims. In some areas, hundreds of Muslims have taken baptism without any signs of church planting. While this evangelistic effectiveness is laudable, the barrier is that these E2 missionaries have not been effective in developing E1 workers. Without E1 workers, forming sustainable MBB churches is nearly impossible. M3 workers who are baptizing many Muslims need training on developing MBB leaders and working with them to plant churches.
M4 leaders have developed at least one MBB church and are developing their disciples into E1 workers. On Shank’s scale, these E1 workers are L1 and L2 leaders. M4 leaders must patiently disciple these L1 and L2 leaders. At this point, the M4 leaders are transitioning to function as shadow leaders, knowing that MBB leaders are the future of any emerging movements. They continue with their disciples while transferring authority and responsibility for their work to them. If M4 leaders do not release authority and responsibility to emerging MBB leaders, it is common for a rift to form. E1 leaders generally have a much higher proficiency in engaging Muslims than E2 leaders. Since a primary activity of M4 leaders is sharing the gospel with Muslims, engaging yellow-lights, and discipling new believers, emerging MBB leaders can sometimes feel that they are better ministers than the M4 leaders. However, emerging MBB leaders still require significant discipleship and coaching, which competent M4 leaders can provide.
One major issue that M4 workers need to address is the relationship of these emerging L1 and L2 leaders to Islam and the mosque. Usually, this emerging work will go one of three directions. First, the emerging L1 and L2 leaders may become extracted from their Muslim community. When these new L1 and L2 leaders are extracted, they usually join local churches and often lose their effectiveness in reaching Muslims. Second, emerging leaders sometimes continue attending the mosque because of fear and community pressure. As a result, any new disciples will naturally follow their pattern. The long-term result is that the emerging movement retains one foot in Islam and one foot in Christ and has split allegiance. While there has been a historic battle over the appropriateness of this approach,[7] followers of Jesus continuing in Islamic worship and practice cannot be reconciled with biblical Christianity.
Instead, new MBBs should remain as cultural insiders in their communities while being theological outsiders from Islam.[8] MBBs should remain in the situation that they were when the Lord called them (1 Cor 7:17-24). They should attempt to retain the same role in society after following Jesus that they held before following Jesus. If they were farmers before following Jesus, they should stay as farmers after following Jesus. At the same time, these MBBs need to separate from the mosque, Qur’an, and allegiance to Muhammad. M4 leaders should patiently teach the Bible to these emerging MBB leaders and especially help them to understand the biblical teaching on the person of Christ. As these MBBs understand the deity of Christ, their loyalty to the mosque, Qur’an, and Muhammad automatically dissolves. As emerging MBB leaders break from Islam, M4 leaders need to coach them to remain in good standing in their community. At this point, emerging MBB leaders struggle through numerous questions related to issues like marriages, funerals, Muslim festivals, and Ramadan.
M5 leaders have successfully coached emerging MBB leaders to the point of reproducing more MBB churches and leaders. At this point, an actual movement has the potential to emerge. Ideally, the M5 leader continues to function as a partner to leaders in this emerging movement. Since the M5 leader has handed off significant leadership responsibility for this work, they become ideal trainers and coaches to other E2 workers seeking to work through this process. Returning to Shank’s leadership development process, these M5 leaders now have the opportunity to become L4 leaders.
Conclusion
South Asia is home to the greatest concentration of Muslim lostness on the planet. There are insufficient expatriate missionaries and indigenous MBBs to finish the task among the almost 600 million Muslims of South Asia. However, there is a sufficient harvest force in the local Christian populations of South Asia. This article describes an idealized path with five identifiable markers by which L2 or L3 leaders can successfully cross into Muslim ministry.
The process of walking along this path is usually difficult. Experience has shown that it is a simple task to get Christian leaders to become M1 leaders, but each successive step requires more death to self. Fewer and fewer continue down this road. Becoming cross-cultural missionaries requires E2 workers to put aside their preferences and culture for the sake of the gospel. Before embarking into Muslim ministry, many of these E2 workers had fruitful ministries. Moving into Muslim ministry often means less financial stability for these workers.
The path described in this article is idealized. While our team is working with some M3/M4 leaders, we cannot say that we have seen any true M5 leaders emerge. There are examples where E2 workers have begun working with pre-existing L3 MBB leaders, but none that I am aware of that have walked down this path from start to finish. The purpose of developing this paradigm is to clearly define the idealized next steps for which our team is striving.
In Muslim ministry in South Asia, training has been developed to help E2 missionaries reach the M1 step. There are also resources available to help these workers emerge as M2 leaders. However, there are almost no resources available for E2 workers at the M3-M5 stages. Developing resources, training, and hosting events where M3-M5 leaders can learn from one another and MBB leaders is a necessary next step for developing these cross-cultural missionaries. In addition, the question of financial support needs to be answered.
[1] Ralph D. Winter and Bruce A. Koch, “Finishing the Task: The Unreached Peoples Challenge,” IJFM 19:4 (Winter 2002), 16.
[2] For insights on the cultural gap between Pakistani Christians and Sindhi Muslims, see Samuel E. Naaman, “Revisioning Outreach to Sindhi Muslims: Proposals for Christians in Pakistan” (D.Miss., Asbury Theological Seminary, 1999).
[3] Nathan and Kari Shank, Four Fields of Kingdom Growth: Starting and Releasing Healthy Churches. Revised and Updated Edition (Self-Published PDF, 2014).
[4] Note that in some contexts in South Asia, the linguistic gap is much wider. For example, Telugu-speaking Christians in Hyderabad have much more difficulty learning Urdu than North Indian Christians.
[5] Often those extracted leave their own cultural context and go to a large city. If they continue in Muslim ministry, it is often among different people groups. Thus, they also become E2 workers.
[6] For an example of the difficulties that Indian MBBs face in between the Muslim community and entering fellowship with Christians, see Sufyan Baig, “The Ummah and the Christian Community,” in Longing for Community: Church, Ummah, or Somewhere in Between? Ed. by David Greenleee(Hyderabad: Authentic Books, 2013) 69-79.
[7] For an updated example of this conflict, see Harley Talman and John Jay Travis, eds., Understanding Insider Movements: Disciples of Jesus within Diverse Religious Communities (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 2015). In response to this defense of Insider Movements, see Ayman S. Ibrahim and Ant Greenham, eds., Muslim Conversions to Christ: A Critique of Insider Movements in Islamic Contexts. New York: Peter Lang, 2018.
[8] The term Cultural Insider Theological Outsider comes from Abu Jaz, “Our Believing Community is a Cultural Insider but Theological Outsider (CITO)” in Muslim Conversions to Christ: A Critique of Insider Movements in Islamic Contexts, ed. by Ayman S. Ibrahim and Ant Greenham. New York: Peter Lang, 2018, 423-430.
“For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and by craving it, some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” 1 Timothy 6:10
Without a doubt, financial issues are the most stressful aspect of missionary work for the average Western missionary. Consider the following:
In 2012, if someone made $34,000 per year, they were among the 1% of the planet’s highest salary earners.
In 2020, the average income in the United States is $63,051 (IMF estimates). Therefore, the average American is in the global 1%
In 2020, the average income in India is $1,877 (IMF estimates).
Many Western missionaries come from middle-class homes. However, upon arrival in South Asia, they are relatively wealthy compared to most South Asians. In a country like India or Pakistan, income inequality is much broader than in the United States. When a Westerner arrives, he is confronted by poverty on a level he has never seen.
The problem is even more pronounced when particular states are examined. For example, the per capita income among the 220 million people of Uttar Pradesh is $972 per year or half of India’s national average. Uttar Pradesh is also home to some affluent areas, such as Noida and Lucknow. There are even some billionaires in Uttar Pradesh that pull this average up significantly. The result is that the average resident of Uttar Pradesh is poor on a level that the average American cannot understand without first experiencing it.
As Westerner missionaries encounter this poverty, many issues collide in their hearts and minds. Here are a few of them.
The Bible commands followers of Jesus to care for the poor. Here are a few verses that we missionaries wrestle with almost daily.
“Give to everyone who asks you.” Luke 6:30
“They only asked that we would remember the poor, which I had made every effort to do.” Gal 2:10
“If a brother or sister is without clothes and lacks daily food and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, stay warm, and be well fed,’ but you don’t give them what the body needs, what good is it?” James 2:15-16
Just as Paul was eager to help the poor (Gal 2:10), the average missionary is filled with compassion regarding the human tragedy surrounding them. We want to help! Moreover, Scripture commands us to help.
In our countries of service, we missionaries are the rich. When we move overseas, we have to wrestle with verses like these for the first time in our lives.
“Truly I tell you, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”Matthew 19:23-24
“But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your comfort.” Luke 6:24
“But those who want to be rich fall into temptation, a trap, and many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge people into ruin and destruction.” 1 Timothy 6:9
Personally, I never considered myself to be rich before moving to South Asia. However, I also remember having a roof over my head, decent clothes, and eating three meals a day. We had a refrigerator in our kitchen as well as an air conditioner and heater in our home. I slept in a comfortable bed and had enough money to take my wife out for a nice meal. Sometimes my wife and I shared one car, but other times we each had our own vehicle. In South Asia, these are all signs of wealth.
At one point, we moved into a middle-class neighborhood in South Asia. We installed one of the first air conditioners in our community to manage the hot South Asian summers. Our little apartment cost $70 USD but was nice compared to many of our new friends.
At the same time, whenever we go back to visit family in the United States, we switch from being rich to being dependent upon others. We have no home nor car in the United States. Everything in the United States is costly in comparison to our South Asian home.
We feel guilt when we enjoy comforts that were normal to us growing up. When I take my family to McDonalds here (which is a special treat!), we usually spend about $10-12 USD. From an American perspective, this is a minimal amount. From a rural Indian perspective, this is enough money to feed a family with rice and beans for a few weeks. Often, I have a hard time enjoying such extravagance while thinking about a friend who may or may not have food for their family. More than one night, I have laid awake in bed, looking at the air conditioner pumping cool air into my bedroom, wondering why I should have the luxury of this device when most of my friends do not. Likewise, I sometimes feel guilty when going to the doctor. I know that my insurance will pay for my bills, while others that I know are praying for God to take care of their medical needs. They are not going to the doctor simply because they lack enough money. Why should I get decent medical care when they cannot? All that I have is simply because of God’s sovereign choice. I could just as easily have been born into a poor family in rural Uttar Pradesh.
I grew up in the most comfortable country in the history of the world. The kings of ancient times would have been jealous if they knew the comforts that Americans experience today. For example, the average American sleeps in a comfortable bed in a temperature-controlled home. The contrast is stark when I stay in rural areas in South Asia. Once I attended a meeting in a village with about a hundred people. I wondered where we would all sleep that night. In the evening, they put out bedsheets on the concrete roof of the church building. There was no pad and no pillow. We each had a bedsheet on a concrete slab. To say the least, I had a poor night of sleep. However, for the South Asians around me, this was normal. A few days later, when I got back to my bed, I felt both grateful and guilty.
It is confusing to know when to help others and when not to help. Today, I have the following requests in front of me. One man is asking me to help him pay for his children’s school fees. If their school does not receive payment in the next five days, his children will be kicked out. Another person is asking for help with a CT scan to understand why they are having chronic headaches. Yet another friend is asking for money to help meet their societal obligations for a relative’s wedding. On top of this, I am helping two brothers in Christ start small businesses that I am hopeful will help make them self-sustaining in the long run. Also, some believers in rural areas have been telling me that they are low on food. I know dozens of others who are in genuine need who have not asked.
In light of all of these requests, a few things are clear. First, I am incapable of meeting the needs of everyone who asks me. Second, a dependency problem exists among many South Asian Christians. Dependency means that many Christians are dependent on outsiders to meet their needs rather than being locally sustaining and independent. Let me share how this works. Imagine a foreigner begins working with a South Asian Christian. The two of them become like brothers, which leads the foreigner to share more and more financially with his friend. He helps his friend get a better home and pays for his children to attend a better school. The South Asian believer quickly becomes dependent on the foreigner to sustain their new lifestyle. Compared to the foreigner, they are still living on a low-income level. However, it is beyond the South Asian believer’s capacity. Now imagine that the foreigner has to go back to his home country for any reason. After a few months or a few years, the funds stop coming to this South Asian believer. Now he is in a crisis, unable to pay the rent at his home and afford to put his children in the new school. So, what does he do? The South Asian believer looks for another foreign income source!
We want to leave healthy churches and ministries in South Asia. The vision of this page is “No Cousins Left.” This vision means that we want to see local ownership of the core missionary task. When we define local ownership, we tend to think of four aspects of this local ownership:
Self-propagating. Local ownership means that local ministries and leaders are propagating the gospel themselves. They are making disciples, planting churches, and developing leaders rather than depending on outsiders to do so.
Self-governing. Local ownership means that local ministries and leaders are led by local leaders. Outsiders are not making decisions for the group.
Self-funding. Local ownership means that local ministries and leaders are financially independent and take care of the ministry’s financial needs locally.
Self-theologizing. Local ownership means that local ministries and leaders study the Scriptures themselves under the Holy Spirit’s guidance to determine truth. Their theology is not being dictated from the outside.
If we think about these four aspects, it quickly becomes apparent that “self-funding” is a core issue. For example, we know that ultimately whoever pays the bills is the one holding the authority. If the person paying the bills is not happy, then they will withhold their financial help. Therefore, whoever is paying makes many of the decisions about strategy and theology. As a result, if a church is not self-funding, it is also not self-governing, nor is it self-theologizing.
Imagine a South Asian leader was being paid to focus on Muslim ministry. While the support continues, it is easy for them to continue this focus on Muslim ministry. They are afraid to leave Muslim ministry since this would cause a loss in their support. The result is that they are led less by the Holy Spirit than they are by an outside donor. Now imagine this external support ceases. If they want to continue in Muslim ministry, they struggle to determine how to do so without support. Imagine that they are having trouble paying their bills a few months later. Someone comes and offers them a salary for translation work or radio ministry or something else. Seeing their family’s needs, they eagerly take this new role while trying to continue in Muslim ministry on the side. After a few years, their passion for Muslim ministry is squeezed out by their employer’s new emphasis.
We want to be wise in our giving. The above just scratches the surface of the issues related to money in missions. Missionaries are usually burdened for the poor. Missionaries are often filled with compassion and want to help. However, missionaries are also often thinking through all of the questions related to money above.
On top of these issues, most South Asians and most Westerners have a vastly different approach to money. In his book, African Friends and Money Matters, David Maranz shared a great deal of wisdom about how Westerners and Africans differ in their approach to finances. A few years ago, I read through this book with one of my good South Asian friends. He was shocked at how Westerners think about money. I was also shocked to learn about how South Asians think about money! While this book was written for African and not South Asia, it is amazingly applicable. I highly recommend this book for understanding two divergent perspectives on money. These divergent perspectives on money often lead to significant misunderstandings.
For example, I knew a Westerner who was starting a business with a South Asian partner. The Westerner was leaving to go back to his home country for a few months, so he gave around $10,000 of cash to his South Asian partner. There was a highly developed business plan for these funds to get the business started while the foreigner was abroad. However, once the foreigner left, the South Asian man’s extended family came to him and pressured him to use large portions of these funds for weddings and other needs. Because of how social pressure and finances work in South Asia, this man gave most of this $10,000 to these needs. When the foreigner found out, he was angry and felt betrayed. This event ended the relationship between these two men. The foreigner ended up moving back to America. The South Asian partner never became involved with ministry again. One of the core issues was that the foreigner involved had no idea how money works in South Asia.
In the end, what should missionaries do regarding money? Let me give five of my convictions.
Be frugal. While most missionaries are “rich” when they come to South Asia, it is best to moderate spending on their personal needs.
Be generous. Missionaries should model 1 Timothy 6:18-19, “Instruct the rich to do what is good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and willing to share, storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of what is truly life.”
Be wise. Missionaries should seek to invest money into developing others so that they are self-sustaining after the missionary leaves. Care should be taken not to create dependency but to use their finances to build others so that they become strong and independent. One good book on this subject is When Helping Hurts.
Be Spirit-led. Missionaries should be wary of depending on their own wisdom regarding finances. Instead, they should pray and consult with other godly men and women to make Spirit-led decisions.
Be forgiving. If we are generous, sometimes we will be cheated. Some people will lie to us or deceive us to get money for something else. Sometimes, the money will get used in a way other than our intention. When this happens, we need to forgive. One big key is not to trust anyone with more money than you can lose. Then as trust grows through experience with that person, you can entrust them with more money.
In the end, remember that “we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out” (1 Tim 6:7). Money is a temporary part of this life that will not be part of eternity. Let us seek to glorify God with the money that He entrusts to us.
Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh have the second, third, and fourth largest Muslim populations globally. The largest population of Muslims on the planet is in Indonesia.
Considering this growth, I recently wondered, “When will there be a billion Muslims in South Asia?” So, I spent some time crunching the numbers. If the growth rates assumed here are maintained, then there will be over a billion Muslims in South Asia by 2047. In 2047, there will be 380.9 million Muslims in Pakistan, 381.2 million Muslims in India, and 247.5 million Muslims in Bangladesh.
2047 is only 27 years away. In the next 27 years, the Muslim population of South Asia is set to almost double!
What does this mean for ministry to Muslims in South Asia?
We need to pray! We need God to move among such a large group of Muslims.
We need to mobilize! The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few.
We need to labor! Let us join God in working among these peoples for whom Jesus died.
As a last note, I want to encourage us all to ask a question… “What is it going to take to reach a billion Muslims?” If you want to learn how to join us in this work, please consider taking our E-Course. Please click here for more information.
This blog post is part of a series on Systematic Theology. The method of this series is to follow Wayne Grudem’s well-known Systematic Theology. This series also interacts explicitly with Systematic Theology with a view towards ministry to South Asian Muslims. These blog posts start with Grudem but are modified. I agree with Grudem’s two presuppositions, “(1) that the Bible is true and that it is, in fact, our only standard of truth; (2) that the God who is spoken of in the Bible exists, and that He is who the Bible says he is: the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them” (Grudem, 26). Each week, one interaction with South Asian Islam will also be noted. Click here for the audio teaching of this lesson.
This lesson is on the second of four characteristics of Scripture: (1) Authority, (2) Clarity, (3) Necessity, and (4) Sufficiency. This post is the fifth of seven about the Word of God. God’s Word, the Bible, is foundational for the development of theology. Therefore, an understanding of the doctrine of the Word of God is our beginning place for theology.
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (2)Clarity. Can only Bible scholars understand the Bible rightly? “The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all [who read it by the enlightening power of the Holy Spirit]”[2] (Grudem, 108).
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (3) Necessity. For what purposes is the Bible necessary? How much can people know about God without the Bible? “The necessity of Scripture means that the Bible is necessary for knowing the gospel, for maintaining spiritual life, and for knowing God’s will, but is not necessary for knowing that God exists or for knowing something about God’s character and moral law” (Grudem, 116).
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (4) Sufficiency. Is the Bible enough for knowing what God wants us to think or do? “The sufficiency of Scripture means that [the Bible] contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly” (Grudem, 127).
The question of the Clarity of Scripture is who can understand the Bible. Throughout church history, this has been a controversial question. For example, the Catholic Church kept the Bible in Latin for hundreds of years so that the average believer could not read it. They believed that only priests could understand Scripture. Therefore, the Bible was kept in a language that only the priests could study and learn it. Unfortunately, this led to a time in church history when even the priests did not understand the Bible well.
One of the key acts of the Reformation was to translate the Bible into common languages so that the average believer could have access to it. Translating the Bible into common languages usually led to the persecution of the faithful men who undertook these tasks. Consider these two brief stories.
In 1534 AD, Martin Luther published his German translation of the Bible from the Greek and Hebrew texts. Luther was famously excommunicated from the Catholic church for his teaching. More than once, Catholic leaders sought to kill Luther for his teaching and for his work in Bible translation.
In 1535 AD, William Tyndale translated the full Bible into English for the first time. In 1536 AD, Tyndale was publicly burned to death for translating the Bible.
Luther and Tyndale published their translations of the Bible at a time when the printing press had recently been developed. As a result, their translations were printed in mass and made available to a much broader audience. For the first time in hundreds of years, the Bible was made available for the ordinary follower of Jesus.
Today, the same issue occurs. Many pastors believe that only people with formal theological education can understand the Bible. The result is that they are slow to put the Bible into the hands of their disciples and encourage them to read it for themselves. Sometimes people are afraid that new believers will misinterpret the Scriptures. Therefore, they tell believers to come and hear their teaching while de-emphasizing their disciples learning directly from God in the Bible.
The doctrine of the Clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who read it by the enlightening power of the Holy Spirit. This doctrine has two parts:
God has revealed His Word in a clear way that ordinary people can understand.
God has given His Holy Spirit to each believer so that His Spirit can guide them into all truth (John 16:13).
The Bible is Clear
“The revelation of your words brings light and gives understanding to the simple.” Psalm 119:130 (Psalm 19:7)
The word “simple” here is a reference to a person without insight and understand. It is a reference to an ordinary person without a great deal of education. The testimony of the Bible is that the Bible is specifically designed to give insight to simple people.
Without a doubt, the most accessible sections of Scripture to understand for new believers are the stories, or the narratives, of Scripture. God, in His wisdom, gave us a Bible that is 43% narrative. The Gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – are undoubtedly the most important books of Scripture. God gave them in narrative form.
According to the Indian census, 59.1% of Muslims in India are literate. Many of these 59.1% are of low literacy, meaning that they can do simple tasks like writing their name but cannot read a book. For those coming to Christ who are illiterate, the stories of Scripture are easily taught. Recordings can be provided of these stories in their heart languages so that the average believer who cannot read and read can still have access to much of Scripture. The Holy Spirit can guide even the illiterate to understand His truth.
While some passages of Scripture are more challenging to understand than others (see 2 Peter 3:16), God has provided His Word in a form that is understandable to most people.
The Holy Spirit Guides Believers to Understand the Bible
Several passages of Scripture show that the Holy Spirit guides believers to understand all truth.
“’Instead, this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel in those days’ – the LORD’s declaration. ‘I will put my teaching within them and write it on their hearts.’” Jeremiah 31:33, quoted in Hebrews 8:10
“I will place my Spirit within you and cause you to follow my statues and carefully observe my ordinances.” Ezekiel 36:27
“But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, who the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you.” John 14:26
“When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.” John 16:13
In contrast, several passages emphasize that those without the Spirit – or those outside of Christ – cannot understand the Bible correctly.
“But the person without the Spirit does not receive what comes from God’s Spirit, because it is foolishness to him; he is not able to understand it since it is evaluated spiritually.” 1 Corinthians 2:14
“When [Jesus] was alone, those around him with the Twelve, asked him about the parables. He answered them, ‘The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to those outside, everything comes in parables so that they may indeed look, and yet not perceive; they may indeed listen, and yet not understand; otherwise, they might turn back and be forgiven.’” Mark 4:10-12
“Yet still today, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their hearts, but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.” 2 Corinthians 3:15-16
The defining difference between these two kinds of people is whether they have the Spirit of God living in them. If we have the Holy Spirit, the Spirit will guide us to understand all spiritual truth. If we do not have the Holy Spirit, then we cannot fully understand the Bible.
How to Be Filled with the Holy Spirit
If the Holy Spirit’s indwelling power is what determines our ability to understand the Bible, then we need to understand what it means to be filled with the Spirit. Bill Bright’s booklet, “Are you Experiencing the Spirit-Filled Life,” is one great way to understand these issues. Click here to go to Bright’s booklet (the three diagrams below are from this resource).
Bill Bright defined three kinds of people: (1) those without the Spirit, (2) those filled with the Spirit, and (3) followers of Jesus who neglect the Spirit and live their own lives. The following three diagrams use circles to show a person’s life. Inside the life is a throne, indicating who is the Lord of their life. The cross indicates Christ, and the “S” indicates self.
When a person outside of Christ hears the gospel, they repent and by faith allow Christ to become the Lord of their life. When they repent and believe, God fills them with the Holy Spirit (John 3:1-8). When Christ is on the throne of their life, they study the Bible, and the Holy Spirit guides them into all truth.
Unfortunately, all followers of Jesus sin (1 John 1:5-10). When we sin, we essentially remove Christ as the Lord of our lives. We put ourselves back on the throne of our lives. In this state, the Holy Spirit is no longer guiding us and transforming us. Many followers of Jesus live sinful lives, and as a result, they are not filled with the Spirit of God. The Spirit no longer teaches them. For them, understanding the Bible is difficult because God’s Spirit is not leading them.
Those followers of Jesus who live sinful lives also need to repent from their sin and place their faith in Christ again. Perhaps the most crucial aspect of walking by the Spirit is a constant choice to turn away from sin and walk by the Spirit. Any time we turn away from God’s way, we need to repent and follow Him again.
The point is that new believers can walk by the Spirit, turning away from sin, and following God. As they walk by the Spirit and read the Bible, God will guide them into all truth.
Conclusion
The result is that when any person comes to Christ, we need to get the Bible to them. As the Holy Spirit comes into them, the Spirit will teach them the truth of His Word. If we neglect to put the Bible into the hands of new believers, we fail to believe that the Holy Spirit is powerful enough to teach the truth to God’s people. If we lack confidence that new believers can understand the Bible, our lack of confidence is really in the Holy Spirit. We are saying that the Holy Spirit is weak. Often those who de-emphasize the ability of the Holy Spirit to teach new believers overemphasize their own ability to teach the Bible. Consider this, if someone’s confidence in their own ability to teach the Bible is greater than their trust in the Holy Spirit to teach the Bible, this person is undoubtedly guilty of pride.
On the other hand, God has given Bible teachers, pastors, and scholars to the church (see Eph 4:11-13). The purpose of these people is to equip the body of Christ so that believers can directly approach God. Some passages of Scripture and some doctrines are harder to understand. It is beneficial to have godly men and women who can help believers grow in their understanding of the Scriptures. However, these leaders must not fall into the Catholic Church’s trap that persecuted Luther and Tyndale for translating the Bible! Every Christian leader should long for those under their leadership to be like the Bereans who took Paul’s teaching and carefully compared it to the Scriptures (Acts 17:11).
Therefore, as Muslims come to Christ, we must get the Bible into their hands. We must encourage them to read the Bible with prayer. As we do so, we can trust that the Holy Spirit will be their best teacher. As they study the Word, we should continue to disciple and mentor them with the hope that they will become wiser than us as they meditate on the Word of God (Psalm 119:99).
To get updates when new Systematic Theology lessons are posted, please subscribe to the No Cousins Left blog!
[1] In the definitions for the Authority of Scripture, the Inerrancy of Scripture, and the Sufficiency of Scripture, the term “Scripture” has been replaced by “the Bible” as seen in brackets. The reason is that the definitions could have been confusing from a perspective of Muslim-Christian conversation.
[2] I have modified Grudem’s definition. What is in the brackets was originally “will read it seeking God’s help and being willing to follow it” in Grudem.
Below, you can download a PDF of J. Waksom Pickett, Christian Mass Movements in India: A Study with Recommendations. New York: The Abingdon Press, 1933.
In December 1928, the National Christian Council of India, Burma, and Ceylon met in Chennai. During this Council, there was significant disagreement about mass movements to Christ in South Asia. Mass movements had been occurring in South Asia for hundreds of years through which thousands or tens of thousands of people were rapidly coming to Christ from a particular caste or tribe. Donald McGavran later called these “people movements.”
Dr. John R. Mott called the council to be cautious about rejecting these movements. Instead, he called for a study of these movements so that proper recommendations could be made. Therefore, in December 1928, the following resolution was unanimously adopted,
“The Council considers that as soon as possible a secretary should be appointed to initiate, in close consultation with Provincial Christian Councils, a study of the work in mass-movement areas and asks the executive to prepare proposals regarding the choice of such a secretary and the raising of funds, outside the regular budget of the Council, for his support.” (11)
Based on this resolution, J. Waksom Pickett was selected to study these mass movements and write up his findings. Pickett studied of five of these mass movements and wrote up recommendations. He concluded that these movements were not only from God but that missionaries should learn from these movements and actively seek God to start more similar mass movements. One of the five movements that Pickett studied was the Presbyterian movement in Sialkot, Punjab. This movement was the beginning of where most of the Pakistani Christian community began to come to Christ.
Download this important study here. Since this book is past its copyright and out of print, the PDF can be freely distributed.
This blog post is part of a series on Systematic Theology. The method of this series is to follow Wayne Grudem’s well-known Systematic Theology. This series also interacts explicitly with Systematic Theology with a view towards ministry to South Asian Muslims. These blog posts start with Grudem but are modified. I agree with Grudem’s two presuppositions, “(1) that the Bible is true and that it is, in fact, our only standard of truth; (2) that the God who is spoken of in the Bible exists, and that He is who the Bible says he is: the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them” (Grudem, 26). Each week, one interaction with South Asian Islam will also be noted. Click here for the audio teaching of this lesson.
This lesson begins a study on the four characteristics of Scripture: (1) Authority, (2) Clarity, (3) Necessity, and (4) Sufficiency. This post is the third of seven about the Word of God. God’s Word, the Bible, is foundational for the development of theology. Therefore, an understanding of the doctrine of the Word of God is our beginning place for theology.
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (1) Authority. “The authority of Scripture means that all the words of [the Bible][1] are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of [the Bible] is to disbelieve or disobey God” (Grudem, 73).
The Inerrancy of Scripture: Are there any errors in the Bible? “The inerrancy of Scripture means that [the Bible] in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact” (Grudem, 91).
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (2)Clarity. Can only Bible scholars understand the Bible rightly? “The clarity of Scripture means that the Bible is written in such a way that its teachings are able to be understood by all who will read it seeking God’s help and being willing to follow it” (Grudem, 108).
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (3) Necessity. For what purposes is the Bible necessary? How much can people know about God without the Bible? “The necessity of Scripture means that the Bible is necessary for knowing the gospel, for maintaining spiritual life, and for knowing God’s will, but is not necessary for knowing that God exists or for knowing something about God’s character and moral law” (Grudem, 116).
The Four Characteristics of Scripture: (4) Sufficiency. Is the Bible enough for knowing what God wants us to think or do? “The sufficiency of Scripture means that [the Bible] contained all the words of God he intended his people to have at each stage of redemptive history, and that it now contains all the words of God we need for salvation, for trusting him perfectly, and for obeying him perfectly” (Grudem, 127).
Grudem defines the authority of Scripture as, “The authority of Scripture means that all the words of the Bible are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of the Bible is to disbelieve or disobey God” (Grudem, 73). It is helpful to break down this statement for examination.
“All the words of the Bible are God’s Words.” While this statement sounds simple, there are several aspects of this statement deserving examination.
Jesus affirmed the Old Testament as Scripture. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass away from the law until all things are accomplished” (Matt 5:17-18).
Paul quoted Luke’s Gospel as Scripture. “For the Scripture says: Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain and the worker is worthy of his wages” (1 Tim 5:18). In this verse, Paul quoted Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7 as Scripture. Therefore, Paul affirmed Luke’s Gospel as Scripture.
Peter affirmed Paul’s letters as Scripture. “Also, regard the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our dear brother Paul has written to you according to the wisdom given to him. He speaks about these things in all his letters. There are some matters that are hard to understand. The untaught and unstable will twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Peter 3:15-16).
The book of Revelation concludes with a solemn warning about adding or removing anything from that book. “I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book. And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share of the tree of life and the holy city, which are written about in this book” (Rev 22:18-19). This solemn warning clearly indicates that Revelation is the Word of God.
(1) The books of the Bible come from authoritative sources, such as prophets and apostles.
(2) The books of the Bible all agree with one another. Sixty-six books by dozens of authors over 1,500 years in two languages that all agree with one another testify that God has given these books.
(3) The Bible is powerful. The life-changing power of the Bible shows that it is the Word of God. Many people have become convinced that the Bible is the Word of God as they read it and experience its power.
(4) The Bible has been received by the Word of God by billions of people throughout history. No other book in human history has been read by so many people in so many languages.
“All the words of the Bible are God’s Words.” It is essential to realize that all the words in the Bible are God’s words. Some people have made a mistake by saying that the Bible “contains” God’s word but is not God’s word. By this, they mean that parts of the Bible are the words of God, and other parts of the Bible are not the words of God.
“All Scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16a)
“Above all, you know this: No prophecy of Scripture comes from the prophet’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21).
The Qur’an claims that the Bible is the Word of God. Click here for another article on this topic. We do not hold that the Qur’an is the Word of God. However, for the sake of Muslim ministry, it can be helpful to study the verses of the Qur’an that say that the books of the Bible are the Word of God. Here are two of the most beneficial.
“And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Torah that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light. And confirmation of the Torah that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.” Qur’an 5:46
“If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise off those in doubt.” Qur’an 10:94
“To disbelieve or disobey any word of the Bible is to disbelieve or disobey God.” Perhaps the best section of Scripture for this point is Hebrews 3:7-4:13.
“Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says: Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion” (Hebrews 3:7-8a).
Hebrews 3:7b-11 is a quotation from Psalm 95:7-11. This passage in Psalm 95 is about the rebellion during the forty years in the wilderness in Numbers.
The phrase “Today, if you hear his voice” is repeated throughout this section (Heb 3:13, 15; 4:7). In the book of Hebrews, “his voice” means the voice of God in the person of Jesus (see Heb 1:2; 2:1-3). “Today” gives an immediacy to hearing the voice of God. The primary way that we hear the Word of God today is by reading the Bible. Therefore, this command is that as we read the Bible today, we must be careful not to harden our hearts!
Hebrews 3:17-18 describes a failure to hear and obey God’s word as disbelief and disobedience to God. “And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, if not to those who disobeyed? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief.” This passage shows the parallel between disbelief and disobedience. Because of their disbelief and disobedience, the people of God faced the judgment of God.
“So I swore in my anger, ‘They will not enter my rest’” (Heb 3:11). The result of the disobedience/disbelief of God’s people was that God would not permit them to enter into His rest. The rest of God is mentioned throughout this passage (Heb 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11). There are two meanings of “rest” in Hebrews 3:7-4:13
Rest as entry into the Promised Land (Heb 3:7).
Rest as entry into heaven. Hebrews 3:8-9 clarifies that there is a “rest” better than the one given through Joshua. The rest given through Joshua is a reference to the Promised Land.
Therefore, this passage means that if anyone hears God’s Word through Jesus that they have a choice to hear and obey or hear and disbelieve/disobey. If someone hears and obeys, then they will enter into God’s promised rest of heaven. If someone hears and disbelieves/disobeys, then they will fall short of entering into heaven.
The final two verses bring this passage back to a focus on Scripture. “For the word of God is living and effective and sharper than any double-edged sword, penetrating as far as the separation of soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. No creature is hidden from him, but all things are naked and exposed the eyes of him to whom we must give an account” (Heb 4:12-13).
In summary, when we read the Bible, we hear the voice of God. Every word of the Bible is the word of God spoken to us. When we hear God’s voice in Scripture, we have a choice to hear and believe/obey or to hear and disbelieve/disobey. “Let us then make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall into the same pattern of disobedience” (Heb 4:11).
To get updates when new Systematic Theology lessons are posted, please subscribe to this blog below.
[1] In the definitions for the Authority of Scripture, the Inerrancy of Scripture, and the Sufficiency of Scripture, the term “Scripture” has been replaced by “the Bible” as seen in brackets. The reason is that the definitions could have been confusing from a perspective of Muslim-Christian conversation.
Today, many Muslim leaders argue that the Bible is not the Word of God. However, this argument is not from the Qur’an or the Hadith. The idea that the Bible is not the Word of God is a later innovation (Arabic bid’ah) of Muslim leaders.[1] Since many Muslim leaders have passed down this “innovation,” many ordinary Muslims have come to believe this idea.
Before moving forward, we need to become slightly more technical in our language. The Qur’an never mentions the “Bible,” instead the Taurat, Zabur, and Injeel are written about in the Qur’an.
The Taurat is the Law of Moses, which is a reference to Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
The Zabur is the Psalms of David.
The Injeel is the Gospel of Jesus. The Qur’an is not clear about what books are in the Injeel.
There is not a single verse in the Qur’an or the Hadith that states that the Taurat, Zabur, or Injeel changed. In contrast, dozens and dozens of verses affirm these books as being true books from God.
Below are a few passages from the Qur’an that testify that the Taurat, Zabur, and Injeel are the Word of God. Before looking at these passages, please allow me to provide a word of wisdom. Followers of Jesus find truth in the Bible rather than the Qur’an. In this article, I will show that the Qur’an also shows that the Bible is true. However, the fact that the Qur’an testifies that the Bible is true has no meaning for me, since I do not believe that the Qur’an is a reliable witness. Moreover, I try not to use the Qur’an when sharing the gospel with Muslims. Instead, I use the Bible! Therefore, what is the value of this post? Truthfully, very little. The only way that I use these passages in the Qur’an is when I need to try to shake a Muslim friend to show them that they should read the Bible for themselves. When I do so, I try to be honest that I do not personally believe the Qur’an and do not personally give any weight to these verses.
“But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) Torah before them? – Therein is the (plain) Command of Allah; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith. It was We who revealed the Torah (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah’s Will, by the Rabbis and the Doctors of Law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Book, and there were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not me, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are Unbelievers.” Qur’an 5:43-44[2]
These two verses share several things about the Torah/Taurat:
The Torah is the command of God. “Therein is the (plain) Command of Allah.”
God revealed the Torah to Moses. “It was We who revealed the Torah (to Moses).”
The Torah contains guidance and light for our spiritual lives. “therein was guidance and light.”
God judged the Jewish people based on the Torah. “By its standard have been judged the Jews.”
If someone fails to adhere to God’s truth as revealed in the Torah, they are an unbeliever. “If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are Unbelievers.”
“And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Torah that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light. And confirmation of the Torah that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are those who rebel.” Qur’an 5:46-47
Here are a few things that these two verses say about the Gospel/Injeel:
God sent Jesus, the son of Mary. “We sent Jesus the son of Mary.”
Jesus came in the footsteps of Moses and the Prophets. “And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary.”
The Injeel confirms the Taurat, meaning that these two books agree with one another. “confirming the Torah that had come before him… And confirmation of the Torah that had come before him.” Today, both the Taurat and Injeel are in the Bible together since these books agree with one another.
God gave the Injeel. “We sent him the Gospel.”
The Injeel contains guidance and light for our spiritual lives. “therein was guidance and light.”
The Injeel admonishes us how to follow God. “a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.”
Followers of Jesus are commanded to judge right and wrong based on the Injeel. “Let the People of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein.” The Qur’an tells Christians to judge truth and error based on their study of the Injeel!
If anyone fails to judge by the Injeel (i.e., live by the Injeel), they are in rebellion against God. “If any do fail to judge by what Allah hath revealed, they are those who rebel.”
“If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise off those in doubt.” Qur’an 10:94
Qur’an 5:43-47 clearly stated that the Taurat and Injeel are books from God that contain guidance and light for our spiritual lives. The Qur’an claims that the Taurat and the Injeel agree with one another. The Injeel confirms the Taurat.
Qur’an 10:94 makes a similar claim, stating that if hearers of the Qur’an have any doubt that they should consult those “who have been reading the Book from before thee.” The Book in reference is clearly the Taurat, Zabur, and Injeel (i.e., the Bible). In other words, the Qur’an says that if anyone has questions about whether the Qur’an is valid, they should check the Qur’an against the Bible to make sure that the Qur’an is true. Therefore, Qur’an 10:94 bases the truth of the Qur’an on the validity of the Bible.
The great irony of Qur’an 10:94 is that the Qur’an and the Bible are widely understood not to be in unity. Therefore, the Qur’an fails its own test. Simply put, the Qur’an is self-defeating by tests of logic. Here are the logical syllogisms based on Qur’anic statements.
The Taurat and Injeel are true books from God (Qur’an 5:43-47).
If the Qur’an is true, then the Taurat and Injeel prove that it is true (Qur’an 10:94).
Therefore (logically), if the Qur’an is true, then it must agree with the Taurat and Injeel.
The Qur’an does not agree with the Taurat and the Injeel.
[1] In most schools of Islam, bid’ah (i.e., innovation) is considered wrong. Instead, Muslims are expected to understand and obey the Qur’an and Hadith.
[2] All Qur’anic references are from the English Translation of Abdullah Yusuf Ali.
Recently, a missionary colleague and I were discussing the question of when a Muslim becomes a Muslim-background believer (MBB). Before addressing this question directly, let me take a few minutes to describe two paradigms for approaching discipleship.
Bounded Sets. Bounded sets are “either/or” sets. Either someone is a follower of Jesus or is not a follower of Jesus. There are only two options. There is no “gray zone” on this issue according to the bounded set view. As way of analogy, Hiebert talks about apples. Either a piece of fruit is an apple or is not an apple. A banana or orange is not 50% apple. Instead, an orange is 0% apple!
Centered Sets. Bounded sets focus on process and see a great amount of gray zone. In the centered set view, following Jesus is at least a little fuzzy. Besides Jesus, no one has ever been the ideal disciple. Everyone is in process of becoming more and more like Jesus. In this view, if someone is 25% a follower of Jesus, the goal is to move them to 30 or 35% as they move towards the ideal.
There are strengths and weaknesses of both the bounded and centered set views. Here are a few of them.
Strength of Bounded Set Approach. On the day of judgement, people will be either in the kingdom or outside the kingdom. In Jesus’ words, they will either been sheep or goats (Matt 25:31ff). Therefore, it is important to define some sets of boundaries into which we are seeking to bring disciples.
Weakness of Bounded Set Approach #1. On the other hand, bounded sets often become difficult in missions. Consider an illiterate Muslim farmer who hears the gospel for the first time in South Asia. He repents and believes, saying that he wants to learn how to follow Jesus. But he does not have everything figured out in his faith, either in belief or practice. If we have a strict bounded set view, we would certainly saw that this man is outside. A bounded-set practitioner would see this man an evangelistic target and continue sharing the gospel with him. A centered-set practitioner would see this as a discipleship opportunity and would begin moving him towards Christ.
Weakness of Bounded Set Approach #2. A problem with bounded sets is that we need to define what is in and outside the bounded set. Through discussion and study, these restrictions become tighter and tighter. For example, consider the following questions:
What beliefs are necessary for a person to be a true MBB?
What practices are necessary for a person to be a true MBB?
What sins automatically put someone outside of being a true MBB?
Which biblical doctrines does a Muslim need to be able to understand and believe to enter the kingdom of God? The hypostatic union of Christ? The Trinity? The penal substitutionary atonement of Christ? These are core doctrines, yet often require time and discipleship to fully understand.
The weakness of this approach is that we can make the boundaries so high and detailed that it is virtually impossible for anyone to come to faith!
Strength of Centered Set Approach. In this paradigm, everyone is seen as being in process. The goal of this process is to continue to move them towards the center, which is the Lord Jesus. Everyone has a next step to take rather than the question merely being of whether someone is “in” or “out.” In fact, one major issue in modern evangelicalism is the bounded set view that anyone who has prayed the sinner’s prayer is “in.” The centered set does not get caught up in that debate but instead focuses on helping each believer to progress in Christ. As a result, most that use centered set approaches focus on developing processes to help individuals move from one place to the next.
Weakness of Centered Set Approach. One failure of centered set approaches is a tendency to overemphasize the fuzziness of discipleship. Some in centered sets are fine with people remaining in gray area in their faith since discipleship is seen as fuzzy. For example, a Muslim may follow Jesus while also perpetually following Muhammad.
In the centered set approach, movement towards the center naturally creates the desired boundaries. Hiebert wrote, “While the centred set does not place the primary focus on the boundary, there is a clear division between things moving in and those moving out. There is an excluded middle. An object either belongs to the set or it does not. However, the set focuses upon the centre and the boundary emerges when the centre and the relationships or movements of the objects have been defined. When the centre and relationships to the centre are stressed the boundary automatically falls into place.”
With this description of bounded versus centered sets, let us return to the question, “When does a Muslim become an MBB?” I personally lean towards a modified centered set practice. Our goal is to share the gospel with Muslims. When a Muslim chooses to repent and believe, declaring a desire to follow Jesus, then I call them an MBB, even if their theology and practice is not fully worked out. This perspective has been very helpful for us since many Muslims are ready to begin on the journey to follow Jesus but are in process. In an upcoming blog post, I will share a paradigm about the process I usually use to help Muslims and MBBs move towards Christ.
From a bounded-set perspective, we tend to give baptism when an MBB takes the more concrete steps of separating from the mosque, Qur’an, and Muhammad. At this point, we expect them to confess that Jesus is fully God.
In this way, we begin discipleship where a new believer is but we have a “bounded set” that we expect as they follow Jesus in baptism.
For additional reading.
Phil Parshall, Beyond the Mosque: Christians within Muslim Community. Grand Rapids: Baker House, 1985.
David Greenlee, ed., Longing for Community: Church, Ummah, or Somewhere in Between? Hyderabad: Authentic Media, 2013.
This post is a message I recently shared at a local church in South Asia. Subscribe to this blog to receive updates in your e-mail about No Cousins Left!
Secret believers are a common phenomenon in Muslim ministry. A few years ago, a friend and I were going village by village in a rural area looking for Muslims whose hearts were open to the gospel. Most people were resting in the heat of the day, but one man saw and invited us into his shop. Naseem was the village doctor and was curious about why we were there. My friend and I shared the gospel with Dr. Naseem, but he was not convinced. I left him with an Injeel (Urdu for the New Testament) and challenged him to read it. I did not expect ever to see Naseem again.
When I woke up the next morning, I saw that I had more than ten missed calls. All of them were from Dr. Naseem. He had been calling me from about 1-5 am, but my phone was on silent mode. When I called him, Dr. Naseem told me that he had not stopped reading the Injeel from the time I had left his shop. He had not eaten nor slept. I could tell that he was troubled on the phone. He told me that he knew that the Injeel was true and asked me, “What do I need to do?”
Unfortunately, Naseem was not willing to count the cost to follow Jesus fully. Naseem regularly goes to the mosque for prayer and has never worshipped with a group of Christians. He keeps his Bible secretly hidden and studies it when he has the chance. He has been unwilling to meet with Christians in his village. He has told me that he has not even told his wife that he believes the Bible is true. When I visit Dr. Naseem, we meet outside of his village, where his friends and relatives cannot see him studying the Bible.
The Story of Nicodemus
In the Gospel of John, we encounter a secret believer named Nicodemus. Nicodemus was part of the religious leadership of Jerusalem (John 7:50). He was a Pharisee (John 3:1), meaning that he was a religious teacher with significant knowledge about the Law of Moses (John 3:10). Being in the Sanhedrin, Nicodemus was in the room when Pharisees and chief priests met during Jesus’ life and ministry.
In John 3, we read Nicodemus’ encounter with Jesus. Nicodemus went to Jesus at night, no doubt, out of fear. He knew that the Pharisees were angry with Jesus and could not be seen consorting with the enemy. Nicodemus said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God, for no one could perform these signs you do unless God were with him” (John 3:2). Jesus famously responded, “Truly I tell you, unless someone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). Nicodemus left his encounter with Jesus realizing a need to be born again. Although he was a religious leader, he knew that he did not know God after meeting Jesus. A little later, Jesus left Judea to go into Galilee because the Pharisees had heard he was baptizing so many people (John 4:1). No doubt, Nicodemus was in meetings of the religious leaders when they tried to decide what to do with Jesus.
In John 7, Jesus returned to Jerusalem and began to teach during a major festival. In John 7:32, the chief priests and Pharisees sent men to arrest Jesus because the crowds started to wonder if He was the Messiah. However, these men did not stop Jesus. Instead, they returned to the Pharisees and said, “No man ever spoke like this!” (John 7:46). The Pharisees were angry and began to speak to one another against Jesus. In that meeting, Nicodemus stood up for Jesus, saying, “Our law doesn’t judge a man before it hears from him and know what he’s doing, does it?” (John 7:51) Nicodemus wanted to hear more from Jesus, while the rest of the Pharisees tried to silence Him. Nicodemus was probably thinking about his own spiritual need when he defended Jesus and his own desire for spiritual rebirth.
In John 9, the Pharisees attacked Jesus for healing a blind man on the Sabbath. A miracle like this caused a separation in the hearts and minds of the people in Jerusalem. Some used it as an opportunity to attack Jesus for breaking the Law of Moses. Others saw this miracle as a sign that Jesus had come from God. When Nicodemus first met Jesus, he said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God, for no one could perform these signs you do unless God were with him” (John 3:2). While the Pharisees attacked Jesus for this miracle, it moved Nicodemus closer to faith. However, Nicodemus was still not ready to fully follow Christ.
Now, before we condemn Nicodemus, we must realize that he was a broken man, a sinner, just like each of us. The Scriptures say that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Each of us has some hardness in our heart, like Nicodemus, and require repentance. What amazes me about the story of Nicodemus is God’s faithfulness towards this man. Jesus continued to perform signs and miracles for men like Nicodemus. Jesus taught publicly so that men like Nicodemus had many chances to hear the Word of God. He continued to provide opportunities for him to repent and believe. The story of Nicodemus reminds me of my friend, Dr. Naseem. I hope that Dr. Naseem’s story ends as well as Nicodemus’!
In John 11, Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. “So the chief priests and the Pharisees convened the Sanhedrin and were saying, ‘What are we going to do since this man is doing many signs?'” (John 11:47). Nicodemus was likely in that council. I am sure that Nicodemus’ heart was screaming, “We should repent and believe in Him” but his mouth remained silent.
Instead, Nicodemus sat silently in fear as the Jewish council conspired to put Jesus to death (John 12:10).
In John 18, the Pharisees found their opportunity to arrest Jesus. Judas Iscariot led a group of soldiers and religious leaders to Jesus at night. I wonder if Nicodemus joined that group to see what would happen or stayed home, awake all night knowing what was going on. After his arrest, Jesus was brought before the religious leaders of Jerusalem. Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin, would have been in that meeting. Again, Nicodemus stood silent as Jesus was mocked and beaten. Likely, Nicodemus was there when they brought Jesus to Pontius Pilate to stand trial. However, his fear continued to silence him. He was afraid of what his friends and neighbors would say if he stood up for Jesus. He was scared of arrest or death or persecution. Perhaps he would share the same fate as Jesus.
However, by the end of that day, something would change in Nicodemus’ heart. In John 19:38-42, we read,
38 After this, Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus — but secretly because of his fear of the Jews — asked Pilate that he might remove Jesus’s body. Pilate gave him permission; so he came and took his body away. 39 Nicodemus (who had previously come to him at night) also came, bringing a mixture of about seventy-five pounds of myrrh and aloes. 40 They took Jesus’s body and wrapped it in linen cloths with the fragrant spices, according to the burial custom of the Jews. 41 There was a garden in the place where he was crucified. A new tomb was in the garden; no one had yet been placed in it. 42 They placed Jesus there because of the Jewish day of preparation and since the tomb was nearby. (John 19:38-42)
Taking the body of Jesus and burying Him was not a secret event. Receiving the body of Jesus required standing before Pilate and requesting it. No doubt, all of the religious leaders were appalled that these two were honoring Jesus in this way. Who knows what persecution followed against these men! It was no secret that Nicodemus brought over 75 pounds of myrrh and aloes. 75 pounds of myrrh and aloes was a quantity fit for a king and a significant expense. Remember when Mary came and anointed Jesus with just a fraction of this amount that Jesus’ disciples were scandalized at the financial waste. Joseph and Nicodemus took great care of Jesus’ body. In this act of properly caring for Jesus’ body, these two men stood publicly in Christ for the first time.
What changed? Just hours earlier, Nicodemus cowered in fear because of the Pharisees. Now, he was willing to risk everything for his crucified Lord! There is only one thing that changed. Nicodemus witnessed the death of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross.
When Nicodemus saw Jesus on the cross, his life was changed. In Roman culture, many would have stood and watched Jesus slowly die a horrible death. The text does not tell us, but I imagine Nicodemus standing at a distance and watching Jesus die as the Spirit of God transformed his life. During that day, Nicodemus was born again. He realized that he was a sinner whose life was broken. He saw that He was far away from God. During that day, Nicodemus became a follower of Jesus.
John 19 through the Eyes of Nicodemus
Having set the scene, let us walk through John 19 and see what Nicodemus experienced. As we can see in Nicodemus’s life, it is a life-changing experience to reflect upon the death of our Lord Jesus. When we look upon the cross, we need to remember that this work of Jesus was necessary because of our sin. When we choose to sin, we dishonor the death of our Lord. Today, as we hear the story of the death of Jesus, I want to challenge you to take this opportunity to repent. If there is any secret sin in your life, make today the day that you turn away from it. If there is anger or bitterness in your life, bring it to the cross today. If your mind is filled with anxiety and worry, cast it upon our crucified Lord. If you are like Nicodemus and have always stood at the edge of the faith without repenting and believing, make today your day to give your life fully to Christ.
In John 19, Nicodemus stood outside of the government headquarters. They had been there since morning while Jesus stood trial before Pilate. Nicodemus could feel the anger in the others. His heart was conflicted about what to do.
1 Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged.
Pilate was the Roman governor over the Province of Judea. After arresting Jesus in the middle of the night, the Jewish religious leaders questioned Jesus at the high priest’s home. Early in the morning, they brought Jesus to stand trial before Pilate. They had already been there for hours while Pilate investigated what was happening and questioned Jesus. Pilate tried to release Jesus, but the Jewish religious leaders had chosen to free a revolutionary named Barabbas instead.
So, Pilate took another step to appease the Jewish leaders by having Jesus flogged. A flogging means that Roman soldiers savagely beat Jesus with a whip. It is most likely that this flogging was public. I imagine that Nicodemus winced every time he saw the whip strike our Lord. A flogging would not have meant one or two blows from the whip. The Jewish people often gave thirty-nine lashes during a flogging. The Romans often did even more! By the end of this event, Jesus was bloody and bruised.
2 The soldiers also twisted together a crown of thorns, put it on his head, and clothed him in a purple robe. 3 And they kept coming up to him and saying, “Hail, king of the Jews!” and were slapping his face.
The mockery of Jesus continued. Imagine how Nicodemus’ heart broke as he watched the crown of thorns pierce our Lord’s head, causing even more blood to run down His face. Nicodemus knew that Jesus was innocent! How could an innocent man be treated this way! They mocked Jesus and called Him “king of the Jews,” which was exactly who He was. Jesus is referred to as the King of the Jews eight times in John 19. Jesus’ only “crime” was that He was the Messiah who had come to save His people from their sins.
4 Pilate went outside again and said to them, “Look, I’m bringing him out to you to let you know I find no grounds for charging him.” 5 Then Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, “Here is the man!” 6 When the chief priests and the temple servants saw him, they shouted, “Crucify! Crucify!”
Pilate had no interest in killing Jesus. He seemed to hope that this savage beating would satisfy the anger of the Jewish religious leaders. I wonder if Nicodemus felt broken at this point. I wonder if he realized that Jesus was suffering as a payment for his sins and the sins of the whole world. This scene reminds me of a famous Urdu song.
Har zakhm jo uska hai, vo mere gunaah ka hai. (every wound that is applied to Him is because of my sin)
6b [To the crowd’s demands to crucify Jesus], Pilate responded, “Take him and crucify him yourselves, since I find no grounds for charging him.” 7 “We have a law,” the Jews replied to him, “and according to that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.”
In Matthew 26:63-64, the high priest told Jesus, “Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” Nicodemus would have been in that meeting and heard the high priest’s question of Jesus. Jesus answered the high priest, “You have said it. But I tell you, in the future you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven.” When he heard Jesus’ statement, the high priest tore his robes and declared Jesus a blasphemer. In that room, I wonder if Nicodemus wondered how a blasphemer could teach God’s word so powerfully. How could a blasphemer open the eyes of the blind? How could a blasphemer raise Lazarus from the dead?
8 When Pilate heard this statement, he was more afraid than ever. 9 He went back into the headquarters and asked Jesus, “Where are you from?” But Jesus did not give him an answer. 10 So Pilate said to him, “Do you refuse to speak to me? Don’t you know that I have the authority to release you and the authority to crucify you?” 11 “You would have no authority over me at all,” Jesus answered him, “if it hadn’t been given you from above. This is why the one who handed me over to you has the greater sin.”
Did you know that Jesus could have stopped His crucifixion right here? When Jesus was arrested, He said, “do you think that I cannot call on my Father and He will provide me here and now with more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matt 26:53) Our Lord Jesus willingly gave His life on the cross. Jesus had the authority and the power to stop this all. He is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. But Jesus knew that He needed to give His life for us. Hebrews 12:2 that for the joy before Him that Jesus endured the cross and despised the shame. This verse tells us that Jesus joyfully gave His life on the cross for us. His life was not taken! He gave Himself for our sins.
12 [After Pilate spoke to Jesus,] Pilate kept trying to release him. But the Jews shouted, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Anyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar!” 13 When Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus outside. He sat down on the judge’s seat in a place called the Stone Pavement (but in Aramaic, ‘Gabbatha’). 14 It was the preparation day for the Passover, and it was about noon. Then he told the Jews, “Here is your king!”
This trial had begun at the break of dawn and was still going at noon. Jesus had not slept nor eaten. He had been mocked, beaten, and stood before them in His crown of thorns and purple robes. Pilate tried to release Him. But the Jewish leaders were crafty. They knew that anyone claiming to be king was considered a rebellion against the Roman Empire. If word got back to Caesar that Pilate gave leniency to a man leading a rebellion, he would also be executed.
15 They shouted, “Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!”
Imagine Nicodemus during this scene. The other Jewish religious leaders were his friends and relatives. He had known them for many years. He respected and loved them. But during this scene, he did not know what to do. He saw Jesus, His King, mocked and beaten, an innocent man whom Nicodemus knew was the Messiah. But the Pharisees, who were Nicodemus’ friends and family, wanted Jesus dead. All around Nicodemus, they cried out, “Take Him away! Crucify Him!”
15b Pilate said to them, “Should I crucify your king?” “We have no king but Caesar!” the chief priests answered. 16 Then he handed him over to be crucified.
Each step along the way, Nicodemus’ heart broke more and more. A large crowd would have stayed and watched the crucifixion of our Lord. I imagine Nicodemus standing silently at a distance. I suspect that his heart was broken over his sin and hypocrisy. Despite being a religious leader, he was not close to God. He stood by silently, while the Messiah, God’s messenger, was being mocked and killed! Imagine Nicodemus watching the crucifixion at a distance while the Holy Spirit worked on transforming his life.
Today, I hope that the Holy Spirit is doing the same thing in your life. “Christ died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3). The only reason that Jesus suffered in this way is that each of us has sinned. Sin is when we choose to disobey God. When we remember the cross of Christ, we recognize that this is the saving power of Christ for our lives. Remember today that Jesus loves each of us right where we are. “God demonstrates His own love towards us that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). Jesus did not wait until we put our lives together. He died for us to make us right with God.
16b Then they took Jesus away. 17 Carrying the cross by himself, he went out to what is called Place of the Skull, which in Aramaic is called ‘Golgotha’. 18 There they crucified him and two others with him, one on either side, with Jesus in the middle. 19 Pilate also had a sign made and put on the cross. It said: Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews. 20 Many of the Jews read this sign, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. 21 So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Don’t write, ‘The king of the Jews,’ but that he said, ‘I am the king of the Jews.'” 22 Pilate replied, “What I have written, I have written.”
I wonder if Pilate wrote this on the sign merely to spite the Jewish religious leaders. However, I imagine Nicodemus starring at this sign all day long, knowing that Jesus was the king of the Jews. While this sign meant to mock our Lord Jesus, Nicodemus knew that it was true. During that day, Nicodemus repented. He turned away from his sins. He chose that day that Jesus was his Lord and King.
Similarly, each of us needs to repent when we hear this story. We need to turn away from our sins and follow Jesus. Every time we look at the cross of Christ, we gain this opportunity again. Every time we choose to repent and believe, we grow closer to Christ. This is the power of the Lord’s Supper. Our Lord Jesus gave us this simple act so that we would remember His death on the cross every time we take it. As we come to the cross, again and again in the Lord’s Supper, the Holy Spirit transforms our lives.
We will finish today by reading just one last paragraph of this story. Please go forward with me to verses 28-30.
28 After this, when Jesus knew that everything was now finished that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he said, “I’m thirsty.” 29 A jar full of sour wine was sitting there; so they fixed a sponge full of sour wine on a hyssop branch and held it up to his mouth. 30 When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished.” Then bowing his head, he gave up his spirit.
It is finished. The wrath of God the Father was fully satisfied. It is finished. The sins of the world were paid for in full. It is finished. The suffering of Christ was now finished. It is finished. The work of man’s redemption and salvation is now completed. It is finished. Jesus “erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it away by nailing to the cross” (Col 2:14). It is finished. Jesus “disarmed the rulers and authorities and disgraced them publicly; he triumphed over them at the cross” (Col 2:15). It is finished. By His work on the cross, Jesus “rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom [of God]” (Col 1:13). It is finished. “now he has reconciled you by his physical body through his death to present you holy, faultless, and blameless before him” (Col 1:22). It is finished. “For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift – not from works, so that no one can boast” (Eph 2:8-9). Jesus’ life was not taken from him. With joy, Jesus freely gave His life for us.
All of human history changed at this moment when Jesus bowed His head and gave up His Spirit. Nicodemus’ life also changed. He and Joseph of Arimathea boldly requested Jesus’ body. They gave Him the burial of a rich man. Nicodemus’ secret life went public. He chose to stand with His crucified Lord.
What about you? As you look to the cross today, what is Christ calling you to do? Are you standing on the edges, like Nicodemus? Today, commit yourself to the Lord. Look at what Jesus did for your salvation! Do you have a secret sin in your life? Look at what Jesus did for your sins! Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your heart! Cry out to God and ask Him to change your life. Go to a brother or sister today and ask for help in following Jesus. Is your heart filled with gratitude today as we remember what Christ has done? Go and proclaim Christ’s work on the cross! Like Dr. Naseem, there are multitudes who need to hear the good news of what Jesus did on the cross. Let us go and tell them.
I want to share an exciting announcement! No Cousins Left has launched its first E-Course to train others in how to make disciples and plant churches among the almost 600 million Muslims of South Asia.
This E-Course is self-paced, meaning that you can access each lesson at any time. This training consists of twelve lessons. It is recommended that you take no more than two lessons each week to allow time for the content to sink in. Each lesson will take about one hour to complete and includes a combination of videos, readings, and quizzes. There is no cost for taking this course.
Most lessons contain the following five topics:
Philosophy of Ministry. Brief videos about developing a strong biblical-theological foundation for ministry to Muslims. Some videos also compare and contrast with other philosophies of ministry.
Prayer for Pakistan. Learning about Pakistan and praying for Pakistan.
History of South Asian Islam. Readings about a historical figure or movement in South Asian Islam and how these historical figures or movements related to Muslim ministry.
Muslim Ministry Tools. Videos training basic ministry tools for ministry to South Asian Muslims.
Folk Muslim Rituals. Most Muslims in South Asia are strongly influenced by folk Islam. These readings reveal the worldview of folk Muslims by studying their rituals.
If you want to join this course, e-mail us at nocousinsleft@protonmail.com. We will send you a link to sign in to the course.
This blog post is part of a series on Systematic Theology. The method of this series is to follow Wayne Grudem’s well-known Systematic Theology. This series also interacts explicitly with Systematic Theology as related to ministry to South Asian Muslims. These blog posts follow Grudem but include significant modifications. The starting point of this study of Systematic Theology follows Grudem’s two presuppositions. “(1) that the Bible is true and that it is, in fact, our only standard of truth; (2) that the God who is spoken of in the Bible exists, and that He is who the Bible says he is: the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them” (Grudem, 26). Click here for the audio teaching of this lesson.
In this introduction to Systematic Theology, there are three primary questions:
What is systematic theology?
Why should Christians study systematic theology?
How should Christians study systematic theology?
What is Systematic Theology?
“Systematic theology is any study that answers the question, ‘What does the whole Bible teach us today’ about any given topic” (Grudem, 21). A doctrine is what the whole Bible teaches about a given topic (Grudem, 25).
The best way to understand systematic theology is to compare it with other methods of studying the Bible and theology. Systematic theology is the second of four parts of a process of developing practical theology.[1]
Analytical Biblical Theology is the process of understanding individual books of the Bible or passages. The foundation for good systematic theology is a rigorous study of separate books of the Bible to understand what they teach. Our goal here is to learn what the authors of Scripture meant in their original context.
Synthetic Biblical Theology or Systematic Theology compares and contrasts different passages and books to answer what the whole Bible teaches on a particular subject. Systematic Theology usually only answers the question of what the Bible meant in its original context. The good news is that what was true when the Bible was written is true today. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). Whatever the Bible teaches about God, Jesus, salvation, and other subjects is as true today as it was in the first century.
Hermeneutics is the bridge that brings together what the Bible meant when it was originally written with what it means for practical ministry today. In point #2, I noted that the truth about God does not change. Since the Scriptures teach that God is all-powerful and all-knowing, we know that God is all-knowing and all-powerful today. Since Scripture teaches that salvation is by grace through faith, we know that this is also true today. However, theology needs to be applied in many practical ways. The contexts of our lives are different than the times when Scripture was originally written. Therefore, we must go through a process of interpreting how to live out Scripture today.
Practical Theology is how to live out Scripture today. Practical Theology has many different aspects, such as missiology, ecclesiology, apologetics, and ethics.
Three Reasons Christians Should Study Theology
To gain the ability to respond to Muslim questions and objections. Many Christians have difficulty answering Muslim objections to the faith because they lack a foundation in their own faith. For example, if a Christian has a poor understanding of the Trinity, how can they defend this doctrine against Muslim objections? Those in Muslim ministry have a significant advantage in studying theology. Often encounters with different faiths become an excellent opportunity to strengthen our own understanding of what the Bible teaches.
To overcome false doctrines in the South Asian churches. Unfortunately, some churches in every part of the world are drawn away into false teaching and beliefs. This phenomenon is not unique to South Asia, but it is present in South Asia. Some examples of false teaching in South Asia include the prosperity gospel, Oneness Pentecostalism, and liberation theology. These false teachings are often attractive when we lack strong biblical foundations. Various cults, such as Jehovah’s Witness and Mormons, have found their way into South Asia. Studying theology helps us think clearly about how to respond appropriately to these groups.
To help us think clearly about God and doctrine. All of us practice theology, meaning that every person has ideas about God and what is true. The act of studying theology provides a process to ensure that the study of theology is done well. It is inherently a good thing to understand God well. As we understand Him, our hearts turn towards Him in worship! Right thinking about God guides us in walking rightly in the world. Likewise, the study of various doctrines guides us to think clearly about doctrines such as sin, angels, or prayer. While understanding does not necessarily lead to obedience, it helps us walk rightly with God.
Four Ways Christians Should Study Systematic Theology
With Bible Study. Like the Bereans (Acts 17:11), we should go straight to Scripture when hearing teaching to learn from the Word whether or not it is true. Before embarking on a study of systematic theology, it is necessary to have a deep knowledge of God’s Word.
With Prayer. The Spirit guides us into all truth (John 16:13). Any pursuit of truth must begin with prayer and be bathed in prayer.
With Humility. “Knowledge puffs up” (1 Cor 8:1). Remember that “God has chosen what is foolish in the world” (1 Cor 1:27). Too often, a study of theology leads to pride, much like the Pharisees of the New Testament. Their pride led to an outward religion that lacked an inward spirituality. We must approach a study of theology with soft hearts, eager to learn from God and others. As God teaches us, we should seek to grow in love and humility, rather than pride.
With Others. Studying theology with others protects us from false belief. If we hold a view that is contrary to other Christians that we respect, then we should humbly dialogue with them and have an openness in our hearts that we are the ones requiring correction.
Islamic Theology vs. Christian Theology
Islamic theology and Christian theology differ in their presuppositions. This theological study is built on two presuppositions. Here they are compared to Islamic presuppositions.
Christian Presuppositions
Islamic Presuppositions
1. The Bible is true and is the only standard of truth.
1. The Qur’an is true and is the primary standard of truth.
2. The God who is spoken of in the Bible exists. He is who the Bible says He is, the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them.
2. The God who is spoken of in the Qur’an exists. He is who the Qur’an says he is, the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them.
While these presuppositions are almost identical, the change from the Bible to the Qur’an as the standard of truth leads to very different theological conclusions. In reality, a third presupposition should be added here about the importance of Jesus in Christian theology versus Muhammad in Islamic belief. I
t is not surprising that a large portion of disagreements between Christians and Muslims center on debates of whether the Bible or the Qur’an is the Word of God. I hope to write more blog posts on that subject.
In South Asian Islam, it is also helpful to know how most Muslims relate Qur’anic teaching to practical living. In Islam, there are four major schools of teaching/jurisprudence (Ar. fiqh). Each of these schools of Islamic thought approach Scripture in different ways. In South Asia, the primary approach is called Hanafi, which comes from Abu Hanifa (d. 767 AD) of Persia. About a third of Muslims in the world are Hanafi, making this the most common fiqh. In South Asia, the Deobandis, Barelvis, Tablighi Jamaat, Sufis, and most others are Hanafi. In contrast, Zakir Naik and some other movements are Salafi, which is heavily opposed to Hanafi Islam.
In simple terms, Hanafi fiqh permits integrating local practices into Islam (e.g., dargahs). Hanafi fiqh is one reason folk practices are so common in South Asian Islam. Here are the sources of authority in Hanafi Islam listed in descending degrees of authority.
The Qur’an is the highest authority.
The Hadith is the secondary authority. Zakir Naik and other Salafis reject any authorities past this point.
Qiyas. A qiyas is a deductive analogy based on the Qur’an and Hadith. The original jurists, such as Abu Hanifa, wrote the apply the Qur’an and Hadith to issues not addressed in the Qur’an and Hadith. To do so, they used deductive reasoning (i.e., qiyas). The writings of these ancient jurists are foundational today for Islamic theology and practice. How Abu Hanafi interpreted and applied the Qur’an is considered by most to be authoritative in South Asia.
Ijtihad. An Ijtihad is the independent reasoning of a Mufti in response to a particular question. Usually, an ijtihad is a significant literary work. A good example in South Asia would be Ahmad Raza Khan Bareilvi’s writings on Muhammad existing as pure light from the beginning of creation. Khan’s writings on this subject have become a source of authority within the Barelvi movement.
Today, most Muslims in South Asia resolve their theology questions by asking for fatwas by Muftis. A Mufti is a highly educated Islamic scholar. Muslims will regularly write questions to these Muftis and ask for legal judgments (i.e., fatwas). For example, recently, some Muslims asked whether it is permissible to use alcoholic hand sanitizer during the Covid pandemic. Deobandi muftis wrote a fatwa calling this halal (Arabic for “permitted”) since no alcohol would be imbibed. The type of alcohol in hand sanitizer is different from that in alcoholic drinks. Likewise, they said it is permissible to sanitize mosques with alcoholic sanitizer. These Deobandi muftis based their opinions on all of the relevant information from the sources of authority above. The writing of fatwas like these also becomes another source of authority in South Asian Islamic practice. Often different schools of South Asian Islam write fatwas directly in contradiction of one another, especially the Deobandi and Barelvi schools.
For Christians ministering among Muslims, it isn’t easy to navigate all of these sources of authority. However, most Muslims in South Asia are likewise ignorant of these books. Most have never read the Qur’an or Hadith, much less these other writings. Also, most South Asian Muslims believe that the Qur’an should only be read in Arabic. Since most South Asian Muslims do not read Arabic, they are, in essence, cut off from their primary source of authority. Instead, their religious leaders are their source of authority.
Compared to the layers of Islamic authority, studying and applying the Bible to our lives is relatively simple. While we value studying Scripture in its original Greek (New Testament) and Hebrew (Old Testament), we believe that God can speak to us through His Word in translated languages. The reasons that we think this will become clear in the next few weeks as we study the doctrine of Scripture.
[1] Please note that this process is different than what Grudem describes.
“What you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, commit to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”
2 Timothy 2:2 (CSB)
I am embarking on a theological education course with my disciples that will take a little over a year. Next week, I plan to begin teaching through Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology. I will make a weekly audio recording of these teachings, which I plan to upload to YouTube. I intend that each recording will cover one chapter. However, some chapters (such as the Person of Christ) will undoubtedly take more than one week. After I upload this recording, I will meet with a core of disciples to discuss this teaching. Each week, these brothers intend to make a recording in Urdu on the same subject. In this blog post, I am sharing why I am embarking on this process.
When the apostle Paul wrote 2 Timothy, he was preparing to die at the Roman government’s hands. He wrote to Timothy, his “dearly loved son” (1:2), calling him to Rome to give him final instructions before his death.
Throughout 2 Timothy, Paul emphasizes the passing of his teaching and his apostolic mission to Timothy. 2 Timothy was a succession letter. As Paul prepared to die, Timothy and others would take up his mission to the Gentiles. As Paul modeled, they would pioneer new places with the gospel, make disciples, and establish new churches.
One aspect of Timothy’s succession was a continuation of Paul’s teaching through Timothy. In 2 Timothy 1:13-14, Paul admonished Timothy,
“Hold on to the pattern of sound teaching that you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit through the Holy Spirit who lives in us.”
God entrusted this deposit to Paul (1:12). Through years of service together, Paul impressed his “teaching, conduct, purpose, faith” to Timothy (3:11). In 2 Timothy 1:13-14, Paul called on Timothy to continue in this teaching. Then in 2 Timothy 2:2, Paul commanded Timothy to continue to give that trust to others. Just as Paul developed other leaders, including both missionaries and pastors, Timothy was to do the same. In this way, the Pauline mission would continue and grow. Entrusting this teaching to others was one way that Timothy guarded the good deposit he received from Paul.
Paul’s mentorship of Timothy is a picture of our vision. An essential part of the missionary task is to develop more missionaries, just as Paul developed Timothy. To reach the Muslims of South Asia, we need to build local missionaries who can continue the core missionary task among Muslims. In training local workers, I need to explain where I see theological education like this and where it fits in the process.
Here is our current discipleship plan for when a new Muslim-background believer chooses to follow Jesus. It is in three steps.
We teach the 7 Commands by helping new disciples first memorize the Bible story. Some can read the story for themselves, but many new believers are illiterate and require significant repetition to remember. After they learn the story, we ask four basic Bible study questions:
What do we learn about God?
What do we learn about people?
Is there anything we should stop doing?
Is there anything we should start doing?
The 7 Commands’ goal is to help new believers become obedient to the basic actions of the Christian life. As we teach these 7 Commands, we follow a pattern to help them grow in obedience. We begin each meeting by asking them how they obeyed the previous teachings. Then we teach the next command. Third, we make a concrete plan about how to obey the new command. In this way, we can help new believers become obedient to follow Jesus over their first month in Christ. At the end of this process, these believers are regularly studying the Word, praying, loving their families and neighbors, sharing the gospel, and meeting with others.
Second, after the Seven Commands, we continue to pour in Bible knowledge. We usually do this by teaching book-by-book through Scripture. The Gospel of Matthew is a typical go-to book after a Muslim first follows Jesus. During this time, the new believer continues to walk out the 7 Commands and make disciples of others, while growing in the Word.
Third, the formation of local churches is always the goal! Local churches are where long-term discipleship and teaching continues. Some new believers will emerge as leaders and desire more long-term training and instruction to grow as missionaries or pastors. This systematic theology course fits within this last category.
Therefore, this Systematic Theology course is designed and aimed at a particular group of believers. It is for those who are already doing the Great Commission among Muslims. This course is not basic discipleship but rather a next step for developing faithful partners in the work.
Friends and coworkers send me biblical questions on a fairly regular basis. Some of these questions are helpful for others as well. So, as I have a chance, I will put my answers here as well.
This morning, a colleague asked me, “How old do you think Timothy was when he started with Paul and at the writing of 1 Timothy? I’m seeing most people say he got picked up between the age 16-21 and was somewhere between 30-40 when he received 1 Timothy. Are there any textual clues so that we can know?”
There are three things that help us known Timothy’s age: (1) the Pauline chronology as it relates to Acts 16:1-3 and 1 Timothy and (2) 1 Timothy 4:12 where Paul commanded Timothy, “Don’t let anyone despise your youth” (CSB), and (3) indications from Acts 16:1 and Roman culture about the minimum age Timothy could have been when he joined Paul’s team.
The Pauline Chronology
The dates here follow my Chronology of the New Testament. Click here to go to that blog post. In that chronology, Paul received Timothy on his team in 49-50 AD. This event occurred in Acts 16:1-3 when Paul picked up Timothy from Lystra. Then Paul wrote 1 Timothy in 64-65 AD. For this date, I assume that Paul had a first Roman imprisonment during which he wrote Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, and Philemon. After the captivity described in Acts, Paul was released and had another period of ministry, during which time he wrote 1 Timothy and Titus. Then Paul was arrested again. During this second arrest, Paul wrote 2 Timothy shortly before his death.
Therefore, for determining Timothy’s age, we can assume that he had been a companion of Paul for about fifteen years by the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy to him.
1 Timothy 4:12 and Timothy’s Youthfulness
Paull called Timothy a “youth” in 1 Timothy 4:12. We should ask ourselves what the Greek term for “youth” meant in the context of the ancient Roman world. The Greek term is neotes, which is a cognate of the Greek term neophyte. The only other times that that neotes occurs in the New Testament is in reference to the rich young ruler who claimed to follow God’s commands “from my youth” (Mark 10:20; Luke 18:21) and Paul who referred to “my manner of life from my youth” in his defense before Agrippa (Acts 26:4).
Here are two clues from ancient texts that show how youth was understood in Roman times.
“The Relics of the Elders that states “But that the age of thirty years is the prime of a young man’s ability, and that it reaches even to the fortieth year, every one will allow.”[1]
Irenaeus’ (c. 130-202 AD) Against Heresies referred to Jesus as a youth *Gr. neophytes). “On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onwards to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age” (2.2.5).
In these texts, a thirty-year-old man is at the peak of his youth. A man can also be considered a youth until the age of forty. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that Timothy was up to forty years old when receiving 1 Timothy.
How young could Timothy have been in Acts 16?
Another question that we should ask is how young Timothy could have been when Paul took him along as a companion in Acts 16:1-3. Here are two indications from ancient Roman culture.
Youth in their teens (or younger) were often given as apprentices to learn trades to begin earning for their families. For example, Lucian (c. 125-180) wrote about the family decision to have him become an apprentice to a sculptor. He wrote, “As soon as I finished elementary school, since I had now reached my teens years, my father discussed with his friends what training he should now give me. To most of them, higher education seemed to require much labor, considerable time, no small expense and an illustrious position, while our family fortunes were small and needed some quick assistance.”[3] Thus, as a teenager, Lucian was sent away from his home to become an apprentice to a sculptor.
In the same way, Paul was taking Timothy along as an apprentice missionary. From a cultural perspective, it is not unreasonable that his parents would have sent him away with Paul as a teenager.
However, there are a few textual clues that indicate a minimum age for Timothy as well.
Timothy was literate. We know this since he was listed as a co-author of six of Paul’s letters. It is doubtful that Paul provided this education. Therefore, it is likely that Timothy had significant education before he joined Paul’s team. In the first century, literacy was not assumed. To be helpful as a co-author of the epistles means that Timothy had more than a basic education.
The believers in Lystra and Iconium spoke well about Timothy (Acts 16:1). This means that Timothy received a commendation from these local churches as being a good candidate to join Paul’s team. The fact that the churches in two cities spoke well of Timothy is significant. These two cities were 60 miles apart. The fact that believers of both cities spoke well of him as a potential missionary apprentice implies that he had travelled back and forth and had probably played some local ministry role before joining Paul’s team.
Summarizing all of these indications from the text and from ancient Roman culture, it is very doubtful that Timothy was younger than sixteen when he joined Paul’s team. Considering the fact that he was known in both Lystra and Derbe and may have been involved in local ministry makes it seem likely that he was older than sixteen.
Conclusion
We have three pieces of information.
Timothy had been traveling with Paul for fifteen years by the time he received 1 Timothy.
In 1 Timothy 4:12, Timothy was referred to as a youth. This means that he was probably younger than forty when he received this letter.
It is doubtful that Timothy was younger than sixteen when he joined Paul’s team.
Considering these three pieces of information, the most likely age ranges are that Timothy was 16-24 when he joined Paul’s team and 31-39 when he received 1 Timothy.
Why is this significant? This means that Paul modeled the power of missionaries taking young men onto their teams to train. Over years, Paul poured his life into Timothy. By the time he wrote 2 Timothy, Paul was ready to give his entire ministry to Timothy. Paul was willing to give substantial authority and responsibility to a young man who had good character when he joined Paul’s team. This is a great example for us today for leadership development.
[1] See William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles Word Biblical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 258. I have been unable to locate the ancient source, The Relics of the Elders that Mounce referenced.
[2] Jo-Ann Shelton, As the Romans Did: A Sourcebook in Roman Social History. Second Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 31.
“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavens.”
Ephesians 6:12 (NASB)
This post is part three of three posts on Spiritual Warfare in Ephesians. Click here for Part one. Click here for part two.
Ephesians 6:10-20 is the most comprehensive teaching on spiritual warfare in Ephesians. Let us look at six keys to spiritual warfare from this text. Three of these keys were in a previous post. Here are the final three.
Put on the full armor of God. God has provided what we need for this fight. However, it is our responsibility to use what He has already given us. Here is a list of the armor of God:
Loins girded with the truth (6:14).
The breastplate of righteousness (6:14).
Feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace (6:15).
The shield of faith (6:16).
The helmet of salvation (6:17).
The sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (6:17).
Each of these pieces of armor is symbolic of our spiritual lives. We do not actually have a breastplate of righteousness. However, walking in righteousness protects us in spiritual warfare just as a breastplate protects a soldier. This means that if we have sin in our lives, we leave ourselves vulnerable to the enemy. One of our most potent tools in spiritual warfare is genuine repentance. Consider Hezekiah, who “tore his clothes, covered himself with sackcloth and entered the house of the Lord” when the Assyrian army reached Jerusalem (2 Kings 19:1). Hezekiah took the enemy’s letter to the temple and spread it before the Lord, acknowledging that God was the true King” (2 Kings 19:14-15). God answered Hezekiah’s repentance by sending the angel of the Lord to strike down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers, decimating their army (2 Kings 19:35).
Likewise, the shield of faith’s purpose is “to extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one” (Eph 6:16). We trust in God that He can protect us and defend us. If our faith grows weak, our first step is to stop and seek Him. Abiding in Christ by faith and righteousness are some of our greatest spiritual weapons in this battle.
I once heard a sermon on spiritual warfare that there are two types of Christians. One type are Christians who face a spiritual problem and then need to go get on their spiritual armor. They are not regularly in the Word and prayer. Perhaps there is sin in their life. Their feet are not daily shod with the preparation to share the gospel. When these Christians face spiritual problems, they have to first go and draw close to Christ. They need to repent and rebuild disciplines of prayer and Bible study.
In contrast, other Christians daily stand in Christ. They are regular in Bible study and prayer. They are filled with faith and walking in righteousness. When a spiritual attack comes against these Christians, they are immediately ready to respond. Paull was this second type. When they beat him and locked him up in Philippi, his heart was so full of Jesus that he and Silas spent the night praying and worshipping. The Lord answered with an earthquake (Acts 16:25-26). Let us also strive to follow the example of Paul. The first step is to simply walk with Christ every day and be filled up with Him. In other words, put on the full armor of God.
Our struggle is not against flesh and blood. Sometimes, when we face persecution or spiritual problems, we can begin to see people as our enemy rather than the spiritual forces of darkness. It would have been easy for Paul to see the guards and the Roman government as his opponents, but he did not. He viewed his imprisonment as an opportunity to proclaim the gospel, both to the guards (Phil 1:15) and government leaders while on trial (2 Tim 4:16-18).
In today’s rationalistic age, we often see spiritual issues as the last potential answer. For example, if we become sick, we often turn to earnest prayer and fasting only after exhausting medical solutions. My wife and I are a good picture of this dichotomy. Once, we were traveling in the Middle East. One of our travel companions was detained by the police at the airport. My first instinct was how to find a phone and figure out who we needed to call to help our friend. My wife’s first instinct was to pray. Clearly, my wife was the one who acted wisely.
This point is especially true when we consider Muslims and Islam. Many people have come to see Muslims as their enemy. They see Muslims as an evil invading force that must be stopped. Others take a more nuanced view that sees the majority of Muslims as peace-loving people and only a minority of Muslims who practice an aberration of radical Islam as the enemy.[1] According to Paul, no Muslims are our enemy. Our struggle is not against flesh and blood.
Instead, I have grown to see Muslims as people for whom Jesus has died. Muslims are in bondage to Islam. Islam is a system that holds captive almost two billion people around the world. Every Muslim is created in God’s image. God loves them and created them to know Him. Muslims are not our enemy. Instead, they are victims of the spiritual forces of darkness who are deceiving them. Like Paul, we should not fight against Muslims, but instead, pray for them and ask God to allow us to make the gospel known to them.
Pray. After admonishing the Ephesians to put on the full armor of God and to stand, Paul called them to prayer. In a prayerless state, the gospel will not advance against the spiritual powers of darkness. Sometimes a dichotomy is seen between two types of spiritual leaders. One has a brilliant strategy, but little prayer. He spends his days devising better and better plans. But he lacks the spiritual power and vitality to overcome the spiritual forces holding people in bondage. The other has little strategy but is mighty in prayer. The second person is preferable to the first. However, it is best if the strategist and the prayer warrior are brought together.
In the body of Christ, the strategist and the prayer warrior work together to advance the gospel. This is not an excuse for the strategist to be weak in prayer. In fact, his best strategy will come as he abides in Christ and is guided by Him. After all, God’s Word says that He chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise (1 Cor 1:27). God does not need our wisdom and insight. However, as we abide in Him, we pray that God will show us the strategy that He desires. In Paul, we are given a model of a man who was both a prayer warrior and a strategist. Let us follow his example in making disciples of all nations.
[1] It is certainly my experience that the average Muslim in South Asia simply wants to live in peace. They want the opportunity to help their children get good educations to get good jobs and live a stable life, and meaningfully contribute to society.
“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavens.”
Ephesians 6:12 (NASB)
This post is part two of three posts on Spiritual Warfare in Ephesians. Click here for Part one.
Ephesians 6:10-20 is the most comprehensive teaching on spiritual warfare in Ephesians. Let us look at six keys to spiritual warfare from this text. Three of these keys are in this post and three will be in the next post.
Keep first things first. Focus on proclaiming the gospel and making disciples just as Paul did when he went to Ephesus. Be ready to deal with spiritual warfare as it comes. In the armor of God of Ephesians, there is only one weapon, “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (6:17). Paul’s purpose was to make the gospel known everywhere for everyone. The first step in spiritual warfare is to simply “Go and make disciples.” In this way, I have heard of spiritual warfare being likened to mosquitos. We do not go out looking to fight with mosquitos; instead, we deal with them as they come. In the same way, we do not go hunting for spiritual forces. Instead, we focus on our commission from the Lord and deal with spiritual forces if they seek to impede our mission.
Paul models an emphasis on proclamation well in this passage. From jail in Rome, his prayer request was not for release from imprisonment nor provision nor comfort. Instead, he wrote, “pray on my behalf, that utterance may be given to me in the opening of my mouth, to make known with boldness the mystery of the gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains; that in proclaiming it I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak” (6:19-20). Paul kept the first things first, despite his circumstances. He focused on making the gospel known to those who had not heard. Let us also follow his example.
Stand. In this passage, the command “Stand” is given three times (6:11, 13, 14). This passage’s primary picture is of a phalanx of soldiers standing in formation together against their enemy. In battle, the goal is to be the last group standing. Boxing provides a good picture of us. The boxer who falls down for ten seconds loses. However, if they continue to get up and stand, the fight continues. In the same way, goal #1 of spiritual warfare is to continue to stand in Christ.
Again, Paul provides a beautiful model for us. Indeed, the spiritual forces of darkness were seeking to trouble Paul. He had faced beatings, shipwrecks, and every possible danger. When he wrote this letter, he had been in jail for years. Yet he stood in Christ. The enemy could not knock him down. Despite his external circumstances, Paul stood firm in his faith. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul noted that his imprisonment led to the gospel spreading faster (Phil 1:12-14)!
Please permit me to share an analogy from the Rocky movies. In those movies, Rocky continued to get up no matter what happened. By the end of each film, he had been severely beaten. His opponents were likewise beaten down. Rocky was simply the one who outlasted his opponent. When we consider the apostle Paul, he was like Rocky. He was knocked down continuously through various attacks and troubles. However, he continued to stand up. In spiritual warfare, follow Paul’s example. Stand firm!
Stand together. One of the most common misperceptions about Ephesians 6:10-17 is that it is an individual’s activity. However, the text clarifies that standing in spiritual warfare is best done as the body of Christ stands together. One reason for this misperception is that English only has one word for “you,” while Greek has two. In Greek, there is a different form for a singular “you” and a plural “you.” In this passage, Paul often uses something we call a collective singular. Let me give you an example. “Put on the full armor of God” sounds in English like something an individual should do. However, an interpretive translation to bring out the collective singular would be like this, “You all put on the single full armor of God.” In the text, “full armor of God” is singular, meaning there is one armor. “You all” are told to put it on. In fact, every command in this passage is best read as a group undertaking this activity together. You all put on the breastplate of righteousness. You all shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace. You all take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit.
We make a mistake when we believe that we need to stand alone in spiritual warfare. God has made us all together as the body of Christ. Again, the picture of this passage is of a group of soldiers standing together against their enemy. A single solder, by themselves, standing against an advancing force is vulnerable. It is difficult for them to stand. Therefore, soldiers are trained to fight together. In the same way, the body of Christ is called to stand and fight together. From jail in Rome, Paul called the Ephesian believers to join in his spiritual fight by prayer (6:18-20). Likewise, Paul labored in prayer for the Ephesians (1:15-23; 3:14-19).
“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavens.”
Ephesians 6:12 (NASB)
I remember my first visit to Kaliyar Sharif dargah in Uttarkhand, India. The Muslim saint, Alauddin Ali Ahmed Sabir Kalyari (d. 1291 AD), buried there is reputed to have power over demons. When Muslims in that area believe that a family member is demon-possessed, they often bring that family member to this saint’s tomb. Often, they even bind them with shackles, just like the man that Jesus freed from the legion of demons (Mark 5:1-20).
The Kaliyar Sharif dargah, like most dargahs, is a cluster of tombs of deceased Sufis. A colony has now emerged in the country around these tombs with hotels, restaurants, and shops. Every day, thousands of people come to these tombs, seeking blessings and miracles from the saints, who are still believed to be active from their graves. Inside the colony is the dargah itself. Everyone removes their shoes before entering. Shops line this inner area, selling topis, shawls, images, and other items that people buy to use in the tomb. A common activity is to buy something at a shop and bring it into the dargah. They believe it will absorb some of the place’s spiritual power (Urdu barkat) so that they can bring some of the tomb’s power home with them.
As you go past those shops, you reach a crowded courtyard. At the center of this courtyard is the actual tomb, usually inside of a small building. Muslim spiritual leaders, called pirs, take donations, pray for visitor’s needs, and make protective amulets, like tawiz, for those who come.
The first time I stepped into the courtyard, I was immediately almost knocked down by a woman rolling on the ground. I jumped out of the way before realizing that two women were writhing on the floor. Their hands were bound with shackles. A pir stood over them, authoritatively yelling in tongues.[1] Shocked, I began to pray, wondering what kind of spiritual darkness I had wandered into.
Islam can be understood as a spiritual shackle that holds Muslims in bondage. As Paul shared in Ephesians 6:12, our fight is not with Muslims (i.e., “not with flesh and blood) but against the spiritual forces of darkness that hold Muslims in bondage. Much like the women shackled in that tomb, many Muslims are held as spiritual slaves to Islam. It is our calling to emancipate them from this darkness.
The book of Ephesians is an excellent place to look for biblical counsel on what to do when we encounter spiritual darkness. Ephesus was home to the great temple of Artemis of the Ephesians (Acts 19:23-41). When Paul began his ministry in Ephesus, he started by sharing the gospel and making disciples (Acts 19:1-10). He did not start with a strategy of spiritual warfare. He was spiritually ready to stand in Christ when spiritual attacks came (Acts 19:11-20). The result was that “the word of the Lord was growing mighty and prevailing.”
A few years after pioneering the gospel in Ephesus and planting churches there, Paul wrote a letter from prison to these believers. Paul showed them that God was building a temple in which he would dwell (Eph 2:19-22). This temple would be grander than the temple of Artemis of the Ephesians since Christ was seated at God’s right hand as the one who fills everything in every way (Eph 1:20-23). Throughout Ephesians, there are references to spiritual forces at work in the world (1:21; 2:2; 3:10; 6:12). Paul told the Ephesians, “you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord” (Eph 5:8). He then admonished them not to “participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness” (5:11). The Ephesians had previously been in bondage to these spiritual forces of darkness (Eph 6:12) but now had been saved by God’s grace (Eph 2:1-9).
Subscribe below to be updated to receive regular updates from No Cousins Left!
[1] By tongues here, I mean that he was speaking in an unknown language similar to some interpretations of the biblical gift of tongues. It is possible that he was speaking in a language that I do not know. He was not speaking the languages of that area of India.
Today, I am reading Sayyid Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi’s short book, Muslims in India. Nadwi (1914-1999), often known as Ali Miyan, was a renowned Islamic scholar from Lucknow who wrote over fifty books. He was considered a key leader in the Deobandi and Tablighi Jamaat movements. As I read, I am amazed at some of the blinders that he has in this book that prevented him from seeing his own prejudice.
Nadwi wrote that Indian Muslims have a “natural awareness of human dignity and equality” (61). He then elaborated that “Things like social exclusiveness or untouchability are completely foreign to Muslim society.” In brief, Nadwi argued in this book that Muslims stood for complete equality of all and had not fallen into the casteism of Hindus.
However, a few pages later, Nadwi noted two issues in South Asian Islam that are, in essence, caste-related. First, Nadwi noted that marriage among South Asian Muslims occurs only with others of “an equal genealogical status” (68). In anthropology, this is called endogamy, which is a group’s trait to only marry within their own group. The caste system in Hinduism is likewise propagated partly by ensuring that caste members do not marry outside of their caste. One particularly poignant example are the Sayyid, who are something like the Brahman of South Asian Islam.
In South Asia, the Sayyid function something like the priestly class of Islam. Most believe that Sufi mystics (i.e., pirs) must be Sayyid. Sufi mystics serve as spiritual leaders in South Asian Islam who are mediators between man and God. Therefore, most South Asian Muslims think that only a particular caste of Muslims should be set apart for this vital role. Sayyid are understood to be descendants of the Qureshi Arab tribe, which is the same tribe that Muhammad was from. Therefore, within South Asian Islam, those descended from Muhammad are understood to be a superior caste with special privileges. In fact, Nadwi was Sayyid, meaning that it may have been difficult for him, being from a privileged caste, to see the casteism in his own belief system. Other Sayyids, such as Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan (d. 1898), were famous for their disdain of local converts to Islam, seeing them as second class Muslims.
The second issue that Nadwi noted is seen in this quote,
“The disgraceful treatment meted out to servants by their masters, which is sometimes so outrageous as to reduce the servants to the level of untouchables, is again, a product of the social impulses received from India together with being a mark of the general degeneration that had set in among the Muslims during the declining years of their power (68).”
This quote indicates that many Muslims in South Asia have adopted the South Asian attitude of casteism. Some individuals are privileged above others. In this mindset, the master is of more value than the servant. This mindset has continued in South Asia through the perpetuation of low castes within Islam. For example, Hindu haircutters in South Asia have traditionally been called Nai. When Nai converted to Islam in large numbers, they took the Arabic name Hazzam, while continuing to marry within their own community. If a young man is born into a Hazzam family, he will also learn the family trade of haircutting. In South Asia, more and more individuals are breaking through the ceiling of their castes through education. However, the basic caste concept persists, even in Islam. In South Asia, many similar groups marry only within their own castes, which are defined by a particular trade.
What does this mean for Christians who are ministering among the Muslims of South Asia?
We must not allow the sin of casteism to come into our hearts! We must treat every person with dignity and respect, despite how the society around them considers them. Every Muslim in South Asia, no matter their lineage or status, is created in God’s image. Since they bear God’s image, we are obligated to treat them as our neighbor and equal. We should show all Muslims the love that Jesus displayed when He died on the cross for our sins.
Perhaps the most concrete action we can take to make sure that we do not fall into casteism is to really see the people around us. We should make a practice of looking past people’s jobs and status. We should see their faces and pray for them. As we see them, we will each struggle with questions of how to respond in the face of such great poverty and need. Often, we cannot provide solutions for every need that we see. However, we need to be willing to see the pain and the brokenness around us and bring it to Christ in prayer.
The sin of casteism is alive and well among South Asian Muslims. As Muslims begin to follow Jesus, we must help them to set aside their casteism.
In Hinduism, those of low caste and untouchables have readily abandoned Hinduism. Some have followed Jesus, while others have become Muslims, Buddhists, or Sikhs historically. In contrast, few Brahman have chosen to follow Jesus. Similarly, it is likely that Muslims of “lower castes,” especially those who have been mistreated by other Muslims because of their status, will be most receptive to the gospel.
A Muslim woman shops at the bazaar outside the Jama Masjid of Delhi, India.
Paul’s driving purpose was to proclaim the gospel where Christ was not known. Paul understood himself as a servant who had a commission from God (Col 1:25a), therefore he operated with the authority and responsibility from God to fulfill his commission. In Colossians 1:25, that commission was “to fill up the word of God.” The context clarifies that Paul’s purpose of filling up the word of God among people groups who did not know the gospel. Paul described the word of God as a mystery that had been hidden but is now manifest to God’s people (1:26). The purpose of revealing this mystery is so that God’s people can make this mystery known among all the nations (1:27). Therefore, filling up the word of God meant bringing the word to peoples and places that did not know.
Modern missionaries do well to emulate Paul’s missionary burden to proclaim Christ among peoples and in places where Christ has not been named. This is the singular purpose that drove Paul’s missionary journeys and propelled him to plant churches in pioneer areas. Since this is Paul’s missionary model, it is shocking that the vast majority of missionaries work in areas where the gospel is established rather than in pioneer areas among unreached peoples.
Paul’s missionary methods were not based only on his own efforts but also the efforts of his disciples. Paul’s letter to Colossae demonstrates that Paul not only planted churches himself but trained and equipped others to plant churches. Before writing this letter, Paul had never visited Colossae. The believers in Colossae had never met Paul (Col 2:1). Instead, the Colossians heard the gospel from Epaphras, Paul’s dearly loved fellow servant (1:7). It is most likely that Epaphras was trained by Paul in Ephesus and sent out as a pioneer missionary. Paul sent out Epaphras and others like him to plant churches across Asia Minor (modern southwest Turkey). Acts 19:9-10 says,
“But when some became hardened and would not believe, slandering the Way in front of the crowd, he withdrew from them, taking the disciples, and conducted discussions every day in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. This went on for two years, so that all the residents of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the word of the Lord.”
The seven churches of Revelation (Rev 2-3) and others were likely planted by Paul’s coworkers during these two years. Paul won men to Christ, trained them, and sent them as pioneer missionaries. While Colossians is the most complete picture of a Pauline coworker planting a church, Paul sent other coworkers who also planted churches all across Asia Minor. In this way, “all the residents of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the word of the Lord.”
Colossians 1:3-8 describes Epaphras’ work. Epaphras shared the gospel (1:7). The gospel caused the Colossians to hope in heaven (1:5). This hope in heaven produced faith and love in the Colossians (1:4). Paul emphasized that the proclamation of the gospel led to a heavenly focus, which produced outward change in new believers. In Epaphras’’ ministry, pioneer evangelism that led into discipleship was the foundation for planting new churches.
Paul’s commission from God was to proclaim the gospel broadly to peoples who had never heard and to train others to do the same. Because of his expansive team of coworkers proclaiming the gospel in many places, Paul was able to say that the gospel “is bearing fruit and growing all over the world” (Col 1:6). And, “This gospel has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven” (Col 1:23).
In this short letter, Paul mentioned nine coworkers by name.[1] These men acted under Paul’s missionary leadership as part of his team. Modern missionaries do well to head Paul’s example of developing missionaries. By emulating Paul’s model of developing leaders, modern missionaries can evangelize broad geographic areas, like Asia Minor. As Paul modelled, modern missionaries develop leaders best in the trenches, leading by example.
In Colossians, Paul also provided a model of how to transcend present difficulties and remain focused on gospel advance. Paul was in jail when he wrote this letter (Col 4:3) and his disciple, Epaphras, was in jail with him (Philem 23). Although he was imprisoned for the gospel, Paul’s heart was free. No human bond or imprisonment could bar him from Jesus. A hymn about Jesus takes a central place in this epistle, reminding us of how Paul worshipped in jail at Phillip (Col 1:15-20; Acts 16:25). When reading this letter, one can almost hear Paul singing that Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. I imagine that Paul’s evangelistic boldness while in jail presented a challenge for his jailers. They were at a loss about how to silence his witness for Christ.
Paul’s only prayer request in Colossians was that God would open a door for him to proclaim the gospel (Col 4:3-4). For Paul, imprisonment was merely one more opportunity to be a witness for Christ. No doubt, Paul was following Jesus’ directions in how to engage in missionary outreach. Our Lord Jesus said,
“They will hand you over to local courts and flog you in their synagogues. You will even be brought before governors and kings because of me, to bear witness to them and to the Gentiles. But when they hand you over, don’t worry about how or what you are to speak. For you will be given what to say at that hour” (Matt 10:17-19).
The irony is that the authorities arrested Paul and Epaphras to stop the advance of the gospel. These men used it as an opportunity for evangelism. Despite their imprisonment, the gospel was bearing fruit and increasing all over the world. The authorities could do nothing to stop the advance of the gospel. Christ was seated on His throne, and Paul was seated with him (Col 3:1).
The imprisonment of Paul and Epaphras became an opportunity for developing more leaders. One purpose of Paul’s letter was to establish Archippus as the leader at Colossae. Paul spoke to him, “Pay attention to the ministry you have received in the Lord, so that you can accomplish it” (Col 4:17). Also, Onesimus became a follower of Christ through Paul during this time. Paul wrote a letter to Philemon, Apphia, and Archippus to appeal for Onesimus to be released from slavery to become one of Paul’s missionary coworkers. Thus, the influence and reach of Paul’s team for the advancement of the gospel grew, despite his circumstances.
In summary, Paul’s driving purpose was to fill up the gospel among unreached peoples and places. In order to accomplish this purpose, Paul developed and sent leaders. He grew a team of coworkers who could fight with him for the advance of the gospel. In the same way, modern missionaries must take up their commission to make Christ known among unreached peoples and places and develop others to do the same.
Throughout mission history, missiologists have used various paradigms to identify and evaluate the progress of the gospel among different people groups. A new shift is in progress from the UPG/UUPG terms to the Seven Phases of Progress among a People Group. The purpose of this blog post is to introduce this shift to prepare the way for subsequent blog posts that will discuss suggested action steps for engaging South Asian Muslim people groups at different phases along this spectrum.
A Biblical Look at People Groups Before diving into the practicals, let’s examine eight verses of Scripture that are foundational to the concept of People Groups and bringing the gospel to them. • Genesis 12:3. “and all the peoples (Heb. Mispaphah. Clan, family, people) on earth will be blessed through you.” See Galatians 3:8 for a New Testament interpretation of this promise. • Psalm 67:1-2, “May God be gracious to us and bless us; may he make his face shine upon us so that your way may be known on earth, your salvation among all nations.” • Matthew 24:14, “This good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed in all the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” • Matthew 28:29, “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations.” • Luke 24:27, “repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all the nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” • Acts 1:8, “you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” • Revelation 5:9, “you purchased people for God by your blood from every tribe and language and people and nation.” • Revelation 7:9, “After this I looked, and there was a vast multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language, which no one could number, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.”
Throughout history, verses like these (and many more!) have propelled missionaries to proclaim Christ where He has not been named. Some of these verses focus on geography (such as Acts 1:8), but many more focus on the people of the earth. The most explicit two verses are Revelation 5:9 and 7:9. These specifically list out four categories and say that Jesus purchased people from each of these four categories for God (Rev 5:9) and that some from each of these categories would stand in worship before God in heaven (Rev 7:9). Scripture, therefore, promises that some from every tongue and tribe and people and nation will repent and enter the kingdom of God.
Here are the four categories:
“Every nation” (Gr. ethnos). Historically, “every nation” was understood by missionaries to mean every geopolitical nation on the planet. However, the Greek term ethnos appears to be more closely related to the modern concept of ethnicity, which originates from the same root. Most geopolitical nations have multiple ethnicities, and some have thousands of ethnicities!
“Every tribe” (Gr. phyle). In the New Testament, the term “tribe” typically refers to the twelve tribes of Israel. Now, all of Israel was one ethnic group, so each tribe was a smaller division of that people group. Within a particular ethnicity, there may be multiple tribes or families. This seems to go back to Genesis 12:3 when God promises to bless every people of the earth through the lineage of Abraham, which was fulfilled in Jesus (Gal. 3:8).
“Every people” (Gr. laos). In contrast to ethnic groups, a people carries the idea of a community that is bound together in the same identity. At the time of the New Testament, the Jewish people were a distinct ethnicity comprising twelve tribes. Still, they were also a unified people bound together by a shared religious identity. Today, various people groups are sometimes bound together by a shared identity. For example, the United States has historically been a melting pot of diverse ethnicities that have blended together into a single people. Many urban areas around the world are also composed of people who have multiple ethnic identities.
“Every language” (Gr. glossa). The concept of language is much more concrete. There are a little over 7,000 spoken languages on earth.
To encompass the diversity of Revelation 5:9 and 7:9, missiologists have coined the term “people groups” and have defined different lists of these groups. The two major lists are Joshua Project, which shows about 17,700 people groups, and peoplegroups.org, which has a list of 12,371. The differences in these lists often stem from nuances regarding which groups should or should not be combined into a single people group.
History of the Terms UPG and UUPG In 1974, Ralph Winter pioneered the term “Unreached People Group” (UPG), primarily in his paper, “The Highest Priority: Cross-Cultural Evangelism.” A UPG was a people group that had little to no access to the gospel. Winter called for cross-cultural evangelism to fill this need. From that point, organizations began to develop people group lists and create strategies to focus on specific people groups.
The term Unengaged, Unreached People Group (UUPG) followed shortly after. A UUPG was defined as a people group with no access to the gospel, and a UPG became a people group that was 2% or less evangelical Christian. As the gospel has spread around the world, thousands of UUPGs have become UPGs, resulting in new believers and churches among these people groups, following the proclamation of the gospel.
Time for a New Paradigm: The 7 Phases of Progress For a time, the distinctions of UUPGs and UPGs helped create clarity on the people groups that needed the gospel. However, most on the front lines now find the UUPG versus UPG distinction to be too broad and have longed for a better paradigm. For example, imagine the 150+ million Sheikh of Bangladesh. When the gospel first reached the Sheikh, the entire people group went from UUPG to UPG. The reality is that this switch from UUPG to UPG was not a good description of the gospel need. Simply toggling between UUPG and UPG is insufficient for a people group as large as the Sheikh. Furthermore, some people groups were moved from UUPG to UPG simply because someone declared their intention to bring the gospel to that particular people group. Often, years later, a UPG would be reclassified as a UUPG because it was discovered that there was no gospel access.
In many places, the gospel reached a people group, but no church ever emerged among them. However, since they were a UPG, sometimes they received less focus in gospel resources than the many remaining UUPGs. Simply put, a new categorization has been required to describe lostness.
Currently, a new pattern, known as the Seven Phases of Progress among a People Group, is emerging to address this need. To be clear, I am not the one who made this paradigm; I am simply sharing it because I want to write further about South Asian Muslims through the lens of this paradigm. And until I had something to point to about this pattern, it wasn’t easy to take the next step. Therefore, I am writing my brief thoughts about it. However, multiple groups around the world are adopting this in such a way that it could become the new global paradigm for missions in the years to come.
Defining the 7 Phases of Progress Here are the seven phases with some basic definitions. Phase 0 – Unengaged. No workers are seeking to bring the gospel to this people group. Phase 1 – Adoption. Identification of workers who take ownership of implementing a church planting strategy among this people group. These workers have legitimate access to the target people group. Phase 2 – Gospel. Workers are consistently sharing the gospel with the target people group with the intention of planting churches. Phase 3 – Disciples. Multiple people from the target people group are responding to the gospel with repentance and faith. Evidenced. By obedience to Christ through baptism. Phase 4 – Local Church. Indigenous churches gather regularly for worship and to study God’s word. Phase 5 – Churches Reproducing. Indigenous churches are sending indigenous church planters out to plant churches among the target people group. Observing second-generation groups and churches beginning to form. Phase 6 – Churches Multiplying. Indigenous churches and leaders are multiplying to the fourth generation. Authority is freely passed down from generation to generation. Phase 7 – Cross-Cultural Sending. Emergence of several indigenous, multiplying church-planting networks. Cross-cultural sending to people and places outside of one’s own culture.
So, the goal here is to identify the phase of gospel progress among a particular people group. The aim is then to help that people group move to the next phase. For example, imagine again the Sheikh of Bangladesh. There are many indications that the Sheikh are at Phase 5, meaning that churches have been planted among the Sheikh who are raising up other Sheikh workers and sending them to plant more churches among the Sheikh. However, it is less clear that the work among the Sheikh has reached Phase 6. Therefore, missionaries among the Sheikh need to wrestle with questions about how to help this work grow to the next phase.
As I write this blog post, I am also reviewing a database of research and gospel progress among approximately 500 Muslim people groups of South Asia. At present, many of these people groups are at Phase 0. However, by God’s grace, there is an increasing number who have reached Phase 4 or 5. God is moving among the Muslims of South Asia! And as God moves among the Muslims of South Asia, we must adjust our methods to partner with Him in what He is doing.
If you want to get updates about this series of blog posts, subscribe below.
In the “good old days”, when William Carey needed to talk to the British Missionary Society, or if they wanted to talk to him, it would take about 8-12 months to send and receive correspondence. Letters had to be carried overland and then slowly shipped by boat around the world. The result was that missionaries spent little to no time in correspondence and reporting.
Over time, the pace of communication has changed. When I first moved to the field, I had never owned a smartphone. Email and Skype were the normal means we used to communicate. If we wanted to set up a Skype call, it meant emailing back and forth to arrange a suitable time.
In contrast, today, most missionaries are highly connected through various messaging and social media apps, allowing them to reach the whole world. One result of this connectivity is that missionaries feel busier than ever. Many missionaries wake up each morning to an inbox full of messages and emails from people on the other side of the planet. As the world has shrunk and connectivity has increased, missionaries find themselves spending more and more time in front of their computers or on smartphones.
Sometimes, I wonder if the productivity of missionaries would vastly improve if we took away their smartphones! But then again, in today’s world, everything is connected by smartphones.
Therefore, missionaries today need to develop better practices in time management and their relationships with their devices. To that end, here are seven time management tools and techniques for busy missionaries.
#1. No Phone Before Bible Principle. The first principle is simple. Missionaries should consider a life practice of never looking at their phones or computers before spending time with the Lord in Word and prayer. Beginning our days by looking at our devices instead of centering ourselves in Jesus is a bad pattern. For many, this pattern will erode their spiritual lives, ultimately sapping their spiritual vitality.
Challenge: For the next 7 days, spend time in the Word and prayer before looking at your devices.
#2. Take An Hour a Day Device Free. Once, I took a two-week vacation without any devices. It was my children’s favorite vacation. I am convinced it was because I was present with them without my devices. My mind and soul cleared tremendously during that vacation. In my everyday life, I am often healthiest when I take an hour a day without my devices. I leave them on my desk and go and engage my wife and kids. Just an hour a day breaks the addiction if we practice this regularly. The best time for me is in the evening when my kids are home from school.
Challenge: For the next 7 days, force yourself to go an hour a day without your phone. Just engage during that time with your family, the Lord, and yourself.
#3. The Urgent-Important Matrix. The Urgent-Important Matrix (below) is most famous from Stephen Covey’s The 7 Habits of a Highly Effective Person. From this matrix, we see a few common errors in most people’s lives. First, most are ruled by “the tyranny of the urgent.” The tyranny of the urgent means that people spend all their time and energy working on tasks and issues that are pressing on them in the moment. In such a case, a person loses control of their life and the ability to focus on anything strategic. Second, many people waste their time on those things that are not important, to the neglect of the important.
Instead, this matrix challenges us to focus on those tasks that are “Not Urgent” and “Important,” i.e., Quadrant 2. If we focus on Quadrant 1 activities, we are always in crisis management mode, putting out fires, which leads to stress and burnout. If we focus on Quadrant 3 activities, we have a short-term focus and fail to accomplish bigger tasks. The result is that our ministry feels shallow, and we feel our lives are out of control. A focus on Quadrant 4 is simply a life of irresponsibility. Quadrant 4 might be someone who plays too many video games, debates on X, or is constantly scrolling social media.
In contrast, focusing on Quadrant 2 allows a person to pursue a greater vision and have control of their life. So, the question is, “How do we spend more of our lives in Quadrant 2 and less of our lives in the other quadrants?” The first step is to recognize that we want to spend more time in Quadrant 2 and decide to do what is necessary to get there. The second step is to develop the time management skills required to do so.
Challenge: Take an inventory of your life. What are the Quadrant 2 activities you are supposed to spend your time on? Examples are language learning, evangelism, discipleship, training others, developing media projects, working on strategic projects, and preparing to teach. So, how much of your time are you focusing on these big picture tasks that will get you to your vision? And how much of your time are you in the tyranny of the urgent, or spending your time on things that are not important?
#4. The 80/20 Principle. The 80/20 Principle is simply that activities that take up 20% of your time have 80% of the output in your life. So, this principle asks, “What are the highest value activities you should dedicate yourself to?” Then the 80/20 Principle challenges us to create more space to pursue those high-value activities. In other words, the 80/20 Principle is just one more way of saying, “Live in Quadrant 2!” However, even within Quadrant 2, there are more and less effective tasks. For example, is it usually better to spend time in evangelism, working with seekers, or discipling new believers? All three of these are Quadrant 2 activities. However, I believe that discipling new believers is the highest value of these three, followed by working with seekers, and then finally evangelizing new contacts. Why? New disciples are a more effective means of sharing the gospel with others. Likewise, in South Asia, it is generally more efficient to develop and train South Asians to do ministry work than to have foreigners do it directly. Now, the foreigners need to do the work as well, but their time spent in training and developing others is more efficient and effective in the long run. Just as Paul poured into Timothy and Titus, so should we develop others to do the work!
Challenge: What are the highest value activities that you should be pursuing? Within Quadrant 2, what are your highest value tasks? Are you prioritizing them appropriately?
#5. Do Deep Work. Deep work contrasts with shallow work. Shallow work is work that you can do while distracted, like answer emails and text messages, answer requests from your children and family, or other similar distractions. The problem is that many people are so accustomed to shallow work that they always try to multitask with everything, which prohibits appropriate deep work. Deep work is that which is challenging to do well while distracted, such as language learning, developing a discipleship curriculum, or even just practicing spiritual disciplines. These tasks are best undertaken with our full focus.
Challenge: What are the deep work tasks that you should spend more time focusing on? Determine what they are, then time box to prioritize them.
#6. Time Boxing. Time boxing means making blocks of time in your schedule and boxing them off for tasks, especially for things like ministry (evangelism, discipleship, trainings), deep work, and other vital tasks. Time boxing sets those things into our calendars to help us focus on Quadrant 2 activities. Everything else must then be arranged around these high-value tasks, which have been previously placed in our calendars.
Challenge: Create a system for time boxing and implement it for the next two weeks. What are the vital tasks you need to undertake? Box off ministry time and then do not let other tasks or meetings infringe on ministry. Box off time for deep work and do the same. Try it out for two weeks and see if you make progress.
#7. The Sabbath Principle. God delights to give rest to those He loves. While we are not under any burden that we must take a sabbath to be right with God, the Sabbath is a gift that God desires to give His children. My advice is to set a weekly sabbath as a family, inform your teammates of your Sabbath, and do your best not to deviate from it. Of course, there will be urgent ministry things that occasionally come up that require your attention, but that should be the exception rather than the norm. Many people spend their entire Sabbath away from their cell phones and laptops, which, in my opinion, could double the effectiveness of a Sabbath day for rest and rejuvenation.
Challenge: What is your sabbath day? How well are you protecting that time? Would your Sabbath be more productive if you spent it away from your device?
In the New Testament, the apostles rarely interacted with churches that they did not plant themselves. Therefore, there is no clear New Testament model for how frontline missionaries should interact with local churches in their places of service. Today, the situation is quite different. God has been working to fill the world with the knowledge of His glory. The gospel has spread to many places and people groups worldwide. Churches have formed in many places and among many people groups. At the same time, there are about 3,000 unreached, unengaged people groups in the world (UUPGs). And there are vast areas where there are no churches. Due to these significant global gaps in the work, it remains necessary to send out cross-cultural missionaries to preach the gospel, make disciples, plant churches, and develop leaders among unreached peoples and in unreached places. However, due to the spread of the gospel, it is increasingly likely that frontier missionaries will live and operate out of cities that have existing churches.
Someone might ask, “If there are churches there, then why are pioneer workers necessary?” This is a great question! Let me share a story about one city in my mind, without naming its name. Imagine a city of 20 million people that has a few international churches and numerous churches among its many ethnic groups. However, imagine that there are 5-8 language groups in that city with at least 500,000 residents, among whom there is no visible church.
Additionally, in the rural areas surrounding the city of 20 million, there are many millions more people who are lost. In many places, there are no churches. In other areas, there are churches for one ethnic group, but other people groups have no witness. The reality is that in that area, there may be 40-50 million people who are not being engaged with the gospel by the existing churches.
Why are they not being engaged? There are several reasons. First, there are often significant linguistic and cultural challenges. For example, if a church worships in one language but the lost in that area do not speak that language or it is not their native language, barriers exist in the gospel reaching them. Second, religious barriers often exist. Many Christians are afraid to share the gospel with Muslims because of fear, anger, and hopelessness. In addition to these barriers and the barriers created by language and culture, most Christians lack training in how to share the gospel with Muslims (click here for an article on these five barriers). In fact, I have friends who are Muslim-background believers (MBBs) in South Asia who are regularly rejected by local churches. The churches do not want them to become members out of their own fears and prejudices. If the churches will not accept MBBs, what are the chances of them engaging Muslims with the gospel?
Because of this dynamic, we often see areas with churches that are growing and flourishing, yet pioneer missionaries are still needed in the same context. In this context, it is common that pioneer workers look to established churches for fellowship and partnership. Both these local churches and the pioneer missionaries should be celebrated. Both are doing necessary work. Both are seeking to be faithful to Jesus. However, tension often exists between the two.
Let me give an example. Imagine a new missionary going to our imaginary city of 20 million. He arrives and begins attending an international church in his city, where he learns the local language and initiates his evangelistic outreach. After attending for a while, he attends a new members class and learns that this church expects him to submit to its leadership in his missionary work to become a member. Through conversation, he learns that they expect him to bring any new believers to their church and that they will baptize and disciple those believers. The leaders of the church are delighted with his heart and passion for reaching out to new people groups if his work is submitted to the authority of the elders of that church. However, the missionary also knows that his people group speaks a different language from the one this church uses for worship. Additionally, many cultural barriers will make membership for new believers from this other culture at that church difficult. It will be the responsibility of the new believer to adapt culturally and linguistically to join the community.
Moreover, this church on the field clearly indicates to him that the missionary methods of his team are flawed. They direct him to share the gospel, make disciples, and plant churches in a manner quite different than his team leader.
Understandably, the new missionary becomes quite confused. After all, he was sent out by his church to make disciples and plant churches among a particular people group. His church in his home country energetically raised funds to support him in this work. But now, his church on the field is telling him that it is not the right way to do things. He is torn because now his missionary team leader is directing him in one way, but the elders of his new church have a different opinion. Moreover, he and his family have been very blessed by the fellowship of their church on the field. Their transition to the field has been challenging. Being able to worship every Sunday in English has been a great blessing. In their opinion, both their team leader and the elders at their new church are men of God.
As this new missionary begins to ask others, there is great confusion about authority and the Great Commission. In Matthew 21:23, the Pharisees asked Jesus, “By what authority are you doing these things? Who gave you this authority?” The same questions are brought to missionaries today. It is becoming increasingly common for elders of local churches to tell pioneer missionaries that they do not have the authority to do the work for which they were sent out by the churches.
In the face of questions like these, I am writing this article. I want to challenge my fellow missionaries to consider four attitudes that we should hold in our hearts when interacting with local churches on the field. At the same time, there are five non-negotiables that we must uphold as field workers in our interactions with local churches.
Attitude #1 – Missionaries Should Be Thankful for Local Churches. Before sending His disciples to preach, Jesus commanded them to pray to the Lord of the harvest to send more laborers (Luke 10:2). Whenever we meet more laborers in the harvest, we should be thankful. We should be grateful to God for sending more workers. We should be thankful for the other workers for their faithful service to Jesus. We should be grateful that we are not alone in the task.
Attitude #2 – Missionaries Should Be Humble Learners. When a missionary arrives in a new location, they are never the expert in that place or its people groups. They usually do not know how things work and often lack knowledge of the area’s history. All this calls for missionaries to be humble. They need to enter as learners and grow. They should pepper everyone they meet with questions. Over time, they will become experts in their people group, culture, language, and work area, if they are persistent. However, everyone benefits when missionaries show up as humble learners.
Attitude #3 – Missionaries Should Bless others with their Spiritual Gifts. Missionaries are usually sent out because their churches have seen incredible talents and gifts in them. Perhaps they are amazing evangelists, Bible teachers, or administrators. While not demanding to use their talents in their church, they should be willing. Maybe they are a gifted Bible teacher, but their church needs help teaching children. They should gladly teach Sunday school to children. A missionary should gladly assist a local church, utilizing their talents in a way that best meets the church’s needs. Perhaps they are a gifted evangelist but are not given a platform for this gift. They should not worry; instead, they should devote themselves wholeheartedly to evangelism.
Attitude #4 – For Missionaries, Their Ministry and Their Church Do Not Need to Be the Same. When a missionary arrives at a church with a single vision, but the church has a different one, it is rare for the church to adopt the missionary’s vision, and that is okay. I have usually found that church leaders want to know my vision and what I am seeking to do. I happily share with them. Usually, they are merely encouraged and pray that God will help me. Sometimes, they can help a little bit. But I never want to presume that upon them. Often, we fellowship in a local church for our own edification while pouring ourselves out in ministry elsewhere. We should still seek to be a blessing to the local church and serve there, even if it is not our primary place of ministry.
Having discussed these five attitudes that missionaries should have towards local churches, here are five non-negotiables that I urge as we seek to work together well. My advice is that if a local church asks you to compromise in these five areas, discuss these issues, but hold your ground. If they demand that you compromise in these areas to remain in good fellowship, my advice is to move on. After all, the harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. We cannot allow ourselves as workers to be taken out of the game. Jesus has sent us through the churches for a purpose.
Non-Negotiable #1 – Missionaries are called to follow Paul’s Missionary Model. My conviction is that God purposefully set the apostle Paul in the New Testament as the ideal missionary model. When I say that Paul is our model, there is a difference in Paul’s authority and ours. Paul was appointed as an apostle by Jesus, while we were appointed as missionaries by churches. Paul was taken to heaven and given his teaching directly from Jesus; we have received our teaching from Scripture. At the same time, Paul presented himself as the ideal missionary and commanded Timothy to follow in his missionary model. Paul then instructed Timothy to follow that model. You can read more about my defense of this way of reading the New Testament here.
Non-Negotiable #2 – Missionaries are primarily under the direction of their missionary team rather than their local church. When missionaries are sent out by the churches, they are sent out in missionary teams, much like Paul’s band of missionaries. Those teams cannot function if the team members are unsure whose leadership to follow. Once, I had a member of my team join a church that told him that it was sinful for him to focus on trying to reach Muslims with the gospel. Instead, they said to him that he should put his energy into developing a healthy church with them, which would automatically lead to Muslims being saved. So, this young man was confused. I was urging him to share the gospel with Muslims. A local pastor was telling him not to and to focus on helping him with his church instead. The young man was confused about who to follow. Eventually, he just grew frustrated and left the field.
Non-Negotiable #3 – Missionaries are called to do the Missionary Task. They cannot abdicate their authority to go among the lost, share the gospel, make disciples, plant churches, and develop leaders among their people group. Missionaries are those who have been sent to go and make disciples of all nations. Usually, they have an unreached people group or several such people groups that they have been sent to engage with the gospel. Some churches on the field tell missionaries that they lack the authority to perform these tasks. What foolishness! Missionaries are cross-cultural church planters. If they are not permitted to plant churches, then what are they doing?
Non-Negotiable #4 – Specifically, missionaries cannot abdicate their authority to baptize; otherwise, they cannot do the Great Commission as described in Matthew 28:18-20. Some churches are arguing that missionaries do not have the authority to baptize. They are told that they can share the gospel, but to leave the baptizing to pastors. However, in Matthew 28:19-20, baptizing is one of the means by which someone makes disciples. In other words, according to the Great Commission, if someone cannot baptize, then they cannot make disciples. If they cannot make disciples, then they can’t do the Missionary Task. What use are missionaries who cannot baptize? If a church requires missionaries to relinquish authority to baptize, then those missionaries should consider leaving that church.
Non-Negotiable #5 – Missionary teams are not fully autonomous, but they are semi-autonomous. The clash between field churches and missionary teams centers on issues of authority and autonomy. The argument is usually presented as missionaries being either autonomous, with no one directing them except Jesus and the Holy Spirit, or as being under the authority of local pastors. I want to tell you that there is a more biblical way. In Scripture, the apostle Paul submitted to the leadership of others, even though he had been appointed directly by Jesus as an apostle. However, Paul assumed the authority to enter new places, share the gospel, make disciples, plant churches, and develop and appoint leaders in his everyday ministry. However, when controversy arose, he submitted to godly decisions made by the appropriate people. After he received his heavenly teaching, he submitted it to Peter, James, and John to ensure that he was not teaching incorrectly (Galatians 2:1-10). Later, when controversy arose over Gentile believers and circumcision, Paul submitted to the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15).
If Paul submitted to others, then we must also. Therefore, the ideal missionary team is not fully autonomous. Instead, it is semi-autonomous. In the day-to-day, missionary teams should devote themselves to the missionary task and move forward with confidence. If they step out of line or if controversy arises, then they should submit to their leadership as they seek to move forward. However, that does not mean that they are in submission to every church that seeks to direct their activities. Instead, they are accountable to those who sent them.
Summary and a Final Word In today’s world, missionaries often interact with local churches on the field. Ideally, the churches will be a blessing to the missionaries, and the missionaries a blessing to the churches. The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. However, missionaries must be careful not to abdicate the authority with which they were sent. If they cannot baptize and make disciples, then how will they plant churches? If they are not church planters, then what are they?
Missionaries, seek to be a blessing and find partnership with local churches. Be a humble learner. Use the gifts and talents God has provided you to bless other local Christians and churches. Do not be demanding of local churches. You certainly have no authority over them. But at the same time, focus your efforts on sharing the gospel, making disciples, and planting churches among the peoples God has sent you to reach. These things do not need to conflict with one another.
Pastors, missionaries can sometimes be difficult church members. God has often given them such a burden for the lost that they focus on sharing Jesus with those who have never heard rather than building up the church. Bless them in the gifts that God has given them. Release them and pray that they may flourish. Pray with hope that God will raise up new believers, new churches, and new leaders among people groups who have never heard. At the same time, encourage them and their families to walk with Jesus. Missionaries often need encouragement, and you can be the person who provides it as they undertake challenging work. Your vision for your church and their mission does not need to be in conflict.
Ultimately, both missionaries and pastors should heed the admonition of the apostle Paul in Philippians 2:3: “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility consider others as more important than yourselves.”
Before I moved overseas, I had the joy of spending two years under the mentorship of a man named Dan, who had served as a missionary in East Africa for 33 years. He used to tell me, “David, living overseas, you will face leadership transitions, reorganizations, policy changes, and many other types of transitions. When that happens, just put your head down and focus on preaching the gospel, making disciples, and planting churches.”
Dan’s advice has been helpful to me many times in our time overseas. In this blog post, I aim to build on Dan’s advice by exploring how to approach changes while living on the field.
Change is rarely easy, especially in ministry. Whether it’s a shift in leadership, a reorganization of teams, or a new strategic direction, transitions can stir up uncertainty, loss, and even fear. For missionaries, the emotional weight can feel even heavier, especially when we’re deeply invested in our work, teams, and the people we serve.
But there is good news: God is not surprised by change. He is not worried about transitions. He is still on His throne, and He is still at work. Our God has a plan, and He is revealing it to us.
As you walk through change or transition, here are nine biblical and practical encouragements to anchor your heart and guide your posture:
1. Remember that God is on His Throne
“After this I looked, and there was a vast multitude from every nation, tribe, people, and language, which no one could number, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were clothed in white robes with palm branches in their hands. And they cried out in a loud voice, ‘Salvation belongs to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!'”Revelation 7:9-10 (CBS)
In Revelation 4, we see a vision of our God seated on His throne. Our God has a vision to see His kingdom expand to every tongue, tribe, people, and nation. Remember that our God’s plans cannot be thwarted or changed. Whether or not we are faithful, God will fulfill all His desires. And he desires to expand His kingdom to every people around the world. Whether your team or organization is faithful or not, God will accomplish His work. Therefore, do not worry about changes in your organization or leadership. Instead, focus on our God, who is seated high and lifted up.
2. Remember Your Calling
“For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” Romans 11:29
Even when God’s people, Israel, were unfaithful, God declared that His gifts and calling towards them were irrevocable. During transitions, my heart is often strengthened by remembering my story about how God called me to Himself and into His work. Remembering my calling has guided me in what opportunities to embrace and which ones to turn down. In particular, my calling is to bring the gospel of Jesus to the more than 600 million Muslims of South Asia. No leadership transition or organizational change can change my calling from the Lord. In this way, our calling can continue to give us direction as we move forward.
3. Focus on the Core Missionary Task
“Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” 1 Corinthians 9:16
The Core Missionary Task is to enter new fields, share the gospel, make disciples, plant churches, and develop leaders in such a way that missionaries can entrust the work to new churches and leaders, enabling missionaries to move into new fields. Woe to us if we become distracted by change and take our focus off these primary tasks! During transition, if you are worried about change, then go and share the gospel with someone who has never heard. I guarantee you that these primary tasks are what our leadership desires for us to do.
4. Maintain a Spirit of Unity and Peace
“Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.” Ephesians 4:3
Transitions can cause relational stress or stir up division. This is a time to be especially vigilant against gossip, assumption, or internal grumbling. Choose the way of peace. Be quick to forgive, slow to speak, and eager to build up. Unity is a powerful witness.
5. Celebrate the Past – Look to the Future
“I will remember the LORD’s works; yes, I will remember your ancient wonders.” Psalm 77:11
Scripture is full of celebration of what God has done in the past. God is at work in South Asia. We can (and should!) remember story after story of how God has changed lives. He has opened up new doors among people groups who had never heard the gospel. Churches have been planted where they had never existed. Leaders have been developed. We must rejoice and celebrate what God has done, just as God’s people in Scripture repeatedly celebrated His mighty works. At the same time, we must keep our eyes on the future, asking God to break through in even more profound ways. We should be thankful for leaders who are moving on, and we should pray for God to bless them in their next roles. We should be prayerful and optimistic for new leaders that God is raising up!
6. Be Open-Handed and Flexible
“In humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” Philippians 2:3–4
Cling to your calling but not your preferences. Structures may shift. Roles may be reassigned. Ministry structures might look different tomorrow than they do today. Ask God for a heart that says, “Here I am. Send me.” Be optimistic that new leadership will provide fresh passion and vigor for the work. Be open-handed and flexible for how they may challenge us to grow and expand the work. Make it your ambition to be easy and joyful to be led in the next season of ministry.
7. Pray for your Leaders
There are many decisions to be made during seasons of transition. Pray that the Spirit of God will guide them in the days to come. Pray that God will grant them the wisdom to lead His people. Pray that the Spirit will provide specific direction to overcome all the ministry challenges ahead of us. Pray that our leaders will be filled daily with wisdom, the Spirit, and the Word of God.
8. Communicate Honestly, Respectfully, and Prayerfully
“Let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger.” James 1:19
During this time, we must be wise in our speech. If you have concerns, pray about them and discuss them discreetly with your leadership. Be honest about your feelings, but also be respectful. Try not to engage in gossip. If you are confused, ask questions. If you’re feeling discouraged and anxious, bring your concerns to God in prayer, and also ask others for encouragement. Bless and build up with your words rather than create division. Your tone matters as much as your content.
9. Embrace Change as an Opportunity for Growth
“See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it?” Isaiah 43:19
God often uses transitions to grow our faith. During seasons of change, ask the Lord how He desires to transform your life and character. Perhaps the most crucial change that will occur is within you.
Final Word: Be Faithful
During transition, it can be tempting to pull back or lose heart. Don’t. Stay present. Stay faithful. Preach the gospel. Make disciples. Plant churches. Develop leaders. Change occurs in ministry, but God remains unchanged. His work in South Asia will be fulfilled.
Roland Muller wrote, “Many Christian workers are encouraged as they see the seeker or new convert growing in the faith, learning the Bible, and developing some spiritual maturity. And then, all of a sudden, he is gone, or he dramatically slows down and soon stops seeking or growing” (Muller, the Messenger, the Message, and the Community, third edition, 84).
Muller’s experience with such circumstances is that the new believers have developed “two faces” and are struggling to know what to do. Face #1 desires Jesus and wants to be conformed to Him and grow into spiritual maturity. Face #2 desires to remain in good standing in their family and community. Face #1 follows Jesus, while Face #2 continues to look like a Muslim. For many Western workers, the gap between these two faces is alarming. If we are not careful, Muslim-background believers (MBBs) can develop into expert liars during this process. The disciple-maker must help them grow to maturity through great patience and wisdom.
The Journey of How MBBs Become Expert Liars
Before sharing how the disciple-maker should help MBBs with these issues, let me describe the journey that MBBs take to become expert liars. Imagine a young man, Muhammad, who grew up in a legalistic Muslim home. His family forced him to attend mosque prayers regularly and outwardly present as a good Muslim. However, he knows that neither he nor his family follows Islam well. His cousins drink alcohol and chase girls. One of his uncles is known to be having an affair, but no one talks openly about it. His dad is abusive and angry much of the time. But outwardly, everyone presents as a good Muslim. During Ramadan, everyone becomes quite devout, but the rest of the year, Muhammad’s family is quite lazy in their obedience to Islam.
There are three dynamics at play here. First, Islam is a works-based religion, which often harbors this kind of religious hypocrisy. Let me describe. Many Muslims are worn out with all the religious rules placed on them, making it so that they try to figure out what is necessary to be “ok.” Many realize that they can never match up to the expectations of Islam. So, they opt to present themselves as being good Muslims to others. If they cannot be a good Muslim, they can at least look like a good Muslim.
Second, the honor-shame orientation of most Islamic societies puts a premium on showing others that you are a good Muslim to gain honor in the eyes of others. For example, if your uncle is having an affair, the whole family will cover it up so that the family does not face dishonor from it. These dynamics result in young men like Muhammad growing up in an environment that fosters lying.
Third, an Islamic doctrine called taqiyah allows permissible deceit and lying. Different schools of Islam have different opinions about this doctrine, but one common take is that it is acceptable to lie to outsiders so as not to dishonor Islam. Others say that it is only permissible to lie to avoid persecution. Sunni Muslims have told me that only Shia practice taqiyah. The difficulty is that since this doctrine is about the permissibility of lying to defend your faith, it is hard to always know who is telling the truth about how taqiyah is or is not practiced. The result of these three factors is that young Muslims grow up in an environment where lying and deceit are common.
Now, imagine Muhammad, who grew up in this context. One day, a stranger comes to him, shares the gospel with him, and gives him a Gospel of Matthew. Muhammad’s heart is touched by the gospel message. He is curious, but he knows that he needs to hide this curiosity from his family. He secretly reads the Gospel of Matthew and begins googling his questions. Out of fear, he is actually more careful to go to the mosque and present himself as a Muslim so no one might suspect he is reading about Jesus.
Over time, he continues to meet with a follower of Jesus and begins growing spiritually. At the same time, he presents himself as a good Muslim to his family. The follower of Jesus begins asking him questions about sharing the message with his family. He is a smart kid, and he knows they expect this of him, so he begins making up stories to make them happy. He starts with a small lie that he shared with his sister, which encourages the followers of Jesus. So they direct Muhammad to share more with her and take more accountability. Muhammad is stuck in the lie, so he goes with it.
Muhammad is now lying to his family, presenting himself as a good Muslim. He is also lying to his new Christian friends, presenting himself as more spiritually mature and more evangelistic than he really is. Muhammad fears that either side might see through his lies and reject him.
With all this deceit swirling around, Muhammad is introduced to other MBBs. One asked him how much money he was getting from the foreigners. Muhammad is confused, having never even considered getting money from them. His new friend explains to him that some of the foreigners are willing to give money to MBBs to be able to do ministry and that he would be happy to make an introduction. Muhammad is told that it’s typical and that if he just baptized a Muslim or two, many foreigners would trust him and see him as a spiritual leader. His new friend tells Muhammad that he promised one of his friends the equivalent of $100 USD if he could baptize him in front of some foreigners to build trust.
I could keep going, but my point is that the process of Muslims coming to Jesus is often rigged so that deceit emerges. MBBs often unexpectedly become expert liars. Muller uses a more considerate term, saying they become “two-faced.” Muller asserts, “You must assume that there is another face” (85).
The Decision: To Help or Not to Help
There are usually two different responses to this discussion: mercy and anger. One person hears this process, and their heart is filled with mercy for MBBs. They desire to help MBBs mature and grow through these issues. Others hear the same information and become filled with anger. They throw their hands up in disgust and want to leave the mess. Others feel a combination of mercy and anger and must wrestle with how they will respond.
Muller asserts that every MBB faces these challenges. I agree with him. Therefore, to help MBBs grow to maturity, we must become experts at addressing these issues. Ultimately, each person seeking to make disciples among MBBs has to decide whether they will get hands-on with these issues. However, addressing and overcoming them is the only path to help MBBs grow to maturity and multiply.
Ten Tips to Help MBBs Overcome Lying
Expect MBBs to lie to you. Many workers believe their MBB partners and friends are not lying to them. That may be true, but they have often fallen into the lying trap. So, the first thing you need to do is have your eyes open. Do not be surprised when they lie. Expect it.
Accept MBBs even when they lie to you. In Western society, lying and breaking trust are often considered great sins. If someone lies, trust is broken, and Westerners usually cannot or will not get past these issues. On this issue, Westerners need to mature to work with MBBs. If you cannot accept and love an MBB when they “burn” you, my advice is to go spend time with the Lord and ask Him to fill you with more love for Muslims and MBBs. I am not trying to be glib here. I know these are complex issues, but this is required.
Get closer to MBBs when they lie. When Westerners catch MBBs in their lies, they often distance themselves from those MBBs. I want to encourage the exact opposite. Spend more time with them. Get to know them better and better. Your disciple needs help in this area. More than likely, they will not figure it out on their own.
Observe them with their friends and family. Do not just get to know your MBB; get to know their friends and family. Observe how they act around others. Watch how they present themselves to their friends and family. Look at the sins that they are surrounded by. It is challenging to disciple MBBs without understanding what is really happening in their lives.
Specifically and clearly call them out in love. When I told you to accept lying MBBs and get closer to them when they lie, I did not mean to ignore the deceit. Instead, gently let them know that you have seen it. But reassure them of your relationship with them. If they are in a leadership role, you may need to create boundaries or adjust your expectations of them, especially if finances are involved.
Connect the MBB to a jamaat or church. Much of the MBB’s deceit is an attempt to control relationships around themselves. If MBBs can become integrated into the body of other followers of Jesus, they will have a much better chance of working through these issues gainfully. God intends all believers to become part of a body of believers.
Introduce them to MBBs who have overcome these issues. As you work with MBBs, help some to overcome these issues so that they can help others. You have to get one person through these issues and stand publicly. Then get a second. Then, a third. Slowly and carefully develop more and more who have overcome. A movement will occur when sufficient believers have worked through these issues and are helping others.
Teach the Word on speaking the truth. Clearly and directly teach your MBB friend from Scripture why it is essential to tell the truth. My favorite passage is Matthew 5:33-37. In fact, the entire Sermon on the Mount is necessary to disciple new MBBs.
Be very careful with money. If you quickly give money to new MBBs, especially for ministry, you will likely exacerbate these issues. The most common pattern is that ministries decide to start doing Muslim ministry, so they look around for an MBB or two to hire to kick-start the process. So, they approach new MBBs and offer them money to join their ministry. Please avoid this trap at all costs.
The term “preach” has been misappropriated in modern ministry. In the New Testament, “preach” held an evangelistic meaning of verbally proclaiming the gospel to non-Christians outside of a Christian setting. In contrast, “preach” is now used for pastors homilizing Christians, instructing their church in the Christian faith as part of corporate worship.[1]
There are at least two detrimental effects of this shift in the meaning of “preach.” First, this shift devalues evangelism by making dozens of biblical examples and commands regarding evangelism about homiletics instead. Second, misunderstanding evangelistic verses as homiletical affects our understanding of Christian instruction. For example, the meaning of the term “preach” implies a one-directional proclamation of a message from a speaker to listeners. Interpreting biblical preaching as homiletics contributes to seeing sermons as the primary mode of discipleship. However, if pastors understand their primary role as teachers rather than preachers, different and potentially more effective methods of Christian instruction may have the potential to flourish.
In our work in making disciples of Muslims in a pioneer context, we have found that sermon-based discipleship has been insufficient for making disciples. There are two reasons sermon-based discipleship is inadequate in our context. First, most Muslim-background believers (MBBs) misunderstand our faith significantly. The unidirectional orientation of sermons does not provide the opportunity to draw out those misunderstandings so that they can be addressed. Second, new MBBs do not know the Bible. Unless we use methods that constantly check their understanding, comprehension drops significantly. Instead of sermons, we utilize inductive Bible study methods where the teacher guides learners through the text.
For example, a few years ago, I taught a group of MBBs through the Great Commandment in Luke 10:25-37 using the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Since this passage was new to them, we had to read and re-read the passage. I used questions to help them evaluate the text and draw its meaning out of them, correcting any misunderstandings. As they understood the text, I sensed frustration in the group. So, I probed further. Finally, one of them asked, “How do we reconcile the command to love our neighbors with the command for jihad?” Their question shocked me, but the fact that I was teaching through questions allowed this issue to arise so I could address it. After further study, the group agreed that God desires us to love our neighbors rather than participate in jihad. After realizing this, one of these brothers meekly said to the group, “And this means that the Bible is true, and that the Qur’an is not!”
Another example is that I recently taught a group of five MBBs through some Bible studies on the uniqueness of Jesus. These men all professed to have been in Christ for more than twenty years. I provided them with New Testaments in their language. They had no problem locating Matthew 1:18-25 to discuss the birth of Jesus. We read and re-read that text several times. Then I asked them questions to help them see Jesus’ unique person and work from several angles. We then moved to a second text on the miracles of Jesus. But some had trouble locating Matthew 9:1-8 in the New Testament. From how they handled the text, their questions, and the fact that they could not navigate the book of Matthew, I realized that they were weak in their faith and needed basic discipleship. If I had been delivering a sermon, I would have understood far less about their faith in Jesus and what they needed to grow in maturity.
In Matthew 9:1-8, Jesus heals a paralytic and forgives his sins. I asked these brothers, “What do we learn about Jesus from the fact that he can forgive sins?” A great discussion about the person of Christ ensued. One man said that it meant he must be God. Others were not sure. While discussing our five basic studies on the unique person of Jesus, the subject of the person of Christ continued to come up. By the end of the afternoon, all five affirmed that the New Testament shows that Jesus is God. I asked them, “Do you believe this about Jesus? Do you believe that he is the God who made all things?” All five affirmed their belief in this statement. In discipling Muslim-background believers, we have found that self-discovery in the Scriptures has been a key to growth.
An issue we have faced in our work is that some have attacked our discipleship methods because they assume that sermons are the proper form of disciple-making. In this regard, “Preach the word” from 2 Timothy 4:2 is a key misinterpreted phrase. Many see 2 Timothy 4:2 as a critical text demonstrating that sermons are the primary form of disciple-making in the New Testament. Here are some examples of misinterpreting that verse as homiletics in modern literature.
Timothy was Not a Pastor
Near the end of his life, the apostle Paul gave a final charge to Timothy, his most faithful disciple. The first imperative of that charge was “Preach the word” (2 Tim. 4:1-5). One contributing factor to modern misinterpretations of this command is the moniker “Pastoral Epistles,” which first occurred in the eighteenth century. Timothy and Titus have been misinterpreted as pastors because these books were inappropriately called “Pastoral Epistles.” Since they have been misinterpreted as pastors, many read the Letters to Timothy and Titus (LTT) through a pastoral lens. Misunderstanding the genre of the LTT has contributed to a homiletical reading of 2 Timothy 4:2 in modern popular literature.
In contrast, understanding the LTT as ad-hoc instructions from Paul to his key missionary leaders, Timothy and Titus, is vital for correctly interpreting 2 Timothy 4:2 (Tomlinson 2010, 53). The consensus view of those holding to the Pauline authorship of the LTT is that these letters do not fit within the timeline of Acts but rather describe a later period in Paul’s work after his first release from Rome in 62 AD (Schnabel 2008, 115-122). Paul had a “fourth journey” from about 62-68 AD, where he ministered in Crete, Ephesus, Macedonia, Troas, Corinth, Miletus, and Nicopolis (Titus 1:5; 3:12; 1 Tim. 1:3; 2 Tim. 4:13, 20; Köstenberger 2017, 24-32).
In First Timothy, Paul gave Timothy the short-term task of “instructing certain men not to teach strange doctrines” (1 Tim 1:3). Timothy’s work in Ephesus was not a permanent post (Knight 1992, 207). Paul instructed Timothy to continue this task until his arrival (1 Tim 3:14; 4:13). At that point, Timothy would rejoin Paul in itinerant missionary work. As evidence of this point, Paul often sent Timothy on short-term tasks. Paul left Timothy and Silas in Berea (Acts 16:14). Paul sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia (Acts 19:22). Timothy delivered First Corinthians (1 Cor 4:17; 16:10). Paul sent Timothy to Philippi (Phil 2:19ff). Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica from Athens (1 Thess 3:1-6). The point is that Paul regularly commissioned Timothy for short-term tasks as a member of his team. There is no textual reason to believe that Paul’s commission to Timothy in First Timothy was long-term. Instead, First Timothy was written primarily for the occasional purpose of correcting false teachers in Asia Minor.
Also, when Paul wrote Second Timothy, Timothy was no longer in Ephesus, which indicates that the task of First Timothy was short-term. Paul told Timothy that he had sent Tychicus to Ephesus (2 Tim 4:12). If Timothy were still in Ephesus, it would have been unnecessary for Paul to share that information in his letter.
The short-term nature of Paul’s instructions to Timothy in Ephesus surfaces questions regarding Timothy’s role. Since the LTT are commonly called “Pastoral Epistles,” many misunderstand Timothy as a pastor. However, based on Paul’s relationship with Timothy, most modern commentators say Timothy was not a pastor.[2] Instead, scholars now prefer the term “apostolic delegate” as a more appropriate term for Timothy.[3] Timothy functioned like a missionary under the leadership of the senior missionary, Paul.
Timothy served for over ten years as an itinerant missionary under Paul. Timothy assisted Paul in planting churches in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, and Ephesus (Acts 16-19). Timothy co-authored six New Testament epistles with Paul.[4] As a Pauline coworker, Timothy was never called a pastor nor described in pastoral terms in the New Testament. Instead, Paul and Timothy established churches with local elders rather than pastoring those churches themselves.
We should read Paul’s final charge to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1-5 in light of his role as a missionary under Paul’s leadership. Paul charged Timothy with the pioneer task of proclaiming the gospel where Christ had not been named. Paul’s death was imminent (2 Timothy 4:6-8). Before his impending death, Paul wanted to ensure that the ministry of taking the gospel to the unreached would continue. Therefore, he charged Timothy to “Preach the word.” Paul desired Timothy to continue heralding the gospel in new places among unreached peoples as Paul had modeled.
Paul Charged Timothy as His Successor
Paul’s purpose in writing Second Timothy strengthens the argument that Paul’s purpose in 2 Timothy 4:2 was evangelistic rather than pastoral. In Second Timothy, Paul was preparing for his martyrdom. “For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come” (2 Tim. 4:6). So, Paul, the prototype missionary, assigned his mission to his most faithful disciple. Paul’s desire to entrust his task to Timothy is apparent in two passages: (1) 2 Timothy 1:12-14 and (2) 2 Timothy 3:10-14.
In 2 Timothy 1:12, Paul referred to “what has been entrusted to me,” presumably a reference to his gospel and teaching that he had received directly from Jesus (Gal 1:11-12). In the following two verses, Paul charged Timothy to “Retain the standard of sound words which you have heard from me… Guard through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us the treasure which has been entrusted to you” (2 Tim. 1:13-14). Paul commanded Timothy to guard his trust, which was the gospel and teaching Paul had received from Jesus.
In 2 Timothy 3:10-14, Paul reminded Timothy of his missionary model. “Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, persecutions and sufferings.” (2 Tim. 3:10-11a). In this second passage, Paul commended Timothy for adhering to his missionary model. Paul’s model included his teaching and extended to his conduct, purpose, and character. Paul’s purpose was to proclaim the gospel where Christ had not been named (Rom 15:20). Paul’s conduct was a lifestyle of suffering and determination that he lived, as evidenced in the book of Acts. Timothy walked with the same purpose and conduct as Paul. Then in 2 Timothy 3:14, Paul commanded Timothy to “continue in the things you have learned and become convinced.”
Therefore, Paul entrusting his teaching, conduct, purpose, and faith to Timothy is the context for 2 Timothy 4:1-5. The historical and literary context of Paul’s final charge to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1-5 suggests that the missionary work of Paul was in view. Paul gave nine imperatives, “preach the word,” “be ready,” “rebuke,” “correct,” “encourage,” “exercise self-control,” “endure hardship,” “do the work of an evangelist,” and “fulfill your ministry.”
In summary, it is absurd to think that the charge, “Preach the word,” in 2 Timothy 4:2, was pastoral. Why would Paul, the great missionary, at the brink of death, call his closest disciple and instruct him to abandon the missionary task and give himself primarily to teaching a single congregation? Adding to this absurdity is that we know of no “pulpit” that Timothy had for preaching. Like Paul, Timothy was itinerant. While Timothy was with Paul, he traveled extensively across the Roman world. In the New Testament, Timothy never pastored a single congregation. The context of Second Timothy indicates that “Preach the word” was an evangelistic charge.
Semantically, “Preach the Word” Means “Evangelize the Gospel”
The phrase “Preach the word” consists of three Greek words. The verb “preach” is the Greek word kerusso, and “the word” is the articular ton logon. An analysis of these terms bolsters the argument that “Preach the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2 is evangelistic.
Kerusso is almost universally used in an evangelistic sense throughout the New Testament and is coherent with the charge “do the work of an evangelist” (2 Tim. 4:5). Kerusso occurs 61 times in the New Testament[5] and carries a general meaning “to make an official announcement” or “to make public declaration” (BDAG, 543). Walking through the New Testament uses of kerusso will demonstrate its evangelistic connotation. In the gospels, kerusso occurs sixteen times to describe Jesus and his disciples’ itinerant preaching ministry,[6] four times to describe John the Baptist’s proclamation,[7] six times in Jesus’ teachings and exhortations on world evangelization,[8] and another three times to describe other individuals proclaiming about Jesus.[9] Luke 4:18-19, quoting Isaiah 61, declares the Messiah’s anointment to proclaim the gospel.
One passage that shows kerusso is distinct from homiletics is Mark 1:36-38:
Simon and his companions searched for Him; they found Him, and said to Him, “Everyone is looking for You.” He said to them, “Let us go somewhere else to the towns nearby, so that I may preach (kerusso) there also; for that is what I came for.”
In this narrative, Jesus was in the wilderness, praying. Simon came to him to tell him that a crowd had formed and wanted Jesus to minister to them. In other words, Jesus had an opportunity to homilize a group who had chosen to follow him but decided to preach to unreached towns instead. Jesus said preaching was his purpose for coming. In Mark 1:36-38, preaching was the initial proclamation of the good news to those who had never heard.
The evangelistic thrust of kerusso continues in Acts. Philip proclaimed the gospel in Samaria (8:5). Paul immediately preached in the synagogues of Damascus after conversion (9:20). The book of Acts ends with Paul in house arrest in Rome, “preaching the kingdom of God and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered” (Acts 28:31).
In the epistles, kerusso is also evangelistic. For example, Romans 10:14-15 says,
How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher (kerusso)? How will they preach (kerusso) unless they are sent? Romans 10:14-15
Paul understood that those who had never heard required preachers to bring the gospel to them.
Also, 1 Corinthians 1:23 says, “We preach (kerusso) Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness.” In this verse, the hearers of this preaching are Jews and Gentiles, meaning lost peoples. Therefore, 1 Corinthians 1:23 verse describes preaching as evangelism. Finally, 1 Timothy 3:16 states, “By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed (kerusso) among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.” In this verse, “the nations” are the hearers of preaching. Therefore, 1 Timothy 3:16 also describes preaching as evangelism.
Moreover, there is no explicit homiletical use of kerusso in the New Testament.[10] If “Preach the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2 is a command to homilize, it is the only homiletical usage of kerusso in the New Testament. Therefore, from a semantic perspective, “Preach the word” should be considered evangelistic rather than homiletical. Jon T. recently made the same argument about kerusso, saying,
“An interesting question for modern-day believers is how a term used primarily in the New Testament to denote proclaiming the gospel to not-yet-believers evolved into a term referring to an activity generally confined to church buildings with the audience being predominantly Christian” (Jon T. 2021, 13).
Additionally, “the word” (ton logon) is a common term for the gospel, especially when articular.[11] Two articular uses of logos in 2 Timothy demonstrate the usage:[12]
“Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, descendant of David, according to my gospel, for which I suffer hardship even to imprisonment as a criminal; but the word of God (ho logos tou Theo) is not imprisoned.” 2 Tim. 2:8-9
“Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth (ton logon tes altheias).” 2 Tim. 2:15
These two uses of logos refer to the gospel message. In 2 Timothy 2:9, Paul “wants to make clear that his suffering and imprisonment does not hinder the gospel’s progress” (Knight 1992, 398). The antecedent of “the word of God” in 2 Timothy 2:9 is clearly “my gospel” from the preceding verse. Likewise, the antecedent of 2 Timothy 2:15 is the gospel in 2 Timothy 2:11-13. Therefore, “the word” as gospel in 2 Timothy 4:2 conforms to a common Pauline usage (Knight 1992, 412).
To summarize, the LTT describe Timothy as a missionary under Paul’s leadership. As Paul pioneered the gospel in new places, so did Timothy. Paul’s final charge to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1-5 was in line with Timothy’s missionary role. Paul charged Timothy to “Preach the word” by evangelizing the gospel where Christ has not been named. Finally, “preach” is universally an evangelistic term in the New Testament, and “the word” is commonly used about the gospel. Therefore, “Preach the word” is an evangelistic reference. Despite this clear evidence, some objections remain to an evangelistic interpretation of 2 Timothy 4:2.
Responding to Three Potential Rebuttals
I have heard three potential arguments for a homiletic interpretation of “Preach the word.” These arguments are ultimately unconvincing. The first argument is that the three imperatives following “preach the word” refer to homiletics rather than evangelism. The second argument is that those who “will turn away their ears from the truth” in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 are Christians. Since Paul references Christians, this is a pastoral rather than a missionary charge. The third argument is that “Preach the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2 points to “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching” in 2 Timothy 3:16. Therefore, “Preach the word” means to exposit “All Scripture carefully.”
Regarding the first argument, “Preach the word” is followed by three imperatives, “rebuke, correct, and encourage.” Word studies of these three terms in the New Testament demonstrate that these terms occur in evangelistic contexts. Therefore, these three terms are consistent with an evangelistic interpretation of Paul’s charge in 2 Timothy 4:1-5. “Rebuke” is commonly used for bringing to light the sins of another, whether a Christian or non-Christian (BDAG, 315). For example, John the Baptist rebuked Herod the Tetrarch (Luke 3:19). Jesus said that the evildoer “does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be rebuked” (John 3:20). The Holy Spirit “will rebuke the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8).
In the New Testament, “correct” (epitimao) is never used for a pastor’s correction of his church, and there is no indication it is being used that way here. In an evangelistic context, this Greek term often occurs in the context of rebuking demons, the wind, or illness (Matt 8:26; 17:18; Mark 1:25; 4:39; 9:25; Luke 4:35, 39, 41; 8:24; 9:42). It is also used to refer to interpersonal corrections in the ministry of Jesus (Matt 12:16; Mark 8:30,33; Luke 9:21, 55). Both uses are consistent with a missionary interpretation of Timothy.
One explicit evangelistic use of “encourage” (parakaleo) is Luke 3:18, “So with many other exhortations (parakaleo) he preached good news to the people.” Another evangelistic use is Acts 2:40, when Peter encouraged the crowd on Pentecost to repent. Therefore, the imperatives “rebuke, correct, and encourage” coalesce with an evangelistic interpretation of “preach the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2.
The second argument concerns Paul’s break from his charge to address false teachers.
Even though Paul framed this as a future reality, Köstenberger stated that “it appears that Paul believes this time has already arrived” (Köstenberger 2017, 273). In the LTT, “sound doctrine” is never separated from the gospel and may even be a reference to the gospel in some passages (1 Tim 1:10; 6:3-4; 2 Tim 1:13; Titus 1:9; 2:1). So, when Paul said,” For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine” (2 Tim 4:3), he was probably framing a reality that had already begun as competing messages and gospels had begun to stand against the truth. Elsewhere in the LTT, Paul described the proliferation of false teachers and false teachings (see especially 2 Tim 3:1-9; 1 Tim 4:1-5). Opposing false teachers was the reason Paul left Timothy in Ephesus in First Timothy.
Paul said that some would “turn away from hearing the truth” (2 Tim 4:4), which was a constant reality in Paul’s ministry. Paul wrote harshly to the Galatians for accepting a false gospel (Gal 1:6; 3:1). Paul warned the false teachers that he would not spare them during his third visit (2 Cor 13:2). Paul handed Hymenaeus and Alexander over to Satan “that they may learn not to blaspheme” (1 Tim 1:20). Paul warned Timothy about the false teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus spreading like gangrene (2 Tim 2:17). As Timothy pressed forward in his evangelistic ministry, Paul is simply telling him that the same will happen again. As Timothy pioneered new fields, false teachers would arise. No doubt, Timothy was to deal with them just as Paul had modeled. Just as the reality of false teachers did not stop Paul’s work in pioneer evangelism, it was not to stop Timothy either.
These verses remind the reader that Paul did not preach the gospel and move on from his new believers and churches. Instead, he entered a long-term relationship with them. He visited them, sent them letters, sent his delegates to them, and prayed for them without ceasing. None of these realities remove the fact that Paul desired Timothy to “evangelize the gospel” in 2 Timothy 4:2.
Regarding the third argument, “the word” is likely about the gospel message rather than “All Scripture” in 2 Timothy 3:16. Both options are possible syntactically. For the reasons provided in the previous section, it is preferable to see “the word” as the gospel rather than an anaphoric reference to 2 Timothy 3:16.[13] However, even if “the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2 references “All Scripture,” my argument in this paper stands. In context, “all Scripture” in 2 Timothy 3:16 is a reference to the Old Testament. Indeed, Paul desired Timothy to proclaim Old Testament truths to his audiences. For example, Paul’s evangelistic sermon at Pisidian Antioch was full of Old Testament references (Acts 13:16-41). Therefore, if “the word” is anaphoric to 2 Timothy 3:16, it likely reflects Paul’s practice of evangelism using the Old Testament.
In summary, these three arguments against an evangelistic interpretation of “Preach the word” are unconvincing. First, the commands “rebuke, correct, and encourage” are consistent with evangelistic preaching. Second, the aside about false teachers in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 magnifies the urgency of the evangelistic task. Third, “the word” of 2 Timothy 4:2 is likely a reference to the gospel.
Conclusion
“Preach the word” in 2 Timothy 4:2 means “Evangelize the gospel.” This interpretation of 2 Timothy 4:2 was demonstrated in three ways. First, Timothy was not a pastor. Instead, he was an apostolic delegate, or missionary, engaged in pioneer church planting along with Paul. As a pioneer missionary, no doubt Timothy taught Christian congregations. In fact, a major emphasis of the LTT was instructing Timothy and Titus in how to instruct Christians. However, like Paul’s, Timothy’s primary task was to herald the gospel where Christ had not been named.
Second Timothy is not a “Pastoral Epistle.” Instead, it is Paul’s final charge to his most faithful disciple to take up his missionary task after his impending death. As a letter of succession, Second Timothy was a clarion call to Timothy to advance the cause of Christ as Paul had modeled. Third, “preach” (kerusso) carries an evangelistic connotation in the New Testament, and “the word” (ton logon) often means the gospel. Therefore, semantically, this phrase is best understood as “Evangelize the gospel.”
There are four practical implications of the evangelistic nature of 2 Timothy 4:2. First, “preach” should be used in an evangelistic sense rather than homiletically.[14] Second, pastors and missionaries should study each preaching passage of the New Testament in their evangelistic contexts. Re-evaluation of these texts will contribute to fruitful and biblical evangelistic and missionary practices. Third, the LTT are more missionary than pastoral and should be understood this way. As others have argued, it is time to stop using the term “Pastoral Epistles” (Towner 2006, 88-89). Fourth, re-evaluating pastoral instruction as homiletical and didactic rather than proclamatory may be beneficial. Since “preaching” and “proclaiming” in the New Testament are evangelistic terms, exploring other speaking terms for New Testament pastor-teachers seems prudent. For example, “teaching” (didasko) and its cognates are commonly used throughout the New Testament to refer to the activity and role of the pastor (Eph. 4:11; 1 Tim. 3:2; 5:17; Titus 1:9). Reconsidering pastoral instruction through the lens of teaching rather than preaching may lead to fruitful and biblical pastoral practices.
Considering recent discussions about pastoral instruction and preaching, I doubt this article is the final word. My contribution is to demonstrate that 2 Timothy 4:2 pertains to evangelism rather than homiletics. Regarding expository sermons, I have in no way indicated that they are wrong. Instead, I have shown that 2 Timothy 4:2 does not make the practice of expository homiletics normative.
Some may determine that expository homiletics is their preferred method for local church teaching. In fact, despite believing that expository sermons are not normative for local church life, my spiritual life has benefited from Bible teachers who utilize that style. In a recent Seedbed article, J.R. Stevenson shared his convictions regarding teaching and preaching.
“For this reason, in my practice, I continue to use DBS as an initial evangelistic tactic and training tool for equipping believers to go out into their communities. However, as the church matures and Christ gifts it with teachers, I aim to encourage more direct forms of teaching and proclamation to eventually replace DBS in the gathered worship of the church” (Stevenson 2022, 130-131).
While I disagree with Stevenson that proclamation should necessarily replace inductive Bible study methods, I share a hope of seeing Muslim-background teachers develop who can accurately teach the Bible. As those teachers emerge, may it be that they produce better and better methods to teach the Word of God!
Bibliography
Dever, Mark. 2013. Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. Third Edition. Wheaton: Crossway.
Köstenberger, Andreas J. 2017. Commentary on 1-2 Timothy & Titus. Nashville: B&H Publishing.
Madsen, Thorvald B. II. 2010. “The Ethics of the Pastoral Epistles,” in Entrusted with the gospel, ed. A. Köstenberger and T. Wilder. Nashville: B&H Publishing.
Liefeld, Walter L. 1999. 1 & 2 Timothy/Titus. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
McArthur, John. 2005. Preaching: How to Preach Biblically. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
Merida, Tony. 2013. “2 Timothy,” in Exalting Jesus in 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Ed. by D. Platt, et al. Nashville: B&H Publishing.
Mounce, William D. 2000. Pastoral Epistles. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.
Schnabel, Eckhard J. 2008. Paul the Missionary. Downers Grove: IVP Academic.
Schreiner, Thomas R. 2014. “Overseeing and Serving the Church in the Pastoral and General Epistles,” in Shepherding God’s Flock, ed. by B. Merkle and T. Schreiner. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel.
Stevenson, J.R. 2022. “Another Look at the Biblical Meaning of ‘Preaching’ and ‘Teaching,” Seedbed (vol. XXXIII.1).
T., Jon. 2021 “’Proclamational’ DBS: Biblical Preaching and Teaching in Discovery Bible Studies,” Seedbed (vol. XXXI.2).
Tomlinson, F. Alan. 2010. “The Purpose and Stewardship Theme within the Pastoral Epistles,” in Entrusted with the Gospel. Ed. by A. Köstenberger and T. Wilder. Nashville: B&H Publishing.
[1] The term homiletics is inspired from Acts 20:11 where Paul “talked with (homilesas) them a long while until daybreak” at Troas. Paul’s teaching time in Troas is the only narrative description of a teaching time in a gathered church in the New Testament.
[2] The following commentators argue that Timothy and Titus were not pastors: Köstenberger 2017, 8; Tomlinson 2010, 53; Madsen 2010, 225; Schreiner 2014, 99.
[3] The following call Timothy and Titus apostolic delegates: Köstenberger 2017, 1; Tomlinson 2010, 53; Towner 2006, 85-86; Mounce 2000, lviii; Liefeld 1999, 19.
[4] 2 Cor 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; 1 Thes 1:1; 2 Thes 1:1; Phlm 1:1.
[5] Two occurrences from the longer ending of Mark are included in this number.
[6] Matt 4:17, 23; 9:35; 10:7, 27; 11:1; Mark 1:14, 38, 39; 3:14; 6:12; 16:20; Luke 4:44; 8:1; 9:2; 12:3.
[10] The New Testament use of kerusso most likely to have a homiletic meaning is Acts 15:21. In this verse, Jew “preach” Moses by reading his Law in the synagogues. This verse could be understood as Jewish leaders teaching to Jews in their synagogues. However, it is likely a reference to the Jewish message being spread to non-Jews through the synagogues throughout the Roman Empire.
[11] For example, see Acts 4:31; 6:2, 4, 7; 8:4, 14, 25; 11:1, 19; 13:5, 7, 46, 48, 49; 14:25; 15:7, 35, 36; 16:6; 17:13; 19:10, 20; 1 Cor 14:36; Eph 1:13; Phil 1:14; Col 1:5, 25; 4:3; 1 Thess. 1:6, 8.
[12] The other four uses of logos in 2 Timothy are not relevant, since (1) 2 Tim. 1:13; 4:15 use logos in a plural sense to describe Paul’s teaching, (2) 2 Tim. 2:17 negatively talks about the logos of false teachers, and (3) 2 Tim 2:11 is an idiomatic statement about trustworthy statements.
[13] For agreement with my view, see Köstenberger 2017, 272; Towner 2006, 600; Knight 1992, 453.
[14] A similar study of the other preaching terms, such as euangelizo, katangello, apangello, and diangello reveals that these terms are also evangelistic rather than homiletic in the New Testament.
In a previous blog post, I argued that Timothy was not a pastor (click here). Like that one, this article continues my posts on Pauline Emulation as a missiological hermeneutic. See my article in the Midwestern Journal of Theology (click here) to read my defense of Pauline Emulation as a valid missiological hermeneutic.
When Timothy received First Timothy, he served as Paul’s delegate to Asia Minor. About ten years before Paul wrote First Timothy, Paul, Timothy, and his team planted churches across Asia Minor. During that ten-year gap, false teachers and heresy arose in those areas, and Paul tasked Timothy to clean house. He removed false elders and installed genuine elders. He corrected false teaching. After Timothy completed these tasks, he moved on to his next task.
Instead of being a pastor, Timothy served as Paul’s missionary team member. Paul sent him to accomplish short-term tasks. Timothy assisted Paul in writing numerous New Testament books and delivered others. Like Paul, Timothy was an itinerant missionary, planting churches in places where Christ had not been named.
Since Timothy was not a pastor, the purpose of this blog post is to determine what designation Timothy served under. There are three basic choices:
1. Apostolic delegate. Modern New Testament scholars tend to call Timothy an apostolic delegate, meaning he was a special class of individuals serving under an apostle’s leadership. As a delegate, he was sent with the apostle’s authority to do the work that the apostle delegated him to do. Andreas Kostenberger, among others, advocates for Timothy as an apostolic delegate.
2. “Small-a” apostle. Others call Timothy an “apostle of the churches” or a “small-a” apostle. This designation essentially means an individual responsible for the apostolic task of taking the gospel to pioneer peoples and places to plant churches where they do not exist. David Hesselgrave, among others, advocates for Timothy as a small-a apostle.
3. Evangelist. Some call Timothy an evangelist, especially since Paul indicated that he held this title in 2 Timothy 4:5. In interpretations of the role of an evangelist, there is functionally no difference between the role of an evangelist and a “small-a” apostle. There is only a difference in titles. George Peters, among others, advocates for Timothy as an evangelist.
In the end, all three of these titles have very similar meanings. Paul designated Timothy to do the same task that Paul did throughout Acts. Timothy was a pioneer church planter, set apart to make the name of Jesus known in pioneer settings. However, Timothy was appointed by men for this role rather than by Jesus. Timothy received his commission through men (Paul and the churches), whereas Paul was commissioned by Jesus. Timothy received his teaching from men (Paul and the chuches), whereas Paul received his teaching directly by revelation from Jesus Christ. Therefore, while Timothy was commissioned to do the same task that Paul did, there is a great magnitude of difference in his authority in doing that task. As a result, Timothy did not provide apostolic leadership to the churches as Paul did. Nor did Timothy write Scripture. However, just as Paul proclaimed Jesus, where he had not been named and planted churches among the lost, so did Timothy. In this way, Timothy, perhaps even more than Paul, is the prototype missionary.
Thomas Grantham and the Successors of the Apostles
Debate about Timothy’s role has existed since at least 1674, when Thomas Grantham, a General Baptist from England, wrote The Successors of the Apostles (click here). Grantham said, “The designe of this treatise is to bring into the good liking of the Church her ancient servants, the messengers or apostles of Christ and his churches (such I mean as Timothy and Titus, and others of that rank) for the more orderly management of her affairs in religion at home and abroad” (Thomas Grantham, The Successors of the Apostles, London, 1674: F2).
In brief, Grantham argued that Timothy and Titus were examples of subordinate apostles. He said that these subordinate apostles lacked the authority of the chief apostles, namely Paul and the twelve. However, these subordinate apostles were required “for the more orderly promulgation of the gospel, and the better settlement of churches to the end of the world” (Grantham, 1).
Throughout this short treatise, Grantham argued that Timothy and Titus were examples of successors of the apostles. While Grantham clearly and forcefully argued that subordinate apostles, like Timothy and Titus, lacked the full authority of the chief apostles, he recognized the need in the seventeenth century for subordinate apostles to take the gospel to the ends of the earth. Grantham also understood himself to be one of these subordinate apostles and took the title “Messenger” to indicate it. However, Grantham stayed in England and saw himself as fulfilling this role in something like the Southern Baptist role of Director of Mission or Associational Strategists in the United States.
My purpose in sharing Grantham is to state that my ideas in this blog post are not new. They have been part of evangelical thought for at least 350 years!
Second Timothy as a Letter of Succession
However, I am much less convinced by church history than by Scripture. The text that concerns us at this point is Second Timothy. Second Timothy is a letter of succession, meaning that Paul expected to die imminently and called on Timothy to take up his mantle and continue his work. Take any modern evangelical commentary off the shelf on Second Timothy and you are likely to see them describe Second Timothy as a letter of succession in one way or another.
As I have argued elsewhere, Paul called Timothy to continue the missionary task of proclaiming Christ, where He had not been named. To defend this point, please read my article “Validating Pauline Emulation as a Missiological Hermeneutic” (click here). After Paul died, he expected that Timothy and others would continue the Great Commission. Paul desired that they would preach the gospel, make disciples, and plant churches in new territories. Paul also admonished Timothy to entrust his teaching to faithful men who would be able to teach others also. Paul intended for Timothy to continue raising up more pastors and missionaries, as Paul had, to continue the task.
Pauline Successors Does Not Equal Apostolic Succession
When I discuss the topic of apostles’ successors, the Roman Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession is often raised. The Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession states that there has been an uninterrupted transmission of spiritual authority from the apostles (and primarily from Peter) through successive popes and bishops. Therefore, the present Roman Catholic pope is said, by this doctrine, to be acting in the same apostolic authority as Peter.
However, what I am saying is the opposite of Catholic apostolic succession. Anyone who looks at the pope recognizes in a moment that he is not functioning in the missionary task of Paul, Peter, and the apostles. The popes do not lead in missionary activity by bringing the gospel into pioneer territories and establishing churches where they do not exist. The dichotomy is like a famous quote by N.T. Wright, “Wherever St. Paul went, there was a riot. Wherever I go, they serve tea.”
In contrast to apostolic succession, Timothy was given the task of Paul and the apostles without their authority. Jesus Christ appointed the apostle Paul as an apostle, while Timothy was appointed by men (Gal 1:1; 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6). The apostle Paul received his gospel and teaching by revelation from the Lord Jesus, while Timothy received the same from Paul (Gal 1:11-12; 2 Tim 1:13-14). While Paul functioned in the authority he received from Jesus, Timothy’s authority was lesser because he received it from man rather than from Jesus. For this reason, Timothy did not continue to write Scripture after Paul’s death. So, let me be clear: there is no biblical warrant for the idea that the authority of the chief apostles now rests in the hands of men.
At the same time, even Paul, who Jesus made an apostle, submitted to others. Therefore, his successors, like Timothy, who possess less authority, must act in submission to others. It is appropriate that churches and missionary agencies exist to provide accountability and direction for those seeking to work in a Pauline missionary role. First, Paul submitted his gospel to Peter, James, and John in Jerusalem. The result was that they recognized his teaching as being from Jesus and gave him the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that Paul and Barnabas should spearhead efforts to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10). Second, when controversy arose about the circumcision of Gentiles, Paul submitted to the Jerusalem Council, where key leaders publicly agreed with Paul and wrote a letter to that effect (Acts 15). My point is that modern missionaries should be even more careful in their submission to others if Paul modeled submission to other church leaders.
Until now, I have argued that Timothy was a successor of Paul but without the apostolic authority that Roman Catholics and others have sought to establish for the pope and others. Instead, he carried Paul’s burden of making the name of Christ known where He had yet to be named. From this point, I want to turn my attention to three potential designations for Timothy: (1) apostolic delegate, (2) small-a apostle, and (3) evangelist.
Was Timothy an Apostolic Delegate?
Modern evangelical scholars have begun using the term “apostolic delegate” for Timothy since they are unconvinced that any biblical title should be utilized. Kostenberger asserts:
“[Timothy and Titus] serve as Paul’s apostolic delegates who are temporarily assigned to their present location in order to deal with particular problems that have arisen in their respective churches and require special attention. For this reason Paul’s correspondence with Timothy and Titus doesn’t merely contain advise to younger ministers. It records Paul’s instructions to his special delegates toward the close of the apostolic era at a time when the aging apostle feels a keen responsibility to ensure the orderly transition from the apostolic to the post-apostolic period (A.J. Kostenberger, 1-2 Timothy & Titus. Nashville: Holman, 2017, 8).
Those emphasizing Timothy as an apostolic delegate usually highlight the fact that this was a temporary role made possible by Paul’s apostolic authority. They see Timothy acting as Paul’s delegate and thus functioning inside of Paul’s authority, which he received directly from Jesus. Therefore, after Paul’s death, the continuity of this role is in question.
In the same work, Kostenberger said, “In 2 Timothy Paul seeks to prepare Timothy for assuming the mantle of Paul’s mission” (Kostenberger, 364). The weakness of the title apostolic delegate becomes apparent at Paul’s death. As Kostenberger argued, Paul expected Timothy to continue his mission. However, under what title or authority did he continue without the delegator?
Was Timothy a Small-A Apostle?
In contrast, many argue today that Timothy was a small-a apostle. The biblical evidence for this is solely in 1 Thessalonians 2:7, which says,” We could have been a burden as Christ’s apostles.” The argument is that the “we” in this verse finds its antecedent in 1 Thessalonians 1:1, making Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy apostles of Christ.
David Hesselgrave argued that Timothy was a small-a apostle, or using his term, an apostle of the churches. He wrote, “other apostles were sent out by Holy Spirit-directed churches or leaders (Acts 13:4; 2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25; 1 Thess 2:6). Apostles or missionaries in this more general sense included Barnabas, Mark, Silas, Timothy, Titus, and Epaphroditus” (Hesselgrave, Paradigms in Conflict. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2005, 216). See Don Dent’s excellent book, The Ongoing Role of Apostles in Missions, for a thorough analysis and defense of this view (Amazon link here).
Arguing for Timothy as an apostle is an argument for the continuity of the role of apostles. If Timothy was an apostle after Paul, others can function as apostles today. The primary argument here is that modern missionaries should see themselves as small-a apostles who have the burden of the apostles’ mission but function in lesser authority. In other words, Hesselgrave and Dent agree with Grantham’s distinction between chief apostles and subordinate apostles. All three authors argued that modern missionaries continue this great tradition.
On the other hand, many have vehemently argued against the continuity of apostles. This vehemence arose during the Reformation as men like Martin Luther and John Calvin sought to fight against the Roman Catholic doctrine of Apostolic Succession. Unfortunately, this resulted in a dynamic during the Reformation in which Catholic missionaries were spread across the world, while the Protestant church had little to no missionary impulse. While theological debate raged in Europe, Jesuit missionaries sought to evangelize the court of Akbar the Great in the Moghul Empire. By the time William Carey went to India, Catholics had been established in the subcontinent for hundreds of years.
From a biblical perspective, the evidence that Timothy was an apostle is not fully convincing. After all, the only verse in the New Testament that might argue for Timothy as an apostle is 1 Thessalonians 2:7. Some commentators see Paul using a “royal we” in this passage. Others say that the “we” is not meant to designate Silvanus and Timothy as apostles but could be a reference to the character of the other apostles. Another view is that the “we” is a reference to Silvanus and Timothy, but that Paul did not intend to designate them as apostles in this passage.
One point that brings me great pause in designating Timothy as an apostle are a few of the letters that Paul and Timothy co-wrote. For example:
“Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by God’s will, and Timothy our brother.” 2 Corinthians 1:1
“Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by God’s will, and Timothy our brother.” Colossians 1:1
In these two letters, Paul seems careful to distinguish his title as apostle from that of Timothy. Both Second Corinthians and Colossians were written after First Thessalonians. Therefore, if Paul intended to designate Timothy as an apostle in that book, why carefully differentiate in later books? Moreover, it is telling that Paul never took the opportunity to designate Timothy as an apostle in First and Second Timothy or any other letter.
The result is that it is a judgment call on whether or not Timothy should be deemed a small apostle. Because of this, each person leans toward the evidence that corroborates their own perspective. Those who want to see a continuity of the apostolic role see Timothy as a small-a apostle, and those who believe the apostlic role has ceased say that he was not.
We need to move beyond this dichotomy. Kostenberger never affirmed Timothy as a small-a apostle but still argued that Paul’s role was to persist in Timothy. Paul’s mission had to continue. Second Timothy is a letter of succession. So, whether Timothy was a small-a apostle or something else, Scripture is clear that Paul’s apostolic function to take the gospel to the end of the earth was to persist in Timothy.
Was Timothy an Evangelist?
One option to break the stalemate over whether Timothy is an apostle or not is to explore whether the title evangelist is more appropriate. In 1972, George Peters, a missions professor from Dallas Theological Seminary, convincingly argued that Timothy was an evangelist. His views could be unifying for some.
Looking at Ephesians 4:11, Peters argued that the roles of apostles and prophets had ceased and been inherited by evangelists and pastor-teachers, respectively. He says, “A careful study leads to the conclusion that a New Testament evangelist is an apostle, fully responsible for the apostolic function minus the apostolic office and original authority” (Peters, A Biblical Theology of Missions, Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1972, 247). An astute reader will immediately recognize that there are virtually no differences between the roles Grantham, Kostenberger, Hesselgrave, Dent, and Peters describe. All argue for individuals who continue “the apostolic function.” All argue that these individuals do not have “the apostolic office and original authority.” It does not matter which term is correct. What matters is the persistence of a role that continues the apostolic mission of bringing the gospel to the ends of the earth.
As we did with Timothy as a small-a apostle, let us look through the biblical evidence of whether he was an evangelist. The primary evidence is in 2 Timothy 4:5, which charged Timothy to “do the work of an evangelist.” Many, especially those who argue for Timothy as a pastor, argue that he is not called an evangelist but simply called to do evangelism. However, before we so quickly dismiss Timothy as an evangelist, consider that Paul only used this term in some of his letters to give Timothy a clear designation (unless 1 Thess 2:7 designates him as an apostle). Paul often referred to Timothy as his spiritual son, which is not a clear ministry designation. He is called “our brother” in 2 Corinthians 1:1 and Colossians 1:1, but that is not a ministry designation. In fact, “evangelist” in 2 Timothy 4:5 is the clearest verse of Paul giving Timothy a title in any of his letters. Other titles used by Paul for Timothy include a servant of Christ Jesus (Phil 1:1), Paul’s coworker (Romans 16:21), and man of God (1 Timothy 6:11).
The clearest title Paul gave Timothy was evangelist—not pastor, not apostle, but evangelist. Considering that point, perhaps the biblical role of evangelist should be seen as individuals who follow in Timothy’s footsteps and take on “the apostolic function minus the apostolic office and original authority.”
The term evangelist occurs only three times in the New Testament: Acts 21:8, Ephesians 4:11, and 2 Timothy 4:5. In Acts 21:8, we hear about “Philip the evangelist, who was one of the Seven.” This designation reminds the reader of Acts 8 when Philip, one of those designated to serve widows, was scattered to Samaria after the death of Stephen. In Acts 8, Philip preached Jesus and baptized many. Then Philip was sent by an angel to Gaza, where he evangelized the Ethiopian eunuch, which began the gospel mission to Ethiopia. Acts 8 is a picture of a biblical evangelist as someone who participates in proclaiming Jesus where He has not been named by does not hold the office or authority of an apostle. Therefore, if Timothy was an evangelist, his role should be likened to Philip’s.
As an aside, here is an obvious point. Modern evangelists like Billy Graham obviously stand in a different role than Timothy. As William Combs stated in his analysis of the biblical role of evangelists, “modern day ‘evangelists’ do not seem to fit the pattern of what the NT means by evangelist, if we are right in seeing the term as more correctly applied to the missionary church planter” (William W. Combs, “The Biblical Role of the Evangelist” in DBSJ (Fall 2002): 48). It seems likely that modern evangelical missionaries are slow to adopt the term evangelist to describe their role because men like Billy Graham have utilized this biblical term in another sense.
Conclusion
Was Timothy an apostolic delegate? Yes. In fact, that term was coined to describe Timothy and Titus, so it, by necessity, describes them. Was Timothy a small apostle? Maybe. But this depends on what a small apostle is and how 1 Thessalonians is defined. Was Timothy an evangelist? Almost certainly.
In conclusion, the difference between these three terms is almost entirely semantics rather than a difference in function. Grantham, Kostenberger, Hesselgrave, Dent, and Peters all argue that Timothy was to continue doing Paul’s apostolic mission but was of lesser authority than Paul. He was appointed by men rather than by Jesus. He received his teachings and gospel from men rather than through revelation from Jesus. He did not inherit the apostles’ authority but rather their duty to take the gospel to the nations.
Therefore, whether we use the term apostolic delegate, small-a apostle, or evangelist for Timothy does not seem to matter. Scripture is clear that Paul intended for Timothy to continue in his missionary task and to train and designate others to do the same. Again, I refer to my paper “Validating Pauline Emulation as a Missiological Hermeneutic” as a defense of these basic points (click here).
If there is little to no difference between these titles, why have I written at such length on this topic?
First, I am writing on this subject because of how divisive the idea is that modern missionaries are small-a apostles. In defending Pauline Emulation, I was careful not to base my arguments on that point. In my experience, many tune out the conversation when others argue that point. There are many reasons that people argue against modern-day apostles. In fact, many false teachers today call themselves apostles; some have grown weary of these things.
Second, I am writing on this subject because there is broad agreement that Paul’s missionary role persists today but with reduced authority. It is helpful to demonstrate how broadly accepted these ideas are.
Third, many who argue against modern-day apostles are put at ease when we emphasize that modern missionaries do not possess the authority of Paul or the apostles. In contrast, most false teachers who take on the title “apostle” do so to emphasize their great authority. Instead, those arguing that modern missionaries are small-a apostles are usually careful to argue a differentiation in authority.
Therefore, let us endeavor to find cooperation and agreement around the role of missionaries, even if some disagreement persists about the correct biblical term to use for them.
Photo by Willian Justen de Vasconcellos on Pexels.com
In South Asia, some Christians take offense when we use particular Urdu or Arabic terms in our worship and witness to Muslims. Hazrat Isa al-Masih and Allah are the terms that create the most significant discussion. This section explains why we use these terms.
Using “Hazrat Isa al-Masih” to Refer to our Lord
Some have taken offense over the use of Isa as a name for our Lord. There is disagreement about which term to use for Jesus in Muslim evangelism. Some argue that only the name Yeshu should be used (e.g., Khudawand Yeshu, Yeshu Masih). Others use Hazrat Isa alayhi-salaam.
Etymology of the name of our Lord. In Greek, the name of our Lord is Ιησοῦς (pronounced “Iesous”). In some ancient Syriac texts, the name of our Lord was transliterated from Greek to Isho. For example, see manuscripts of the Curetonian Gospels and the Siniatic Palimpsest. It seems likely that the Arabic transliteration, Isa, was derived from this Syriac transliteration of the Greek. The Arabic name “Isa” is as faithful to the original Greek as the English name “Jesus.” The name “Jesus” for our Lord was a Latin transliteration of the Greek name of our Lord. Therefore, we should not be offended that the name Isa is incorrect for our Lord.
Why do we have different names for our Lord in different languages? One significant difference between the Christian and Muslim faith is our approach to language. In Islam, they say that the Qur’an was revealed in Arabic. Therefore, the Qur’an is read in Arabic, prayers are made in Arabic, and the Arabic language significantly influences local languages with a significant Muslim population. In contrast, the Bible was written in two languages, Greek and Hebrew. The Old Testament was translated into Greek before the birth of our Lord. In the New Testament, the Greek Old Testament is often quoted, meaning that our biblical text allows us to use Scripture translations. From a theological perspective, Christians believe that God is so great that He can understand prayers in every language and that, as our heavenly Father, He wants to hear from His children in their heart languages.
Whether to use Isa or Yeshu in Muslim evangelism in South Asia depends on the type of Muslim you are trying to reach and your evangelistic style. Many who prefer to use Yeshu focus on apologetic and polemical debate with educated, orthodox Muslims. Therefore, using a different term for Jesus helps create a clear boundary between Islamic and Christian teachings on Jesus.
Most engaging ordinary (or folk) Muslims prefer to use Isa. Using Isa helps the evangelist to enter the world of the person they are evangelizing. The goal is to reinterpret Isa from merely a prophet to Savior/Son of God/God for the Muslim listener.
Since Hazrat is a Persian term for “honored,” there is no issue in attaching that prefix. It seems to be an inoffensive term for both Muslims and Christians. In worship, we tend to use the name Khudawand Isa al-Masih. Khudawand is a term for “Lord” that implies his deity.
Regarding a suffix to Hazrat Isa, some prefer al-Masih, while others use alayhi salaam. Alayhi salaam is an Arabic phrase meaning “May the peace of God (Allah) be upon him.” In Islam, it is considered disrespectful not to use this phrase after the name of a prophet. Some Christians have objected to this phrase since Isa is the one who gives us peace. We are not able to grant peace to Him! However, this phrase is usually used in Islamic cultures to show respect. Therefore, I think it is permissible to use.
In contrast, I prefer to use a suffix of al-Masih, Arabic for “the Messiah.” There are four reasons for this preference. First, al-Masih is a term for our Lord in both the Bible and the Qur’an. Therefore, this term acts as a bridge for understanding between Christians and Muslims. Second, most Muslims see this replacement of alahi salaam with al-Masih as respectful towards our Lord. Therefore, this term seems to mitigate the removal of alayhi salaam as offensive to Muslims. Third, using this term for our Lord helps Muslims realize that I am emphasizing something different about Hazrat Isa al-Masih. It usually helps them realize that I am not simply telling them about a prophet of Islam but calling them to follow our Lord. Fourth, when training South Asian Christians, al-Masih is easier for Christians to master saying than alayhi salaam.
Can we Use Allah for God?
Likewise, some Christians are offended by the use of Allah. I tend to use Khuda for God, but sometimes using Allah is more appropriate. For example, the traditional Muslim greeting, asalamu alykum, means “May the peace of Allah be upon you.” Therefore, some Christians use only salaam (“peace”) when greeting Muslims so as not to invoke the term “Allah.” However, I believe that the term “Allah” for God is permissible for Christians to use for three reasons.
Reason #1 Etymology. Etymologically, “Allah” is related to the Hebrew term for God, “Elohim.” In the Hebrew Bible, the plural “Elohim” is commonly used; however, the singular “Elah” is also used in some places (e.g., Deut 32:15; Isa 44:8; Psa 50:22). Since both Hebrew and Arabic are in the Semitic language family, it is easy to see how the singular “Elah” and the Arabic “Allah” are related. Therefore, the root of “Allah” derives from the Hebrew word for God.
Reason #2: Historical use of Allah. Historically, both Christians and others used Allah in Arabic-speaking contexts before the advent of Islam. Before Islam, “Allah” meant God in the Arab world. Therefore, we can use “Allah” with a clear conscience since, historically, it did not hold the technical meaning of the God of the Qur’an.
Reason #3 Current use of Allah. At present, Allah is the term used or God in Arabic-speaking churches. Christians also use it as the primary word for God in other countries. Since Christians currently use Allah in worship in some languages, it is permissible to use in Urdu as well.
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. He made Hazrat Adam (PBUH) and his wife Howa (PBUH). He placed them in a beautiful garden and gave them authority over everything in the garden. But He gave them one command: “Do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Gen 2:17).
But what did Hazrat Adam (PBUH) and his wife do? They ate from the tree and broke God’s command. Because of this one act of disobedience, this one sin, their relationship with God was broken. If we have even one sin inside of us, we cannot go into the presence of God. Just like Hazrat Adam (PBUH), we are also sinners. This includes each one of us. Every person has the same problem – they are sinners and cannot go into God’s presence because of their sin.
For example, look at a bottle of water. Can we drink it? Yes, this water is clean. However, imagine that someone comes and puts in just one drop of alcohol. Can we drink it then? No! Why not? One drop of alcohol makes the whole bottle impure. The water was pure, but just one drop of the impure makes the entire bottle impure.
In the same way, if we are pure, just one sin makes us impure. Can that which is impure enter heaven? Of course not! Can that which is impure enter the presence of the pure God?
Since we are sinners, how can we enter God’s presence? A good idea is to look at the example of the man called the friend of God, Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH). What is Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH) famous for? God called him to give his son as a sacrifice. Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH) heard God’s command and, obediently, was about to sacrifice his son when God stopped him. God provided an animal for Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH) to sacrifice in place of his son.
Why did Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH) make a sacrifice? What is the purpose of sacrifice? We need a satisfactory answer to these questions. However, when we look at the examples of the prophets, many of them made sacrifices. Hazrat Nuh (PBUH) made a sacrifice. Hazrat Musa (PBUH) made a sacrifice. Hazrat Dawood (PBUH) made a sacrifice. Therefore, we need to know the purpose of sacrifice. To understand the meaning of sacrifice, we should look to the writings of Hazrat Musa (PBUH) in the Taurat Sharif. In that book, we are shown that if we sin, we must make sacrifices for our sins. In one place, God’s word says, “Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb 9:22). That is why Hazrat Ibrahim (PBUH) made a sacrifice. This is the reason Hazrat Musa (PBUH) made a sacrifice. All the prophets made sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins.
But this teaching about sacrifice creates a problem in our lives. Looking at society around us, we see that sin is common. When we look at our own lives, we know that we are also sinners and that we often break God’s commands. One sacrifice per year is not sufficient for our daily sins. For this reason, God sent other prophets who spoke about a Masih who would come and offer one perfect sacrifice. The prophets taught that the Masih’s sacrifice would be sufficient to forgive the sins of the whole world.
One day Hazrat Jibril (PBUH) came from heaven with an announcement to Hazrat Miriam (PBUH), saying, “Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bring forth a son, and will call his name Isa” (Luke 1:31). When she heard this, Hazrat Miriam (PBUH) was amazed and said, “How can this be, seeing I am a virgin?” (Luke 1:34) Hazrat Jibril (PBUH) responded, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35). And it happened just as Hazrat Jibril (PBUH) announced. Is the birth of any other prophet this special? Did angels announce the birth of any other prophet? Was any other prophet born without a father?
Hazrat Isa al-Masih is also famous for His miraculous works. He healed the sick. He gave life to the dead. Once, He walked on water. Another time, Hazrat Isa al-Masih fed 5,000 people with five pieces of bread and two fish. The power of Hazrat Isa al-Masih was great. Was any other prophet able to do such mighty works?
Hazrat Isa al-Masih had the most unique birth of any prophet. He also did the most extraordinary miracles. The teaching of Hazrat Isa al-Masih was also unique. Every other prophet said this is the way of God. Walk on this path. However, Hazrat Isa al-Masih said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Hazrat Isa al-Masih’s teaching was different since He is the path for us to gain access to God. All the other prophets merely taught about a path, while Hazrat Isa al-Masih became our path.
So, Hazrat Isa al-Masih’s birth was special. His miracles were special. His word was special. But that is not the most special thing about His life. The most unique thing He did was become a sacrifice for our sins. Hazrat Isa al-Masih gave the sacrifice of His own life. A perfect sacrifice. A blameless sacrifice. He died on a cross for our sins. And do you know what happened three days later? He came back from the dead! Have you ever met anyone who was in the grave for three days and came back from the dead?
Know this. Hazrat Isa al-Masih’s birth was special. His miracles were special. His word was special. His death was special. And His resurrection was special. Where is Hazrat Isa al-Masih today? He went to heaven. He remains in heaven today in the presence of God. Every other prophet, teacher, or spiritual leader remains in a grave. However, one grave is empty because Hazrat Isa al-Masih was great enough to walk out of His grave and ascend to heaven.
A day is fixed when, one day, Hazrat Isa al-Masih will return on the day of judgment. He will give judgment to all people everywhere. We must be ready for this day of judgment by walking on the path of Hazrat Isa al-Masih. We do this by repenting, believing in Hazrat Isa al-Masih, and becoming His disciples. If we do this, we will be ready for the day of judgment. If we do not, we will end up in the fires of hell. This is our choice today when we hear the message of Hazrat Isa al-Masih.
No Cousins Left 
