My brother Chet and sister-in-law Allison (IBEX Fall 99!) gave me a book for my birthday that I thought was worth sharing about here. The Costly Call, by Emir Caner and H. Edward Pruitt is subtitled, “Modern-Day Stories of Muslims Who Found Jesus.” This 150-page book gives the accounts of twenty men and women from all over the Muslim world. It is interesting, inspiring, and recommended. What struck me as I read it were the common themes that were to be found in many of the stories and I thought it would be profitable to share them here in case you don’t have time to read the book.
The first and most obvious theme, given the title of the book, is the extreme persecution that many of these believers faced when they came to Christ. Physical assaults, arrest and imprisonment, and rejection by family were common. It strikes me that herein we see a distinction between the natures of Christianity and Islam. When someone leaves the faith in Christianity, he is not beaten or arrested (and in times past when such happened, e.g., the Inquisition, it was clearly not biblical Christianity). But the nature of Islam is violent and ugly. This reflects the spiritual origin of the religion.
A second reality I observed was that in almost all cases the convert had contact with a Westerner. Because Muslim countries tend to be all-Muslim, there are not usually opportunities to hear the faith from your neighbor. Consequently, I got to anticipate the arrival of the Westerner in each story – someone from whom they could hear the gospel.
The methods of how the Westerner shared his/her faith differed. Sometimes the Westerner was more forward; sometimes the Muslim inquirer had to ask many questions in pursuit of the truth. But common to a number of the stories was the observation by the Muslim of the integrity of the Westerner. Often it was this honesty that started the Muslim questioning. In more cases than not, the Westerner was a businessman and not a missionary, but his practices set him apart.
A third observation was a little more disturbing to me personally. The authors seemed to go to some lengths to include the role of visions in the conversions. I am certainly not going to deny that the Lord may work this way today, but I am troubled by the apparent significance that the vision played in some of the accounts. If it is the vision that was the cause of faith, there are some problems:
- All would recognize that not all “visions” are valid. Some may be the result of illness, drugs, or non-divine spiritual activity. If the convert has a vision next week of Muhammad, would that change his faith again?
- The Bible indicates that the world has sufficient witness to the Lord and His Son through the creation and Scripture. But if it takes a vision to bring a Muslim to Christ, does that leave an excuse for those who do not have visions?
- It would seem to undermine the purpose of this book (which is revealed at the end and I’m not going to give away), if visions are the normative method for bringing about conversion.
It is true that in each account Scripture also plays a role (sometimes more or less in relation to the vision), and the authors never suggest that a conversion occurred completely absent the Bible.
A final observation is the resultant life of the convert. They were not the half-hearted, slow-to-grow “believers” that are too often seen in America. If they came to faith, it was genuine and there was significant and immediate fruit. Sometimes that meant not renouncing Christ when being beaten nearly to death. Oftentimes that meant sharing the faith with family and leading many to Christ.
This book is fast and easy to read. It is especially recommended for those 1) thinking about going to the Muslim world for business or missions; 2) who want to pray better for the Muslim world; 3) who don’t give a rip about praying for the salvation of Muslims.
From my readings of writings of Muslim apostates at faithfreedom.org, another observation is bitterness and ridicule for Islam and its rituals They often express anger at Islam, its supporters and themselves too for how they wasted part of their life bound to Islam. A good number are atheists rather than adopting Christianity but the feelings are common among them.
thanks for the info. about the new book! i’ll have to check that one out. i really appreciate the caners and look forward to reading this book co-authored by him. thanks!! : )
“It strikes me that herein we see a distinction between the natures of Christianity and Islam… the nature of Islam is violent and ugly. This reflects the spiritual origin of the religion.”
The nature of Islam is violent and ugly?
On what do you base this offensive assertion?
– The word Islam means Peace. If the nature of Islam is violent and ugly, why choose such an inappropriate word? Why not “strength”, “power”, “force” or even Mohammedanism, following Christianity and Bhuddism, or Arabism, following Judaism?
– The Quran is for Muslims a legally-binding document, as well as a source of spiritual guidance. Within it, God (according to Muslims) states that all are equal before God. This is a principle which Islam and Christianity share.
It is further expressly stated that men and women are equal. This is the first legally-binding document to state this. (The second came a thousand years later in the first French Constitution after first Revolution). It also states expressly that all races are equal.
One of the consequences of this is that any abuses of and power imbalances in the following relationships were rendered unlawful: man/woman; black/white; slave/master; clergyman/layman; employer/employee; state/citizen; Muslim/Christian/Jew etc. I fail to see how this type of equality is violent or ugly in nature – surely it is noble and idealistic? Indeed, no country on Earth has yet truly embraced it.
– The Quran lays down strict rules of war (predating the Geneva Convention by over 1000 years) and such rules cannot be bypassed by clever trickery – for in Islam ones intention must be pure and sincere. An illustrative but not exhaustive list of these rules follows:
1. Muslims are only to fight in self-defence, never as the aggressor (anticipating and predating the UN’s equivalent policy).
2. If one country aggresses against another, all Muslim countries must join together against the aggressor (again, predating the UN’s policy on aggression).
3. In war, no civilians must ever be attacked or harmed.
4. This includes strict rules against rape etc.
5. Captured enemy soldiers must be treated humanely.
How is any of that violent or ugly in nature? These provisions go further than the procedures of the armies of the most civilized of Western countries.
– As for freedom of worship, Islam recognizes Jesus as a prophet and the Bible as scripture. Islam recognizes Moses, Abraham and all the other Old Testament prophets as prophets and the Torah as scripture. Christians and Jews are considered brethren in the Quran. How is this violent or ugly in nature?
As for atheists or followers of other relgions, the Quran prescribes the following attitude for Muslims:
“To you, your way, to me, mine”. How is that ugly or violent in nature? If that is not religious tolerance, I don’t know what is.
None of the above precludes the fact that some people who call themselves Muslims or purport to act in the name of Islam will in fact through their conduct and actions be sinning according to Islam and even directly contradicting what they believe is the direct, true word of God.
There are several reasons for this:
1. As Islam prescribes equality, anyone with a vested interest in maintaining a power imbalance might act against Islam, sometimes even publicly in the name of Islam.
2. Much of the world’s Muslim population lives in some of the world’s poorest countries, with the world’s lowest levels of literacy. As a result, a large proportion of Muslim-majority country populations are illiterate and cannot therefore read the Quran. This means that they are dependent on others to tell them what the Quran actually says. This creates a power imbalance in which de facto and self-appointed clergymen can appear. This position is open to abuse, espcially by those people I have mentioned in Point 1 above.
3. A large proportion of Muslim-majority countries were former colonies of Western powers. As a result of the remaining institutional infrastructures left in place and the persistent and continuous exploitation without compensation of their natural resources, many Muslim-majority countries are impoverished. One occasional by-product of poverty and the competition for food and shelter is that less of an emphasis is placed on ideals such as equality and fair treatment (including as prescribed by Islam). A culture of brutality can sometimes emerge. Yes, this culture of brutality is a violent and ugly in nature.
This culture of brutality is forbidden in Islam. This culture of brutality is not caused by Islam. This culture of brutality is not exclusive to Muslim-majority countries.
So how then can you state simply and without any kind of explanation that “the nature of Islam is violent and ugly”?
It seems to suggest that you have not taken the time to investigate what Islam actually is, and that you feel under no obligation to make any such enquiries before making statements which would be offensive to over one-sixth of the world’s population.
As for the book itself, I am sure it is an interesting and worthy account of the struggles and oppression faced by those twenty converts interviewed. Of course, the twenty people interviewed do not make up the entirety of Muslim-to-Christian converts and would of course have been screened and selected to fit with the overall theme of the book.
It would be sloppy science to extrapolate from their experiences and assume that all Muslim converts to Christianity are treated so abhorrently, or that Islam encourages such treatment, or that such abhorrent treatment is uniquely suffered by Muslim converts to Christianity or uniquely suffered at the hands Muslims.
In closing, I strongly urge you to investigate further before making such grossly inaccurate, misleading and offensive statements in future.
I base these assertions on personal experience and study. You can offer whatever theoretical ideas you want based on etymologies and a selective reading of the Quran, but while these things may be claimed in the virtual world, they are not true in the real world.