The blame lies beyond, on a much more sinister, diabolical, Luciferan origin. The dirtying of the name Allah by associating blasphemies is only one of the means, albeit a first step …Let us now find out what the next steps are....
As usual this monkey will travel the world wide web...in search for obscure documents hosted in the public environment.........today his search focuses on Church Planting Techniques in Muslim Societies......
Enter the C1-C6 Spectrum.....first published by John Travis in 1998 to describe the six very different kinds of Christ-centered communities in the Muslim World....if you are wondering what the C stands for....it is Christ Centered Community
C1 is a traditional Christian church which either reflects the culture of foreign Christians or that of the minority indigenous national church. Many English-speaking churches in former British colonies are good examples of the prior, while most Coptic churches of Egypt are good examples of the later. In either case, Travis writes,“A huge cultural chasm often exists between the [C1] church and the surrounding Muslim community” (1998:407). C1 churches speak neither the daily language nor the religious terminology of the local Muslim population. C1 believers identify themselves as “Christians.”C2 is basically the same as C1, except C2 churches use the daily language of the surrounding Muslim population. Like C1, C2 churches avoid Islamic terminology and instead use a distinctively “Christian” vocabulary for religious description. The cultural chasm between C2 believers and the surrounding Muslim community is often still huge. C2 believers identify themselves as “Christians.”C3 churches are essentially the same as C2, except C3 makes use of local music styles, dress, art and other indigenous cultural elements. C3 makes a clear distinction between practices that are purely “cultural” and those which are “Islamic.” Islamic norms are rejected. Travis writes, “The aim is to reduce foreignness of the Gospel and the church by contextualizing to biblically permissible cultural forms” (1998:408). C3 believers also identify themselves as “Christians.”C4 congregations are much like C3 but have also adopted biblically permissible Islamic forms and practices (e.g.,praying prostrate, perhaps toward Jerusalem; washing before prayer and before touching the Bible; abstaining from pork, alcohol, or from keeping dogs as pets; using some Islamic terms; wearing some clothing popular among Muslims). To distance themselves from the negative baggage and misperceptions Muslims have about “Christianity,” C4 believers do not call themselves “Christians” but “followers of Isa (Jesus).” However, the Muslim community does not generally regard C4 believers as fellow Muslims. From a Muslim’s perspective, “If they were Muslims, they wouldn’t hesitate to call themselves Muslims. And we’d see them at the mosque on Fridays as well!”C5 is much like C4 with the primary difference being self-identity. Whereas C4 believers identify themselves a “followers of Isa,” C5 believers identify themselves as “Muslim follower of Jesus”—much like Messianic Jew calling themselves “Jewish follower of Jesus.” Islamic theology incompatible with the Bible is rejected. Some C5believers remain in the Muslim community for as long as they can to “win Muslims as Muslims” (1 Cor. 9:19–23). In time, however, their deviance from mainstream Islamic theology may lead to their banishment from the Muslim community. But where whole communities of Muslims begin to follow Jesus, the local mosque may transform into a Messianic Mosque for Jesus. Some C5 believers desire to distance themselves from the mosque and Islam, still preferring to maintain their identity as Muslim followers of Jesus. In contrast to C4, Muslims view C5 believers as Muslim, though perhaps “a strange kind of Muslim.” Most Muslims have never met Muslims who “follow Jesus,” so the curiosity that results from their identification often leads to open doors to share their faith in Christ.Drawing Muslims: Joshua MasseyInternational Journal of Frontier Missions, Vol. 17:1 Spring 2000
The spectrum above describes the probable approach towards the Target Muslim Group...
Now let us look at the "Target".....Enter the M1-M9 Spectrum
Each segment of the spectrum requires a different approach towards building the Christ Centered Community......
Muslims Disillusioned with Islam. Iranian Muslims are a great example. Many saw what Khomeini did to their country under the banner of Islam and said, “If this is Islam, we want nothing to do it!” When a Persian in the West was asked what her religion was, she said with conviction, “I have no religion!” She, and many like her, are so disillusioned with Islam they do not even want to be publicly identified as Muslim.Muslims Ambivalent about Islam. These Muslims are ignorant and apathetic about Islam. They don’t know much about Islam, and they really don’t care.Muslims Content with Islam. These Muslims love Islam. They believe with all their heart that Islam is the only true path to God. When they look at Christianity, they see countries with the highest divorce rate in the world, where selfish ambition and materialism are at their zenith, where sexual immorality and homosexuality are accepted as commonplace, and whose economic appetites led to the colonization and exploitation of their people and national resources. They are impressed with theperson of Jesus, but totally unimpressed with Christianity.Each of these three “Muslim attitudes about Islam” (“M”) has high and low ends on the spectrum. High contentment (M9) could represent devout Muslims as well as propagators of Islam. Low contentment (M7) could represent liberal Muslims who may not be too impressed with, and perhaps even embarrassed by, the dogmatism of many Islamic leaders. Nonetheless, they are very proud to be Muslim. Most communistic and rice Muslims would probably fall somewhere on the ambivalence portion of the spectrum (M4–M6), while westernized Muslims are often found between low ambivalence and low contentment (M6–M7)Drawing Muslims: Joshua MasseyInternational Journal of Frontier Missions, Vol. 17:1 Spring 2000
Joshua writes further that based on the M Classification the "appropriate" C approach will be utilised......
Which approach will be most effective with Muslims who are perfectly content with Islam? I believe C5 offers great promise. C4 is excellent too, but it isn’t hard to understand why Muslims who are content with Islam would much prefer to learn about Jesus from a “fellow Muslim” than they would from a non-Muslim (i.e., C1–C4). For a Muslim to enter the home of a “Christian” to learn about religious matters is akin to treason. But to enter a fellow Muslim’s home—even though a Muslim following Jesus may seem rather unusual—is much less likely to worry watchful neighbors. In fact, they may even go themselves to see what this study of the Taurat, Zabur, and Injil (the Bible) is all about!Also, when the Muslim seeker after God comes home with some literature about Jesus, it is C5 literature, often printed by well-respected Muslim publishers, not by suspicious-looking Christian organizations. Therefore, such literature does not need to be hidden under a mattress. Instead, it can be freely shared with family and friendsBecause the C5 believer was raised a Muslim in a Muslim family, he is worlds apart from the peculiar foreigner claiming to be “Muslim.” The C5 believer really talks like a Muslim, observes proper respect for holy books like a Muslim, washes before prayer, and eats food like a Muslim. The dietary habits of C5 believers allow Muslim guests to be at ease during meal times. In non-Muslim homes, by contrast, Muslims often need to create polite excuses to leave before meals lest they be confronted with the uncomfortable situation of being served haram (forbidden) foods.Which approach will be most effective with Muslims who are totally disillusioned with Islam? It will not be a pro-C4 or C5 approach! Muslims disillusioned with Islam want out! These Muslims are ripe for conversion to “Christianity” and want to be “extracted” from their Muslim communities. C1–C3 churches should, therefore, be most suitable to reach them, depending on their language and cultural preference.What about Muslims who are ambivalent about Islam? What approach is best for them? Few from this group tend to come to faith in Christ because their ambivalence about Islam is often rooted in ambivalence about spiritual matters. The contented and disillusioned groups may therefore prove to be much more fertile soil for sowing God’s Word. Nonetheless, ambivalence toward Islam means they might be reached by any community of believers along the C1–C5 spectrumDrawing Muslims: Joshua MasseyInternational Journal of Frontier Missions, Vol. 17:1 Spring 2000
The house is split especially on the "acceptable" approach towards Muslims.....especially in the Grey Area of C4 & C5
C5 contextualisation (and sometimes C4) is the centre of controversy in most of the literature on contextualisation among Muslims. C4/C5 is the level at which believers are often encouraged, among other controversial practices, to remain in the mosque and to call themselves Muslims; missionaries are often encouraged to convert to Islam (Douglass 1994:69-73); Mohammed is accepted as a prophet and the Koran is accepted as one of the holy books. C5 proponents suggest two lines of reasoning for their approaches. Many, if not most, Islamic forms are redeemable. This supposition is based on another reasoning, namely that Islam is a religion with essentially similar monotheistic and God-inspired roots as Judaism and Christianity (Eenigenburg 1997:310-315).
CONTEXTUALISATION OF THE GOSPEL AMONG MUSLIMS
M. Coleman2 & P. Verster
One of the pioneer of such method is Phil Parshall.
In his own words, he was longing for a new approach to Muslim evangelism when he returned for furlough from working several years as a missionary in Bangladesh (Parshall 2001:1-4). He enrolled for a Masters programme at Trinity Theological Seminary from 1972 to 1973 where the possibility of applying church development principles to Muslim evangelism first occurred to him. Returning to the field with a team of over twenty individuals he experimented with a variety of Islamic forms and practices, with the exception of the Salat, the Muslim ritual prayer , and accepting the prophetic role of Muhammad. In the late 1970s Parshall enrolled for a Doctoral course under the guidance of Kraft at Fuller Seminary. His doctoral dissertation was published as New paths in Muslim evangelism.CONTEXTUALISATION OF THE GOSPEL AMONG MUSLIMSM. Coleman2 & P. Verster
Phil Parshall certainly became the vanguard of C4 fellowships in the late 70s, and he endured an extreme amount of opposition from more than a few C1-3 believers who had serious concerns about the integrity of C4 work. In spite of the opposition that Parshall and other pro-C4 workers endured, early adopters of C4 believed it held tremendous potential for Kingdom advance in the Muslim context—even though it did not come without risks in such uncharted territory.Ironically, 20 years after Parshall’s ground breaking publication of New Paths in Muslim Evangelism, C4 is today probably the most common approach used by new missionaries to Muslims. And who could have predicted 20 years ago that God would raise up still another group of messengers who believe God wants to take them beyond C4? C4 surely paved the way for C5, whose major difference is one of identity. Whereas C4 allows any biblically-permissible Islamic form or practice, C5 does not claim to go any further, except in the area of self-definition.C5 practitioners insist that even as Paul argued tirelessly with Judaizers that Gentiles did not have to convert to Judaism to follow Jesus, Muslims do not have to convert to “Christianity” to follow Jesus. There is no doubt that C5 believers are genuine disciples of Jesus (Acts 15:8, 11), but they do not desire to align themselves with what they perceive as that godless Western institution called “Christianity,” where (from a Muslim perspective) homosexuals enter the clergy, immodest women come to worship in scantily clad summer dresses, and people put the Word of God on the floor right next to their dirty shoes.C5 workers point out that Jesus commanded us to make disciples, not converts (Mt.28:19). They argue that when Muslims who are drawn to Jesus commit to obey all his commands, bearing witness that Jesus is the only mediator between God and man and that only his death on the cross can pay the price for man’s sin, what does it matter what they call themselves? In reality, much like E. Stanley Jones described “Christ-centeredness” as quite separate from “Christianity” (1925), C5 workers want to convert Muslims to Jesus, not to Christianity. Our mandate is not to “Christianize” the nations with fine-sounding labels of self-identity, but with love for Jesus and obedience to his commands (Mt. 28:20; John 14:15, 21)Drawing Muslims: Joshua MasseyInternational Journal of Frontier Missions, Vol. 17:1 Spring 2000
Fuh.....letih gua copy paste ni.......format macam sial aje blogger vs pdf.
..
Anyway since you have read up till here.....might as well you read the whole thing......
- God's Amazing diversity in Drawing Muslim to Christ : Joshua Massey
- Messianic Muslim Followers of Isa: A Closer Look at C5 Believers and Congregations : John Travis
- Contextualisation of the Gospel Among Muslims
I will now share with you my experiences in Indonesia
The C4 and C5 groups are big here, they wear Tudung, they "Solat" in Church, they offer you "Salam" among others......
In John Travis own words
Some C5 believers I know change the creed when performing their prayers to exalt Isa rather than Muhammad, proclaiming “there is no god but God, and Isa is the Straight Path” Others whisper prayers in thename of Jesus or remain silent when the shahada is recited in public worship.
The Allah name issue is the just first step towards contextualisation........and if I may quote Massey again
Therefore, if the translator’s objective is to render the Scriptures in a way that will be well received as “Good News” by Muslim readers, the solution to this linguistic quagmire is not necessarily to avoid the terms Allah, no matter how vehemently some non-Arabic knowing Christians may oppose it. Allah has been a perfectly acceptable term in Bible translation to millions of Arab and non-Arab Christians for over a millennium, and remains so for Muslim readers today.
Wake up Malaysia!
