Palestinian Muslims Coming to Christ, Invitation

This entry is an excerpt from my dissertation that begins a new series in which I highlight my doctoral research, which was an investigation of the process of West Bank Palestinian Muslims coming to faith in Christ. The goal of the research was to find out what these people thought were important and helpful in persuading them to trust Christ.

I interviewed 24 converts, and their conversion-story summaries will be provided as individual blog entries for this series. These stories also will be supplemented with other entries that explain my research process and important findings.

Feel free to interact in the comments or download my dissertation as a free PDF here.

The following information is ©2014 University of Pretoria and Craig Dunning and, if used elsewhere, should be cited as:

Dunning, CA (2014) Palestinian Muslims converting to Christianity: effective evangelistic methods in the West Bank. Pretoria, South Africa: University of Pretoria, PhD thesis, pp. 1-2.

Preface

I like stories. I like to hear them and I like to tell them. One of the things I enjoy most in meeting new people is hearing their stories. Where are they from? What was life like in their childhood? And, if they are Christians, I want to hear the story of how they came to faith in Jesus. I am always thankful to hear a testimony of God’s saving grace, but I am a missionary/pastor, and that makes me also want to know how the good news of Jesus Christ was delivered. That is the focus of this project, finding out how people heard the Gospel. What were the challenges they faced in believing? What solved those challenges? What moved them from unbelief to belief?

I’m not interested for the sake of marketing another method. Honestly, I’m quite disheartened at the marketing madness of the Western church, which seems so hungry for the next fad in marketing the gospel. It is very discouraging for me to receive email advertisements of crafted sermon series that have been used in this or that church and “caused a 50% increase in attendance.” This project is not about finding the next wave of methodology. I agree with Scott McKnight, who said, “Conversion can’t be reduced to a formula anymore than love can be set out as an equation” (2002:77).

Certainly conversion involves methodological considerations, but this project is primarily about hearing individuals tell the story of how they actually heard the gospel and learning what we can from their experiences.

Because I like stories, and this report is actually the story of how the gospel is being effectively shared among Muslims in the West Bank, I have chosen a more personal, narrative format to report my findings.

Without shame I will use the personal pronoun “I” in telling the story of my research. The process of decision making will be detailed and personal, often elaborating on the various possible methodological choices, and how and why I made certain choices; why I did it this way and not that way, as well as stories of things that were said or done that confirmed my decisions along the way. This story will include much about the personal aspects of how I went about my research, and, when necessary, in an appropriate way that protects my respondents, I will share portions of their stories.

The researcher and the nature of the project are appropriately represented in this narrative style of presentation, which is well supported in the literature (Weiss 1994:193-210; Newman 2006:498-500; Emerson, Fretz &Shaw 1995:169-210). It also accurately reflects my research findings, which is the main thrust of the project.

Please join me as I tell the story of how the greatest story ever told is being told in the West Bank.

Sources Cited:

Emerson RM, Fretz RI and Shaw LL. (1995) Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. University Of Chicago Press.

McKnight S. (2002) Turning to Jesus: the sociology of conversion in the gospels: Westminster John Knox Press.

Neuman WL. (2006) Social research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches. Allyn & Bacon.

Weiss RS. (1995) Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies. Free Press.

NEXT: Palestinian Muslims Coming to Christ, Demographic Issues

Download my dissertation as a free PDF here.

You asked: Should we support retired missionaries?

A number of pastors have asked me if their church should continue supporting missionaries once they retire. Recognizing the natural discomfort created by such a question, they usually try quickly to justify their inquiry: “After all, our mission budget is supposed to be spent on those doing mission work on the foreign field, not those living out their golden years in America. Right?”

My answer – yes, no, or maybe – is dependent on some important facts. Getting to these facts requires some effort, which is likely more work than we really want to do. But, if we are going to make good decisions regarding continued support, we must do the work, which, requires 4 important considerations: 1) What does God’s word say about honor?, 2) What was the historical/cultural context under which those missionaries went to the field?, 3) Was the missionary’s service credible?, and 4) What is the retiring missionary’s true financial situation?

Before I explain these considerations, I want to say that I realize church budgets are tight, and often growing tighter, there remains a vast number of people who have yet to hear the gospel, and there is a real dilemma whether to send mission money to missionaries in the field or to those retired in America. If these tensions didn’t exist, this discussion would be unnecessary.

1. What does God’s word say about honor?

Below are 10 verses (in no particular order) that address in some way the concept of honoring those who have given their life to missionary service. Some may argue that honoring the elderly should not be understood only in terms of money. I agree that honor applies more broadly than money, but regarding those in need, it certainly must include monetary consideration.

I Tim 5:17 – Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching.

Romans 13:7 – Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

Romans 12:10 – Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.

Leviticus 19:32 – You shall stand up before the gray head and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the Lord.

Proverbs 3:27 – Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power to do it.

I Timothy 5:18 – For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.

I Timothy 5:3 – Honor widows who are truly widows.

Acts 20:35 – In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

I Thessalonians 5:12-13 – We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.

Romans 12:13 – Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality.

2. What was the historical/cultural context under which those missionaries went to the field?

In all of the cases of which I’m aware, none of the missionaries had a contract with a church regarding the longevity of their support. Neither was anything specifically mentioned between the missionary and supporting church regarding the missionary’s retirement. However, discussion of retirement seemed to them unnecessary because of at least two cultural realities of the 1960s and 1970s: 1) An overwhelming urgency to reach the lost whether because of a belief in the soon return of the Lord, the rapture, or simply out of compassion, and 2) the principle of company loyalty that existed in that generation.

I recently had a septuagenarian ask me, “How come I don’t hear people talking about Jesus coming back like I did in the ’60s and ’70s?” My first response was, “People are still talking about it.” He countered, “Some might be talking about Jesus coming back, but not like they did 40 or 50 years ago.” After some consideration, I think, apart from the upswing related to the Left Behind phenomenon (c. 1995-2007), he is probably right. The Lord’s return (or rapture, depending on your view) doesn’t seem to be so prominent these days, which might suggest a topic for another blog series.

Anyway, based on what I know of the generation of missionaries under consideration here, I think many of them were in a hurry to get to the field and went underfunded. Whether that decision was solely because of pure compassion for the lost, or was heightened by a belief in the imminent rapture of the church, or something else, the result is a number of senior citizens who gave their lives to mission work have found themselves in financial difficulty.

Some of them have told me that they were so convinced that Jesus was coming back any day, “we didn’t worry about debt. Many of us just said, ‘we’ll leave the debt to the Devil. He can worry about it!'” We can discuss whether that was foolish thinking or not, even among those of us who still sense an urgency of His return. However, where the rubber meets the road, we are talking about a generation who was consumed with getting to the field to evangelize the lost before Jesus returns or raptures the saints. And at this point in their lives, there isn’t time to correct what might have been foolish decisions made decades ago.

A second major influence on this generation’s decision not to prepare “properly” for retirement is the principle of company loyalty that this particular generation of missionaries knew and believed in when they went to the field. One of the “values” that generational studies often point out in reference to Builders and Boomers is company loyalty. This loyalty was bi-directional; employees commonly spent their entire working life at a single company and that company, in return, offered loyalty to their employees in the form of a retirement package during their post-employment years. In a generations seminar I recently attended, the presenter, who has done extensive generational research, said that company loyalty is definitely not a cultural value of Generations X, Y, Z, and Alpha. In fact, the further from the Builders one goes, the less each succeeding generation relates to the concept of company loyalty. Generations X, Y, Z, and Alpha are or will be mobile generations that move from employer to employer.

3. Was the missionary’s service credible?

For me, this is an easy question. While credible can be a very subjective term (e.g., “One man’s junk is another man’s treasure.”), I will give you a good rule of thumb via a single question: Did your church continue supporting this missionary throughout their working career? If so, the church has by default already said the missionary’s work was credible.

4. What is the retiring missionary’s true financial situation?

The missionary’s true financial situation might be the most uncomfortable issue to address, but it must be done. Someone – a pastor, finance committee member, or someone else – must ask the missionary seeking continued support to explain and provide documentation of their current financial situation. While asking these kinds of questions may be uncomfortable, making an informed decision requires the effort.

A retiring missionary who has made bad financial decisions – whether chasing bad investments, opting out of Social Security and not investing the money, not planning for retirement, or something else – may be embarrassed by the process, so it should be done gently and with no sense of superiority. Think of them as your grandparents. With that in mind, I will also say that a retiring missionary who has made bad financial decisions should be mature enough to own up to his/her mistakes, especially if he/she is asking for continued financial support – support that could be directed to new missionaries going to the field.

A word of caution should be offered here: The supporter should not expect the missionary to live an unreasonably low lifestyle. Neither should the missionary expect to live an unreasonably high lifestyle. In summary, you don’t want to read in the newspaper that your missionaries are digging through dumpsters to find food. Neither do you want to find out that the missionary’s children/grandchildren inherited a small fortune when the missionary eventually dies.

Conclusion

As a matter of kindness and honor, my default position is yes, continue supporting retiring missionaries who went to the field in the 1960s and 1970s IF they need the support. However, I don’t suggest that be the default position for future generations.

Moving Forward

Clear communication, informing new missionaries of the ground rules up front will alleviate much of the stress and uncertainty of these types of situations.

My recommendation is for churches to do the following:
1. Tell new missionaries up front that (x amount of time) after their retirement, financial support will end. “X amount of time” may range from 1 month to 1 year.
2. Provide financial counseling to new missionaries at no cost to the missionaries.
3. Consider automatically depositing 10% of the new missionary’s support into his/her retirement account. Example: If the missionary receives $100 support, send him/her $90 and deposit $10 in their retirement account.
4. Consider matching the automatic retirement deposit. Example: If the missionary receives $100 support, send him/her $90 and deposit $10 in their retirement account, then add another $10 to the retirement deposit. In this case, the missionary is actually receiving $110 support.
5. Consider providing a $100,000-$200,000 life insurance policy for the new missionary.

 

 

In the Presence of Significance

(L to R): Craig Dunning, Lorraine and Leon Dillinger

(L to R): Craig Dunning, Lorraine and Leon Dillinger

Yesterday, I had the rare opportunity to sit with people of significance, Leon and Lorraine Dillinger. Such opportunities are rare in life, because people of true significance are rare treasures. I’m tempted to use the word “greatness” in reference to the Dillingers, but doing so would 1) embarrass them, and 2) risk taking honor away from the Lord whose work in and through them is what tempts me to use the word “greatness.”

In a nutshell: Equipped with an intense love for Jesus paired with an unsurpassed commitment to do the Lord’s will and some medical and Wycliffe translation training,  Leon and Lorraine went to Papua, Indonesia in 1958, and have, for 56 years and counting, given their lives to the Lord’s service among the Dani people. Leon, arrived 9 months before Lorraine, and in addition to preparing an airstrip for future flights in/out of this remote highlands village, he also prepared their “honeymoon cottage,” which was a grass hut. When Lorraine arrived, they married and lived in that grass hut.

The stories they have lived are too numerous to attempt to retell, but a few important ones must be included here: they reduced the Dani language to writing; taught the Dani to read and write (their own language); translated the Bible into Dani; have been part of the establishment of 130+ Dani churches, led by Dani pastors; and established schools and a Bible institute. They also helped improve the Dani people’s health by introducing certain medications and a variety of new vegetables (the sweet potato made up about 85% of the Dani diet when the Dillingers arrived) and protein sources including soy beans, peanuts and a variety of animals for meat.

A fun contextualization story: When they were translating Isaiah 53, they faced a conundrum.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—every one—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.

The Dani had no knowledge of sheep. The only animal of which they were aware were wild pigs. Lorraine said, “We wondered what to do. The Dani had never seen or heard of sheep. We decided that we could use ‘pig’ in place of ‘sheep’ because the Dani understood how pigs can run off; they see that all the time. However, that didn’t solve the problem. Pigs don’t go to the slaughter quietly, which meant we couldn’t use ‘pig’ in place of ‘sheep.'”

What did they do? Realizing only “sheep” or “lamb” could work in that passage, they requested and received from the Dutch government a flock of sheep and began teaching the Dani about the character/personality of sheep so that the passage could make sense to them. (The sheep also served as a source of protein and wool, which was helpful in the cold temperatures of the Papua highlands.)

In addition to speaking in chapel, Leon and Lorraine spoke to our student ministries class. I was impressed at how this couple who has spent over 50 years living among a primitive people could so easily communicate with a group of youth-directors-in-training, who are part of a high-tech, modern world. However, the principles of culture that the Dillingers learned in their work among the Dani are the same principles of culture that today’s student ministry leaders must adapt. I hope at least some of our students realized the privilege they had in hearing from these fountains of wisdom and knowledge yesterday.

leon-dillinger-time-coverIn the Dillingers, I met humble unassuming servants of the Lord. They have the work credentials – even making the cover of Time (Dec/1982) – that many in our culture would flash before others in order to get to the front of the line or gain complimentary goodies. But they don’t use their credentials in those ways. I noted in Leon’s chapel presentation that he didn’t communicate “I did” or “we did,” – even though it would have been perfectly normal in our “it’s about me” culture. Instead, always mindful to give the Lord proper priority, he used phrases like, “the Lord worked it out so that . . .”

Lorraine was equally humble (remember, she has worked side by side with Leon reaching the Dani since 1958): In a private conversation about what can be a controversial topic in mission theory, I pressed her for a clarification about their work as it contrasted to something a recognized missiologist said in a seminar I attended recently, and her answer was simply, “What we found was . . .” Even though she obviously disagreed with the other person’s statement and has a lifetime of credentials to support her position, she didn’t throw him under the bus or speak unkindly toward his work. She simply reiterated what she and Leon had experienced among the Dani. I learned much from their demonstration of humility.

Although they no longer live full time among the Dani, their work has not stopped. They continue to visit the Dani regularly, and Leon is working on a set of Bible commentaries in the Dani language. I hope that their complete story (or as much as is possible) can be captured in a book. The historical record of the modern mission movement will have a significant gap if it isn’t.

 

 

You asked: Can I learn another language?

I’ve started my Arabic language studies again. Unfortunately, it is a self-paced, self-study, which gets interrupted far too often. I’m still plugging away, though. Thankfully, there are a number of Arabic speakers in my area, so I get the chance to use what I’m learning.

You, too, CAN learn another language, but . . . it will take effort and commitment. People often ask me whether this or that language program is any good. My standard answer: “More important than the quality of the program is your commitment to learning. Even the best program will not help you if you don’t put effort and time into it. Working a poor program is better than not working a great program.”

Below is an info-graphic that illustrates/explains approximately what it takes for native English speakers to learn another language.

HT: David Joannes

learn-a-language

Words: Be careful how and when you use them

In his book You Bring the Bagels, I’ll Bring the Gospel, Barry Rubin says, “It’s important to understand that whereas a word may mean one thing to you, it will often convey a different meaning to someone else” (p. 93). In this, Rubin provides an important caution for those who work cross-culturally.

One morning while picking up people for our worship service, we picked up a man who, prior to the collapse, had fled the Soviet Union for the relative freedom offered in Israel. He was an unbeliever and this was his first visit to our congregation. Since we didn’t know him, we began the customary “get to know you” conversation, which was very enlightening and pleasant. However, things changed quickly and dramatically when the driver concluded that portion of our conversation with words he had probably said one thousand times before . . . back home in the United States.

“It’s good to have you.”

I happened to be looking over my shoulder into the backseat where our guest was sitting and the look that came across his face was startling. Upon hearing those words, his countenance immediately changed to one of fear. The implications of those words – “It’s good to have you.” – would be difficult to understand for those who had grown up in the 1940’s United States and had never been inside the borders of the old Soviet Union.

Our guest’s response is still fresh in my mind some twenty years later: “Not only do you not have me, you will never have me.” In that event, I learned an important lesson about the challenge of saying things cross-culturally and about apologizing when I inadvertently offend.

Have you ever had one of those “oops” moments? Share it in the comments.