Title: DIALOGUE
1DIALOGUE DEBATE2006(Jay Smith)
2Introduction
- Christians and Muslims, for much of the past 1400
years have been in conflict with each other, both
- theologically (as has been evidenced in the many
debates between the two faiths) (Mulder
1977footnote) - physically (evidenced by the numerous wars and
conflicts between Christians and Muslims)
(Rippin 1998357)
3Problem lies in their Primary Doctrines
- Norman Daniel
- There are irreducible differences between
non-negotiable doctrines... The Christian creeds
and the Quran are simply incompatible and there
is no possibility of reconciling the content of
the two faiths, each of which is exclusive, as
long as they retain their identities (Daniel
1993335-336)
4Christian Missiologists have posited 3 broad
theological positions
- Exclusivism Stresses the uniqueness of the
gospel as Gods definitive revelation, while
emphasizing the discontinuity with other
faiths (debate dialogue) - Inclusivism Salvation through Christ, but also
through other religions as well (irenic
dialogue) - Pluralism All religions are equally imperfect
human attempts to seek after God, yet they all
lead equally to God (no discourse) (Hick 19873)
5- Majority of Christians and Muslims
Inclusivists or Exclusivists - Thus would use dialogue debate
6Definitions of DIALOGUE
- Oxford Dictionary
- a conversation, a talk, or discussion, in
written form, or between two groups - based on the Greek dialegesthai to
converse (Webster 2003223) - too broad
7Dr. D. C. Mulder (20TH C. inclusivist
Definition)
- The essence of dialogue is the meeting between
people in mutual respect, frankness and
sincerity. Dialogue can never be an encounter of
systems or religions in the abstract. In
dialogue two or more people are meeting and they
can never be totally identified with the system
of religion or ideology to which they adhere...on
the other hand every person in his or her
religion is deeply influenced by tradition...that
is why Christianity and Islam as such cannot have
dialogue, but Christians and Muslims can and will
be affected by the history of their respective
religion... (Mulder 1977 WCC Papers on 10
years of Muslim-Christian Dialogue foreword)
81st Century, New Testament
- Dialegesthai to think different things,
ponder on them, and then dispute (May 19901) - Paul
- Moved from town to town
- Entered Jewish Synagogues
- Confronted their ideas and beliefs
- A two-way flow of ideas
- Acts 172-3, 17-18 he sought to prove,
marshaling arguments to support his case,
providing evidence, thereby engaging in
argument, due to his convinced preaching
(Goldsmith 120) - Pauls intent was not that his hearers were
converted, but that they were persuaded (Acts
174).
9Zebiris modern definitions
- Dialogue of Life, or the dialogue of presence
(Zebiri 199737) - spontaneous dialogue whenever religious
communities live in proximity to one another - 2) Spiritual Dialogue shared prayer
contemplation, devotional reading of each others
scriptures and spiritual classics, to better
understand the world-view of the respective
faiths. - Dialogue of Needs practical co-operation,
- dialogue on social concerns (Riddell 2004211)
, shared experience, and shared vision,
partnership - 4) Discursive Dialogue exchange of
information, debate and intellectual enquiry, in
order to eradicate distortions and
misunderstandings and thereby eliminate obstacles
to conversion (Zebiri 199738)
10Four Principles of Dialogue (British Council of
Churches)
- Dialogue begins when people meet each other,
pointing out that each person needs to be
approached as individuals, and not simply
representing a system of beliefs. - Dialogue depends upon mutual understanding and
mutual trust, suggesting that each person should
be permitted to define themselves concerning what
they believed. - Dialogue makes it possible to share in service to
the community, alluding to the fact that dialogue
can be a vehicle to bring about harmony between
those of separate faiths. - Dialogue becomes the medium of authentic witness,
suggesting that because it begins in a context of
trust, dialogue allows not only a witness of
ones own faith, but assumes the freedom of a
person of any faith, including the Christian, to
be convinced by the faith of another (Riddell
2004111) - Inclusive Principles
11Purpose of Dialogue
- For missions a vehicle to become better
acquainted with what the other actually
believes - 1) for mutual understanding, since many conflicts
are the result of ignorance - 2) to understand God better, -experience of him
in the midst of dialogue - 3) to witness to ones faith, -implies, the
other may choose to change their faiths - 4) to co-operate in areas -social, or secular
dialogue (Riddell 2004188)
12(WCC)
- to achieve greater mutual respect and better
understanding - to raise questions which lead to deepening and
renewal of spirituality, - to lead Christians and Muslims fulfill common
practical responsibilities (Christian-Muslim
Conversation19891)
13Evangelicals
- ...to learn to appreciate, but it must chiefly
be to teach and to tell men and women about Jesus
Christ, the Way, the Truth, and the Life
(Christian Witness to Muslims198023 Note
even the title Christian Witness to Muslims
denotes the more robust purpose behind the
dialogue, in contradistinction to the more
inclusive WCC title of Christian-Muslim
Conversation) - David Hesselgrave
- Any form of dialogue that compromises the
uniqueness of the Christian gospel and the
necessity that the adherents of other faiths
repent and believe it, should be rejected and
supplanted by forms of dialogue that enjoin
conversion to Christ (Hesselgrave 1981126)
14Muslims on dialogue
- al-Faruqi, Dialogue allows the removal of all
barriers between men for a free intercourse of
ideas where the categorical imperative is to let
the sounder claim to the truth win (al-Faruqi
19929) - Khurram Murad, there is no point in entering
into dialogue unless it is Dawah invitation
(Siddiqui 199476)
15History of Dialogue
- 7th century, Muslims conquered, encountered a
divided Christianity Byzantium Copts of Egypt,
Thus, initially, Christians living under Muslim
rule were rarely persecuted - (Dialogue between Patriarch John 1 vs. Amr
al-As) - 8th century, however, Christians suffer a general
decline in status, converting to Islam. i.e.
North Africa, the decline became almost complete
(Siddiqui 199476) - Dialogues Leo III vs. Umar II
- John of Damascus (d.749) vs. Saracen (Moffet,
200239) - Patriarch Timothy I vs. Caliph Mahdi
- (apologetical, not polemical)
- 9th century, Muslims, were able to surpass
Christian sophistication (Zebiri 199725) - Christians outside Muslim rule were more
polemical, as Muslims were seen as a military
threat - Dialogue al-Kindi vs. al-Hashimi Quran the
prophet Muhammad (Muir 200211 Newman 1993359)
1620th Century
- Protestants
- 1) WCC Created in 1937 all the principle
Christian denominations (numbering over 330),
representing about 400 million Christians, in 100
countries (Riddell 2004107) - -Interfaith Movement, but Muslim govt.
officials, liberals, not religious scholars
(Siddiqui 199730 Zebiri 199735-36) - -Secular and Social, irenical
- Evangelicals, 1951 World Evangelical Alliance
(WEA), 114 church alliances, 700 million
Christians, in 110 nations (Edwards 2003) - - discursive dialogues
17Catholics
- Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue
- (PCID) 1964, - irenical approach
- Anglicans
- Building Bridges January 2002, dealing with
the fallout from the 911 attacks (Riddell
2004153) - -Christians organized many dialogues
- -Muslims were slow to follow suit
- -Except Muslim governments, such as Libya,
Tunisia, and Jordan (Zebiri 199735) - -Or individual liberal Muslims in the West
(Zebiri 199736)
18Rules for Dialogue
- Claude Geffre
- respect the differences in the other
- respect ones own faith, and so
- speak honestly and candidly about them, even if
it hurts the sensibilities of their counterparts
(Geffre 1993101-113)
19Problems with Dialogue
- Impractical
- In 1966 Victor Hayward identified a real problem
- If dialogue is used to break down barriers of
prejudice, indifference, suspicion and fear, and
practical steps are taken to promote
understanding, co-operation, and relationships
favourable to genuine dialogue and witness, no
such agreement was possible with the Muslim in
the realm of theology (Hayward 197713) - The Irenical form of dialogue can rarely publicly
engage with, in any deep and meaningful way, that
which is foundational to each faith, yet likewise
separates them, namely, their conflicting and
often contradictory belief statements.
202. Unequal
- i.e. WCC sponsored dialogue 1976, Chambésy,
Switzerland. - -Khurshid Ahmad -Islamic Foundation (Leicester,
England) slung invective and vitriol in the
direction of Christian missions, pinpointing four
criticisms of Christian missions 1)
misrepresentation of the teachings of Islam, and
the message of the prophet, 2) concentrated on
the weak and helpless, 3) missions aim was to
subvert the faith and culture of Islam, and 4)
that it subjected Muslims to covert
discrimination and repression), summarized as an
exercise which failed to commend itself as
something noble and holy (Christians Meeting
MuslimsChambésy 1977131-132) - -Dr. Kerr apologized, accepting that Muslims were
justified to feel incensed to the point of
outrage by certain aspects of Christian action in
the name of mission (Christians Meeting
MuslimsChambésy 1977134) - Thanked the Muslim participants for attending,
despite the fact that they had, personal
experiences of western Christian missionaries
which had left him suspicious of Christian
motives (Christians Meeting MuslimsChambésy
1977135) - Nowhere did he seek reciprocity, asking why so
few Muslim countries even permitted, let alone
encouraged Christian missions in their respective
jurisdictions, nor why so many freedoms demanded
and afforded by Muslims living in the West are
simply not permitted by Christians in their own
lands.
213. Un-trustworthy
- Muslims suspect dialogue, as it leads to
religious syncretism - Or compromises the faith (Glasser 1981)
- Seen as a subtle ploy towards prosletysm
- A Western Christian initiative.
- Perceived as an adjunct of colonialism
- Covert form of evangelism (Christians Meeting
MuslimsChambésy 1977131-132) - Invariably Muslims are invited as guests, not
able to set the agenda, so they feel they have
little to gain (Zebiri 199736) - Siddiqui It is an extension of a whole Western
Christian domination (Sidiqqui 199459)
224. Unpopular
- Dialogues simply do not attract Muslims who
represent their communities, and therefore have
little impact on those same communities. - i.e. Faith and Power conferences, convened in
1997, all had majority Christians to Muslims, so
that the final Faith and Society conference,
convened in June 2003, at the London Central
Mosque and Islamic Cultural Centre, of the 47
people who took part, only seven were Muslims,
five of whom had to be there as they were
presenters on the day (Riddell 2004157) - As Riddell says,
- there was virtually no participation of the
rank and file from the Muslim community. The
reasons are unclear...though there seems to have
been no attempt to promote the event in the
British Muslim community (Riddell 2004158)
23CONCLUSION
- Dialogues do bring Christians and Muslims
together, they get the ball going - They offer a wide range of models
- They are usually promoted by Christians only.
- Attract Liberal-Western elite Muslims.
- Tend not to be robust, more acquiescent on the
part of the Christian participants. - And most importantly, they dont reach the
radical Muslims, the ones causing most of the
problems today. - So, whats the solution?
24DEBATES
- In the wake of 911, and the consequent growing
unrest between Christian and Muslims, there are
those who must be wondering whether inter-faith
dialogue, while proven adequate in bringing about
mutual understanding between the two faiths, can
cope with todays more aggressive and growing
radical element within Islam. Thus, if we are
going to confront this more radicalized form of
Islam, we will need to incorporate new approaches
to deal with such a paradigm, ones which confront
the foundations of the more radical elements
within the Muslim community, particularly those
theological and historical foundations rooted in
Islamic scriptures (and the Islamic Traditions),
to which the radicals look for authority in
substantiating the actions they carry out. - Christian-Muslim debates are a growing part of
the mosaic of Christian-Muslim interaction in
recent years to meet just that sort of need.
These debates primarily relate to a specific
subset of the Muslim community, namely radical
Islamists, for whom other dialogical approaches
have not proved effective in building bridges
between communities (Riddell 2004162) For them,
dialogue is simply not an option, because the
premise behind such an exercise, to build
bridges, seems irrelevant, if not even
counter-productive.
25- Maryam Jameelah
- We must crush the conspiracies of Zionism,
freemasonry, Orientalism and foreign missions
both with the pen and with the sword. We cannot
afford peace and reconciliation with the Ahl
al-Kitab until we can humble them and gain the
upper hand (Jameelah 1989412)
26- With sentiments such as these, it is no surprise
that across the country, on university campuses,
over the past few years, Christian and Muslim
apologists and daists have been coming together
to engage in 2-3, sometimes even 5 hour debates,
in front of hundreds, even thousands, on subjects
ranging right across the apologetical/polemical
spectrum
27Muslim Debates
- Historical precedence for debate
- Debate is not new to Islam, for this mode of
exchange fits within its paradigm of Islams
perception of the West. - Lewis speaks to this perception in his book on
Cultures in Conflict, saying, - Since Europe has historically been the Islamic
worlds most inveterate military adversary, and
since it has been perceived by Muslims in
primarily religious terms, references to
Christians in Muslim writings have usually been
hostile. In light of Europes military and
cvilizational inferiority, which endured for
several centuries, references to Europe or
Christendom in Muslim writings were often
disdainful (Lewis 199513)
28- This disdain is echoed in Lewiss other treatise
on the subject, Muslim Discovery of Europe, where
he noticed that in the Persian, Turkish and
Arabic languages, Christians have commonly been
referred to as Kafirin (infidels), while in
Ottoman usage in particular, when referring to
Europeans, it was customary to add curses or
insults to the names (Lewis 1982172-174)
29Reasons Muslims, today, Debate
- Due to the political and economic dominance of
Western countries, there is some dignity in
claiming moral and religious superiority. - Polemical debates help to reinforce the lines of
demarcation between Islam and Christianity. - Debates can be used to convert Christians to
Islam. - The Quran provides a model for polemics,
engaging Christians, Pagans Jews in arguments
over their beliefs - (an example often used is that found in Surah
361, which was supposedly spoken to a deputation
of Christians from Najran, and says, If anyone
disputes with you concerning i.e. Jesus after
the knowledge which has come to you, say Let us
gather together our sons and your sons, our women
and your women, ourselves and yourselves, and
pray and invoke the curse of God on those who
lie)
30Who Debates?
- Transnational Islamic organizations incorporating
dawah as their primary aims - Muslim World League
- World Islamic Call Society
- Islamic Council of Europe (Siddiqui 1994148ff)
- FOSIS in the UK
31Ahmed Deedat
- Most prolific
- Most popular
- Gujarati origins
- Lampoons Christian Missionaries
- He employs a flamboyant style which seems as
much designed to entertain as to edify he
employs ridicule and sarcasm, and not
infrequently raises laughter from the Muslim
section of his audience. He also utilizes crude
language, and images which seem designed to
shock (Zebiri 199747) - However, the quality of his work, which after
all hardly aspires to go beyond the level of
rhetoric and apologetic, is poor even by the
standards of religious polemic (Zebiri 199747)
32Dr. Maurice Bucaille
- The Bible, the Quran and Science
- -Scientific Exegesis
- -Most popular in breadth of circulation
- -Employs Eisegesis
33Current Debaters
- Shabir Ally (Christology of Jesus)
- Abdul Raheem Green (Source Criticism)
- Dr. Zakir Naik (Trinity Science)
- Dr. Jamal Badawi (Quran vs. Bible)
34Where are the Debates
- University Campuses
- University Unions (Parliamentary style)
- FOSIS (Federation of Students Islamic Societies)
- ISOC (Islamic Societies)
- Christian Unions (Universities and Colleges
Christian Fellowship UCCF) - Why?
- They are culturally relevantpassionate form of
communication! - They attract large numbers of Muslims
- They are neutral and central
- They are non-threatening
- They are cheap
- They are Conducive to students
-
35Methodology of Muslim Debate
- Always Polemical, quoting Liberal Christian
scholars - Adolph von Harnack (d.1930), the most often
quoted Christian scholar, due to his liberal
opinions (Zebiri 199785) - Bousset and Loisy 19th and early 20th century
scholarship concerning St. Pauls Hellenistic
influences, rather than his Jewish roots (Zebiri
199785) - Edward Carpenter Pagan sources
- J.M. Robertson Pagan Christianity (Zebiri
199786) - Edward Gibbon Christianitys black history in
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Zebiri
199785) - Bertrand Russell Why I am not a Christian is
used to expose the history of the church - Ernest Renan New Testament criticism, and
anti-supernaturalism (a criticism which also
hurts their Islamic paradigm). - Robert Briffault and William Draper to show the
debt the West has on Islam (Zebiri 199785)
36Problems with Muslim Debate
- 1) Negative bias both in selection of data to be
presented and in interpretation of that data
(Zebiri 199784) - Sources are often used selectively. From the
broad spectrum of opinion which is represented in
Western scholarship, it is often the extreme end
of the spectrum which is chosen in this way
authors can usually find what they set out to
look for (Zebiri 199785) - 2) Muslims, who speak often about misinformation
are often guilty of the same. Muslim
anti-Christian polemic goes relatively
unnoticed...because it occurs within an almost
exclusively Muslim market - Rarely is Islam subjected to critical scrutiny
(Zebiri 199789)
37Christian DebatesChristians Critical of Debates
- Henry Martyn (d.1812),
- I lay not much stress upon clear arguments.
The work of God is seldom wrought in this way
(Cragg 199223) - Brown, missionary to the Sudan and Jordan,
- The natural reaction of any man when his
beliefs are attacked is to maintain them the more
resolutely and even to discover better reasons
for doing so. The results of missionary
preaching during the past century and a half
demonstrate with tragic clearness how
unproductive such a method really is (Brown
196290)
38Colin Chapman (7 Criticisms)
- 1854 Munazara in Agra between Carl Pfander
Valpery French vs. Rahmat Allah Dr. Wazir Khan - 1) Attacks against Islam sometimes degenerate
into polemics, resulting in nothing more than a
tit-for-tat criticism of Christianity by
Muslims, and vice versa. - Yes, however, culturally good for communication,
exchange of ideas, since the Gospel is
confrontational, so should expect tit-for-tat
and let people compare, and come to their own
conclusions. - Zwemer, If the missionary to Moslems has a creed
of less content and holds it less passionately
than the loyal and orthodox Moslem holds his
own-so much the worse for the missionary (Zwemer
1941225)
39- 2) Debates appealed too much to the reason and
the intellect, and not enough to the heart - Yet, Muslims instigate reasoned intellectual
challenges, geared towards auth. of Bible,
Jesus - 3) Christian debaters are not aware of the latest
Biblical critical research ongoing in the West,
and so become helpless when Muslim opponents use
them. - Shame on us! Learn it, always be a student, in
praxis
40- 4) Debates are conditioned by the social and
political context in which we work, i.e. freedom
to be critical. - Yes, so lets use those freedoms, and not run
away, or only allow Muslims these freedoms! - 5) We should question the validity of public
debates which concentrate entirely on theological
issues at the expense of the many social and
political issues which both Muslims and
Christians share in common - Be involved in social gospel, but introduce
Jesus crucified, and debates will naturally
evolve.
41- 6) Responding in a polemical fashion merely
mimics the agenda of the Muslim protagonist,
which merely forces the Christian on to the
defensive, and we fall into a scriptural paradigm
we probably dont even accept ourselves. - Confuses content and methodology, Jesus is our
revelation, but debate helps us convince them so. - 7) Chapman argues for a complete cessation of
polemics itself, believing it to be not only
disrespectful, but unloving. - Define disrespect and love, was Christ
disrespectful or unloving in chasing out the
money-changers (Mat.2112-13), or confronting the
Pharisees (Matt.2313-33)?
42Christians Supportive of Debates
- Jesus (against the Pharisees Matt. 2313-33)
- Paul (Mars Hill, Aeropagus, Lecture Hall of
Tyrannus Acts 19) - Paul disputed in the synagogues (Acts 1717) in
the school of one Tyrannus, daily (Acts 199) for
two years. In Jerusalem he disputed against the
Grecians until they sought to slay him (Acts
929)...II Corinthians, Galatians and Colossians
could be classified as controversial literature
of the first century...His military vocabulary is
proof enough that he was no spiritual pacifist
but fought a good fight against the enemies of
the Cross of Christ and all those who preached
another gospel (Zwemer 1941225)
43- Catholic creeds, such as the Nicene and the
Athanasian Creeds, came out of Polemics. - The Reformation a religious controversy.
- The Gospel of John Nearly all the discourses
were begun by controversy
4419th and 20th Century Examples
- Dr. Carl Pfander (d. 1865)
- -Agra Munazara of 1854
- -Balance of Truth (Mizan ul-Haqq)
- William St. Clair Tisdall (d.1928)
- -Critiqued the origins of Islam
- -Sources of Islam
- Samuel Zwemer
- -Arabia and Egypt
- -Muslims worshiped a different God
- -Muhammad was insincere and opportunistic
- -Controversy, so long as it was not
discourteous, was an appropriate method of
evangelism to Muslims
45Westerners Supportive of Debates
- Maxine Rodinson regrets that any criticism of
the Prophets moral attitudes are becoming
increasingly taboo (Rodinson 197959) - Andrew Rippin, The Irenic approach has led to
the unfortunate result of a reluctance on the
part of many scholars to follow all the way
through with their insights and results,
particularly concerning the historical dimensions
of the faith that conceives itself as having a
stake in that very history (Rippin 1985159)
46Examples of Recent Debates
- Date Debaters Venue Title
- 01-93 Tony Costa vs. Shabir Ally Univ. of
Toronto Is Jesus the Divine Son of God? - 06-94 Tony Costa vs. Shabir Ally Univ. of
Toronto Is the Qur'an the Word of God? - 08-95 Jay Smith vs. Jamal Badawi Cambridge
Univ. Is The Quran the Word of God? - 02-97 Jay Smith vs. Dr. Musa Pidcock Tynneside
Univ. Bible vs. Quran - 04-97 Jay Smith vs. Shabir Ally Univ. of
Manchester Christ. vs. Isl. Relevancy sin - 11-97 Tony Costa vs. Shabir Ally Univ. of
Waterloo Who is God? - 02-98 Jay Smith vs. Shabir Ally Birmingham
Univ. Historicity of the Quran - 04-98 Jay Smith vs. Sh. Abdul Green South Bank
Univ. Is the Quran the Word of God? - 10-99 Jay Smith vs. Sh. Omar Bakri Friends
Mtg.Hse Khilafa vs. Kingdom of God - 01-00 Tony Costa vs. Shabir Ally Ryerson
University Who is the Historical Jesus? - 02-00 Jay Smith vs. Benazir Bhutto Oxford
Union Is Islam Relevant to the UK? - 03-00 Peter Saunders vs. Shabbir Ally Glasgow
Was Jesus a Muslim? - 03-00 Keith Small vs. Shabbir Ally Bradford Scrip
tures-Jesus-Trinity - 10-00 Jay Smith vs. Shabir Ally Ga.Tech Univ.
Atl Who is the Historical Jesus? - 02-02 Jay Smith vs. Zaki Badawi Oxford Union Is
Islam Compatible w the West? - 04-02 Jay Smith vs. Imam Sahib Kingston
Univ. Bible vs. Quran - 10-02 Jay Smith vs. Min. Ishmael Muh. Trinity
Univ., Dublin Oppose Islamic Law?
47Problems with Debates
- Fear of Muslims Sensibilities
- Fear of ones security
- Rarely done with Reciprocity in mind
- Tendency towards apologetics only
- Few experienced Debaters
- Little teaching or preparing for debates
- Debaters good talkers w/ little knowledge
- Unable to use cut and parry
- Marriage.
48Advantages with Debates
- Attracts many Muslims
- Makes a greater impact (i.e. Al-Azhar)
- Confronts Islam publicly
- Starts the agenda moving
- Pre-Evangelistic
- For many the first time Muslims have heard
legitimate criticism of the Quran Muh. - Muslims tend to initiate them (fits their
cultural paradigm) - Creates a Christian Public Presence
49Impromptu Speakers Corner Debates
50(No Transcript)
51Heckling (Triangulization)
52Formal Debates
53What weapons will we use?
For though we live in the world, we do not wage
war as the world does. The weapons we fight with
are not the weapons of the world. On the
contrary, they are divine power to demolish
strongholds. We demolish arguments and every
pretension that sets itself up against the
knowledge of God, and we take captive every
thought to make it obedient to Christ (II
Corinthians 103-5)