Justin Taylor's Blog, page 37

Reading the Rule of St. Benedict for Today

Written by: Justin Taylor

The Rule of St. Benedict (regula Benedicti) was written by Benedict (c. AD 480-547) as a rule for communal life under the order of an abbot (the head of the abbey).

For fifteen centuries, it has served as a leading guide for balanced monastic living. And these days, Benedict is making a comeback, thanks in no small part to Rod Dreher’s bestselling The Benedict Option, which picked up on philosopher Alasdair Macintyre’s comment that “We are waiting not for a Godot, but for another—doubtless very different—St. Benedict.”

As Timothy Fry explains in his editorial preface to an English transition, these 73 rules offer “directions for all aspects of the monastic life, from establishing the abbot as superior, the arrangement of psalms for prayers, measures for correction of faults, to details of clothing and the amount of food and drink.”

For a quick historical summary of the Rule, this is a helpful overview.

Accessing Bendict’s biblical fidelity—or lack thereof—depends in large part upon larger questions related to the nature of Christian spirituality, and specifically the wisdom of seeking sanctification in a monastic order. While the monastic impulse may be regarded as understandable and well-intentioned, most Protestants will struggle with its ascetic orientation, some of its key doctrines (e.g., of creation, justification, sanctification, authority, vocation), and its extrabiblical rules that not only go beyond Scripture but at times contradict it..

Because Catholic (i.e., Western) Monasticism holds to the Great Tradition, there is much that Reformed and evangelical readers will find unobjectionable per se. And many of the rules are good, basic, proverbial counsel for living life.

At times, a particular principle itself may be biblical, but Benedict makes unbiblical applications due to the monastic assumptions he brings to the text.

As a minor example, note his prohibitions on laughter:

“We absolutely condemn in all places any vulgarity and gossip and talk leading to laughter, and we do not permit a disciple to engage in words of that kind.”
“The tenth step of humility is that he is not given to ready laughter, for it is written: Only a fool raises his voice in laughter (Sir 21:23).”

This is one of those places where I want to respond, “Yes, but.” Yes—let us put away all vulgarity and gossip. And we should put away the kind of laughter that is incommensurate with knowledge of our sin (James 4:9). But laughter itself can be biblical, an expression of joy at the great things God has done (Ps. 126:2). Benedict relies upon a non-canonical book in prohibiting readiness to laugh rather than focusing upon the object of laughter. C.S. Lewis once noted that “There’s no sound I like better than adult male laughter.” But for Benedict, adult male laughter was a cause for suspicion.

As another example, Benedict is rightly concerned that the monks not give occasion to the Evil One (Eph. 4:27; 1 Tim. 5:14). But when will this happen? Benedict warns that it can happen when the monks go to sleep early. Or it can happen when they engage in “idle talk” (65, 70). Or it can happen if they are distressed when their abbot takes gifts sent to them from their parents and gives it to another monk. These were undoubtedly practical realities with monks living together in an abbey—under a father-like authority who controls all aspects of their lives—but specific “rules” become well-intentioned strictures that actually limit our biblical freedom in Christ.

Nevertheless, some of Benedict’s rules exhibit good biblical sense and are applicable for all leaders (e.g., “Let him strive to be loved rather than feared”).

Benedict seems to miss the distinction between discipline and punishment. The former is applicable to believers (e.g., Heb. 12:5-6), but punishment is not (for Christ has born it once and for all). God’s discipline of his children is now redemptive not retributive. But Benedict claims (emphasis added):

“He will have no reward for service of this kind; on the contrary, he will incur punishment for grumbling, unless he changes for the better and makes amends.”
“For all the more reason, then, should evil speech be curbed so that punishment for sin may be avoided.”
“If he does not use this occasion to humble himself, he will be subjected to more sever punishment for failing to correct by humility the wrong committed through negligence.”

Benedict’s position is understandable in light of Roman Catholicism’s teaching on justification and purgatory, but it does not thereby make it more biblical.

Other criticisms could be offered (e.g., his commending of shame as a motivator, his view of our satisfaction for our own sins, etc.).

Again, my bottom-line takeaway from reading the Rule of St. Benedict: much of his counsel is fine, in and of itself—but mainly when it is confined to the most general level. The more specific he gets, the more problems he seems to create, especially if the rules are regarded as universal and inviolable.

Reading the Rule of St. Benedict for Today

The Rule of St. Benedict (regula Benedicti) was written by Benedict (c. AD 480-547) as a rule for communal life under the order of an abbot (the head of the abbey).

For fifteen centuries, it has served as a leading guide for balanced monastic living. And these days, Benedict is making a comeback, thanks in no small part to Rod Dreher’s bestselling The Benedict Option, which picked up on philosopher Alasdair Macintyre’s comment that “We are waiting not for a Godot, but for another—doubtless very different—St. Benedict.”

As Timothy Fry explains in his editorial preface to an English transition, these 73 rules offer “directions for all aspects of the monastic life, from establishing the abbot as superior, the arrangement of psalms for prayers, measures for correction of faults, to details of clothing and the amount of food and drink.”

For a quick historical summary of the Rule, this is a helpful overview.

Accessing Bendict’s biblical fidelity—or lack thereof—depends in large part upon larger questions related to the nature of Christian spirituality, and specifically the wisdom of seeking sanctification in a monastic order. While the monastic impulse may be regarded as understandable and well-intentioned, most Protestants will struggle with its ascetic orientation, some of its key doctrines (e.g., of creation, justification, sanctification, authority, vocation), and its extrabiblical rules that not only go beyond Scripture but at times contradict it..

Because Catholic (i.e., Western) Monasticism holds to the Great Tradition, there is much that Reformed and evangelical readers will find unobjectionable per se. And many of the rules are good, basic, proverbial counsel for living life.

At times, a particular principle itself may be biblical, but Benedict makes unbiblical applications due to the monastic assumptions he brings to the text.

As a minor example, note his prohibitions on laughter:

“We absolutely condemn in all places any vulgarity and gossip and talk leading to laughter, and we do not permit a disciple to engage in words of that kind.”
“The tenth step of humility is that he is not given to ready laughter, for it is written: Only a fool raises his voice in laughter (Sir 21:23).”

This is one of those places where I want to respond, “Yes, but.” Yes—let us put away all vulgarity and gossip. And we should put away the kind of laughter that is incommensurate with knowledge of our sin (James 4:9). But laughter itself can be biblical, an expression of joy at the great things God has done (Ps. 126:2). Benedict relies upon a non-canonical book in prohibiting readiness to laugh rather than focusing upon the object of laughter. C.S. Lewis once noted that “There’s no sound I like better than adult male laughter.” But for Benedict, adult male laughter was a cause for suspicion.

As another example, Benedict is rightly concerned that the monks not give occasion to the Evil One (Eph. 4:27; 1 Tim. 5:14). But when will this happen? Benedict warns that it can happen when the monks go to sleep early. Or it can happen when they engage in “idle talk” (65, 70). Or it can happen if they are distressed when their abbot takes gifts sent to them from their parents and gives it to another monk. These were undoubtedly practical realities with monks living together in an abbey—under a father-like authority who controls all aspects of their lives—but specific “rules” become well-intentioned strictures that actually limit our biblical freedom in Christ.

Nevertheless, some of Benedict’s rules exhibit good biblical sense and are applicable for all leaders (e.g., “Let him strive to be loved rather than feared”).

Benedict seems to miss the distinction between discipline and punishment. The former is applicable to believers (e.g., Heb. 12:5-6), but punishment is not (for Christ has born it once and for all). God’s discipline of his children is now redemptive not retributive. But Benedict claims (emphasis added):

“He will have no reward for service of this kind; on the contrary, he will incur punishment for grumbling, unless he changes for the better and makes amends.”
“For all the more reason, then, should evil speech be curbed so that punishment for sin may be avoided.”
“If he does not use this occasion to humble himself, he will be subjected to more sever punishment for failing to correct by humility the wrong committed through negligence.”

Benedict’s position is understandable in light of Roman Catholicism’s teaching on justification and purgatory, but it does not thereby make it more biblical.

Other criticisms could be offered (e.g., his commending of shame as a motivator, his view of our satisfaction for our own sins, etc.).

Again, my bottom-line takeaway from reading the Rule of St. Benedict: much of his counsel is fine, in and of itself—but mainly when it is confined to the most general level. The more specific he gets, the more problems he seems to create, especially if the rules are regarded as universal and inviolable.

The post Reading the Rule of St. Benedict for Today appeared first on The Gospel Coalition.

Nabeel Qureshi (1983-2017)

Written by: Justin Taylor

On Saturday, September 16, 2017, Nabeel Qureshi, age 34, entered into the joy of his master, Jesus Christ, after enduring a yearlong battle with cancer.

Islam Was All

Nabeel was born in California as a U.S. citizen to Pakistani immigrants who fled religious persecution at the hands of fellow Muslims. His parents were devout members of the peaceful Ahmadi sect of Islam, which differs from orthodox Islam on some minor doctrines but shares with it a belief in the six articles of faith

belief in tawheed [absolute monotheism]
belief in the prophets
belief in the books
belief in the unseen
belief in the day of judgment
belief in the decree of Allah

and holds to the five pillars of the faith

reciting the shahada (witness of faith)
praying the salaat (ritual prayer)
paying the zakaat (alms)
fasting
performing hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca).

Nabeel’s family was the most loving and tightly knit family that he knew. And it was entirely centered on Islam, which formed the framework and blueprint of his life.

His mother taught him Urdu and Arabic before he learned English at the age of 4. By the age of 5, he had read the entire Qur’an in Arabic and had memorized many chapters.

His parents also trained him in apologetics so that he would not only believe in Islam, but could defend it and refute other religions like Christianity.

Encountering the Claims of Christ

In August 2001, while a student at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, Nabeel observed fellow student David Wood reading the Bible in his free time. Nabeel regularly read the Qur’an, but it struck him as odd to see a Christian reading the Bible on his own.

Nabeel challenged David’s belief in Christianity, beginning with the charge that the Bible had been corrupted over time. Wood aspired to be a Christian apologist, and the two young men formed a friendship and engaged in debate that lasted for several years.

In working through David’s arguments and examining the evidence for himself, Nabeel eventually became convinced of the general reliability of the New Testament.

He next raised the objection that Jesus never claimed to be God. After being shown this was untrue, Nabeel challenged David that Jesus had never died on the cross. Again, by being willing to investigate the evidence, Nabeel changed his mind.

It was now two and a half years later, and Nabeel raised the greatest stumbling block for accepting Christianity: how could one man die for another man’s sins? And how could the one true God be a Trinity? He was now reading the Bible and considering Christ’s claims for himself.

In return, David began to challenge Nabeel’s confidence in the claims of Islam. Intellectually, Nabeel held to Islam for several subjective reasons (like the kind of life it produced), but objectively, the central claim was that Islam was true because Muhammad was a true prophet of God. But after studying primary sources and biographies, Nabeel eventually concluded that he could not reasonably hold to the idea that Muhammad is the greatest of prophets and history’s most perfect man.

From December 2004 to April 2005, Nabeel experienced three vivid dreams that strongly suggested to him that Christianity is true and that Christ should be followed.

Later that year, he traveled to Washington, D.C., Canada, and England to search out knowledgeable Muslims who could answer the arguments against Islam that he had encountered. “I heard various replies running the gamut from terribly unconvincing to fairly innovative, and I encountered people that ranged from sincere to condescendingly caustic. At the end of my research, the arguments for and against Islam still hung in the balance, but one thing was abundantly clear: they were far from approaching the strength of the case for Christianity.”

Christ Is All

He describes his final conversion to Christ, while a medical student, and the effect it had on his world:

I began mourning the impact of the decision I knew I had to make. On the first day of my second year of medical school, it became too much to bear. Yearning for comfort, I decided to skip school. Returning to my apartment, I placed the Qur’an and the Bible in front of me. I turned to the Qur’an, but there was no comfort there. For the first time, the book seemed utterly irrelevant to my suffering. Irrelevant to my life. It felt like a dead book.

With nowhere left to go, I opened up the New Testament and started reading. Very quickly, I came to the passage that said, “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.”

Electric, the words leapt off the page and jump-started my heart. I could not put the Bible down. I began reading fervently, reaching Matthew 10:37, which taught me that I must love God more than my mother and father.

“But Jesus,” I said, “accepting you would be like dying. I will have to give up everything.”

The next verses spoke to me, saying, “He who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for my sake will find it” (NASB). Jesus was being very blunt: For Muslims, following the gospel is more than a call to prayer. It is a call to die.

I knelt at the foot of my bed and gave up my life.

A few days later, the two people I loved most in this world were shattered by my betrayal. To this day my family is broken by the decision I made, and it is excruciating every time I see the cost I had to pay.

But Jesus is the God of reversal and redemption. He redeemed sinners to life by his death, and he redeemed a symbol of execution by repurposing it for salvation. He redeemed my suffering by making me rely upon him for my every moment, bending my heart toward him. It was there in my pain that I knew him intimately. He reached me through investigations, dreams, and visions, and called me to prayer in my suffering. It was there that I found Jesus. To follow him is worth giving up everything.

In another place, he recounts the incredible pain this created in his family:

After my family learned of my conversion, they have not been the same.

My mother has tears in her eyes whenever I see her, a quiver in her voice whenever I hear her, and absolute despair on her face in sleep and while awake. Never have I met a mother more devoted to her children than my mother, and how did I repay her? In her mind, decades’ worth of emotional and physical investment ended up with her son espousing views that are completely antithetical to everything she stands for.

My father, a loving, gentle, and big-hearted man with every ounce of the emotional strength expected of a 24-year veteran of the U.S. military, broke down for the first time that I had ever seen. To be the cause of the only tears I ever saw fall from his eyes is not easy to live with. To hear him . . . the man who stood tallest in my life from the day I was born, my archetype of strength, my father . . .  to hear him say that because of me he felt his backbone has been ripped out from behind him, feels like patricide.

It was then that I wondered why God had let me live; why had God not just lifted me to himself when I had found the truth? Why did I have to hurt my family so much, and practically eschew the ones who loved me more than anyone else?

The answer was sought and found in God’s Word. After accepting him, it is my duty to work for him and walk his path. For now, my loss was to be comforted by his words found in Mark 10:29-30:

“I tell you the truth,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life.”

Ambassador and Apologist

Nabeel went on to study Christian apologetics at Biola University, graduating with an MA in 2008, while also completing his medical degree at Eastern Virginia Medical School, graduating in 2009. In 2012, he completed an MA in religion at Duke University, and then entered an MPhil and PhD program at Oxford University in New Testament studies. In 2013, he became an itinerant speaker with Ravi Zacharias International Ministry.

In February 2014, Nabeel published his first book, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus: A Devout Muslim Encounters Christianity (Zondervan), which landed on The New York Times bestseller list, and was awarded the Christian Book Award for both “Best New Author” and “Best Non-Fiction Book” of 2015. It has sold more than a quarter of a million copies.

In 2015, Nabeel’s wife, Michelle, gave birth to their daughter, Ayah Fatima Qureshi, named after a Christian martyr.

In March 2016, Zondervan published Nabeel’s book Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward.

Five months later, in August 2016, Zondervan released No God But One: Allah or Jesus? A Former Muslim Investigates the Evidence for Islam and Christianity.

Cancer

On the day of the book release for No God But One, Nabeel wrote the following on Facebook, announcing that he had been diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer:

Dear Friends and Family,

This is an announcement that I never expected to make, but God in His infinite and sovereign wisdom has chosen me for this refining, and I pray He will be glorified through my body and my spirit. My family and I have received the news that I have advanced stomach cancer, and the clinical prognosis is quite grim. Nonetheless, we are going to pursue healing aggressively, both medical and miraculous, relying on God and the fact that He is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine.

In the past few days my spirits have soared and sank as I pursue the Lord’s will and consider what the future might look like, but never once have I doubted this: that Jesus is Lord, His blood has paid my ransom, and by His wounds I am healed. I have firm faith that my soul is saved by the grace and mercy of the Triune God, and not by any accomplishment or merit of my own. I am so thankful that I am a child of the Father, redeemed by the Son, and sealed in the Spirit. No, in the midst of the storm, I do not have to worry about my salvation, and for that I praise you, God. . . .

Friends and family, may I ask you to fast and pray fervently for my healing? I do not profess to know the will of the Lord, but many of my close friends and confidants are convinced that this is a trial through which the Lord intends to bring me alive and refined. May His will be done, and may I invite you to seek Him in earnest, on your knees, fasting on my behalf, asking our Yahweh Rapha for healing in Jesus’ name.

And as you pray and fast, “I will rejoice, for I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, this will turn out for my deliverance, as it is my eager expectation and hope that I will not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death.” (Philippians 1:18-20)

For His Glory,

-Nabeel

In October 2016, his wife, Michelle, suffered a miscarriage, and in May 2017, Nabeel announced that the radiation had not worked and that the cancer had spread to his chest.

In September 2017, his doctors decided to place him on palliative care, as there were no further medical options to pursue.

As a Christian apologist with a special focus on Islam, Nabeel was often introduced as a “former Muslim.” He felt ambivalence about the label, wondering if he would be forever bound by the life he left.

We don’t identify other Christians as “former adulterers,” “former narcissists,” etc. I have been made a new creation in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17), I strive every day to cast off the old self and to put on the new (Ephesians 4:22-24), reflecting the fact that I have been born again from above (John 3:3).

I would be thrilled if I never had to talk about Islam again, focusing instead on the awe-inspiring power of God’s incarnation and resurrection!

But, he added:

. . .  as long as there are Muslims, there will be Christians who need to be equipped to share the Gospel with them in compelling compassion.

Until that is no longer the case, I am honored to discuss my former way of life to build up the body of Christ.

Glory and Joy

Today, Nabeel Qureshi, beholding his Savior face to face, is able to declare what is true:

I have fought the good fight.

I have finished the race.

I have kept the faith.

Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

(2 Tim. 4:7-8)

Entering into the joy of his Master, he undoubtedly heard the words, “Well done, my good and faithful servant.”

A fund has been created for Nabeel’s wife and daughter, which you can contribute to here.

Nabeel Qureshi (1983-2017)

On Saturday, September 16, 2017, Nabeel Qureshi, age 34, entered into the joy of his master, Jesus Christ, after enduring a yearlong battle with cancer.

Islam Was All

Nabeel was born in California as a U.S. citizen to Pakistani immigrants who fled religious persecution at the hands of fellow Muslims. His parents were devout members of the peaceful Ahmadi sect of Islam, which differs from orthodox Islam on some minor doctrines but shares with it a belief in the six articles of faith

belief in tawheed [absolute monotheism]
belief in the prophets
belief in the books
belief in the unseen
belief in the day of judgment
belief in the decree of Allah

and holds to the five pillars of the faith

reciting the shahada (witness of faith)
praying the salaat (ritual prayer)
paying the zakaat (alms)
fasting
performing hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca).

Nabeel’s family was the most loving and tightly knit family that he knew. And it was entirely centered on Islam, which formed the framework and blueprint of his life.

His mother taught him Urdu and Arabic before he learned English at the age of 4. By the age of 5, he had read the entire Qur’an in Arabic and had memorized many chapters.

His parents also trained him in apologetics so that he would not only believe in Islam, but could defend it and refute other religions like Christianity.

Encountering the Claims of Christ

In August 2001, while a student at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia, Nabeel observed fellow student David Wood reading the Bible in his free time. Nabeel regularly read the Qur’an, but it struck him as odd to see a Christian reading the Bible on his own.

Nabeel challenged David’s belief in Christianity, beginning with the charge that the Bible had been corrupted over time. Wood aspired to be a Christian apologist, and the two young men formed a friendship and engaged in debate that lasted for several years.

In working through David’s arguments and examining the evidence for himself, Nabeel eventually became convinced of the general reliability of the New Testament.

He next raised the objection that Jesus never claimed to be God. After being shown this was untrue, Nabeel challenged David that Jesus had never died on the cross. Again, by being willing to investigate the evidence, Nabeel changed his mind.

It was now two and a half years later, and Nabeel raised the greatest stumbling block for accepting Christianity: how could one man die for another man’s sins? And how could the one true God be a Trinity? He was now reading the Bible and considering Christ’s claims for himself.

In return, David began to challenge Nabeel’s confidence in the claims of Islam. Intellectually, Nabeel held to Islam for several subjective reasons (like the kind of life it produced), but objectively, the central claim was that Islam was true because Muhammad was a true prophet of God. But after studying primary sources and biographies, Nabeel eventually concluded that he could not reasonably hold to the idea that Muhammad is the greatest of prophets and history’s most perfect man.

From December 2004 to April 2005, Nabeel experienced three vivid dreams that strongly suggested to him that Christianity is true and that Christ should be followed.

Later that year, he traveled to Washington, D.C., Canada, and England to search out knowledgeable Muslims who could answer the arguments against Islam that he had encountered. “I heard various replies running the gamut from terribly unconvincing to fairly innovative, and I encountered people that ranged from sincere to condescendingly caustic. At the end of my research, the arguments for and against Islam still hung in the balance, but one thing was abundantly clear: they were far from approaching the strength of the case for Christianity.”

Christ Is All

Nabeel described for Christianity Today his final conversion to Christ, while a medical student, and the effect it had on his world:

I began mourning the impact of the decision I knew I had to make. On the first day of my second year of medical school, it became too much to bear. Yearning for comfort, I decided to skip school. Returning to my apartment, I placed the Qur’an and the Bible in front of me. I turned to the Qur’an, but there was no comfort there. For the first time, the book seemed utterly irrelevant to my suffering. Irrelevant to my life. It felt like a dead book.

With nowhere left to go, I opened up the New Testament and started reading. Very quickly, I came to the passage that said, “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.”

Electric, the words leapt off the page and jump-started my heart. I could not put the Bible down. I began reading fervently, reaching Matthew 10:37, which taught me that I must love God more than my mother and father.

“But Jesus,” I said, “accepting you would be like dying. I will have to give up everything.”

The next verses spoke to me, saying, “He who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for my sake will find it” (NASB). Jesus was being very blunt: For Muslims, following the gospel is more than a call to prayer. It is a call to die.

I knelt at the foot of my bed and gave up my life.

A few days later, the two people I loved most in this world were shattered by my betrayal. To this day my family is broken by the decision I made, and it is excruciating every time I see the cost I had to pay.

But Jesus is the God of reversal and redemption. He redeemed sinners to life by his death, and he redeemed a symbol of execution by repurposing it for salvation. He redeemed my suffering by making me rely upon him for my every moment, bending my heart toward him. It was there in my pain that I knew him intimately. He reached me through investigations, dreams, and visions, and called me to prayer in my suffering. It was there that I found Jesus. To follow him is worth giving up everything.

In another place, he recounts the incredible pain this created in his family:

After my family learned of my conversion, they have not been the same.

My mother has tears in her eyes whenever I see her, a quiver in her voice whenever I hear her, and absolute despair on her face in sleep and while awake. Never have I met a mother more devoted to her children than my mother, and how did I repay her? In her mind, decades’ worth of emotional and physical investment ended up with her son espousing views that are completely antithetical to everything she stands for.

My father, a loving, gentle, and big-hearted man with every ounce of the emotional strength expected of a 24-year veteran of the U.S. military, broke down for the first time that I had ever seen. To be the cause of the only tears I ever saw fall from his eyes is not easy to live with. To hear him . . . the man who stood tallest in my life from the day I was born, my archetype of strength, my father . . .  to hear him say that because of me he felt his backbone has been ripped out from behind him, feels like patricide.

It was then that I wondered why God had let me live; why had God not just lifted me to himself when I had found the truth? Why did I have to hurt my family so much, and practically eschew the ones who loved me more than anyone else?

The answer was sought and found in God’s Word. After accepting him, it is my duty to work for him and walk his path. For now, my loss was to be comforted by his words found in Mark 10:29-30:

“I tell you the truth,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age (homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—and with them, persecutions) and in the age to come, eternal life.”

Ambassador and Apologist

Nabeel went on to study Christian apologetics at Biola University, graduating with an MA in 2008, while also completing his medical degree at Eastern Virginia Medical School, graduating in 2009. In 2012, he completed an MA in religion at Duke University, and then entered an MPhil and PhD program at Oxford University in New Testament studies. In 2013, he became an itinerant speaker with Ravi Zacharias International Ministry.

In February 2014, Nabeel published his first book, Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus: A Devout Muslim Encounters Christianity (Zondervan), which landed on The New York Times bestseller list, and was awarded the Christian Book Award for both “Best New Author” and “Best Non-Fiction Book” of 2015. It has sold more than a quarter of a million copies.

In 2015, Nabeel’s wife, Michelle, gave birth to their daughter, Ayah Fatima Qureshi, named after a Christian martyr.

In March 2016, Zondervan published Nabeel’s book Answering Jihad: A Better Way Forward.

Five months later, in August 2016, Zondervan released No God But One: Allah or Jesus? A Former Muslim Investigates the Evidence for Islam and Christianity.

Cancer

On the day of the book release for No God But One, Nabeel wrote the following on Facebook, announcing that he had been diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer:

Dear Friends and Family,

This is an announcement that I never expected to make, but God in His infinite and sovereign wisdom has chosen me for this refining, and I pray He will be glorified through my body and my spirit. My family and I have received the news that I have advanced stomach cancer, and the clinical prognosis is quite grim. Nonetheless, we are going to pursue healing aggressively, both medical and miraculous, relying on God and the fact that He is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine.

In the past few days my spirits have soared and sank as I pursue the Lord’s will and consider what the future might look like, but never once have I doubted this: that Jesus is Lord, His blood has paid my ransom, and by His wounds I am healed. I have firm faith that my soul is saved by the grace and mercy of the Triune God, and not by any accomplishment or merit of my own. I am so thankful that I am a child of the Father, redeemed by the Son, and sealed in the Spirit. No, in the midst of the storm, I do not have to worry about my salvation, and for that I praise you, God. . . .

Friends and family, may I ask you to fast and pray fervently for my healing? I do not profess to know the will of the Lord, but many of my close friends and confidants are convinced that this is a trial through which the Lord intends to bring me alive and refined. May His will be done, and may I invite you to seek Him in earnest, on your knees, fasting on my behalf, asking our Yahweh Rapha for healing in Jesus’ name.

And as you pray and fast, “I will rejoice, for I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, this will turn out for my deliverance, as it is my eager expectation and hope that I will not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death.” (Philippians 1:18-20)

For His Glory,

-Nabeel

In October 2016, his wife, Michelle, suffered a miscarriage, and in May 2017, Nabeel announced that the radiation had not worked and that the cancer had spread to his chest.

During this time, Nabeel’s parents came to Houston, where he lives, and helped to care for him:

In September 2017, his doctors decided to place him on palliative care, as there were no further medical options to pursue.

As a Christian apologist with a special focus on Islam, Nabeel was often introduced as a “former Muslim.” He felt ambivalence about the label, wondering if he would be forever bound by the life he left. When asked about this by Boundless, he responded:

We don’t identify other Christians as “former adulterers,” “former narcissists,” etc. I have been made a new creation in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17), I strive every day to cast off the old self and to put on the new (Ephesians 4:22-24), reflecting the fact that I have been born again from above (John 3:3).

I would be thrilled if I never had to talk about Islam again, focusing instead on the awe-inspiring power of God’s incarnation and resurrection!

But, he added:

. . .  as long as there are Muslims, there will be Christians who need to be equipped to share the Gospel with them in compelling compassion.

Until that is no longer the case, I am honored to discuss my former way of life to build up the body of Christ.

Glory and Joy

Today, Nabeel Qureshi, beholding his Savior face to face, is able to declare what is true:

I have fought the good fight.

I have finished the race.

I have kept the faith.

Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.

(2 Tim. 4:7-8)

Entering into the joy of his Master, he undoubtedly heard the words, “Well done, my good and faithful servant.”

A fund has been created for Nabeel’s wife and daughter, which you can contribute to here.

Nabeel’s funeral was held on September 21, 2017. You can watch it in its entirety below, courtesy of Ravi Zacharias International Ministry.

The first 27 minutes is a photographic montage of his life.

The first speaker is Jim Tour of Rice University, one of the most cited chemists in the world.

The second speaker is Ravi Zacharias.

If you want to go straight to Ravi’s eulogy, see the video below:

The post Nabeel Qureshi (1983-2017) appeared first on The Gospel Coalition.

Michael Horton’s Four Coordinates on the Compass of Pilgrim Theology

Written by: Justin Taylor

In Pilgrim Theology, the concise, lay-level version of Michael Horton’s Systematic Theology, Horton explains the four coordinates of the compass for integrating faith and practice as pilgrims seeking to glorify God:

All of our faith and practice arise out of the drama of Scripture, the “big story” that traces the plot of history from creation to consummation, with Christ as its Alpha and Omega, beginning and end.

And out of the throbbing verbs of this unfolding drama God reveals stable nouns—doctrines.

From what God does in history we are taught certain things about

who he is
and what it means to be created in his image, fallen, and redeemed, renewed, and glorified in union with Christ.

As the Father creates his church, in his Son and by his Spirit, we come to realize

what this covenant community is and what it means to belong to it;
what kind of future is promised to us in Christ, and
how we are to live here and now in light of it all.

The drama and the doctrine provoke us to praise and worship—doxology—

and together these three coordinates give us a new way of living in the world as disciples.

This rubric—of disciples living in the drama expressed through doctrines for the purpose of doxology—is a very helpful way to think through the various aspects of theology.

Zondervan has put together a nicely designed version of Horton’s application for each of the major doctrines.

For PDFs of these images, go here and here.

Thanks for Zondervan for permission to post these images.

The Marks of a Crusty Christian

Written by: Justin Taylor

A good word from Kevin DeYoung’s The Good News We Almost Forgot: Rediscovering the Gospel in a 16th Century Catechism (Moody, 2010):

What makes a Christian crusty?

A number of things.

For starters, it’s an attitude. It’s a demeanor where being Calvinist or paedobaptist or inerrantist (three things I am gladly) are put on like armor or wielded like weapons, when they are meant to be the warm glow of a Christian whose core radiates with love for Christ and the gospel.

I believe in theological distinctives—I believe in them and I believe it is good to have them—but if the distinctives are not manifestly the flower of gospel root, the buds aren’t worth the blooming.

A second mark of crusty Christians is approachability, as in, not having any. There is a sizing up-ness that makes some theological types unnecessarily prickly.

They are bright and opinionated and quickly analytical. . . .

Crusty Christians are hard to be around.

They are intimidating instead of engaging and growling instead of gracious.

They are too willing to share their opinions on everything and unable to put any doctrine in any category not marked “absolutely essential.”

When theology is more crust than core, it’s not so much that we care about good theology too much, we just don’t care about some other hugely important things in the same proportion. . . . Striking the balance is not easy.

But let’s try hard to be discerning and grounded without always looking for the next theological misstep in our friends, our family, or the songs we sing.

And let’s be able to tell the difference between wandering sheep and false teachers. We must delineate between a slightly ill-informed wording of a phrase and a purposeful rejection of truth.

We must pursue a passion for fidelity to Scripture and a winsomeness that sweetens the already honey-like drippings of the word of God.

Let us be more like a chocolate covered raisin, likeable on the outside and surprisingly good for you on the inside, and less like a tootsie roll pop with its brittle, crunchy exterior that must be broken through before anyone can get to the good stuff. Our theological heart, if it is worth anything, will pulse throughout our spiritual bodies, making us into someone more prayerful, more godly, and more passionate about the Bible, the lost, and the world around us. We will be theologically solid to the core, without the unnecessary crust.

The Largest Survey Ever Conducted of American Religious and Denominational Identity: 14 Major Findings from a Landmark Study

Written by: Justin Taylor

PRRI (Public Religion Research Institute)—a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to conducting independent research at the intersection of religion, culture, and public policy—has released their report on the 2016 American Values Atlas (AVA), which was the single largest survey of American religious and denominational identity ever conducted.

The AVA draws upon data from more than 100,000 bilingual telephone interviews conducted among a random sample of Americans in 2016, with 40,000 interviews on political issue areas.

Because of its large sample size, the AVA allows analysis of specific census regions, all 50 states, and even 30 major metropolitan areas, while providing a rare portrait of smaller religious communities and ethnic groups.

The following is drawn from their executive summary.

1. White Christians now account for fewer than half of the public.

Today, only 43% of Americans identify as white and Christian, and only 30% as white and Protestant.
In 1976, roughly eight in ten (81%) Americans identified as white and identified with a Christian denomination, and a majority (55%) were white Protestants.

2. White evangelical Protestants are in decline—along with white mainline Protestants and white Catholics. 

White evangelical Protestants were once thought to be bucking a longer trend, but over the past decade their numbers have dropped substantially.
Fewer than one in five (17%) Americans are white evangelical Protestant, but they accounted for nearly one-quarter (23%) in 2006.
Over the same period, white Catholics dropped five percentage points from 16% to 11%, as have white mainline Protestants, from 18% to 13%.

3. Non-Christian religious groups are growing, but they still represent less than one in ten Americans combined.

Jewish Americans constitute 2% of the public while Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus each constitute only 1% of the public.
All other non-Christian religions constitute an additional 1%.

4. America’s youngest religious groups are all non-Christian. 

Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists are all far younger than white Christian groups.
At least one-third of Muslims (42%), Hindus (36%), and Buddhists (35%) are under the age of 30. Roughly one-third (34%) of religiously unaffiliated Americans are also under 30.
In contrast, white Christian groups are aging. Slightly more than one in ten white Catholics (11%), white evangelical Protestants (11%), and white mainline Protestants (14%) are under 30.
Approximately six in ten white evangelical Protestants (62%), white Catholics (62%), and white mainline Protestants (59%) are at least 50 years old.

5. The Catholic Church is experiencing an ethnic transformation. 

Twenty-five years ago, nearly nine in ten (87%) Catholics were white, non-Hispanic, compared to 55% today.
Fewer than four in ten (36%) Catholics under the age of 30 are white, non-Hispanic; 52% are Hispanic.

6. Atheists and agnostics account for a minority of all religiously unaffiliated. Most are secular. 

Atheists and agnostics account for only about one-quarter (27%) of all religiously unaffiliated Americans.
Nearly six in ten (58%) religiously unaffiliated Americans identify as secular, someone who is not religious; 16% of religiously unaffiliated Americans nonetheless report that they identify as a “religious person.”

7. There are 20 states in which no religious group comprises a greater share of residents than the religiously unaffiliated. 

These states tend to be more concentrated in the Western U.S., although they include a couple of New England states, as well.
More than four in ten (41%) residents of Vermont and approximately one-third of Americans in Oregon (36%), Washington (35%), Hawaii (34%), Colorado (33%), and New Hampshire (33%) are religiously unaffiliated.

8. No state is less religiously diverse than Mississippi. 

The state is heavily Protestant and dominated by a single denomination: Baptist.
Six in ten (60%) Protestants in Mississippi are Baptist.
No state has a greater degree of religious diversity than New York. 

9. The cultural center of the Catholic Church is shifting south. 

The Northeast is no longer the epicenter of American Catholicism—although at 41% Catholic, Rhode Island remains the most Catholic state in the country.
Immigration from predominantly Catholic countries in Latin America means new Catholic populations are settling in the Southwest.
In 1972, roughly seven in ten Catholics lived in either the Northeast (41%) or the Midwest (28%).
Only about one-third of Catholics lived in the South (13%) or West (18%). Today, a majority of Catholics now reside in the South (29%) or West (25%).
Currently, only about one-quarter (26%) of the U.S. Catholic population lives in the Northeast, and 20% live in the Midwest.

10. Jews, Hindus, and Unitarian-Universalists stand out as the most educated groups in the American religious landscape. 

More than one-third of Jews (34%), Hindus (38%), and Unitarian-Universalists (43%) hold post-graduate degrees.
Notably, Muslims are significantly more likely than white evangelical Protestants to have at least a four-year college degree (33% vs. 25%, respectively).

11. Asian or Pacific-Islander Americans have a significantly different religious profile than other racial or ethnic groups.

There are as many Asian or Pacific-Islander Americans affiliated with non-Christian religions as with Christian religious groups.
And one-third (34%) are religiously unaffiliated.

12. Nearly half of LGBT Americans are religiously unaffiliated.

Nearly half (46%) of Americans who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) are religiously unaffiliated.
This is roughly twice the number of Americans overall (24%) who are religiously unaffiliated.

13. White Christians have become a minority in the Democratic Party.

Fewer than one in three (29%) Democrats today are white Christian, compared to half (50%) one decade earlier.
Only 14% of young Democrats (age 18 to 29) identify as white Christian.
Forty percent identify as religiously unaffiliated.

14. White evangelical Protestants remain the dominant religious force in the GOP.

More than one-third (35%) of all Republicans identify as white evangelical Protestant, a proportion that has remained roughly stable over the past decade.
Roughly three-quarters (73%) of Republicans belong to a white Christian religious group.

To read more details on each of these points, go here.

Or use their interactive map to interact with specific questions that interest you.

A Corporate Confession of Faith Based on the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount

Written by: Justin Taylor

Last Sunday, at our church, we recited together this corporate confession written by Bob Kauflin, followed by an assurance of pardon from Isaiah 53:1-5. I commend it to you. The elements in bold were read by the pastor.

Holy and righteous God, we confess that like Isaiah, we are a people of unclean lips. But it is not only unclean lips we possess. We are people with unclean hands and unclean hearts. We have broken your law times without number, and are guilty of pride, unbelief, self-centeredness and idolatry. Affect our hearts with the severity of our sin and the glory of your righteousness as we now acknowledge our sins in your holy presence.

We have had other gods before you.

We have worshipped and served the creature rather than the creator.

We have sought satisfaction in this world’s pleasures rather than in You.

We have loved to praise our own glory more than yours.

We have taken your name in vain.

We have prayed religious prayers to impress others.

We have uttered your name countless times without reverence or love.

We have listened to others use your name in vain without grieving.

We have murdered in our hearts.

We have often destroyed our neighbor with our tongues.

We have been quick to uncharitably judge others.

We have considered revenge when we were sinned against.

We have committed adultery with our eyes.

We have loved temptation rather than fighting it.

We have lusted after unlawful and immoral pleasures.

We have justified our lusts by using the world as our standard.

We have stolen what is not ours and coveted what belongs to others.

Our lives overflow with discontent, ungratefulness, and envy.

We have complained in the midst of Your abundant provision.

We have sought to exalt ourselves through owning more.

We have lied to you and to others.

We have told distorted truths, half-truths, and untruths.

We have despised the truth to make ourselves look better.

Even in our confession, we look for ways to hide our guilt.

O God, we have sinned against your mercy times without number. We are ashamed to lift up our faces before you, for our iniquities have gone over our heads. If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand? How shall we answer you? We lay our hands on our mouths. We have no answer to your righteous wrath and just judgment.

We have no answer. But God Himself has mercifully provided one for us.

“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.” (Is. 53:6)

For a compelling book on why churches should have a gospel-shaped liturgy, read this by Bryan Chapell.

Reading the Gospels: Do You Know the 7 Differences between Galilee and Judea in the Time of Jesus?

Written by: Justin Taylor

R. T. France, in his commentary on The Gospel of Matthew (NICNT; Eerdmans, 2007), laments:

Modern readers of the NT often know little about the geopolitical world of first-century Palestine.

We tend to think, France says, that “the Jews” were

an undifferentiated community
living amicably in the part of the world we now call “the Holy Land”
united in their resentment of the political imposition of Roman rule to which all were equally subject.

But, he says, “this is a gross distortion of the historical and cultural reality.”

The northern province of Galilee was decisively distinct—in history, political status, and culture—from the southern province of Judea which contained the holy city of Jerusalem.

Admitting that the following is a drastic oversimplification, but hoping that it’s not a complete caricature, Professor France summarizes seven differences.

1. Racially

The area of the former Northern Kingdom of Israel had had, ever since the Assyrian conquest in the eighth century B.C., a more mixed population, within which more conservative Jewish areas (like Nazareth and Capernaum) stood in close proximity to largely pagan cities, of which in the first century the new Hellenistic centers of Tiberias and Sepphoris were the chief examples.

2. Geographically

Galilee was separated from Judea by the non-Jewish territory of Samaria, and from Perea in the southeast by the Hellenistic settlements of Decapolis.

3. Politically

Galilee had been under separate administration from Judea during almost all its history since the tenth century B.C. (apart from a period of “reunification” under the Maccabees), and in the time of Jesus it was under a (supposedly) native Herodian prince, while Judea and Samaria had since A.D. 6 been under the direct rule of a Roman prefect.

4. Economically

Galilee offered better agricultural and fishing resources than the more mountainous territory of Judea, making the wealth of some Galileans the envy of their southern neighbors.

5. Culturally

Judeans despised their northern neighbors as country cousins, their lack of Jewish sophistication being compounded by their greater openness to Hellenistic influence.

6. Linguistically

Galileans spoke a distinctive form of Aramaic whose slovenly consonants (they dropped their aitches!) were the butt of Judean humor.

7. Religiously

The Judean opinion was that Galileans were lax in their observance of proper ritual, and the problem was exacerbated by the distance of Galilee from the temple and the theological leadership, which was focused in Jerusalem.

The result of neglecting these differences, France writes, is that

even an impeccably Jewish Galilean in first-century Jerusalem was not among his own people; he was as much a foreigner as an Irishman in London or a Texan in New York. His accent would immediately mark him out as “not one of us,” and all the communal prejudice of the supposedly superior culture of the capital city would stand against his claim to be heard even as a prophet, let alone as the “Messiah,” a title which, as everyone knew, belonged to Judea (cf. John 7:40-42).

This may at first blush sound like interesting background material that is not especially helpful for reading and interpreting the gospels. But Mark and Matthew have structured their narratives around a geographical framework dividing the north and the south, culminating in the confrontation of this prophet from Galilee and the religious establishment of Jerusalem.

Professor France writes: “To read Matthew in blissful ignorance of first-century Palestinian sociopolitics is to miss his point. This is the story of Jesus of Nazareth.”

The Amazing Lumo Project: Filming All Four Gospels as Feature Films, Using Only the Unabridged Bible as the Script

Written by: Justin Taylor

I am a big fan of the Lumo Project, which is seeking—for the first time—to film all four Gospels as feature films, using only the unabridged biblical text as their script.

Watching these films really brings out how Anglicized or Western are many of the Jesus movies are.

But how do you get a cast of actors who speak fluent, undistracting English and yet look like the part of Mediterranean Jews?

In December 2002 Popular Mechanics reported on scientists and archaeologists using forensic anthropology to reconstruct what a first-century Galilean Semite might have looked like, with the following result:

The way that the Lumo Project solved this issue was by having Selva Rasalingam play Jesus. Rasalingam, whose ethnicity is partly Tamil, looks more like the picture above than the typical Anglo-Jesus version.

Furthermore, the actors in the film speak Aramaic. But you can’t really hear their dialogue clearly. Rather, you hear the voice of the narrator, British actor David Harewood. Harewood is essentially reading the Gospel of John word-for-word (you can choose whether to hear it as NIV, KJV, or in the Spanish Reina-Valera translation) as the actors depict the scenes.

One exciting aspect of this approach is that the film can be translated with relative ease into multiple languages, since it only requires one voice-over narrator to read the biblical text. The film is currently available in the following languages:

English
Spanish
Russian
Korean
Italian
Brazilian-Portuguese
German
Turkish
Swahili
French
Mandarin
Arabic
Cantonese
Dutch
Polish
Afrikaans
Thai

 

The film is shot on location in Morocco, and the cinematography is at times beautiful. There is also an appropriate use of CGI to reconstruct the city of Jerusalem from a difference.

The first release was the The Gospel of John (2015):

Now, The Gospel of Mark (2017) is available for rent or purchase. Here is a scene:

Here are some other videos on how the films were made, narrated,  and constructed: