Barry Peters - When Culture Gets in The Way of The Gospel

St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol.
II (June 2006)
When Culture gets in the way of the Gospel:

Western Christian Missionaries meet Arab Muslims
By Barry Peters1
The majority of missionaries worldwide are from Western countries. Arab Muslims have
shown themselves particularly resistant to the Christian message. This essay explores the
cultural differences which may contribute to the West’s inability to communicate with
Muslims. Categories explored include ways of thinking, ways of relating to other people
and ways of behaving. The unique culture of the West, differing markedly from most
other cultures throughout history, is assessed, along with the distinctive social patterns of
Arab Muslims. Relevant biblical and Qur’anic passages are brought to bear on the topic.
A way forward, the path of incarnation, is discussed.
Contents
Introduction 2
Are there any truly national characteristics? 3
Ways of thinking 5
(a) Styles of thinking
(b) Categories of thought
(c) Apolitical or political?
(d) Specialisation or Generalism?
(e) Guilt or shame?
Ways of relating to other people 9
(a) Task-oriented or person-oriented?
(b) Physical space
(c) Time
(d) Individual or collectivist?
(e) Competition or cooperation?
(f) Power distance
(g) Status
(h) The Status of Women
(i) Love versus loyalty
Ways of behaving 15
(a) Change versus tradition
(b) Freedom versus restraint
(c) Truth-telling versus dissimulation
A way forward? 19
Conclusion 19
Bibliography 20
1
A Pseudonym for a career missionary in the Arab World.
St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision 1
www.stfrancismagazine.info - www.interserve.org - www.arabvision.org
St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol. II (June 2006)
INTRODUCTION
The last 250 years of Christian missionary endeavour have been impressive in their
results.2 From its initial concentration in Europe and North America, the Christian church
has now spread to every continent, forming the largest religious bloc world-wide and
leaving a presence of some sort in every nation. The major group of missionaries has
come from Western3 countries, which currently send out about 80% of all cross-cultural
Christian workers4. This trend is starting to change, and the future will see a greater
proportion of non-Western people involved in world mission. However it is clear that the
missions agenda of the last two and a half centuries has been set by the West.
Western missionaries have brought more than the Christian message to the
countries and communities they have evangelised. Every cross-cultural worker “goes to
another culture with a heavy load of internalized ‘cultural baggage’.”5 All societies are to
some extent ethnocentric, unaware of their own biases, and the West is no exception.
Edward Sapir has suggested that people do not live in the same world with different
labels – they live in different worlds.6 Westerners may find it more difficult than some to
unravel their worldview from their theology. Western culture exhibits the greatest
quantitative and qualitative of differences from the majority of other cultures of the
world, according to Kraft; it takes positions and advocates customs very different from
them. Thus Western missionaries find it harder to identify with and minister in the more
normal ways of life of other societies.7
The Muslim world has shown a greater resistance to the gospel than most other
religious blocs.8 In the Arab heartlands of Islam, this has been even more pronounced.9
Several reasons have been suggested for the relative lack of response of Arab Muslims to
the Christian message. Samuel Zwemer cited the theological and doctrinal stumbling-
blocks.10 Others have noted the relative lack of investment of people and resources by the
church into the Muslim world.11 A third factor may be the lack of insight that Western
2
K.S.Latourette, 923 estimates that, in 1750 AD, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism may have had
more adherents worldwide than did Christianity, with Islam not far behind. Today 1 in 3 people would
identify themselves as Christian.
3
For the purpose of this essay, ‘Western’ is defined as those coming from Western Europe, including the
UK, and the English-speaking countries which derive from the UK i.e. the USA, Canada, Australia, New
Zealand and South Africa.
4
In 2000 AD, there were 336,068 missionaries (Catholic and Protestant) from North America, Europe and
Oceania out of a total of 419,524 missionaries world-wide, according to Barrett vol.1 p.843
5
Dye, 28. He continues: “Many of the things which he naturally assumes to be right, sensible, and natural
are not in fact biblical ideals at all, but simply part of his own culture. For instance, American values such
as efficiency, punctuality, and cleanliness are very important to many American Christians, though hard to
document from Scripture.”
6
Cited in Hiebert (1983), 33
7
Kraft (1996), 81.
8
Nickel, 122
9
Significant church growth has occurred among some Asian Muslims (e.g. Bangladesh and Indonesia), but
Christian expression among Arabs has generally been restricted to traditional church communities (such as
the Copts in Egypt or the Maronites in Lebanon).
10
Zwemer, 180. By contrast, McGavran (1980), 215 suggests: “The great obstacles to conversion are
social, not theological”.
11
In 1978, only 2% of Protestant Missionaries were involved in Muslim work according to The Lausanne
Occasional Paper no. 4 p.3. By 2002, this figure had risen to 6%. Guthrie, 35.
missionaries have regarding the Muslim worldview. “In dealing with Arabs it is
imperative that Westerners have some grasp of this traditional world view, in which there
are strong subconscious motivations radically different from those of Westerners.” 12
This essay aims to explore the different worlds of the Western and Arab peoples.
This has particular importance as Western missionaries endeavour to take the good news
of Christ to Arab Muslims13.
ARE THERE ANY TRULY NATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS?
The first question to ask is: is it feasible to try and identify common features of groups
such as Westerners and Arab Muslims? Do such national characteristics exist?
People are often stereotyped according to their national or social background. Australians
are supposed to be ‘laid back’, the English are lacking in emotion, Americans are loud,
Germans are organised, Italians emotional, and French are seen as artistic and cultured.
Needless to say, it is always easy to find individuals who do not fit these patterns. But are
there any patterns at all? The monumental work of Hofstede suggests there are definite
and measurable trends within different cultures.14 These can include beliefs as well as
practices. Patai refers to “modal personality” as having an equivalent meaning to
“national character.”15
Elmer16 places people’s values (both individual and group) into three categories:
Things they believe to be ‘right’, things they believe to be ‘wrong’, and things that are
considered ‘differences’, neither required nor condemned. These can be expressed on a
line graph as follows:
RIGHT DIFFERENCES WRONG
Within a family or a relatively homogeneous society, the width of each of the categories
may vary somewhat, but generally most people will agree on what is right and what is
wrong. When we compare the Western world and the Muslim world, however, we find
that the contents of the categories rarely line up at all.
The concept can be demonstrated by surveying a group of Australians and a group
of Muslim Arabs. Most Australians, for example, believe that ‘a dog is man’s best friend’
and can see the value of dogs as pets. A small minority will reject the notion of dog-
ownership on animal liberation grounds or as a reaction to world poverty and the amount
12
Matheny , 24
13
In the following discussion I have sometimes used the terms 'Arab' and 'Muslim' interchangeably. The
reality, of course, is much more complex– only 18% of Muslims are Arab, and there are about 18 million
Arab Christians. This essay is about Arab Muslims. There is much variety within this group, but it is
counted as one group for convenience. See Patai, 9-15 for a discussion on this approach.
14
Hofstede, 13-17
15
Patai, 18
16
Elmer, 23-27
of money spent on pet food in Australia.17 Most Arabs, however, are disgusted at the
idea of dogs as pets, believing them to be unclean.18 A few who have lived in the West
might see the security advantages of a dog. When asked a question like: “Is it ever
acceptable to have a dog as a pet?”, a range of responses would occur in both groups, but
the trends would be quite different. This graph portrays the likely outcomes:19
Number of
respondents Arabs Australians
Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always

Question: “Is it ever acceptable to have a dog as a pet?”
Yet with a question like, “Is it ever acceptable for a 50 year old man to marry a 14 year
old girl?”, the responses would most likely be reversed. Wealthy older man marrying
teenage girls is often observed in the Arab world, and the example of the prophet
Mohammed would be cited.20 Many Muslims would approve of this practice. Amongst
Australians, such behaviour is highly distasteful, and as well as being illegal, and those
involved are labelled as ‘sexual predators’.
It would appear, then, that some beliefs are more widely and more consistently
held in some communities than in others. Since this essay paints a sweeping picture using
a broad brush, its implications and applications must of necessity be general, rather than
specific. It reveals trend and inclination rather than accuracy and precision. Societies are
also changing. With the spread of post-modernism in the West and the decline of
traditional ways of life in the Arab world, many stereotypes are becoming even less
relevant. Differences are often portrayed in this essay as bright, discrete colours clearly
at different ends of a spectrum. The reality is much closer to a gradual blending, with
prominent hues occasionally discernible along the continuum.
17
According to AUSAID, Australia spent $1.89 billion on foreign aid compared to $1.55 billion on pet
food and pet care products in 2003. Source;
http://www.tai.org.au/WhatsNew_Files/WhatsNew/PetfoodWebpaper2.pdf accessed on 25th July 2005
18
A hadith informs them: “Once Gabriel promised the Prophet (that he would visit him, but Gabriel did
not come) and later on he said, "We, angels, do not enter a house which contains a picture or a dog.” in
Sahih el-Bukhari 4:450 cited in The Islamic Scholar Ver.3 (Johannesburg: Par Excellence, 1998) CD-
ROM
19
The writer has tested this with Australian church groups. After living overseas among Muslims and
Arabs for the past 20 years, I am reasonably certain that their response would be as indicated.
20
“By 624 Muhammad had married his youngest wife, Aisha. She was six years old when they married,
though he did not consummate the marriage until she was nine.” George Braswell, Jr. Islam: Its Prophet,
Peoples, Politics and Power (Broadman and Holman, 1996) Chapter 2 on The World of Islam ver.1.0
(Global Mapping Information, 2000) CD-ROM
It is at the basic level of cognitive processes that several of these differences arise,
and to that topic we will now turn.
WAYS OF THINKING
(a) Styles of thinking

“The natural act of thinking is greatly modified by our culture,” stated the sociologist
Edward Hall. “Western man uses only a small fraction of his mental capabilities; there
are many different and legitimate ways of thinking.”21 Western thinking is usually based
on Aristotelian or linear 'logic', where a person starts with a basic premise or premises
and then draws inferences or conclusions which are claimed to proceed from them.
“Western man sees his system of logic as synonymous with the truth. For him it is the
only road to reality.”22 To brand something as ‘illogical’ suggests it is not worthy of
consideration by an intelligent person.
In Muslim thinking, reasoning is more allusive or evocative. A term or an
illustration used by one proponent may suggest another thought which is then brought
into the discussion. One Arab writer notes: “It is a characteristic of the Arab mind to be
more swayed by words than by ideas, and more by ideas than by facts.”23 A connection
between two topics may be linguistic or incidental, but it is deemed a legitimate part of
the dialogue despite being an apparently random association. This is tangential reasoning
rather than sequential logic.
The arrows between elements in a diagram in Western thinking indicate the flow
of the process: cause → effect, or at least, event → correlation. But in Muslim thinking,
arrows are more likely to be double-headed, and indicate a relationship between two
entities: father ↔ son.24 Reasoning must always consider the context.
Western thinking often assumes a process is heading towards some kind of
resolution, so we can designate an ‘end-product’ as the final point of the procedure.
Western cultures “tend to emphasize goals over process.”25 The aim of this
‘dichomotistic’ thinking is to discover what is ‘right’ and what is ‘wrong. Muslim
‘holistic’ thinking26 is often more interested in exploring the interplay between the
various elements. Process is emphasized over goals – ‘being’ is more important than
‘doing’. Muslims often feel that Westerners are lacking in perspective due to their
segmental thinking and attention to minute detail. Moreover their philosophy “tries to
capture reality in words. But there are some aspects of reality that cannot be formulated
in words and phrases...[nor] comprehended by human ‘thought’ because they are outside
the realm of its operation.”27 Theologically this is may arise from the Muslim view of
God: “The Allah of the Koran is essentially unknowable.”28
21
.Hall , 9
22
Hall, 9
23
Edward Atiyeh The Arabs (Baltimore: Penguin, 1955), 96 quoted in Patai, 48
24
Fiske, 39 uses this distinction to classify two different approaches to semiotics.
25
Gannon, 13
26
The terms ‘dichotomistic’ and ‘holistic’ are from Lingenfelter & Mayers, 52ff
27
Qutb, 11
28
Hesselgrave (1978), 186
(b) Categories of thought

It is not only the mode of thinking but the classification categories that differ between the
West and the rest. Take, for example, the concept of poor health. “Illness … is a matter of
theological (not simply medical) understanding in virtually all cultures except those
characterized by western secularism.”(italics his)29 The teaching of the Bible seems to
support the idea that disease is attributable to evil spirits (Lk.6:17,18) or disobedience to
God (Num.12:1-10), rather than simply to germs as Western doctors usually claim. The
response to sickness in the Scriptures is exorcism (Lk.9:42), healing (Lk.4:40),
repentance (2 Chr.32:26), or prayer and fasting (Ps.35:13), rather than medicine. Where
remedial procedures were used, it was in the context of repentance and a word from the
Lord (2 Kg.20:1-7). Missionary doctors typically resort to Western medicinal technology
when faced with sick people, rather than calling on them to repent, or fasting and praying,
or exorcising or healing them. Lesslie Newbigin has argued that “Western Christian
missions have been one of the greatest secularizing forces in history.”30 What Christians
may see as a legitimate secularism which separates science (medicine) and religion (faith)
can be perceived by Muslims as a rationalistic godlessness.
Westerners often give the impression that all things will be understood eventually
through scientific means31, and this conveys a sense of arrogance.32 Muslims seem much
more comfortable with a world which contains mystery, where all may not be known. It
accords better with their view of the incomprehensibility of God. The Qur'an affirms that
"God is above all comprehension" (Sura 6.103). There is no-one like God (Sura 4.34) and
His will can only be known by revelation (Sura 42:51). Although the Bible affirms the
same truth (Dt.29:29), most Western Christians have accepted the prevailing view of
science as ‘all-conquering’ from their own secularised education.
This carries over into their perception of how the world could be and should be.
Western commentators seem completely blind to their own biases. On the topic of
“Cultural Imperialism”, one analyst writes about the potential advantages of a world-wide
cultural homogenisation. “It is not difficult to think of examples of cultural practices
which would probably attract a consensus in favour of their universal application: health
care, food hygiene, educational provision; various ‘liberal’ cultural attitudes towards
honesty, toleration, compassion and so on; democratic public processes, etc.”33 Of course,
Muslims would be quick to point out that every one of these ‘cultural practices’ reflects a
modern Western worldview based on scientific and humanistic rationalism, rather than a
so-called ‘universal’ worldview, intrinsically shared by everyone.
(c) Apolitical or political?

A further division relates to the area of politics. For many Western Christians, politics is
‘dirty business’ and to be eschewed. Some would take their cue from the words of Jesus
about Caesar and God (Lk.20:25), and His statement “My Kingdom is not of this world”
(Jn.18:36). This has been exacerbated by a reaction to the fourth century
29
Kraft (1979), 305
30
Honest Religion for Secular Man (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) cited in Hiebert (1999), 418
31
Broderick suggests that genetic modification may result in human immortality. Science, he believes,
could eventually cure death.
32
Ironically, the Christians of Mohammed’s time were commended for their humility (Sura 5:85)
33
Tomlinson, 309
Constantinisation of the church, and the subsequent too-close relationship between

church and state throughout the Middle Ages. The quietistic flavour of later Methodism
with its disengagement from the world has continued to waft through evangelical thought
in recent centuries. A reaction against Walter Rauschenbusch’s “social gospel”
movement of early last century further divorced politics from religion in the minds of
many evangelicals.34
Muslims have no such qualms. The birth of Islam is counted from the hijra when
the early followers of Mohammed fled to Yathrib (later renamed Medina) and established
a community ruled by the Prophet himself. The close connection between Islamic
religion and politics has been unchallenged ever since. Ayatollah Khomeini warned the
Islamic community against attempts by Western “imperialists” to separate them “in order
to prevent religion from ordering the affairs of this world and shaping Muslim society
…[and] to gain dominance over our people and plunder our resources.” He taunts those
who seek recourse in Allah alone and retreat to their religious devotions: “Pray as much
as you like; it is your oil they are after – why should they worry about your prayers? They
are after our minerals and want to turn our country into a market for their goods.”35
It is only in recent days and through minority voices that an alternative is being
heard. Salman Rushdie proffers: “The restoration of religion to the sphere of the personal,
its depoliticization, is the nettle that all Muslim societies must grasp in order to become
modern.”36 It is doubtful that his call will be heeded. Western Christians, however, must
develop plausible responses to the Muslim proclivity to combine religion and politics.37
(d) Specialisation or Generalism?

As an industrial society, the West has become highly specialised. The ‘social contract’
concept and burgeoning of technology allows the majority of workers to be employed in
areas not related to the production of food or goods necessary for physical survival.
Individuals are able to dedicate their working lives to increasingly narrow fields of
expertise. Even in religion, this has created a class of specialists, the clergy. Because faith
is relegated to the ‘spiritual-only’ sphere, the clergy are often seen as irrelevant to the
society as a whole. “Insofar as a society becomes structurally differentiated, religion loses
social significance; once that happens, restoration is difficult if not impossible. In
differentiated, specialised institutions engaged in technical control of the world, religious
distinctions have little role.”38
Islam claims to have a generalist view of life, where all the different facets
interact in balance and wholeness. “The tragedy of secular societies is that they fail to
connect the different aspects of life. The secular and the religious, the scientific and the
spiritual seem to be in conflict. Islam puts an end to this conflict and brings harmony to
man's vision of life.” 39 This has tended to work itself out in restricting the levels of
34
Moberg details much of this debate.
35
Ayatollah Khomeini Islam and Revolution (Berkeley: Mizan, 1980), 38 quoted in Parshall (1985), 74
36
Rushdie, 358
37
Yoder is one approach that has been taken.
38
Lechner, 329
39
“Basic Material” in The Islamic Scholar (Johannesburg: Par Excellence, 1998) Ver.3 CD-ROM
specialisation needed for high quality technology. 40 The Arab world has often responded
to this by importing technical expertise from other countries, either the West or rapidly
developing Asian countries such as India or the Philippines.
William Smalley saw Western specialisation as a major stumbling to mission. He
comments that it is “an ironical thing that the West, which is most concerned with the
spread of Christianity in the world today, and which is financially best able to undertake
the task of worldwide evangelism, is culturally the least suited for its task because of the
way in which it has specialized itself to a point where it is very difficult for it to have an
adequate understanding of other peoples” 41 Jesus condemned those who claimed to have
insight when their own vision was severely impaired (Mt.7:3-5), and those who
concentrated so much on the details that they missed the big picture (Lk.11:42).
(e) Guilt or shame?

Societies of the world have been classified as predominantly ‘guilt’, ‘shame’ or ‘fear’
cultures. Western cultures are generally seen as guilt-oriented, with a strong emphasis on
right and wrong, and the personal conscience playing a predominant role.42 In the secular
world, people will often do the right thing because of their internalised ‘law’. A Western
presentation of the gospel usually draws on this paradigm, emphasising human sinfulness
(Rom.3:23), the conviction of the conscience (Rom.7:14-24), and the death of Christ as a
payment for sin (Rom.6:23). It is a legal model of the atonement.
For Arabs, this approach is not very convincing. In their strongly people-oriented
society, what matters is how others see you, not your own opinion of yourself, nor even
the judgement of some impersonal law. Reputation is an external matter, rather than an
internal one. Arab Muslims are greatly concerned about establishing and maintaining
their honour, and avoiding shame. "Honor is what makes life worthwhile; shame is a
living death, not to be endured, requiring that it be avenged. What otherwise seems self-
destructive in Arab society is explained by the anxiety to be honored and respected at all
costs, and by whatever means."43 Westerners tend to be direct and open, sometimes
exposing the short-comings of others. Arabs will more often resort to the use of a
mediator, some-one trusted by both sides, who will seek for common ground and
reconciliation. This approach has strong biblical sanction (1.Tim.2:5,6; Heb.9:15), as
does the need to avoid shame (1.Pet.2:6). Jesus bore our shame on the cross (Heb.12:2)
so that we could stand unashamed before him at his return (1. Jn.2:28).
The contrast in ways of thinking suggests that Westerners and Arab Muslims will
often be talking at cross-purposes since their basic suppositions differ greatly. They have
much ground to cover if they are to even begin to understand each other.
40
Remarkably, this has not always been the case. “In the Middle Ages, the flow of technology was
overwhelmingly from Islam to Europe, rather than from Europe to Islam as it is today. Only after around
A.D. 1500 did the net direction of flow begin to reverse.” Diamond, 253
41
William Smalley “Cultural Implications of an Indigenous Church,” in Practical Anthropology 5: 64
quoted in Kraft (1979), 306
42
Muller , 18,19
43
Pryce-Jones, 35
WAYS OF RELATING TO OTHER PEOPLE

It is not only in thinking styles and underlying assumptions that Westerners are greatly
divergent from Arab Muslims. Their social interactions portray further great differences.
(a) Task-oriented or person-oriented?

The technological advances in the West have come at a price. The desire to produce
many goods cheaply for popular consumption has resulted in work practices designed for
efficiency. Often these are not in accordance with human values, such as socialising and
personal satisfaction. The desire for excellence and the status attached to personal
achievement have sometimes spawned a workaholism that bedevils personal and social
well-being. Work has got out of all proportion. The completion of tasks at greater speed
and lower cost often has a higher priority than people-values. As one Muslim
commentator puts it: “Hundreds of millions of humans have been destroyed and made
into machines in order to increase production!”44 Jesus criticised those in his day who
valued people less than the means of production (Mt.12:11,12; Lk.13:15). He mocked
those who equated them (Lk.14:5). In his worldview, human needs had priority over
religious regulations (Mt.12:1-5).
The Arab world decidedly favours human relationships. The communal nature of
its society impacts work attitudes, so that people come before productivity. Competence
for the task is only one of the criteria for selecting employees, and often not the most
important one. Family connection or personal affability usually win over professional
capability. Social skills are highly esteemed in this people-oriented civilization.
It is ironic that the selection procedures of many Western mission societies are
weighted against those who might eventually become more effective communicators of
the gospel. Typically the requirement is the completion of academic qualifications, either
theological or professional. These may weed out some of the more promising candidates.
“Our educational system is not designed to reward individuals who are person-oriented.
These students often struggle to meet the schedules and demands of learning and are
unwilling to sacrifice interpersonal ties for long hours of study. … performance in school
is not always a reliable indicator of potential success in ministry.”45 Our Western task-
orientation rather than people-focus may have impeded the universal mission movement.
(b) Physical space

Whenever two people meet, the physical space they maintain between themselves is a
matter of cultural negotiation.46 Hiebert notes the following distances regarding space for
a North American, although they can be applied to all ‘low contact’ cultures, including
Northern European and Asian. Within 12 feet (3 ½ m), another person becomes a ‘social’
entity, and should be acknowledged. Outside this is ‘public’ space, and the person can be
politely ignored. Two people within 4 feet (1.2 m) of each other are inside each other’s
‘personal’ space, and are exhibiting a relationship of some depth. A distance of less of
than 2 feet (60 cms) suggests an intimate conversation, excluding others. High contact
cultures such as Arab, Latin American and Mediterranean have a different range of
44
Qutb , 72
45
Lingenfelter & Mayers, 85
46
This is known as the science of ‘proxemics’
http://www.bremercommunications.com/Proxemics_How_We_Use_Space.htm cited on 11th July, 2005
distances. The ‘social’ space is 5 feet (1.5 m), ‘personal’ is 2 ½ feet (75 cms) and
‘intimate’ is 1 ½ feet (45 cms). 47 When an Arab physically approaches a Westerner too
closely, the latter often steps backwards into a space that feels comfortable, and so is seen
as cold, distant and withdrawing. If the Arab keeps moving closer, into a space which he
deems appropriate, he may be seen as forceful and invading.
Jesus’ ministry shows him operating in high contact mode in public (Lk.8:45) and
private (Jn.20:21) situations. He frequently touched other people, both friends (Jn.13:5)
and strangers (Lk.5:13) and was touched by them (Lk.6:19). Arab men will often walk
along the street holding hands with male companions in an open display of friendship,
with no sense of embarrassment. The ‘low-touch’ reserved style of Anglo-culture is a
stark contrast. Western missionaries may find it hard to put aside their own inhibitions to
relate physically to Arabs in culturally-appropriate ways.
(c) Time
Hiebert reports that, in Egypt, only servants turn up on time. Men of equal rank turn up
an hour late to show their independence and social status. ‘On time’ is one hour after the
appointment. 1 ½ hours is considered late. They think of American ‘on time’ as
subservient. Westerners operate on monochronic time i.e. “scheduling and completing
one activity at a time”; the Arab preference is polychronic time:“not distinguishing
between activities and completing them simultaneously.”48 These variant ways of
viewing time are a source of much misunderstanding and frustration between the two
cultures.
There is another aspect of time which is significant. “The Western Christian is
strongly future-oriented. The past is seen as outdated and, in the main, irrelevant to the
fast-breaking developments of the here and now.”49 The present can be used in ways that
will positively impact the future. It often leads to a deferred gratification syndrome. In the
secular marketplace, people are willing to endure jobs which bring little satisfaction in
order to enjoy a well-superannuated retirement. If potential pleasure is thought to be
secured, present pain can be tolerated. At a spiritual level, the Bible encourages this
outlook (2.Cor.4:16,17), since it was found even in Jesus (Heb.12:2).
To Muslims it is presumptuous in the extreme to speak of the future50, perhaps
due to a lingering fatalism. 'Whomsoever God leads astray, no guide he has; He leaves
them in their insolence blindly wandering' (Sura 7.185). “The same belief in
predestination renders the Muslim utterly devoid of presumption with regard to his future
actions, or to any future events. He never speaks of anything that he intends to do, or of
any circumstance which he expects and hopes may come to pass, without adding, “If it be
the will of God..”51 This too finds an echo in Scripture (Jam.4:13-16).
47
Hiebert (1983), 34
48
Edward Hall, cited in Gannon , 9
49
Parshall (1980) , 68
50
This was apparent from the earliest days. As Muslim armies occupied countries, they sent the tribute
back to Mecca. “The idea of depositing any portion in the treasury to be held as a reserve against
emergencies was alien to the first Caliphs. Omar looked upon the suggestion of it as blasphemous and as
implying that Allah would not provide for every contingency; he severely rebuked the man who broached
the matter.” Levy , 298
51
Edward William Lane quoted in Patai, 149
(d) Individual or collectivist?

The spiritual precursor of the Christian community was a highly collectivist one. The
Hebrews were preoccupied with national rather than personal concerns. "The nation was
the organic unit with whom God had dealings."52 In the teaching of the prophets
Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the emphasis on the individual came to the fore.53 This has
continued to the present day in some societies, being further developed in the movements
of the Reformation and the Enlightenment. “In the Western world … we draw a line
around the individual and say this is our basic entity – the building block of all social
relations and institutions.”54
Many other civilisations, including Arab culture, are collectivist. ”Islam has a
strongly social emphasis, which includes a political element. This is one of the
unique organisational features of the Muslim community.”55 The individual has
meaning only within his or her group. Among Arabs, a person “does not, even under
normal circumstances, establish an identity separate from that of his community.”56
Family and tribal solidarity is paramount. Western individualism can be seen as
selfishness and arrogance, as though the person considers himself independent of those
who brought him into the world and who currently sustain him. In the desert context from
which Islam arose, a person alone could not survive.57
There is also a sense of accepting one's place in Islam.58 The Quran states: “God
has favoured some of you more than others in the matter of sustenance, and those who
have been favoured should not hand over their sustenance to what their right hands
possess, so that they may be equal in that respect. Will they then deny the favours of
God? “(Sura 16.71). This is in clear contrast to Paul's advice to the Corinthian
Christians to give for the relief of the Judean believers "that there may be equality."
(2.Cor.8.14)
The concept of social class for Christians, although not denied, ( I.Cor.1.26-29;
Col.3.18 - 4.1) becomes irrelevant in the light of Christ (Eph.2.11-22, Gal.3.28). The
move towards individualism, particularly in Western countries, has had an atomising
effect on the Christian church. This needs to be addressed through the communal images
of the Kingdom of God and the body of Christ.
(e) Competition or cooperation?

“Competition has gotten out of hand in the West in just about every area of life.”59 It has
spread from the sporting field, where it is appropriate, to include commerce (“the world’s
richest man”), aesthetics (beauty contests), and academics (the Nobel prizes). It even
52
Smart, 370
53
Harrison, 140. Compare Ezekiel 18:1-20 with Ex.20:5,6
54
Hall , 231
55
Smart, 538
56
Hall, 226
57
Patai, 85
58
The 'eschatological ethics' in the teaching of Paul on circumcision, slavery, and marriage in I.Cor.7.17-31
would seem to concur with this, but the idea of 'remaining in the state in which you were called’ is
given as general principle only. Paul's readers are given permission to change if desired (vv.21,28), and
the ultimate goals stated are 'to promote good order and secure your undivided attention to the Lord'
(v.35)
59
Kraft (1979), 304
extends to the church, where Christian authors are classified as “best-sellers” and pastors
are graded by the size of their congregations60. This is despite the biblical invitations to
collaboration (Eccl.4:11,12) and warnings against comparison (2.Cor.10:12). For
collectivist societies, the concept of competition has been described as “repugnant and
foreign ... [it] is subversive and threatens the very core of his existence. It is like having
different parts of the psyche in competition. When this happens, the individual can only
suffer.”61
Muslims tend to devalue competition, and aim for cooperation. Theologically this
derives from the doctrine of tawheed (unity), based on the monistic nature of God. “Our
notion of God’s Oneness must be reflected in our own striving towards a co-ordination
and unification of the various aspects of our life.”62 At the personal, family and tribal
levels, there is a strong sense of looking out for each other and a pervasive (often
invasive!) interest in the affairs of others. It gives Islam a feel of unity in origin, identity
and destiny. One Muslim writer suggests the following: "God is one, religion is one,
and the messengers of God are all brothers, responsible for a single mission - the
guidance of mankind."63
However this is unlikely to result in any kind of political unity. Half a century
ago, Cragg wrote: “No concrete scheme of Muslim world-federalism is on the horizon.
Whatever may be true ideally, centripetal forces are very potent in actuality. Even within
the more homogeneous Arab world the forces of unity are compromised by personal and
dynastic rivalries and suspicions.”64 This analysis remains just as valid today. Some
would see this as the fulfillment of the prophecy concerning Ishmael in Gen.16:13: “His
hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in
hostility toward all his brothers.” It is enshrined in a well-known Arabic proverb: "I
against my brothers; I and my brothers against my cousins; I and my cousins against the
world".65 Arabs will often joke about their differences, express disgust at the actions of
fellow-Arabs, and occasionally take up arms against each other. “But even in the midst of
fratricidal wars, the feeling persists that, however painful the conflict, it is merely a
temporary disagreement which sooner or later will be settled and which, even while it
lasts, in no way infringes upon the principle of Arab brotherhood and the ideal of all-
Arab national unity.”66 This gap between ‘ideal’ and ‘reality’ will be discussed below.
(f) Power distance

In any society or organization, power is not distributed equally. Power-distance is the
extent to which leaders and followers accept hierarchical differences between them, and
how much leaders and followers can determine the behaviour of the other. This is a key
distinction between Western and Arab societies. Hofstede assesses different national
groups according to these criteria. From a top figure of around 100, and a low of about
10, Western countries such as the US, UK, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands are on
60
For example, Robinson is described on the cover of his book as “the Senior Pastor of one of Australia's
largest churches”.
61
Hall, 231
62
Mohammed Asad Islam at the Crossroads (Lahore: Arafat Publications, 1955), 17 quoted in Qutb,107
63
Abd al-Karim al-Khatib "Christ in the Quran, Taurat and Injil" in The Muslim World Vol.61, 1971, p.91
64
Cragg, 191
65
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/democracyprint.htm accessed on 11th July 2005. Also in Patai p.42
66
Patai, 41,42
the low end, grouped between 35 and 40. Arab countries are ranked at 80, suggesting a
high power-distance.67 He portrays the differences as follows68:
Low power distance High power distance

A few should be independent; most should
All should be interdependent
be dependent
There should be an order of inequality in
Inequality in society should be minimized which everyone has his/her rightful place;
high and low are protected by this order
Hierarchy means an inequality of roles,
Hierarchy means existential inequality
established for convenience
Superiors and subordinates are both people Superiors and subordinates are both of a
like me different kind
The use of power should be legitimate and Power is a basic fact of society that
is subject to the judgment between good antedates good and evil; its legitimacy is
and evil irrelevant
All should have equal rights Power holders are entitled to privileges
Powerful people should try to look less Powerful people should try to look as
powerful than they are powerful as possible
Stress on reward, legitimate and expert
Stress on coercive and referent power
power
The system is to blame The underdog is to blame
The way to change a system is by The way to change a system is by
redistributing power dethroning those in power
Latent harmony between the powerful and Latent conflict between the powerful and
the powerless the powerless
Older people neither respected nor feared Older people respected and feared
The concept of democracy is problematic in ‘high power-distance’ societies, for it

challenges many of their basic assumptions. It denies any ‘divine right’ of rulers, and
instead allows the removal of leadership and its replacement with those who better reflect
the wishes of the masses. Those in power are answerable to all who have suffrage. Thus
power is shared. Democracy is a great leveler in many respects. The Qur’an refutes such
egalitarian notions, suggesting a hierarchy of divine origin (Quran 16.71) Attempts to
divide up control may be perceived as a lack of honour towards to those who have
received heavenly support to get where they are.
(g) Status
Cultures allocate status to people on different grounds. In ‘ascribed status’ cultures, the
most important factors are those of birth. Honour comes from being born into a well-
known or prestigious family or tribe. Genealogies are highly valued in such societies.
Other factors would be high rank (e.g. honorific titles and military designation), wealth
and old age. “The amount of respect one receives is permanently fixed; attention focuses
67
Hofstede, 87
68
Hofstede, 98
on those with high social status in spite of any personal failings they have.”69 Arab
cultures generally operate on this level. A person’s surname (or tribal name) and titles
reveal as much about them as many people want or need to know. It indicates their
background, and therefore their social echelon. Upward mobility is difficult in such a
context.
‘Achieved status’ societies would look at a person’s accomplishments. An
individual can earn social standing by their own deeds, no matter what their family of
origin. In the West, status can be obtained by accruing personal wealth or through
outstanding performance in a field such as sport or even academic pursuits. Often those
who perform at a high standard when starting from a lower social position are even more
esteemed.
It is interesting to note that, according to the Judaism of his day, the apostle Paul
could have claimed both types. His ascribed status came from his Hebrew credentials
(Phil.3:4,5) and his achieved status from his role as a persecutor of those who had strayed
(Phil.3:6). Yet he turned his back on them both, counting them as nothing for the sake of
Christ (Phil.3:7-11).
Jesus too had enviable genealogies on both sides of his family (Mt.1:1-17;
Lk.3:23-38). However much of its value was dissipated by coming from Nazareth, in
Galilee, and by the people he mixed and ate with. Despite this, his achievements were
impressive, in speech (Mt.7:28), in action (Mt.9:33) and in impact (Jn.12:19). The fact
that he turned his back on his inherent status (Phil.2:5-8) will result elevation to a
position of ultimate respect (Phil.2:9-11).
(h) The Status of Women

Both Westerners and Muslims claim to esteem women highly. In the West this is shown
by according women a social status equal to that of men. Christian teaching advocates
that men and women have identical value before God, being one in Christ (Gal.3:28).
Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church (Eph.5:26). Although neither
of these principles has been widely carried out in practice, the ideal is clearly presented.
The feminist movement of the late 20th century has brought women into higher
prominence in many public roles in the West.
Despite some Muslim countries electing women as heads of state70, the Arab
world lags far behind. Arabs would more typically claim that they value their women by
protecting them, rather than subjecting them to public scrutiny. Women are seen as
weaker. “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel
over the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women).”
(Sura 4:34 – Pickthall’s translation). Women have some legal rights, but “men have a
degree above them.” (Sura 2:228). In another place, men and women are described as
“protectors of one another” (Sura 9:71), suggesting an equality. Female offspring receive
only half the inheritance of male offspring (Sura 9:11). Women are presented to men as
69
Lingenfelter & Mayers , 100
70
Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. Significantly, three were the daughters or husbands of
previous heads of state, suggesting a hereditary principle rather than one based on gender equality. It still
contraverted the Hadith: “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler” (alBukhari
5:709; 9:219) cited in Parshall (1994), 219

“a tillage for you; so come into your tillage as you wish, and forward for your souls”.
(Sura 2:223 – Arberry translation). In this agricultural depiction of women, one female
Muslim commentator finds “significant similarities between a contract of marriage and
contract of sale.” 71 Many of the freedoms enjoyed by Western women are not accessible
in the Arab world by Muslim women.
(i) Love versus loyalty

This raises the question of different views of marriage in Western and Islamic societies.
In the West, “mate selection is based on a personal free choice after which the couple
lives independent of their parents. Love is assumed to be the starting point and sole
criteria for the relationship. If a husband and wife … become ‘incompatible’, there are far
fewer concerns about dishonoring their vows than about demanding personal rights. It is
assumed that if love no longer exists, divorce is justifiable.”72 Western society confuses
the biblical concept of ‘love’ with a culturally-determined ‘romance’ based on emotion.
Considering its rate of marriage and family breakdown, one Christian observer suggests:
“the West has little to say to Muslims on the subject of family life.”73
In Muslim countries, marriage is not usually based on romantic love.74 In
traditional societies, marriage serves to cement wider social relationships and to keep
wealth within the extended family. The sons produced will enhance the prestige of the
tribe or family and protect its interests in the future. Daughters will eventually marry
within the tribe or extended family and produce more sons. A couple will enter into and
persevere in a marriage not primarily because of mutual love, but due to a loyalty to the
wider family. This picture of faithfulness may be quite close to the kinds of marriages
depicted in biblical cultures. Western marriages, including between missionaries, more
often reveal their own cultural backgrounds rather than biblically-sanctioned models of
marriage. “The Old Testament has close parallels to Muslim family structures. Arranged
marriages, submission of the woman to the husband, the close-knit family, and the
extended nature of relationships all bear strong resemblance to conditions in Islamic
lands.”75
WAYS OF BEHAVING
(a) Change versus tradition:

In the sixth century B.C. the Greek philosopher Heraclitus commented: “Nothing endures
but change.”76 The Bible affirms that change is inevitable (Ps.102:25, 26), even though
God Himself does not change (Mal.3:6; Jam.1:17; Heb.13:8). Westerners see change as
an integral part of life. They will prepare for it, in what Lingenfelter calls a ‘crisis
orientation’, where they anticipate change, organize for it and seek a quick
71
Haeri , 358
72
Huffard, 166
73
Parshall (1980), 69
74
This is despite the advice of the prophet Mohammed to a man intending to marry a woman he had not
seen: “Look at her for it is better than there should be love between you.” Al-Tirmidhi Hadith no. 3107 on
The Alim for Windows ver 4.5 , 1996 CD-ROM
75
Parshall (1980), 69
76
http://www.yuni.com/quotes/heraclitus.html accessed on 11th July 2005
resolution to avoid ambiguity.77 But even more than this, they promote change.78 Change
is seen as a sign of growth, and stability is often equated with stagnation. Many books
have been written on how to encourage and manage change in an organisation.79
The view from the Muslim world is quite different. Sayyid Qutb speaks out
against Western philosophy’s “craze to discard everything from the past and to embrace
everything new, …and to mock everything traditional whether in the moral or any other
sphere…To advocate continual change is merely an excuse for doing whatever one wants
to do.”80 This is not to say that Islam totally opposes any kind of change. The Qur’an
affirms that “Allah does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in
their selves.” (Sura 13:11). Some would go further. “Is the law of Islam capable of
evolution? [Mohammed] Iqbal answers the question with an emphatic affirmative and
welcomes liberal re-interpretations of Islam.” 81
However the overall thrust of Muslim society is to maintain the status quo. For
them this is a way of honouring their forbears who delivered their current traditions. It is
also a recognition of the over-arching power of God. “Let him who will, take the right
path to his Lord. Yet you cannot will, except by the will of Allah. Allah is wise and all
knowing. He is merciful to whom He will.” (Sura 76.30 Dawood). This may exhibit itself
in a paralysing fatalism. There is no choice but “to go through the course of events which
have been written down for him in God’s Book to the smallest detail … it does not pay
and is not even possible to try to do anything to procure an advantage.”82
Of course, all the factors are interactive, reinforcing each other. The extreme
individualism of the West bestows an incredible mobility. Since each person is
considered a discrete entity, they can move about society alone and can fit into new group
situations more easily. Paradoxically, the group identity of Arab societies means a person
often feels comfortable and secure only within his or her own social context. To venture
into a different community without the company of family members or others of their
own tribe can be a fearful experience. It is a journey into the unknown. For a culture
which does not encourage innovation and risk, this is a difficult position to be in.
Muslims will more often want to withdraw into familiar territory.
(b) Freedom vs restraint

The Muslim aversion to change can lead to a type of mental imprisonment. The Bible
speaks often of ‘freedom’ as a desirable state (Jn 8:36) over against ‘slavery’ or
‘bondage’ (Gal.5:1). It also contains warnings against licentiousness (Gal.5:13). However
many observers find that Western self-expression has led to a level of public morality
bordering on unrestrained sensuality. Muslims regard this as a total shamelessness which
they do not want to infect their own societies. One Muslim commentator gauges the goal
of Western freedom as “to remove all restrictions in the way of fulfilling desires and
passions, …[and] encourage(s) individuals to indulge in their desires and to pursue bodily
77
Lingenfelter, 75
78
Newbigin, 36 refers to ‘a permanent principle of revolution’ found in technological societies
79
An example would be Lyle Schaller’s The Change Agent
80
Qutb, 76
81
Nazir-Ali , 82
82
Hilma Granqvist quoted in Patai, 149
pleasures”.83 The Qur’an sets a high standard in sexual matters, requiring both men and
women to lower their gaze in each other’s presence (Sura 24:30). In fact every part of a
Muslim’s existence is legislated. “All legal and social transactions as well as all personal
behaviour, are subsumed under the Shari’a as the comprehensive principle of the total
way of life.” (italics his).84
Christianity’s emphasis on freedom has been observed by Muslims from the
earliest days. Around 870 A.D, Constantine of Thessalonica at the age of twenty-four was
asked by the Byzantine Emperor to go into Muslim territory to defend the Christian
teachings of the Trinity. A Saracen challenged him: “Philosopher, perceive you the
wondrous miracle, how the Prophet Mohammed brought us joyful tidings from God and
converted numerous peoples, and how we all keep his law without transgression in any
way. But in keeping Christ’s law, you act and do whatever pleases each of you, one this,
another that.” (italics mine).85 The remarkable diversity of Christian lifestyle in contrast
to Islamic uniformity was evident even at that time.
(c) Truth-telling versus dissimulation

In other areas, it is Islam that shows the greater diversity and creativity. For Christians,
speaking the truth is imperative. The idea is first outlined in the Ten Commandments
(Ex.20:16). Lying is condemned by the prophets (e.g. Jer. 23:26), and derided in the
Wisdom literature: it is “better to be poor than a liar” (Prov.19:22). Jesus picked up this
theme, emphasizing unembellished speech (Mt.5:37), and claiming to be the Truth
himself (Jn.14:6). Paul warns his readers to speak the truth in love (Eph.4:15). Financial
transparency was dramatically enforced in the early Christian community (Acts.5:1-11).
This heavy emphasis on truth has left its imprint in Western society with the expectation
of, or at least the aspiration to, integrity in public and private life. Lying in court (perjury)
is a punishable offence. Calling some-one a ‘liar’ could be considered libel or slander and
be subject to judicial proceedings. Being found guilty of unscrupulous practices can mean
the end of a business career. Misleading parliament occasionally ends a political career.
For Muslims there are other values which might be rated more highly. “After
observing Muslims for many years, I am brought to the conclusion that lying is not
considered a serious sin. I have been told my Muslim friends that it becomes a sin if the
consequence is bad. If lying does not harm, then it is not wrong.”86 Telling the truth when
it might negatively affect a relationship would not necessarily be seen as a virtue. The
theological basis for this is a doctrine called ‘dissimulation”, al-tagiyya, based on Suras
3:28,and 6:106. It means "concealing or disguising one's beliefs, convictions, ideas,
feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in
time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury."87 It has been more broadly
interpreted, and the prophet Mohammed himself claimed that it was justified in times of
war, to bring reconciliation between Muslims, and between a man and his wife.88 Some
claim it is only a Shi’a doctrine, but others point to the Qur’an and Hadith rulings.
83
Qutb, 76,77
84
Rahman, 117
85
Hesselgrave & Rommen , 22
86
Parshall (1994), 218
87
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html
88
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html
Whatever the theological standing of this doctrine, it certainly has affected the
Islamic world-view. Muslims often see Westerners as naïve, being willing to hold to their
principles of truth even at personal and economic cost.
What may be seen in one culture as ‘lying’ could be simply viewed as hyperbole
in another. “To the Arab mind, eloquence is related to exaggeration, which is not meant
to be taken literally but which only serves the purpose of effect.”89 Patai finds the root of
Arab verbal embellishment in cultural child-weaning practices. Boys are often breast-fed
on demand up to three years old. Simply verbalising invariably brings instant
gratification without any further action by the child. This connection affects the psyche of
the child resulting in a characteristic trait in adulthood among Arabs: “the proclivity for
making an emphatic verbal statement of intention and failing to follow it up with any
action that could lead to its realisation.”90
One Arab psychologist finds the disparity in the Arabic language. “The to-be-
expected gap between the real self of the Arab and his ideal-self becomes even larger
when strengthened by the superimposition of the gap between literary Arabic, which
reigns supreme in the ideal-self, and colloquial Arabic, which is the monopoly of the
practical functions of the real self. When the Arab thinks of his ideal-self he thinks in
terms of what he has learned from reading and listening, that is, in terms of literary
Arabic. But in his everyday living, he is free to distinguish between his ideal-self and
what he really thinks and does, thanks to his use of the colloquial Arabic.
The psychological consequence is this: while an Arab may express himself in the
loftiest moral tone, he may also under the proper circumstances freely descend to a low
stratum of moral behavior ---and what is significant, feel all the time little contradiction
between the two modes of action.” 91
As a consequence, Muslims may be viewed as devious and untrustworthy by
Westerners. Agreements that have been made by them are later adjusted unilaterally, or
repudiated, and it is difficult to know when a final deal has actually been struck. This is a
great source of misunderstanding in international business involving Arabs and
Westerners.
The gaps between Western Christians and Muslim Arabs in thinking, behaviour
and social interaction are wide and multifarious. “The assumptions of the Western
worldview are more sharply distinguished from those of other people than has been the
case with any other major culture in history …Most contemporary non-Western
experiences, assumptions and values are an incomprehensible ‘closed book’ to them
also.”92 It is difficult to envisage that common ground can even be found, let alone to
know how to find it. But it must be sought. If the gospel of Jesus Christ is to go to
Muslims some way forward is imperative.
89
Patai, 48
90
Patai, 31
91
E. Shouby, “The influence of the Arabic language on the psychology of the Arabs.” Middle East
Journal ( Washington, DC: The Middle East Institute, 1951), 301-302, cited in Brown, 13
92
Pearse, 15
A WAY FORWARD?
Taking his cue from Paul’s description of his own ministry in 1.Cor.9:19-23, Zwemer
suggests the following: “We must become Moslems to the Moslem if we would gain
them for Christ. We must do this in the Pauline sense, without compromise, but with self
-sacrificing sympathy and unselfish love. The Christian missionary should first of all
thoroughly know the religion of the people among whom he labours; ignorance of the
Koran, the traditions, the life of Mohammed, the Moslem conception of Christ, social
beliefs and prejudices of Mohammedans, which are the result of their religion, -
ignorance of these is the chief difficulty in work for Moslems.”93 He places a high
premium on the role of knowledge. This is a good start, but hardly sufficient. More recent
commentators have emphasised attitudinal aspects. Elmer (following Larson and
Brewster) suggests becoming a ‘bi-cultural person’94 . He recognises that it is neither
possible nor desirable for an individual to completely repudiate their birth-culture.
But what would it look like in practice? Lingenfelter describes it thus: “We must
suspend our commitment to the context in which we have lived all of our lives, enter a
context which is strange to us, and appropriate that new context as the framework for our
life and ministry. By doing so we will experience a reintegration in our lives, yet we will
not lose our prior identity or personal culture and history. This significant change in our
thinking will allow us to enter into relationships with people whose values and lifestyles
are fundamentally different from our own.”95 He refers to this process as becoming a
150% person. This is the radical call to incarnation, following the example of Jesus
(1.Pet.2:21). We are called to imitate God (Eph.5:1) and live a life of love (Eph.5:2). We
will never become 100% insiders in a new culture – the only way to do that is to be born
into it, like Jesus was. But we can become less attached to our own culture (reducing its
pull to 75%) and take on as much of the new one (increased to 75%) as possible. 96
CONCLUSION
The hiatus between the two cultures, Christian West and Muslim Arab, is manifest. It
impinges on thinking styles and content, and personal and group behaviour. Many
Westerners feel that their culture is biblically-sanctioned because of its historical
Christian roots. More often this betrays an ethnocentrism which will impede missionary
work among Muslims. Communication requires mutual comprehension before any
content can be exchanged. The task of taking the good news to the whole world
(Mt.28:19,20) will come at some cost. Part of this cost must include Western missionaries
laying aside cultural norms that form a barrier to Muslims coming to know the love of
Christ. As Parshall puts it: “The onus for change and adaptation is on the missionary.”97
93
Zwemer , 183
94
Elmer, 198
95
Lingenfelter & Mayers, 123,124
96
Lingenfelter & Mayers , 24
97
Parshall (1980), 110
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abd al-Karim al-Khatib "Christ in the Quran, Taurat and Injil" in The Muslim World
Vol.61, 1971
David Barrett et al World Christian Encyclopedia (New York: Oxford University Press,
2001), 2nd ed.
Rick Brown Current Issues in the Use of Spoken Arabic Dialects and Registers (Amman:
SIL, 1998)
Kenneth Cragg The Call of the Minaret (New York: Oxford University Press, 1956)
Jared Diamond Guns, Germs and Steel (London: Vintage, 1998)
Wayne T. Dye “Toward a Cross-Cultural Definition of Sin” in Missiology (1976) Vol. 4
Duane Elmer Cross-Cultural Connections (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2002)
John Fiske Introduction to Communication Studies (London: Routledge, 1990)
Martin J. Gannon Understanding Global Cultures (London: Sage, 2001)
Stan Guthrie “Doors into Islam” in Christianity Today 9th Sept, 2002
E.T.Hall Beyond Culture (New York: Anchor, 1976)
Shahla Haeri “Obedience versus Autonomy” in Frank Lechner and John Boli (eds) The
Globalization Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004)
R.K.Harrison Jeremiah and Lamentations (London: Tyndale, 1973)
David Hesselgrave Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,

1978)
David Hesselgrave and Edward Rommen Contextualisation: Meanings, Methods and

Models (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989)
Paul Hiebert Cultural Anthropology (Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 2nd ed. 1983)
Paul Hiebert “The Flaw of the Excluded Middle” in Ralph Winter & Stephen Hawthorne
(eds) Perspectives on the World Christian Movement (Pasadena: William Carey Library,
1999)
Geert Hofstede Culture’s Consequences (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001 (2nd ed)

Evertt Huffard “Culturally Relevant Themes about Christ” in Dudley Woodberry

Muslims and Christians on the Emmaus Road (Pasadena: MARC, 1989)
Charles Kraft Anthropology for Christian Witness (New York: Orbis, 1996)
Charles Kraft Christianity in Culture (New York: Orbis, 1979)
K.S.Latourette A History of Christianity (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1954)
Lausanne Occasional Paper no. 4 The Glen Eyrie Report: Muslim Evangelization (1978)
Frank Lechner and John Boli (eds) The Globalization Reader (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004)
Frank Lechner “Global Fundamentalism” in Frank Lechner and John Boli (eds) The
Reuben Levy The Social Structure of Islam (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1957 )
Sherwood Lingenfelter & Marvin Mayers Ministering Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids:

Baker Book House, 1986)
Donald McGavran Understanding Church Growth (Grand Rapids: Eerdman, 1980)
Donald McGavran Bridges of God (New York: Friendship Press, 1981)
Tim Matheny Reaching the Arabs (Pasadena, CA: William Carey, 1981)
David O. Moberg The Great Reversal (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, 1972)
Roland Muller Honor and Shame: Unlocking the Door (New York: XLibris, 2000)
Michael Nazir-Ali Islam: a Christian Perspective (Exeter: the Paternoster Press, 1980)
Lesslie Newbigin Honest Religion for Secular Man (London: SCM, 1966)
Gordon Nickel Peaceable Witness among Muslims (Waterloo, Canada: Herald Press,
1999)
Phil Parshall New Paths in Muslim Evangelism (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1980)
Phil Parshall Beyond the Mosque (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985)
Phil Parshall Inside the Community (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1994)
Raphael Patai The Arab Mind (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1973)
Meic Pearse Why the Rest hates the West: Understanding the Roots of Global Rage
(Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004)
David Pryce-Jones The Closed Circle (London: Weidenfield & Nicolson, 1989)
Sayyid Qutb The Islamic Concept and its characteristics (Indianapolis: American Trust
Publications, 1991)
Fazlur Rahman Islam (New York: Anchor, 1968)
Stuart Robinson Mosques and Miracles (Mt Gravatt: CityHarvest Publications, 2003)
Salman Rushdie “Yes, This is About Islam” in Frank Lechner and John Boli (eds) The
Lyle Schaller The Change Agent (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1972)
David Shenk “Conversations Along the Way” in Dudley Woodberry Muslims and
Christians on the Emmaus Road (Pasadena: MARC, 1989)
Ninian Smart The Religious Experience of Mankind (London: Collins, 1969)
John Tomlinson “Cultural Imperialism” in Frank Lechner and John Boli (eds) The
Ralph Winter & Stephen Hawthorne (eds) Perspectives on the World Christian
Movement (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1999)
Dudley Woodberry Muslims and Christians on the Emmaus Road (Pasadena: MARC,
1989)
J.H.Yoder The Politics of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972)
Samuel Zwemer The Moslem Christ (Edinburgh & London: Oliphant, Anderson &
Ferrier, 1912)
Websites accessed:
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html cited on 18th July 2005
http://www.bremercommunications.com/Proxemics_How_We_Use_Space.htm cited on 11th July, 2005
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/democracyprint.htm accessed on 11th July 2005
http://www.yuni.com/quotes/heraclitus.html accessed on 11th July 2005
Software used
The Alim for Windows ver 4.5 , 1996 CD-ROM

The Islamic Scholar Ver.3 (Johannesburg: Par Excellence, 1998) CD-ROM

The World of Islam ver.1.0 (Global Mapping Information, 2000) CD-ROM


Barry Peters - When Culture Gets in The Way of The Gospel

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Barry Peters - When Culture Gets in The Way of The Gospel

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

St Francis Magazine Nr. 1 Vol.

When Culture gets in the way of the Gospel:

ARE THERE ANY TRULY NATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS?

RIGHT DIFFERENCES WRONG

Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always

(a) Styles of thinking

(b) Categories of thought

(c) Apolitical or political?

Constantinisation of the church, and the subsequent too-close relationship between

(d) Specialisation or Generalism?

(e) Guilt or shame?

WAYS OF RELATING TO OTHER PEOPLE

(a) Task-oriented or person-oriented?

(b) Physical space

(d) Individual or collectivist?

(e) Competition or cooperation?

(f) Power distance

Low power distance High power distance

The concept of democracy is problematic in ‘high power-distance’ societies, for it

(h) The Status of Women

St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision 14

(i) Love versus loyalty

(a) Change versus tradition:

(b) Freedom vs restraint

(c) Truth-telling versus dissimulation

Jared Diamond Guns, Germs and Steel (London: Vintage, 1998)

Wayne T. Dye “Toward a Cross-Cultural Definition of Sin” in Missiology (1976) Vol. 4

John Fiske Introduction to Communication Studies (London: Routledge, 1990)

Martin J. Gannon Understanding Global Cultures (London: Sage, 2001)

E.T.Hall Beyond Culture (New York: Anchor, 1976)

R.K.Harrison Jeremiah and Lamentations (London: Tyndale, 1973)

David Hesselgrave Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,

David Hesselgrave and Edward Rommen Contextualisation: Meanings, Methods and

St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision 20

Evertt Huffard “Culturally Relevant Themes about Christ” in Dudley Woodberry

Charles Kraft Christianity in Culture (New York: Orbis, 1979)

K.S.Latourette A History of Christianity (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1954)

Sherwood Lingenfelter & Marvin Mayers Ministering Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids:

Donald McGavran Understanding Church Growth (Grand Rapids: Eerdman, 1980)

Donald McGavran Bridges of God (New York: Friendship Press, 1981)

David O. Moberg The Great Reversal (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, 1972)

Fazlur Rahman Islam (New York: Anchor, 1968)

Lyle Schaller The Change Agent (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1972)

Ninian Smart The Religious Experience of Mankind (London: Collins, 1969)

J.H.Yoder The Politics of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972)

http://www.bremercommunications.com/Proxemics_How_We_Use_Space.htm cited on 11th July, 2005

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/democracyprint.htm accessed on 11th July 2005

http://www.yuni.com/quotes/heraclitus.html accessed on 11th July 2005

St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision 22

The Islamic Scholar Ver.3 (Johannesburg: Par Excellence, 1998) CD-ROM

St Francis Magazine is published by Interserve and Arab Vision 23

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi