Abu Daoud interviewed by VirtueOnline

I was recently interviewed by David Virtue at VirtueOnline. Here is an excerpt:

VOL: We hear there are conversions of Muslims to Christ. Many Muslims are seeing visions and dreams of the risen Christ. Can you speak to that? 

ABU DAOUD: We should not lose heart. "The Church is an anvil which has worn out many hammers" (Beza). Muslims are turning to Christ in unprecedented numbers. Not so much here in Israel and Palestine, but it is happening there too. Training Christians in the USA to be effective in reaching out to Muslims is at the heart of the new stage of our mission back in the USA. If there are any parishes out there interested in learning about this they can contact me through my blog, islamdom.blogspot.com. 

But as to the traditional churches in Israel including the Anglican churches, there is little or no future. Israel is the one country in the region where Muslims can legally convert to Christianity, yet it hardly ever happens. Anglicans in the Diocese of Jerusalem are mostly allergic to the idea. There are some exceptions, but not many. Anglicanism may well die out; the same goes for the Orthodox and Catholic churches, but the faith won't die out. "The Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent lay hold of it." 

You will want to read the whole thing.

What Abu Daoud predicted about the Arab Spring

Hi All,

I was recently going over this interview I did with Don Warrington at Positive Infinity for another interview I'm doing right now, and I was struck by how I nailed the Arab Spring all the way back in January of 2012. Check this out:

6) Where do you see MENA going, especially in view of events such as the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and the Arab Spring?

This is the million-dollar question, isn’t it? First, the people who protested didn’t take political control, so as much as they wanted freedom and democracy, they just won’t get it, I’m sorry to say. The Egyptian elections were demonstrably corrupt, though the international press has not said so—I have no idea why. The Islamists will take power and they will not let it go. And why is this surprising? That is precisely what Muhammad did—engaged in diplomacy and compromise and so on, but once he had power he was ruthless. In the end, an Islamic society cannot be a free society. Islam and freedom are mutually exclusive.

The question I have is this: will it be like Iran? After the revolution in `79 Islam had a chance to prove itself in the political arena, and Islam, unlike Christianity, makes substantial guarantees in this area. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians have concluded that Islam failed—it did not deliver politically so it must be false in terms of its religious and spiritual claims too. They have turned to Christianity some of them, and some to secular humanism or atheism. Will this happen in these newly Islamist states? Perhaps. I pray it will. Islam’s love of political power may well be its Achilles’ heel. Meanwhile, that means the native Christians need to stay as long as they can, and foreign missionaries like me need to stay no matter what. I will do it. Maybe the kids and wife need to go back to the US, I will do everything I can to stay here even if all hell breaks loose.

Anyway, if you didn't read the interview when it came out, I think it contains a good summary of my own philosophy of mission and opinions regarding the Arab world today: here are Part 1 and Part 2.

How many virgins may a Muslim get in Paradise?

Muhammad: cross-dresser and unfair husband

The Qur'an says that a man may take up to four wives (and the Prophet up to eight) as long as he treats them all fairly.

Did Muhammad do this? Check out this sahiih/verified hadith from Al Bukhari which shows how unjust Muhammad was to his wives, and also his explanation of why he favored A'isha the daughter of Abu Bakr above his other wives. Enjoy:

From the Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, Hadith Number 2442, Chapter 52. Book of Setting Free, VII: The one who gave a gift to his friend aiming for a time when he was with one of his wives rather than another.   

It is related from 'A'isha that the wives of the messenger of Allah fell into two parties. One party contained 'A'isha, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sawda, and the other party contained Umm Salama and the rest of the wives of the messenger of Allah. The Muslims knew of the love of the messenger of Allah for 'A'isha, so when any of them had a gift which he wanted to give to the messenger of Allah he would delay it until the messenger of Allah was in 'A'isha's house. Then the person with the gift would send it to the messenger of Allah while he was in 'A'isha's house. The party of Umm Salama spoke about it and said to her, "Tell the messenger of Allah to speak to the people and say, 'Whoever wants to give a gift to the messenger of Allah should give it to him in the house of whichever wife he is.'" Umm Salama spoke to him about what they had said, but he did not say anything. They asked her and she said, "He did not say anything to me." They said to her, "Speak to him." She said she spoke to him when he went around to her as well, but he did not say anything to her. They asked her and she said, “He did not say anything to me.” They said to her, “Speak to him until he speaks to you.” He went around to her and she spoke to him. He said to her, “Do not injure me regarding 'A'isha. The revelation does not come to me when I am in the GARMENT of any woman except 'A'isha.” She said, "I repent to Allah from injuring you, Messenger of Allah.” Then they called Fatima, the daughter of the messenger of Allah, and sent her to the messenger of Allah to say, “Your wives ask you by Allah for fairness regarding the daughter of Abu Bakr.” She spoke to him and he said, “O my daughter, do you not love what I love?” She said, “Yes indeed.” She returned to them and informed them. They said, “Go back to him,” but she refused to go back. They sent Zaynab bint Jahsh and she went to him and spoke harshly, saying. “Your wives ask you by Allah for fairness regarding the daughter of ibn AbiQuhafa.” She raised her voice until she turned to 'A'isha, who was sitting down, and abused her until the messenger of Allah looked at 'A'isha to see if she would speak. ‘A'isha spoke to answer back Zaynab until she had silenced her. She said, “The prophet looked at 'A'isha and said, ‘She is indeed the daughter of Abu Bakr.’” 

-HT to Aisha Bewley: http://bewley.virtualave.net/bukhari20.html#gifts

Syrian-Australian woman speaks out for Syria

Powerful. Please do share.

Episcopal Church Leased to Muslim Group

Dr. Khamis Abu-Hasaballah, president of the FVAMC, told The Christian Post that they are "thrilled" by the interfaith partnership and plan to move into the Avon property soon. 

"We hope to move in in the coming weeks. Since we're leasing the facility, we're keeping the modifications to the bare minimum needed to accommodate our activities," said Abu-Hasaballah. "The facility has been de-consecrated by the bishop and the altar removed. We are also relocating some pews to free up enough space for Muslim congregational prayers."

Read it all HERE.

Sad to see stuff like this happen.

Context and Power

Some great quotes here and context, power, and forming or making theology:

...identifying a context is not simply naming a place, group or identity, but is an activity laden with power and purpose that has theological and social dimensions. 

[...] 

Moving to a new identity--Christian--then becomes a matter of constructing a notion of a new context, a Christian one, where the previous identities may or may not intersect.

Power and Identity in the Global Church, eds Brian Howell and Edwin Zehner, p 5

Did the Apostles espouse insider movements?

I answer that the Biblical witness clearly leads to the answer no:

Further, the mixed churches in cities like Rome and [the region of] Galatia were likewise errors. These believers, both Jews and non-Jews, had mistakenly supposed that they in some way had come into a new oikos and a new identity, and Paul, lacking wisdom as usual, taught them these things. Indeed, a triumph of IM hermeneutics and practice would have meant that Peter should have been victorious when Paul confronted him. Indeed, Paul, in violating kashrut was stepping needlessly outside of his oikos, while Peter himself was honoring his God-given identity as a Galilean Jew. 

In the end though, it was the faith—the apostolic faith—that was victorious. A faith which understood that in Jesus a new community had come into being demanded allegiance above and beyond one’s own community of birth. Or as one African pastor put it in those early centuries: you cannot have God for your Father without having the Church for your mother.

From my recent article on insider movements.

"Rebecca Lewis and Kevin Higgins against the Ropes": a new article by Abu Daoud

As a contributing editor of St Francis Magazine I have the privilege (and duty) to write at least one substantial article per year. All my previous SFM articles can be found in the menu to the right of the main blog text. My recent article started as a mere book review of Jeff Morton's recent book Insider Movements: Biblically Incredible or Incredibly Brilliant?

The material in this book unfolded itself into an article-length article (which is also a review) concerned with 'insider movements'. In his book, Morton particularly takes on two of the main proponents of IM: Rebecca Lewis and Kevin Higgins--hence the full title (and biblio):

Abu Daoud. 2013. "Rebecca Lewis and Kevin Higgins against the Ropes: sounding the death nell of the insider movements and the victory of Apostolic faith" in St Francis Magazine 9(4), August, pp 52-58.

(Yes, that is "Abu Daoud" and not "Daoud, Abu.")

The article also takes on Dave Bogs, who is the gatekeeper of the 'Insider Movement' entry at Wikipedia, which is well-curated and totally inaccurate. It is a good reminder as to why Wikipedia is not allowed to be used in academic papers!

Here is an excerpt:

If you journey over to Wikipedia and check out the Insider Movement entry, you will enter the personal fiefdom of one Dave Bogs. If you click on the ‘view history’ tab you will find that anything he does not like is deleted (by him). His justification for this is invariably that a significant number of people have said that the article is balanced. If you click on the ‘Talk’ tab (next to the ‘Article’ tab) you will find that a bunch of people went to Wikipedia between March13th and 17th of 2012 and left positive comments on the article. Is it possible that Dave or someone else was teaching a class on IM, and that the students were told to log in to Wikipedia and endorse the article as ‘excellent, concise’ and so on? (p. 55)

Dear Dave Bogs, please leave a remark here and clarify the situation. I won't delete your material like you do with the poor souls who try to fix the IM article at Wikipedia. As Christians, dialogue is a fine way to work this out, but your control of the Wikipedia site makes this impossible.

Anyway, check out the entire article here, and let me know what you think. If Kevin Higgins or Rebecca Lewis or Dave Bogs would like to leave any comments, they are most welcome.

Find it a Scribd or download the PDF from St Francis Magazine.

(You can also download the entire issue, if you like.)