Posted on 04/03/2008 10:37:09 AM PDT by 2banana
http://joshuafund.blogspot.com/2008/03/big-untold-story-in-middle-east-2008.html
THE BIG (UNTOLD) STORY IN THE MIDDLE EAST: Muslims converting to faith in Jesus Christ in record numbers --
2008 Update
"I will build my church," Jesus said, "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18)
The lead story on Drudge over the weekend was the Pope baptizing a prominent Egyptian author who converted from Islam to Catholicism, and for good reason. It's a huge story in Italy and the Muslim world, especially coming as it did the week that Osama bin Laden accused the Pope of waging a "crusade" against Islam. But this particular baptism is just the tip of the iceberg.
Despite unprecedented press coverage of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Middle East since September 11, 2001, one big story is generally not being told by the mainstream media. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims are converting to evangelical Christianity and will be celebrating their first Easter this year, even amidst widespread persecution and the very real threat of death.
I first began reporting this story in 2005 after interviewing some three dozen Arab and Iranian pastors and evangelical Christian leaders in the U.S. and the Middle East. Over the last three years, however, I have had the privilege of traveling to Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, the West Bank, Turkey, and Morocco. What's more, I have had the honor of meeting with and interviewing more than 200 Arab, Iranian, Kurdish, Sudanese and other pastors and Christian leaders. With more data, the trend lines are becoming even more clear and the story is even more exciting.
The God of the Bible is moving powerfully in the Middle East to draw men, women and children to His heart and adopt them into His family in record numbers. More Muslims have come to faith in Jesus Christ over the last thirty years -- and specifically over the last seven to ten years -- than at any other time in human history. There is a revival going on among the ancient Catholic, Coptic, and Chaldean churches. Today, the Church is being truly resurrected in the lands of its birth.
Consider the latest evidence:
* AFGHANISTAN -- In Afghanistan, for example, there were only 17 known evangelical Christians in the country before al-Qaeda attacked the United States. Today, there are well over 10,000 Afghan followers of Christ and the number is growing steadily. Church leaders say Afghan Muslims are open to hearing the gospel message like never before. Dozens of baptisms occur every week. People are snatching up Bibles and other Christian books as fast as they can be printed or brought into the country. The Jesus film, a two hour docudrama on the life of Christ based on the Gospel of Luke, was even shown on television in one city before police shut down the entire TV station."God is moving so fast in Afghanistan, we're just trying to keep up," one Afghan Christian worker told me, requesting anonymity. "The greatest need now is leadership development. We need to train pastors to care for all these new believers."
* UZBEKISTAN -- There were no known Muslim converts to Christ there in 1990. Now there are more than 30,000.
* IRAQ -- As I shared during an interview on Fox & Friends on Easter morning, in Iraq, there were only a handful of Muslim converts to Christianity back in 1979 when Saddam Hussein took full control of that country. Yet today, there are more than 70,000 Iraqi Muslim background believers in Jesus (MBBs), approximately 50,000 who came to Christ as refugees in Jordan after the first Gulf War in 1990-91, and another 20,000 who have come to Christ since the fall of Saddam Hussein. John Moser, the executive director of The Joshua Fund, and I just returned from nine days traveling through five provinces in Iraq. We met with 19 Iraqi evangelical Christian leaders. I had the privilege of preaching in a church of more than 100 MBBs from Baghdad -- a church that didn't even exist in 2002 before liberation. We also had the privilege of meeting and interviewing numerous former Islamic jihadist terrorist who have come to Christ and are now pastors and church planters.
* KAZAKHSTAN -- In Kazakhstan, there were only three known evangelical Christian believers before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Today there are more than 15,000 Kazakh Christians, and more than 100,000 Christians of all ethnicities.
* EGYPT -- More than 1 million Egyptians have trusted Christ over the past decade or so, report Egyptian church leaders. The Egyptian Bible Society told me they used to sell about 3,000 copies of the Jesus film a year in the early 1990s. But in 2005 they sold 600,000 copies, plus 750,000 copies of the Bible on tape (in Arabic) and about a half million copies of the Arabic New Testament. "Egyptians are increasingly hungry for God's Word," an Egyptian Christian leader told me. Last Christmas, I had the privilege of visiting the largest Christian congregation in the Middle East, which meets in an enormous cave on the outskirts of Cairo. Some 10,000 believers worship there every weekend. A prayer conference the church held in May 2005 drew some 20,000 believers.
* IRAN -- In 1979 when the Ayatollah Khomeini led the Islamic Revolution, there were only about 500 known Muslim converts to Christianity. Today, interviews with two dozen Iranian pastors and church leaders reveals that there are well over 1 million Shia Muslim converts to Christianity.
* SUDAN -- Despite a ferocious civil war, genocide and widespread religious persecution, particularly in the Darfur region -- or perhaps because of such tragedies -- church leaders there tell me that more than 1 million Sudanese have made decisions to follow Jesus Christ just since 2001. Since the early 1990s, more than 5 million Sudanese have become followers of Jesus. Seminary classes to train desperately-needed new pastors are held mountain caves. Hundreds of churches have been planted, and thousands of small group Bible studies are being held in secret throughout the country.
In December 2001, Sheikh Ahmad al Qataani, a leading Saudi cleric, appeared on a live interview on Aljazeera satellite television to confirm that, sure enough, Muslims were turning to Jesus in alarming numbers. "In every hour, 667 Muslims convert to Christianity," Al Qataani warned. "Every day, 16,000 Muslims convert to Christianity. Every year, 6 million Muslims convert to Christianity." Stunned, the interviewer interrupted the cleric. "Hold on! Let me clarify. Do we have six million converting from Islam to Christianity?" Al Qataani repeated his assertion. "Every year," the cleric confirmed, adding, "a tragedy has happened."
One of the most dramatic developments is that many Muslims throughout the Middle East and even in the United States are seeing dreams and visions of Jesus. They are coming into churches explaining that they have already converted and now need a Bible and guidance on how to follow Jesus. This is in fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. The Hebrew Prophet Joel told us that "in the last days, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days....And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved." (Joel 2:28-32)
In Epicenter: Why The Current Rumblings In the Middle East Will Change Your Future, I devote an entire chapter to these dramatic trend lines and why Muslims are converting in record numbers. I am currently working on a new non-fiction book and documentary film called Inside The Revolution, to be release during Easter 2009, with much more detail on this subject, including first person accounts of former Muslim terrorists who have become the new Apostle Pauls of our time -- murderous religious zealots who had visions of Jesus Christ and are now pastors, evangelists, church planters and powerful Christian leaders. Other books I would highly recommend on this subject are Light Force: A Stirring Account of the Church Caught in the Middle East Crossfire by Brother Andrew and Al Janssen; and Secret Believers: What Happens When Muslims Believe In Christ.
Is life easy for these Muslim converts? By no means. They face ostracism from their families. They face persecution from their communities. They face being fired from their jobs. They face imprisonment by their governments. They face torture and even death at the hands of Muslim extremists. But they are coming to Christ anyway. They are becoming convinced that Jesus is, in fact, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that no one comes to the Father in heaven except through faith in Jesus' death on the cross and powerful resurrection from the dead.
One of the reasons my wife and I began The Joshua Fund was to educate the Church around the world at what God of the Bible is doing in the epicenter. We want to mobilize a global movement of Christians praying for these dear brothers and sisters. We want to find ways to encourage and strengthen them. We want to provide them with Bibles and Christian literature, and with humanitarian relief supplies so they can love their neighbors and their enemies, as Jesus tells us to do. Their stories are typically being told by the mainstream media, but they are important stories nonetheless. Theirs are testimonies of the greatness of our great God.
He is risen! He is risen indeed!
Thank you for that re-interpretation, very insightful.
I think that Barack Obama poses a more immediate threat to this country as an apostate Muslim and believer in Liberation Theology than the terrorists.
Let me explain. Liberation Theology is pure Marxism that uses religion in a way that subordinates religion to Marxist philosophy. It is not Christian in the sense that we know it because it does not put Christ or God at the top as a higher power. It only borrows from religion the unifying connection to all oppressed people and the admonishment to share and love thy neighbor. The Liberationists view religion as what they call a praxis, a means of putting Marxism to work within the community. Their main tenets are opposition to capitalism, to classism, to sexism, to technocentrism (wouldn’t want to get too scientific about this), and militarism (they are only opposed to military might of the oppressor, not when used by the oppressed).
The really important part of all this is that Liberationists view the US(along with Israel) as an oppressor and the Islamic world as being oppressed. This explains the refusal by the left to recognize the threat posed by Iran or Iraq.
It also explains Barack Obama’s statements that his foreign policy would be to talk to Iran and other Middle Eastern countries, rather than pursue a military solution.
Good move. You can also end Bibles to the mid-east or China through them. This explosion of Christianity is also happening in India, and I recommend supporting the India Gospel League. I went on a short term mission trip to India and saw with my own eyes that the money is well spent.
There’s also a group of Chinese believers who are especially interested in spreading the word to the Mid-East. They believe that Christianity was introduced in the Jerusalem and has since spread steadily westward until it came to China. Now it’s their turn to complete the circle. They call this movement “Back to Jerusalem.”
Post ONE phrase or verse of Jesus that incites violence, murder, rape or slavery of unbelievers.
Yes, you can show imperfect men doing imperfect things who were Christians through history - but go to the SOURCE and founder
Now - I get give you literally hundreds of verses from the koran and hadith that incites violence, murder, rape and slavery towards unbelievers. OBL and the terrorists are just following their manual - to the letter.
And he made a scourge of cords, and cast all out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen; and he poured out the changers money, and overthrew their tables...
That is it? Throwing out money changes in the most holiest of Jewish temples?
Sura 4: 88-89 reads: “Whosoever turns back from his belief, openly or secretly, take him and kill him wheresoever ye find him, like any other infidel. Separate yourself from him altogether. Do not accept intercession in his regard.”
Well, actually, whipping the money changers, but no big deal...you asked for one so I gave you one.
Were you born a Jew? The only reason I ask is beacause of your screen name.
You said,
“Peter (and his successors) were (and are) in charge of the Church on earth in Christ’s absence...”
Christ is in charge of the church on earth, as well, as He is not, nor has He ever been absent.
Elsewhere you said,
“The Church is built on Peter, and Peter “stands” on Jesus, exactly as a lieutenant’s authority derives from his captain. There’s nothing whatsoever “inconsistent” about the exegesis.”
And so, ultimately, the rock upon which Christ builds IS Christ Himself. So, when Peter was in error (as in Galatia) Paul “resisted him to his face,” because Peter’s doctrine was WRONG. Did the Lord know this error would come up when He was addressing Peter in Matthew 16, or didn’t He? Did He know that this “rock” would be responsible for misguiding certain would-be new believers with a works-based message of salvation (Paul warns in Galatians about those who would preach another gospel, whether they be men or angels, which is no gospel at all)Of course, the answer is, “Yes,” (Peter tells the Lord in John 21, “You know all things, Lord...” when the Lord told Peter to “feed my sheep.”
Peter was suffering from the fear of men when he was compelling certain non-jews to go along with Jewish converts who were insisting on the idea of circumcision. He was wrong, out of step, serving as a veritable blind-guide. Paul says, “I withstood him to his face...” How must that have looked for the “rock” (so-called) to have to back down to this new upstart apostle, the one who was himself wasting the church? If everyone around knew Peter to be the one upon whom the church would be built, wouldn’t they have rebuked Paul? Wouldn’t Peter (if he knew himself to be the rock upon which Christ had said, “I will build my church”, wouldn’t he have interjected, “No, Paul. Christ has chosen me to be the chief apostle here. I am the one to whom the church must look.” None of this occurred because Peter knew himself to be full of human frailty—not a rock, but shifting sand at best. He needed a major ROCK underneath him to keep him from all his predisposition to sin.
One last thing you said was about Paul:
“And you must have missed the point about Paul hiself journeying to Jerusalem to have his ministry “blessed” by Peter and the other apostles (by the “laying on of hands”, which indicates his official consecration into priestly office)...”
There was no doubt occasion for all sorts of hashing out the Lord’s motives and intents for the new church. After all, He was using flawed human beings to carry out His work. The Apostles (those who walked and talked directly with the Lord, who were given special powers of healing, speaking in other languages, powers to even raise the dead) were indeed seen as those given ultimate authority/responsibility as the spreading of the Gospel and building of the church began. Paul, a persecutor of the church before his conversion, was doubtlessly viewed as a questionable christian by all who knew of his former life as a persecutor of the church. By receiving a blessing from those in Jerusalem, he received the imprimatur of Christ’s Apostles. In gatherings of believers it is wise for those seeking to begin new ministries in Christ to have the approval and blessing of believers with established testimonies in the Lord. At our meeting we do not let a new convert conduct a ministry within the church (gathering of believers, not a building) until elders, deacons, the flock are sure of their testimony of their walk with the Lord. No apostle is called for, none needed. We follow the scripture when it comes to the run and order of gatherings of believers. The days of Apostles is over. The office no longer operates. After all, Apostles were those who walked and talked directly with the Lord. Christ use them to initiate his work in building a church. So, if all this arguing for Peter is over his POSITION as a founding member, then I believe we are in agreement. But if it is to argue for his position as AUTHORITATIVE HEAD of the church, then we are not. And, so, if you continue to look to continue the office of Apostle by continuing a line of Peters, you are not founding your practice on sound exegesis. Even if you were to do this, why wouldn’t you (if you are a gentile) follow the “established” Pauline Apostleship? He himself declares in Romans, “For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office...” and also, “Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.” As the apostle to the gentiles (a title Peter never claimed—and for which never corrected Paul, nor withstood him to his face), it would appear he has the weightier claim on gentile devotion and obedience.
One last thing, all who are in Christ are made priests and kings to our God (see Revelation 1). All believers have DIRECT access to God through the ONE MEDIATOR, which is Christ (see 1Tmothy). This is done not by human apostles, but by the “...the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus...”
My contention, as I suppose the contention of many who disagree with the view held by the Roman church on the subject of Peter (but I do not presume to speak for anyone else here—let everyone search the scriptures ALL the scriptures) is that the elevation of a person other than Christ in the Church (with a capital ‘C’) will always lead to vanity, pride, error. “He must increase, I must decrease,” is ever the way of the people of God and His church.
Oy...my first response should read:
Christ is in charge of the church on earth, as He is not, nor has He ever been absent.
and not
Christ is in charge of the church on earth, as well, as He is not, nor has He ever been absent.
Unfortunately for your position, none of the Apostles ministered strictly to the Jews. ALL of them ministered to whomever asked. I doubt that Thomas found much of a Jewish community in India, for instance. Indeed, Peter made a mistake---so what---Paul made a few too. But if you recall, it was Peter, and NOT Paul, who accepted the first Gentile converts--so what Paul was upbriding Peter for (and rightly) was being inconsistent. But again, so what---the Church doesn't claim impeccability for its leadership.
But, as usual, you completely mis-understand Catholic doctrine (as 99.99% of Protestants do). Like it or not, Christ established a hierarchical church, with Peter in charge, and priests and deacons as teachers. This is what the Bible itself teaches throughout the New Testament, and this is what history shows was universally believed for a millennium and a half, until Luther started teaching apostasy.
So I'll stick to the original Church, as Christ founded it, and which has been in continuous and active existence for two millennia. (Footnote: I didn't start out there, as I joined the RC church only recently--but I did so after LONG and arduous study of Catholic doctrine. As a result of that study, I found that the Protestant doctrines were simply and grossly wrong, in the face of Biblical, historical, and logical evidence).
You said,
“the Church doesn’t claim impeccability for its leadership.”
Yes it does. Christ is the head of the Church. Therefore, it does claim impeccability (but not if you are looking to men.)
And, again you said,
“Like it or not, Christ established a hierarchical church, with Peter in charge, and priests and deacons as teachers. This is what the Bible itself teaches throughout the New Testament...”
Where exactly does the Bible teach about the authority of Peter? Were the churches Paul wrote to directed to seek out Peter’s counsel or God’s in resolving local matters? Paul told these local assemblies to appoint elders (spiritually mature, discerning believers) to act in oversight capacity. But all were to take their direction from scripture and the Holy Spirit (who was to guide them into all truth.) In Acts 20 we read:
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”
They were not sending to Peter every time a controversy arose (in fact, Paul had more interaction with the assemblies in Asia Minor and Greece. If anyone was offering spiritual insights and docrinal distinctions to these fellowships it was Paul, and not Peter.)
Again you said
“But, as usual, you completely mis-understand Catholic doctrine”
That’s okay by me. I’m not interested in the docrtines of men—nor should anyone who claims Christ as Savior and Lord. Salvation is found in a person—Christ. The Church is His instrument on earth for the dissemination of the Gospel, for the edification of the saints, for the work of Christ (helping the poor, for example). The Church is precious to Christ and important to His work. Ultimately, though, the Head of the Church is what is most important. There are plenty of “whited sepulchres” around, dead places where there is no Living Head. The Book of Revelation warns us about the nature and practice of the Church in the end times and Christ hates these practices (the Nicolaitans, for instance). The answer to the problems of this world, to your problems and mine is not the Church, but the Christ. In reading through your postings you tend to promulgate an institution. I am trying to promulgate a Person.
Finally, you said,
“So I’ll stick to the original Church, as Christ founded it...”
To that I say, “Amen,” And to bring the conversation full circle, I rest on the Solid Rock, the true Rock, that Rock is Christ “Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.”
May He continue to direct you as you seek to know Him and His purposes for your life.
He does, by his infallible Word (ALL of it, not just those snippets that are captured in the Bible). You see, I was once as deluded as you, but I examined the issues and learned the truth. I suggest you do the same.
You said,
“(ALL of it, not just those snippets that are captured in the Bible...”
This is the most unscriptural statement you’ve made thus far! It is clear that you cannot discuss the WORD of God (as you repeated choose to level personal invective—this one coming on the Lord’s Day, no less.) In fact, your thinking and your positions (judging from this comment) are extra-biblical in nature—something the Bible warns AGAINST.
Lastly (for I shall not comment to you further), you said:
“I was once as deluded as you, but I examined the issues and learned the truth. I suggest you do the same.”
I can tell from the way you speak that the truth is not IN you. You seem to know ABOUT the Lord, but Him, you apparently do not know.
Simply put, the doctrine of "sola scriptura" is nonsense. As I said on another thread, the Bible is certainly the inerrant word of God, but ALL TRUTH is not contained therein (and the Bible itself doesn't claim such. Christ himself taught from non-scriptural sources (including Jewish non-written-scriptural "verbal tradition")). In fact, the Bible itself repeatedly says directly that all of Christs acts and teachings are not within it. But I'm sure you'll ignore THAT Bible teaching, just like you ignored the three I listed showing how the Bible directly teaches Peter's authority.
I have a perspective here, so hear me out.
I don't think that 9-11 was a tragedy that reveals God has stopped protecting America. It was horrific, of course, but many natural and man-made disasters with larger loss of life have occurred. That's why I also don't believe that Katrina was a disaster of heavenly significance.
3,000 lives were lost on 9-11. But 50,000 American lives were lost during the Vietnam War, 400,000 lives lost during World War II. Small by comparison. More data: 600,000 lives were lost during the Civil War, 18,000, 12,00, and 11,000 in each of three campaigns.
1,800 lives were lost during Hurricane Katrina. But in 1900, 8,000-12,000 lives were lost when a Cat 5 hurricane slammed into Galveston Texas.
During the 1918 flu pandemic, 50 million people died worldwide, and 600,000 in the USA. 50-75 million died during the infamous "Black Death" (The Plague), including 30-60% of Europe's population. More numbers providing perspective.
I'm not trying to downplay the fact that 9-11 was a tragedy. But as a Christian I am loathe to ascribe God's wrath to tragedies on earth, especially when the data on lives lost is not higher than other tragedies. It is not for us to penetrate the thought of God. I for one think it is arrogant, possibly blasphemous, to try.
I will say, however, that God chooses not to intervene and stop evil, when individuals, families, communities, and nations stop praying and ignore / shun him. Meaning, no lucky breaks. That's how I feel about 9-11. Because the Muslim world can inflict far worse on us, and kill millions if they get hold of nukes and missiles as delivery vehicles. Were 50 million Westerners to die as a result, yes then I would wonder about God removing his protection.
And don't forget about the disasters that are truly of heavenly proportion -- the ones described in the Book of Revelation.
St. Peter was in Antioch, Syria (i.e., what has historically been an Orthodox area before the Muslims invaded) for 9 (nine) years before going to Rome for 2 (two) years, ending in his martyrdom. So if any Christian body in the world could lay claim to being The.True.Church.Because.of.St.Peter, it would be the Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch.
Read more history. At the time we’re talking about, there was no “Orthodox church”. The only church in existence called itself “catholic”.
Amen, I second it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.