Removing Son of God from the Bible?

Yet another thought-provoking article from Carl Medearis--Aaron

By Carl Medearis

There’s an interesting debate going on within Christian missions circles these days. Wycliffe Bible Translators have taken out the term “Son of God” in the New Testament when referring to Jesus in their Arabic Bible translations. They’ve done this because (they say) it does not represent what the words originally meant to a Jewish audience when a modern Muslim is reading them in Arabic. As you might guess, there’s been a huge backlash from the Christian community.

And as is typical, there’s been little room for nuance. If our answers can’t fit on bumper stickers, most aren’t interested. So the simplified version of both sides are: It makes sense….and….Heresy.

(Although I’m not really writing about this point – my opinion would be to leave those words in since they are the words used, and footnote the phrase each time it’s used with an explanation at the bottom of the page).

But here’s the real issue – it’s communication. Language. Semantics. Here’s how the conversation often goes with a Muslim. They ask the Christian this “Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God? Because, we don’t.”

The Christian, thinking he’s answering honestly and with integrity say, “Of course. Jesus is called that in the Bible.” The Muslim shakes his head and cries out to God to protect him from this awful heresy of the Christians. The Christian is offended and gets even more defensive about Jesus being “the Son of God” and round and round it goes…

Here’s what the Muslim is thinking when he asks the question:

To continue reading this entry, click here

On Jihad and the burning of holy books

By Carl Medearis

You could only imagine how many times in a week (or day) I get asked questions like “Do you think we should bomb Iran?” Or… “Do you think Iran is going to get nuclear weapons and then will bomb Israel?” Or… “Why do the Muslims get so angry when we accidentally burn their Qur’an and yet they seem to feel free to burn our Bible?”

I remember being in southern Iraq a few years ago and the bus boy at the hotel where we were staying looked at me with large brown innocent eyes and asked “Sir, why do the Americans hate us?”

Actually in 30 years I can’t count the times when an Arab Muslim has asked similar questions. “Why do you want to take over the world?” They ask. Or… “I don’t understand why America doesn’t care about Palestinians who are being killed?” And… “Do all Americans love their family the way you do? Because I have never heard of such nice Americans before.”

Funny how this works. Lack of understanding usually goes both ways. And misunderstanding between potential enemies is dangerous. When we don’t personally know someone we can easily fall into fear. And fear leads to all things bad.

I remember early on during our Lebanon years a family saying to Chris and I that they could never become Christians because they LOVED their family. That meant, that what they thought of Americans/Christians (which they see as the same thing) are only people who don’t love each other. Who get divorced. Who send their kids off to colleges far away when they turn 18 (like we’ve done). And they – being good God fearing family oriented Muslims – could never do that.

So back to the questions. Why do they seem to hate us? Want to kill us? Bomb Israel?

To continue reading this entry, click here!

An Israeli response to the Arab Peace Initiative

When it comes to proposals to end the Israel/Palestine conflict, the Arab Peace Initiative is most comprehensive one that comes to mind, yet a lot of American Christians believe that any peace initiative proposed by Arabs is simply a trick to weaken Israel's defenses, so that they can slaughter them later! Well, it turns out there's a group of highly influential Israelis starting to take the API seriously, and they've responded with a peace plan of their own. I have my friend Carl Medearis to thank for bringing this to my attention.

I'm sharing this for two reasons:

1. It's a very good summary of the most problematic issues of the conflict, and proposes reasonable solutions.

2. It shows that the extremely hawkish position of Netanyahu and the Likkud party (which many mistakenly presume is the Israeli perspective) is not the only Israeli perspective out there.-----Aaron

In light of the continuing political stalemate over the past years, and especially in view of the current dramatic events that are taking place in the area, and their effect on the State of Israel, its security and its international status, we call upon the government of Israel to make a courageous decision and take the initiative, the purpose of which is to advance a regional peace agreement in the Middle East, to strengthen the security of Israel in the tumultuous region and its problematic international standing.

We call upon the government to present a framework for the conclusion of the Israel-Arab conflict, as a comprehensive response to the 2002 Arab peace initiative. Israel must decide on its future from a position of strength and not to be dragged along by events.

We present the public and its elected representatives with our proposal for an Israel Peace Initiative, which has been developed over the past years with the aid of Israeli experts, based on the known solutions to all the basic problems in the area (for example, the Clinton parameters, the proposals put forth Barak at Camp David, the Olmert and Livni understandings in the framework of the Annapolis process, the talks with Syria from the time of Rabin, Netanyahu, Barak till Olmert). We have a strong basis to believe that the initiative will be accepted favorably by the Arab capitals and the Palestinian leadership.

We hope that brave leaders will be found in Israel, in the area and in the international community who will translate the Arab and Israeli vision for peace into reality, instead of waiting for vain magic to take place.

Following are the main principles of our proposal:

Israel will accept the Arab initiative of 2002 as a basis for negotiations for peace agreements in the area, and will present her ideas on the points of dispute.

Israel will announce that her strategic aim is to reach a permanent agreement with the Palestinian Authority, as well as permanent peace agreements with Syria and Lebanon that will put an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict on the basis of the following principles:

1. A solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict through “two states for two peoples”, which shall form two nation states – one for the Jewish people and one for the Palestinian people (including the implementation of the Declaration of Independence from 1948 regarding the equality of Arab citizens in Israel).

2.The establishment of a Palestinian state on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip on the basis of the 1967 lines, and territory swaps on a 1:1basis, in limited scope.

3.The Palestinian state will be demilitarized with control over its internal security, side by side with strict security measures on its borders.

4.Jerusalem will be the capital of both peoples, whereas the Jewish neighborhoods, the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter will be under Israeli sovereignty and the temple mount shall remain under a special no-sovereignty regime (“G-d sovereignty”) with special arrangements. Israeli Jerusalem will be acknowledged as the capital of Israel.

5. An agreed upon solution regarding the problem of the refugees on the basis of financial compensation and their return to Palestinian territory only (with symbolic and agreed upon exceptions).

6. An agreement with Syria that is based on the gradual withdrawal to the 1967 borders (similar to the model in Sinai), a 1:1 exchange of territories and broad security measures on the border.

7. A peace agreement with Lebanon based on the UN decision 1701 and on significant security measures on the border.

8. A commitment by Syria, Lebanon and Palestine to prevent terror and to discontinue cooperation with hostile entities and states.

9. The establishment of regional security arrangements between Israel, Arab states and the international community.

10. The building of regional economic development in order to ensure prosperity and stability among all the people of the area.

11. The advancement of normal relations between Israel and the Arab world and Islamic countries will take place alongside progress in the negotiations, coupled with mutual commitment towards peace education and the prevention of incitement.

The Advantages of the Initiative

1. The uniqueness of the initiative is that it provides an answer to the Arab initiative, with a wide perspective of the future of the area and not only regarding the topics of the conflict but from a strategic political, security and economic perspective.

2.Israel demonstrates that she is ready for far-reaching concessions only if the recompense will be the conclusion of the conflict and the end to all claims alongside significant security measures.

3. The actual announcement of the Israeli initiative will open channels to both new and old Arab leaders, will break the circle of isolation and international de-legitimization and will prevent international pressure and forced solutions.

4.Israel is sending an important message to the Arab public in general and to its youth in particular, that she is a true partner for peace, democracy and economic prosperity in the area.

5.It is possible to translate the initiative to progress in each channel simultaneously and without pre-conditions.

6.It is possible to use the initiative as a framework for a permanent agreement or an agreed-upon political horizon in the context of interim agreements.

Okay, so I lied. There's a third reason why I wanted to share this with you, so that I can say this:

Don't buy into the lie that Jews and Arabs are destined to fight each other until Jesus comes back! That is a self-fulfilling, self-defeating gross misreading of the Scriptures...that makes a mockery of the life and teachings of the Prince of Peace!

Glad I got that off my chest.

To read the full text of the Israeli Peace Initiative, click here!

Why I didn't attend Governor Perry's prayer rally

Below is an article I helped write for author Carl Medearis.

For the past 20 years, I've had the privilege of helping lead a delegation from the Middle East to attend the National Prayer Breakfast, an annual event that gathers politicians and people of influence from around the world over several days. It's one of the few prayer events where you're as likely to see Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton as you are to see Sam Brownback or Sarah Palin. It's my favorite week of the year. It's hard to put into words how inspiring it is to see Democrats and Republicans, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus -- and probably a few non-religious types thrown in the mix -- gathering together to pray and talk about faith. What's even more remarkable is the one person that every politician or religious leader agrees on: Jesus. From the opening prayer to the closing ceremony, and every workshop and roundtable discussion in between, the life and teachings of Jesus take center stage. As a follower of Jesus who believes in prayer, this is a prayer event I can sign on to.

Governor Perry's prayer rally last Saturday....

Not so much.

For the rest of the article: Click here!

What Mohammed the boat captain thinks

I love going to the gym in the mornings. It gives me a chance to watch the news. It also gives me a chance to compare the differences between the major networks and how they cover the events of the day. Last Friday as I was working out on the treadmill, I caught a glimpse of CNN's analysis of what's happening in Egypt. The CNN storyline emphasized the precarious situation that President Obama faces, and the difficulty of navigating through the thorny issue of demonstrating loyalty to a key ally on the one hand and protecting the image of the U.S. as a promoter of democracy and human rights on the other hand. Fox News--predictably--portrayed the protests as a Muslim Brotherhood-led coup, as if there's no possible alternative between a U.S. backed secular human rights abuser and Shariah. The pundits can say what they want, but the reality is it's not their opinions that matter, it's the opinion of the Arab street that matters. Which is why I recommend my good friend Carl Medearis's book Tea with Hezbollah.

A few years back, Carl Medearis and Ted Dekker took a journey to the Middle East for the sole purpose of interviewing people whom the average American views as "the enemy", people like the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the Bin Laden family, and leaders in Hamas and Hezbollah. Along the way, they also captured the opinions of ordinary Arab Muslims. While they were in Egypt, a man named Mohammed took them on a tour of the Nile. The following is a brief excerpt of an interview between Ted Dekker and Mohammed the boat captain.

Ted: What are the most important issues facing you and the world today?

Mohammed: Number one, to find work. Number two, to be able to eat. Number three, to build a house. Number four, to get married. Number five, to live in peace. I was in the '73 war, but war ruins everything. I just want to find a wife and live in peace.

Ted: What do most of your friends think about America?

Mohammed: America is controlling the world. They treat no one fairly, and if I told you anything else, I would be lying.

I saw on the news this morning that the tear gas canisters fired on the Egyptian protestors say "Made in the U.S.A." I wonder what Mohammed and his friends are thinking now?

Can Muslims follow the Biblical Christ--and still be Muslim?

Lately, I’ve been hearing a lot about the “Insider Movement” which is what missionary experts refer to as Muslims that love and follow Jesus while remaining within the cultural fold of Islam. I can remember before moving to Senegal as a missionary, a thought flashed through my mind, “I wonder if God might use me to initiate a movement of Muslims coming to Biblical faith in Christ as part of a Reformation movement within Islam?”

It turned out to be a fleeting thought. Instead I opted for the traditional apologetics approach, pointing out to Muslims why the New Testament is superior to the Koran and why they’re wrong about denying the divinity of Jesus and the atonement. I never seriously questioned this approach until I read Carl Medearis’s excellent book “Muslims, Christians, and Jesus.” In his book, Carl shares stories of his interactions with Muslims who deeply love Jesus and strive to follow His teachings—yet remain committed Muslims. I nearly wept thinking about how things could have been different if I had trusted my original instincts.

But now I have new questions, and they’re a bit unnerving because they strike at the heart of what it means to be a “Muslim” and what it means to be a “Christian.” I’ve heard that there are Muslim followers of Jesus that revere and strive to follow after the Jesus that they see revealed in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), but I’m wondering if these same Muslims can find a place in their theology to accept the rest of the New Testament as well? And if they can, I’m wondering if Christians can find a place in their theology to make room for Muhammad as a pre-messianic figure, pointing people to faith in Jesus the Messiah (a term the Koran affirms by the way) maybe not as authoritative as an Old Testament prophet, but perhaps on par with the status of local prophets in the New Testament?

Let’s break this down. Because most Muslims can’t bring themselves to say, “Jesus is God”, Christians write them off as heretics. The problem with this is that there’s nowhere in the New Testament that says, “Jesus is God”; so what we’re doing is insisting on non-Biblical language as a litmus test for Biblical faith. The doctrine may be true, and I believe it is, but should we really think of someone as outside the fold if they can’t bring themselves to say something that isn’t directly stated in the New Testament?

I wonder if a Muslim that respects the New Testament could find it in his or her theology to accept the statement, “In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was God….and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:1-14). If a Muslim can accept this statement as the inspired Word of God, could we not call them brothers and sisters even if our understanding of what these verses mean may be slightly different?

Let’s talk about the cross. Mark Siljander has done an excellent job in his book “A Deadly Misunderstanding” showing that the case can be made in the Koran that Jesus died and rose again. If this is true, might it be possible for a Muslim to accept that the Messiah’s death has saving significance even if—to my knowledge—the Koran doesn’t explicitly say so? After all, the Koran does confirm the authenticity of the gospels and the case can be made from the gospels that the blood of Jesus was shed for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28).

If we look at the sermons of Peter and Paul in the Book of Acts, we see neither a very high Christology, nor do we see the doctrine of penal substitution—a doctrine highly offensive to Muslims—and yet we’re told explicitly that those who heard and believed their message received eternal life (Acts 13:48). The Apostles’ message in the Book of Acts was essentially “Jesus was crucified, but God raised Him from the dead and through this man is preached to you forgiveness of sins and the hope of eternal life” (see Acts 10:39-43, 13:37-49, 17:31-32). Notice the Apostles’ emphasis on the humanity of Jesus in His saving work. I daresay if an evangelist preached like that today, he or she would likely be labeled a heretic!

Lest I be misunderstood, I’m not denying the deity of Christ, and neither am I saying that the doctrine of penal substitution is wrong per se. I’m simply raising the issue that if a Muslim can believe and practice the bare essentials of what Biblical faith in Jesus requires and still be true to their own faith, then not only have we figured out a way to build a bridge of peace between the historic religions of Islam and Christianity, we’ve also figured out a way for Christians to be faithful to the command of Jesus to “Go and make disciples of all nations” without using our faith as a battering ram to demonize people of another faith.

Discuss!

Can Muslims follow Jesus and still call themselves Muslim?

Can Muslims follow Jesus and still call themselves Muslims? My friend Carl Medearis has some insights on this that I think deserves a hearing.

Read it here!

Let me know what you think.

Recommended reading

I've read a TON of books this year. I thought I'd make a few recommendations. I'd like to be able to provide the links, but I can't figure out how to double click on my I-Book G4, and Firefox doesn't have a copy and paste feature on blogger. If someone wants to educate this technically inept dodo (that would be me) feel free.


1. Tea with Hezbollah by Ted Dekker and Carl Medearis. If you're looking for an introduction to issues regarding the Middle East and to how America's perceived enemies perceive us, this is a great place to start.

2. Son of Hamas by Mosab Hassan Yousef. This is a gripping account of the son of one of Hamas's founders and how he converted to Christianity and ended up as a spy for the Israelis. The weakness is that it's a bit one-sided and may tickle some Christian's ears that are already looking for reasons to be prejudiced towards Muslims in general. Still, it's well worth the read, and the behind the scenes look at Hamas is fascinating.

3. Jesus, Muslims, and Christians by Carl Medearis. This book has the potential to be a life-changer, especially if you're involved with ministry to Muslims. It rocked my world! (side note: I'm going to meeting with Carl at the end of the month)

4. A Deadly Misunderstanding by Mark Siljander. Mark Siljander is a former Republican congressman that now travels the world promoting peace between Jews and Muslims. He has done a lot to clear up misunderstandings about the Koran and to show how the two faiths have misinterpreted each other. I personally think he goes a little too far in this book in trying to reconcile Islam and Christianity, but still, his perspective is a must read! His insights on friendship diplomacy are second to none!

I think this is a good place to start.

Happy reading!