The problem with following Jesus

Some Muslims will say they "follow Jesus." They follow His way, or His teachings or His path. There are ample scriptures in the Quran about "the straight path" and if followed carefully it's notable that they often refer to the way of Jesus of Nazareth.

The believing community needs to be a context for social and spiritual development. As converts are marginalized from their normal social contexts, or even persecuted, the biblical community needs to be able to meet basic physical and social needs. As the early church flourished in a spiritually hostile climate, so too, perhaps, will the church among the Muslims emerge. A strong ethic of suffering will need to continue, where courage and risk-taking are highly valued. The love of the body of Christ is essential to strengthen converts' resolve to continue on in faith in Christ while facing likely hostile reaction. In addition, the biblical community must be strongly truth-focused, offering educational alternatives to the mosque. Church leaders need to direct themselves to the long-term viability of the community by prioritizing biblical teaching and theology. This requires high standards of training in biblical orthodoxy and apologetics among emerging indigenous leaders.

All such renewal should be understood as part of the Spirit’s work of inner transformation of character (reflected in the ‘fruits’ of the Spirit) and empowering of ministry (reflected in the fruit of active and ongoing missional life). We have discovered in our own movement’s history how pervasive our dysfunctional tendency is to substitute the priority of seeking lasting God-oriented fruit with simply personal experience. While the presence of God is always transforming at some level, we do well to ask what difference God is ultimately trying to make in our lives that will last and bear fruit.

C3 contextualization accommodates non-religious aspects of the indigenous culture. At the same time, there is a conscious attempt to break from all visible elements of Islam-such as observing Ramadan, dietary laws, association with the mosque and so forth. This moderately contextualized model assumes that Islamic cultural forms can not be purged of their religious meaning, and should be abandoned to avoid fostering syncretism. C3 is a form of contextualization that most Westerners are comfortable supporting because it sharply contrasts Islam and Christianity. Conversion means parting from Islamic identity and coming into a new one. However, the problem is that to the eyes of the Muslim world, there is little real difference between C3 and C2, with the consequence that C3 amounts to an "extraction" strategy. In some contexts C3 strategy may directly subvert the goal of birthing an indigenous people movement because, each convert extracted from his own cultural situation reinforces in the minds of Hindus and Muslims the misunderstanding that Christians are opposed to their cultural traditions. In this sense, one could defend the thesis that each convert won from these faiths at present actually represents a setback to winning large numbers from these communities.

"For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus ... Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit." 1 Thessalonians 4:2, 8

Street preaching was a regular evangelistic activity for Newbigin during his missionary days in India. This attempt at cross-cultural communication enabled Newbigin to formulate two problems. The first is concerned with the gospel and culture (singular): here the question is how can one avoid the twin problems of syncretism and irrelevance? The evangelist must use the language of the hearers. Yet that language uses terms that reflect the worldview by which the hearers make sense of their world. The Tamil language, for example, is a shared way of understanding the world that reflects Hindu faith commitments. As such it expresses commitments that are irreconcilable with the gospel. Therefore, there will be a clash of ultimate commitments between the gospel and Hindu culture. Thus cross-cultural communication of the gospel will call into question the underlying worldview implicit in that language. The problem is how to use the language and yet call into question the worldview that shapes that language.