Handling the Intersection

I haven't ever hurt myself running with scissors, so I assume I can just run faster with them and be OK. I haven't gotten fired yet for a blog post, so ... let's talk about the Muslim issue.

Of course, there is no singular "Muslim issue." We could talk about theology, we could talk about general immigration, we could talk about the Syrian refugees, we could talk about ISIS, or some other related issue. And whatever conclusions might be drawn about one of these aren't necessarily transferable to any of the others. It's like saying let's discuss "the Christian issue" or "the political issue" or "the baseball issue" - too many variables to reduce the topic down to one, digestible idea.

I have opinions on each of these and more, but it's not my goal here to explain my views or in any way tell you what you should conclude. My point here is to challenge you who are followers of Jesus on how you come to those conclusions.

I have seen Christians respond in such a broad spectrum of ways that it appears we're reading out of two different Bibles (or more). Not to critique any particular view, I've seen people who want to shut and lock the door, others who want people to knock and know the secret password before getting in, others who want to cautiously hold the door open, and still others who want to leave the door wide open. (The "door" refers to anything from immigration to theological discourse.)

I offer the following thoughts to consider in order to determine what you think about the various ways Muslims intersect your life.

A follower's primary citizenship is in heaven, not the U.S. As you sort through these issues, remember your primary citizenship. We should operate without wavering according to that Kingdom, and then according to the nation only where it doesn't conflict. How do the ways that are specific to the Kingdom of God determine what we should think, say, and do? What did Jesus teach about that Kingdom? 

There certainly is room for loyalty to one's nation, but at least we should be able to agree that Jesus taught us to seek the Kingdom before everything else. Not only ask yourself what are the attributes and ways of the Kingdom, but how do I seek the Kingdom - even pursue it - by how I think through these issues? How am I seeking the Kingdom first by trying to figure out what to think and do?

This also means that we can have two goals - the goal as a follower of Christ and the goal as a citizen of this country. Those two goals may not end up being the same thing! Believe it or not, it's OK to have dissonance here. In fact, conflating the two ideas prevents us from thinking through either one rightly. However, the goal as a follower must have priority over the goal as a citizen wherever they are different.

The Great Commission is our main mission. Jesus was very clear in His post-resurrection appearances that what He wants us to do as first priority is to make disciples from every nation for Him. It's also clear that His model for doing so is through loving relationships. How we decide our response to issues related to Muslims must be for the purpose of achieving our highest task - making disciples from all nations through relationships. What will best help us progress in that mission over the long haul? Over the short haul?

Would Jesus do what I'm doing, say what I'm saying? This is kind of the inverse of WWJD. If I step out of myself and listen to what I just said or watch what I just did, can I reasonably conclude that Jesus would have said or done that? That's what being a follower of someone means - following what they would think, say, and do. If I cannot imagine Jesus doing something (without twisting Scripture), then what possible justification can there be for me to do so?

What is the right amount of risk? There is risk, no matter what. There are innocuous risks, such as leaving one's comfort zone to befriend (or even just coexist with) a Muslim - doing so runs the risk of having some of your assumptions challenged. On the extreme end, there are life-and-death risks posed by the radicalized. Of course, risks of this level are found in many corners of our lives, not just the jihadist corner. 

There are risks from little to small. What place should that play? Is avoiding risk what a follower should do? Is throwing caution to the wind what a follower should do? Jesus and the apostles certainly risked their lives at times, and certainly avoided danger at other times. We are called to be willing to give our lives for our King and for the Gospel, but how does that rightly translate to these issues? Furthermore, what risk do I end up imposing on others? No matter what you decide, you are assigning some form of risk to someone else - either to a refugee or to a neighbor or to the stability of another nation or to some other group. For the follower, though, we cannot make personal safety an idol - that cannot be our non-negotiable factor.

Blow people's minds by being humble. This addresses more of our manner than the process we use to make up our minds. Engage in disagreements about these important, complex issues with kindness. It's not easy for anyone to know what to think, and engaging in ugly exchanges is rarely the Jesus way. You're in process, others are in process, and kindness fosters that process for everyone. Blow their minds! Once it turns ugly, people dig in their heels, and positions become unnecessarily fixed. Try listening to the other person's views, ask questions, refrain from telling them what they should think, and then lay out what you're thinking. Be humble enough to be able to learn from someone else. For issues so complex, it's OK to change your mind.

In case you weren't sure, you don't know everything there is to know about this subject. You don't have all knowledge and there are angles you have not considered, yet. Without omniscience, our only choice is to assume a posture of being able to learn and ... yikes ... change.

I have opinions on most of these issues, and as I discuss them with people (not always following my own advice), I have frequently faced worthy ideas that draw me in one direction or another. That's good! These issues are too important and too complex to firmly hold conclusions without room to adapt to new information. We don't have to have firm opinions.

What we can be solid about is determining now which methods we will use to seek out those conclusions. We can be firm about the "rules of engagement" we will use to think these things through, such as the suggestions I've made here. These methods don't force one conclusion or another, but do set the parameters and how those (flexible) conclusions can be reached. Perhaps there are other rubrics even more appropriate than these.

A "Christian answer" cannot be reliably achieved apart from "Christian ways" of thinking about the question.