Over the last week or so, a minor spat has been escalating across the internet around the actions and intentions of some of us who have sought to provide slightly different perspectives on how we engage Islam as Christians committed to the gospel: seeking to relate constructively and openly to the reality of diverse Muslims. I would want to reaffirm, as I trust the history of my posts on this site would demonstrate, my concern for the plight of persecuted Christians around the world and want to add my support to the advocacy of the suffering church, particularly in many Muslim-majority contexts and for that aspect of the work of the Barnabas Fund. The post that referenced Ben White's review on the Fulcrum site, and my earlier post about the Barnabas Fund has merely provided a suggested alternative reading of some elements of Islam and the consequent appropriate Christian response to that presented in some Barnabas Fund publications.
A number of statements have had to be published following the circulation of an article by the Barnabas Fund. You can read the statement issued by Global Connections, the network of evangelical mission organisations including Interserve, Arab World Ministries, CMS and Crosslinks among others, here. The open evangelical network, Fulcrum, have been obliged to publish a statement, too, here. And my own mission organisation CMS have a statement here.
I trust this clarifies the position somewhat. Shortly, Global Connections, through the Christian Response to Islam network ("CRIB") will be publishing a set of guidelines on a gracious response to Islam that I hope to be be posting on this site. This should add some specific points for discussion that I hope and pray will sharpen our Christian ethic and witness as we aim to engage Muslims after the manner of Christ. It will be good to have a document with which all of us from across the church can discuss and engage with robustly, conscious that we are all called to account for the manner in which we follow our calling and not merely the ends we are striving for.
Anyway, it's been a messy week for evangelical Christians working with Muslims and I couldn't help but chuckle wrly at this cartoon.
So did you decide to target Patrick Sookhdeo at the CRIB conference or not? Is the person who claims he heard with his own ears Bryan Knell identify Sookhdeo as a target telling the truth?
Will you allow this comment to stand, and 'discuss and engage robustly' with this most serious issue?
Posted by: Abe R | February 22, 2009 at 10:23 PM
My experience has been that those who spend their time attacking others themselves, are those who complain most bitterly and vigorously when they feel attacked themselves, rightly or wrongly.
Your response on the other-hand seems to be considered and gracious. Well done.
Steve
Posted by: Steve Sparrow | February 22, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Steve - Ben White his used his review to attack Sookhdeo, and this blog endorsed it. Why?
Posted by: Abe R | February 22, 2009 at 11:22 PM
Steve - Ben White his used his review to attack Sookhdeo, and this blog endorsed it. Why?
Posted by: Abe R | February 22, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Abe: I think the Global Connections statement answers your question about the CRIB meeting. Do please read through Ben White's review; there is no personal attack in the review merely academic questions about some of the material in the book Global Jihad hence my willingness to link to it.
Posted by: Richard Sudworth | February 23, 2009 at 09:08 AM
My question is why did Fulcrum, an evangelical Christian journal, publish a lengthy book review by a self-identified non-Christian individual. Does a political barrage by a leftist, anti-semitic, Islamist apologist with no identifiable connection to (or history of interest in) any serious evangelical discussion really belong on Fulcrum?
Posted by: Josef | February 23, 2009 at 05:16 PM
Richard, are you aware that Ben White has painted Hezbollah as a nationalist group and not an Islamist group?
http://seismicshock.wordpress.com/2009/02/22/when-is-jihad-not-jihad/
Based on the evidence provided in the above link, do you think White should be writing about jihad?
Posted by: Mordechai | February 23, 2009 at 05:26 PM
Here is my personal statement on recent events:
http://www.benwhite.org.uk/2009/02/25/statement-on-my-review-of-global-jihad-and-subsequent-barnabas-fund-emails/
Posted by: Ben White | February 25, 2009 at 06:35 PM
Your cartoon is a little below the belt - regarding the issues, there are serious consequences for the Barnabas Fund where a cartoon is inappropriate. A can of worms has been opened and laghter in not the solution 0 lives are at stake.
Posted by: Len Grates | February 25, 2009 at 08:40 PM
Len: the cartoon is very much gallows humour..... what seems to be at stake is the ability of Christians to disagree well and respectfully.
Posted by: Richard Sudworth | February 25, 2009 at 10:02 PM