November 01, 1989 by Tom Trueman

Never before has a major mission with vast experience in non-Muslim mission efforts suddenly expanded into Muslim countries—and with fresh, new perspectives! —Ed.

Over the years missions have gained vast experience in translation, but primarily for animists, not followers of Islam.

Is any of what has been learned with animists valid for field work with Arabicized peoples? Or should we start again from scratch? After observing and reading about Muslim work in the course of consulting in several countries, I am forced to conclude that certain lessons from work with animists could be very useful to those who work with Muslims.

Over the last three decades there has been a growing consensus about culturally appropriate ways to work with animists. Missiologists have now provided ample evidence that God uses certain basic principles to bring people to Himself. In fact, these principles of cultural relevance are widely taught and seem to be almost universally accepted by translators working with animists.

These ideas are not designed around the peculiarities of animism, but around characteristics inherent in human behavior everywhere. One would therefore expect that they may be helpful in Muslim work also. The data so far seem to bear this out. Where these simple principles are now being followed, the number of practicing believers which result is much greater than with traditional approaches.

Yet I do not find these principles being followed nearly so rigorously by those who translate for Muslims. Not that they are unaware of the issues, but somehow the whole tradition of Christian work with Muslims seems to have followed quite a different course. What would seem to be natural adjustments to an animistic culture seem like radical steps in adapting to a Muslim ethnic group. Now, when God is leading us to much greater involvement with Muslims, it seems an appropriate time to look at what has been learned elsewhere and see how much can be applied.

I will briefly summarize these basic principles and suggest how following them might bring changes in translation programs for Arabicized peoples. They can be put under these headings: a respectful approach, relating through life, relevant work, and realistic hopes.

When a custom is not understood, the workers need to wait to learn more.

A Respectful Approach

Effective cross-cultural work requires deep respect for one’s hosts and their culture. This begins with their language and extends to all of their customs, world view, values, everything about their way of life. Real problems are not ignored, but the best interpretation is put on their ideas and motives. When a custom is not understood the workers wait to learn more. Many translators have told of discovering after several years the good sense in an apparently senseless practice. Others eventually discovered the insights about human nature behind an apparently irrational feature of their host’s world view. Witchcraft accusations, for example, include many features that make no scientific sense, but they also express the truth that disloyalty and strife in a family profoundly affect health and community well-being.

The need for respect applies in religion also. There is at least some truth in most long-held religious beliefs. A good communicator begins with this already understood truth and expands (and sometimes corrects) from there. The operative question is, “What in this belief system can I accept and build upon?” I have repeatedly been amazed at the insights which translators have learned from their animist friends when they waited patiently to really understand and consider those insights. Often the end result is that new believers understand Biblical truth much better than if translators had disregarded traditional insights.

For example, the Bahinemo of Papua New Guinea insisted that sin should be translated by a word which essentially means “disrupt.” We were wary until we came to understand their world view. Bahinemo people perceive a universe which is a kind of seamless web of natural, supernatural, and human relationships. Sin is a disruption of the proper God-given harmony of things, an excellent way for them to understand it.

A respectful approach avoids a stance of opposition to traditional leadership and social structures. It tries to work with them as smoothly as possible, avoiding conflict unless absolutely necessary. Again, the result often is that the translator comes to see some measure of truth in the viewpoint which he once thought so unreasonable. Even if there is none, people sense that one has really listened to them and tried to adapt to them, and they appreciate it. Not only are they more likely to allow the foreigner to stay on, but they are much more open to hearing Biblical truth.

Applications for Field Work

Traditional Christian missions to Muslims seem to have followed quite a different track. The belief in Allah is taken to be superficial, and Allah Himself is not always recognized as the Creator God. Because Islam is inherently legalistic in its ethics and because many Muslims are only going along with their culture, missionaries sometimes disdain Islam as a shallow and superficial belief system. However, many Muslims are much more devout in their faith than those who typically call themselves Christians in parts of the world such as the United States Bible belt.

Christian treatises on Muslim doctrine often emphasize how wrong it is. They talk about philosophical mistakes (e.g. not understanding the Trinity), theological mistakes (e.g. works instead of grace), ethical errors (superficial versus inner obedience to God). The admixture of superstition and animism characteristic of village religions throughout the world (including the Christian parts) is taken for a peculiar result of Islam (e.g. Zwemer 1920, still a standard reference). Witness is done by giving reasons why “Isa” is not Jesus, why there are errors in the Koran, why Mohammed was a bad man.

Missionaries were insisting on calling themselves Christians, opposing Islam, setting up western style churches.

This is all very far from an approach which asks what is good about the Islamic faith and can be built upon. When I ask that question of Islam, the answer is startling. Much, if not most, of Islamic teaching agrees with Christian teaching! To be sure, the differences are important; a few are crucial. Nevertheless, there is a great deal in Islamic teaching on which a Christian can build. This is not to avoid the “offense of the cross,” but precisely to keep the offense of Christianity in the real issues, not superficial differences with more basis in culture than in the Bible.

One who follows this approach works with local leaders as much as possible, rather than opposing them unnecessarily. He looks for the best in people, recognizing that even their attempts to stamp out Christianity stem from a desire to secure God’s continued blessing on the community, not just a hunger for power.

In one East African cattle group, the people were folk Muslims. Their major commitment was to God: Islam had come in later in a part of westernization. The most influential village was open to literacy and practical help, in fact eager for it. Not to Christianity, however. They had heard that Christians were opposed to Islam, and so they were sensitized to Christian terms. Yet, missionaries were insisting on calling themselves Christians, opposing Islam, setting up western style churches.

The translators had to ask themselves, “Should we align ourselves with the missionaries and identify ourselves as Christians? Can we show respect to the villagers’ Islamic worship of God?” It would seem better in this case to start with a more neutral identity---as people who love God and want to translate His book. When they find “Isa” (Jesus) in it, they can make their own decision about Him. But initially aligning oneself with a western confrontive style of Christianity would build unnecessary walls that could hinder the people from ever hearing about Christ.

Relating Through Life

It is in the moral realm where the issues are most critical. I am using the term broadly. It includes all of the ‘oughts’ of life, everything which people do that is considered upright, proper, polite---just plain good. Of course it also includes their opposites, all the things which good people should not do in the same situations. The usual ethical and moral issues are included, but certain standards of etiquette and good manners are included as well. The reason is that these matters of ‘etiquette’ serve as pointers to enable people to decide whom to respect. Etiquette is sometimes seen as a set of fussy details about living, unrelated to real morality. In a rural village, however, many customs which seem to an outsider to be mere details of etiquette are seen by the people as the very marks of moral goodness. They include some, but not all, aspects of dress, greetings, ways of dealing with older and younger people, and many other forms of good manners.

Missionaries need to be “good” people, as the local people define goodness, if they are going to be heard.

One basic issue here is that missionaries need to be ‘good’ people, as the local people define goodness, if they are going to be heard. This means that a missionary needs to adapt to their customs to the degree that local people perceive an ethical issue. In short, he needs to identify himself with them.

Fortunately, many animist groups have been willing to accept outsiders who did not live like them. Often they were accustomed to dealing with people who did not share their beliefs, and sometimes they did not ascribe a religious moral value to many of their own customs. The world view of many animistic peoples does not include an ethical standard which is binding on those outside their own group. Therefore, relatively little adaptation to local customs was really needed to get a hearing from animists.

Imagine that your home pastor announced that, in order to emphasize love between husband and wife, wives must hereafter sit on their husbands’ laps in church!

Furthermore, many tribal societies have been attracted to Christianity precisely as a way to westernize. It was not that they were quick to abandon ethics for ‘European’ wealth. Rather, their world view held that wealth and power come from moral uprightness. Therefore, the wealth of westerners showed that their strange lifestyle must be morally all right, and of course the wealth was desirable in itself.

To show how a Muslim might feel in a Western church service, imagine that your home pastor announced that, in order to emphasize love between husband and wife, wives must hereafter sit on their husbands’ laps in church! Yes, we agree that this would not be appropriate even in our Western style church services. However, it is with this same sense of impropriety that the Muslims view our mixed worship. I reluctantly conclude that Western cross-cultural workers must adapt to Muslim norms or pay the price of negative testimony of their day-to-day lives.

Relevant Work

The third aspect is to adapt the work to local values and goals. This includes involving local people in the work whenever possible. It includes adapting orthographics, reading materials, and other things to their ideas. It means studying their learning styles and adapting to those also. It is not necessary to dwell on this important aspect, since many others are covering it well. I will only mention a few ideas which in one place or another might be part of the relevant work.

Where there is lack of interest in vernacular literacy, and especially in reading the Scriptures, involving local people in the work takes time and ingenuity. Nevertheless, some of our colleagues have found many ways to accomplish this. Language committees can make key decisions about whom to hire, about wages and working conditions, and about orthographics and writing systems. They can have much to say about what is published, both in linguistics and in local language materials. The translator, however, should be the one to determine how much of the Bible is needed, although local people can have much to say about what passages are translated first and what its format should be.

In cultures which value politeness, deference to others and long discussions, it is extremely difficult for a hard-working Westerner to actually let local co-workers make decisions. They read the Westerner’s views in his intonation and body language. They note his desire to speed up the decision making process and conclude that he holds a very strong opinion on the matter being considered. They then hesitate to suggest something different. A Westerner must therefore work very hard to encourage local people to put forth their views, and he must be willing to take plenty of time for these views to be expressed and clarified.

If the church is truly indigenous the missionary won’t like it. If one is expecting a Western worship style, he may be sadly disappointed in the worship of the new church. There is a great difference between what is worshipful to a Westerner and what is worshipful to a Muslim.

There are other ways to be relevant to local needs. The Arabic language might have a place in diglots or as a writing system for the vernacular. Since rote memorization of the Koran is so important, scripture memorization can be emphasized. It is surprising what sufficiently motivated people can learn in this way. Bible names will need to be in the Koranic forms. Translations may need to be explicitly labeled as just translations in deference to the Muslim idea that a holy book is not truly translatable.

Eventually, patient teaching will also be necessary to get across some crucial differences between Muslim and Christian teachings. Christianity is a religion of inner essences. It is the inner character of our relationship to God, not its outward manifestation, which is crucial. In both worship and obedience the outward merely manifests or expresses the inner core. Unlike the Koran, the Bible is intended to be translated. The first translations of Jesus’ words were by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. It is this characteristic which allows Christians to change their style of worship; the inner relationship does not and must not be changed. None of this will be easy to communicate.

Realistic Hopes

What kind of results are expected? Many translators among animists are deeply disappointed in the church that results. Smalley once pointed out that if the church is truly indigenous the missionary won’t like it. This is doubly true among Muslims. If one is expecting a Western worship style, he may be sadly disappointed in the worship of the new church.

There is a great difference between what is worshipful to a Westerner and what is worshipful to a Muslim. In fact, the Zwemer Institute tells American Christians who are witnessing to Muslims never to take them to church! It will greatly undermine the witness. The predictable counterpart of this is that a good church service in an Islamic culture will leave the Western missionary uncomfortable.

Since an effective church service in any culture will reflect what people see as worshipful, the feelings about worship held by new believers need serious consideration. One would expect a truly indigenous church to be more like a mosque where men take off their shoes and kneel and bow on a mat. They are unlikely to want singing in the church, but might have great praise services at other times and places. If women are allowed to enter during worship, they would be covered and behind a divider, similar to the pattern in Jewish synagogues in Bible times. That way the men would not be distracted from thinking about God Himself.

One will also expect some new believers to be deeply devoted to God, far beyond what most of us attain. We are likely to be viewed as unspiritual in their eyes. The Bible will be treated with great respect. On the other hand, believers can be expected to be quite legalistic. This has been a problem in almost all peasant societies. Since the believers will have grown up with Muslim teaching, they are all the more likely to interpret the Bible in legalistic terms.

In short, it will be their church, with their strengths but also their weaknesses. By anticipating this we can more easily recognize the work of God’s Spirit in them, and we can know better how to encourage them to grow.

These new ideas for field work in Arabicized contexts are essentially new applications of the well-tested principles of Christian work with animists.

Conclusion

This small sample of ways to adapt to Islamic culture is included to clarify what I mean by basic principles of cultural relevance. Readers familiar with current literature on Arabicized work will recognize the radical new approaches suggested in these examples. Those familiar with the literature on “tribal” groups will recognize all these principles as basic to work with such groups. My central point is just that. These new ideas for field work in Arabicized contexts are essentially new applications of the well-tested principles of Christian work with animists. They are new in Arabicized field work because Islam is so intimidating, the work has been so difficult, and the tradition of mutual antagonism so deep, that only now are the ideas really being tried.

This is cause for encouragement; the principles have worked well in some initially resistant animist groups. Maybe they will be helpful with other groups. When one considers the relative size of the ethnic groups and the difficulty of the work, it is as if the animist programs have been pilot projects. The real challenge is beginning now.

It is also cause to examine the literature for more lessons from work with animists. Surely some useful ideas are still there to be mined. Ministry in an Arabicized context is pioneer work; many new approaches must be found. But let us also use the tools which God has blessed elsewhere, expecting Him to guide us in adapting them to new situations.

The Challenge of the Muslim World
As we move into the 1990s we rejoice that the Church of Jesus Christ has made significant inroads among:

• many Marxist peoples;
• major towns and cities of India;
• the Chinese;
• Latin America;
• Sub-Saharan non-Muslim Africa;
• all of Europe—even Eastern Europe with the possible exceptions of Bulgaria and certainly Albania.

Therefore, the great remaining challenge in completing the Great Commission is indisputably the Muslim world.

There are 44 countries where Islam totally dominates the peoples, plus several countries where Islam is not dominant but is certainly a presence. For example, India has 100 million Muslims, the Soviet Union has 60 million and China 40 million.

For too long too many small mission groups have tried to build a ministry independent of others. Thankfully, we are in a period of collaboration when the whole Body of Christ is finally ready to work together to see “a church for every Muslim people” become a reality in our generation. We must seize this new spirit!

—Excerpted from a memo from a mission agency to Muslims

“Fresh Thinking on Muslim Missions” is reprinted from Interconnect, a periodical on Muslim missions which offers subscriptions by invitation only. References for the information cited in this article are available from Interconnect or Mission Frontiers offices.

Islam: An Overview

Historically, Islam has been Christianity’s greatest challenge. Today Muslims number nearly 1 billion, one-fifth of the world’s population. Maneuverings of the Arab oil cartel and various incidents in the Middle East have stereotyped Muslims as backward, violent fanatics.

The real Islam is surprisingly human and varied. Arts, holidays, humor and trditions are treasured in families bound by strong ties of morality and loyalty. Most Muslims are not Arabs. Peoples dominated by Islam can be vound from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Great Wall of China. Indonesia boasts the largest Muslim population of any country. At the current growth rate, 35% of the Soviet Union will be staunchly Muslim by the year 2000.

Islam is moving westward as well. Twenty-six million Muslims live in the West as students, businessmen and refugees. Mosques are appearing in Rome, London, Cordoba and Chicago. Islam is now the second largest religion in Europe and is gaining proselytes in sub-Saharan Africa and among the minorities of America.

Even though Muslims are known to be resistant to the Gospel, it is probably true that they resist the methods of missionaries more than the message. Missionaries have often approached Muslims aiming to denounce everything Islamic. Sensitive appraoches are proving effective. Muslims are not all hardened to God’s love in Jesus.

Perhaps it is Christians’ hearts that are hardened toward Islam. Some conservative estimates guess that no more than 1% of the total global mission force spends most of its time reaching Muslims. The advance of Islam and its sheer numbers make church-planting efforts among them urgent!