|
Terror attacks: diverse responsesBritish Muslim reactions to the terrorist attacks on the US on September 11 have been diverse, reflecting the variety of views within the community. We quickly became familiar with the various Muslim voices raised in support of the attacks and of prime suspect Osama bin Laden, especially since the British media saw fit to give extensive coverage to them initially. Groups such as Sheikh Abu Hamza's Supporters of Shariah (SOS) - previously in the news in 1999 accused of sending young British Muslims as jihad fighters to Yemen. And the Muslim Youth Association drew much media attention also. They referred to Islamic scriptures as promising great rewards in paradise for all who die in jihad and warned that attacks on Muslims such as bin Laden would be considered a direct attack on Islam and as such should be responded to with violence. Perhaps most vocal of all has been Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad, leader of the militant Al-Muhajiroun, who has publicly denounced the United States and its allies, now including President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, as enemies of Islam and called on Muslims to fight back in accordance with the teaching of the Qur'an. Moderate majorityHowever, against this radical tide, the more moderate and certainly the majority voice of Islam in Britain is being increasingly heard. Herein lies, perhaps, some hope for the future. Condemnation of the terrorist attacks came on BBC Radio's Thought for the Day on September 13 from Dr Zaki Badawi, Director of the Muslim College (London) and Chairman of the Imams and Mosques Council. He also referred to the Qur'an but in order to denounce, not support, what had been perpetrated in the name of Islam. Muslims at prayerMention should also be made of the thousands of Muslims who have been praying for the victims in the US and are calling for the perpetrators to be brought to justice and an end to terrorism. However, there has only ever been ad hoc and muted criticism of what Muslim extremists have done in other parts of the world and clearly this response has been inadequate. We would hope that more critical voices will be heard from now on as the spotlight is so clearly on Islam and what is done in its name. Christian responsesI approached Dr. Peter Riddell, Director of the Centre for Islamic Studies and Muslim-Christian Relations at London Bible College and Dr. Peter Cotterell, Associate Senior Lecturer in Islamic Studies and former principal of LBC, for their views on what the Christian response to recent events should be. The varied response by Muslims and their opposing interpretations of the Islamic sacred texts begs the question: 'Who is right?' What do the texts actually say? This, of course, is not an issue unique to Islam. Christians over the centuries have produced opposing interpretations of biblical texts. Dr. Cotterell explained that texts can be extracted from the Qur'an which support violence, but there are as many verses that advocate peace. There is, in fact no consistent approach, Muhammad having written down what was applicable to events in his time; he was not a systematic theologian. Dr. Riddell echoed this and went on to say that it is not for Christians to decide on this, but it is far more important that firm guidelines and teaching come from the Muslim community itself, from those recognised as having authority. However, Patrick Sookdheo of the Barnabus Fund says that it is difficult to avoid the implications of such Qur'anic verses as: 'Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)' (Surah 9, verse 5). An explanatory note in the respected translation by A. Yusuf Ali makes clear that this is not intended metaphorically: 'When war becomes inevitable it must be pursued with vigour'. The fighting may take the form of slaughter, or capture, or siege, or ambush and other stratagems. There are some Muslims who argue that this verse need not be interpreted literally any more, but the orthodox majority hold that the Qur'an is the immutable word of God. It is true that the Qur'an also contains verses urging tolerance of non-Muslims but these verses pre-date the more belligerent ones. Islamic scholars have a simple rule to deal with such contradictions in the Qur'an: the later verse takes precedence. Another verse from the Qur'an which is not often quoted in non-Islamic contexts runs: 'Ye shall be summoned to fight against a people given to vehement war: then shall you fight or they shall submit' (Surah 48, verse 16). The meaning here is that the Muslims should fight until their opponents embrace Islam. In the early days of Islam, the faith was indeed spread by the sword. Those who would not embrace Islam were killed. The same thing is happening today in Indonesia, where at least 8,000 Christians have been forcibly converted to Islam by well-armed Islamic extremists. Any who refused were killed. More peaceful interpretations of the Qur'an, however, now appear to be promoted by recognised Muslim religious leaders as they speak out against the minority who interpret the texts to justify their acts in the name of Islam. Moderate Muslims need to engage with and openly denounce the radicals in their midst in order to prevent further atrocities in the name of Islam. Is there a biblical response which Christians can use in their dealings with Muslims? Cotterell differentiates between a biblical and a political response. Governments should act quickly and with a certain amount of force if circumstances require it. Christians, as members of the state, could support such action. However it is inappropriate for Church leaders to advocate any type of violent response on the Church's part. While recognising that evil must be punished, this is not the responsibility of the Church. To practise violence is an abuse of scripture and justifying it with reference to Old Testament texts is not Christian theology; the Crusades are a case in point. Individual responsesWhat of the response of the individual Christian within one's community? We should be getting alongside our Muslim neighbours to build a sense of brotherhood in these difficult times and to condemn indiscriminate harassment of Muslims by members of the public. We need to be engaging with Muslim both to enhance social harmony and to share our faith. One might think that the recent events would tend to create more animosity among Muslims towards the gospel. What evidence there is, however, suggests that, at least in some places, the reverse is true, with Muslims eager to engage in discussion about the Christian faith. There is much to be said for learning as much as possible about Islam in order to find common ground to build on. Ignorance is the cause of much discrimination in this country today. We can build bridges by inviting Muslims into our homes and socialising with them. At the local level churches can dialogue with local Islamic centres and engage in joint community projects. In the words of Peter Cotterell, quoting Abraham Lincoln, 'Do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?' Lisbet Diers © Evangelicals Now - November 2001 |