Western support for the state of Israel has often been unquestioning; and Christians (especially evangelical Christians, and especially in the USA) have played a highly significant role in strengthening this instinctive sympathy for Israel. This support for Israel, however, combined with all the different policies of Western powers linked with it in recent years (including the war in Iraq) is probably at the top of the list of grievances that have fueled the anger of Arabs and Muslims in recent years. I might even go as far as to suggest that if the West after 1967 had dealt with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a more even-handed way and pressed both sides hard and consistently towards a peaceful resolution on the basis of international law, 9/11 might never have happened.
This is a divisive topic around which there are considerable differences of opinion, heightened emotion, and deep confusion. One speaker I heard recently explained the difference between Shari’ah and Islamic law better than I had ever heard it explained, and he did it in one short sentence. He said that the U.S. Constitution is to Shari’ah as American law is to Islamic law.
What does this short sentence mean? The U. S. Constitution sets forth in a general way the values and principles upon which American law is to be formed and evaluated. The Congress, the legislative branch of government, passes law, whereas the judicial branch of the government checks whether that law is consistent with the values of the Constitution. The Constitution is thus not synonymous with American law, but American law is supposed to be grounded in the Constitution. Similarly, Shari’ah embodies the values upon which Islamic law is to be generated. For example, while there is one Qur’an comprising a major part of Shari’ah, there are multiple schools of jurisprudence in Islam that interpret the Qur’an as they generate Islamic law. So, Shari’ah is not synonymous with Islamic law, but Islamic law is supposed to be grounded in the Qur’an…
In the book, Shenk lays out twelve paths or principles, each presented in a chapter, for engaging Muslims. Reflecting much on his five-decade journey of loving and commending Christ to Muslims, Shenk’s book conveys much of this wisdom to Christ followers desiring to engage Muslims in the 21st century. In this brief review, I would like to highlight four themes that particularly struck me and seem instructive for the church today…
Grand Mufti Dr. Shawki Allam’s essay is a good reminder that neither Muslims nor sharia are a monolith. As some pull from the Islamic heritage to destroy the current age, others access it in conformity – and presumably both seek first and foremost a fidelity to religion.
But a key question comes to mind.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is an institution of the Egyptian state. This state’s official religion is Islam, but it also promotes a concept of equal citizenship independent of religious creed. Why then does the mufti say…