Insider movements: Contemporary mission is firmly committed to contextualizing the gospel for other cultures. One of the most trumpeted recent examples of a contextualization methodology is known as the Insider movement. Insider movements have been defined as, “popular movements to Christ that bypass both formal and explicit expression of Christian religion.”¹ A key text used to support Insider methodology regardless of which faith system is involved is “Each one should remain in the condition in which he is called (1 Corinthians 7:20).” Insider movements are not expressions of church planting. They remain outside of Christianity and within their original faith systems. The Gospel is incarnated within the originating culture. Insider or “messianic” Muslims therefore do not consider themselves as Christians and usually not as Muslim followers of Jesus. The phrasing itself implies a continuum from unbelief to Christ, not from unbelief to Christianity.

Messianic Muslims: A proponent, John Travis describes Messianic Muslims as Christ-centred communities who have accepted Jesus as Lord and Saviour. Believers remain legally and socially within the Islamic community. Aspects of Islam incompatible with the Bible are rejected or if possible, reinterpreted. Believers may remain active in the mosque. If sufficient numbers permit, a C5 (Travis’s term for messianic Muslims) mosque may be established.² Phil Parshall notes they call themselves Muslims without any reference to their relationship to Christ. They perform the salat like any other Muslim; thought the content of their prayers may vary. They affirm the shahada (creed), underlining the prophethood of Muhammad and may go on the ritual pilgrimage. They may participate in their own communities for worship. In certain Insider communities, evangelical Christians can legally convert to Islam and join the mosque community.³ They justify their ideas by comparing what they do to the early co-existence of churches and synagogues in the first century. The hope, of course, is that Messianic Muslims will redefine and reshape Islam according to the Bible. The concern for removing “cultural” barriers has also led over the last 10 years to the creation of Insider Bible translations. These are characterized by a commitment to using vocabulary and phrasing familiar as well as acceptable to Muslims. Some of these advocate, for example, the replacement of offensive phrases such as “Son of God” by more acceptable and less “confusing” (if incomplete) alternatives such as “Isa al Masih” (Jesus the Messiah).

            Assessment-Justification based on dubious biblical and theological grounds: 1CO 7:20 (“Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him”) is used repeatedly to justify remaining in Islam. The context however does not fit as it deals with domestic circumstances like marriage. To drag an application from that to a question of the endorsement of another religion does violence to the text. Furthermore, it ignores the vast array of biblical injunctions to avoid other religions. The Bible is saturated with injunctions to avoid syncretism and idolatry. C5s reply with the situation in 2Kings 5 concerning Naaman worshipping at the temple of Rimmon. I fail to see how this trumps anything. One vague, unexplained reference does not counteract the weight of the entire Old Testament which condemns false religion. Insiders also attempt to distinguish between idolatry and monotheistic religions like Islam. This however does not clear up their difficulty because the Bible equates true religion with covenantal revelation. To equate biblical revelation and products of general revelation and human fallenness such as Islam is to erect a bridge to syncretism not incarnational, contextual witness. The Bible never stops with a simple, generic monotheism. Standing on the other side of the equation are passages such as 2C0 6:14-7:1, counseling believers against being unequally yoked to unbelievers. In this case, the context is believers from pagan backgrounds continuing to worship in their former context. The counter argument that Islam does not worship idols is not completely accurate. Islam does not worship the Triune God.

            Dismissive of historical, doctrinal standards: Insider missiologists appear to place the bar too low in an attempt to keep the church from placing it too high. Assessments by Insider proponents extol the life-changing virtues of the movement. It sounds good, but it leaves out the church and everything that goes with it. Proponents say that the denial of Christ crosses the line into syncretism, but that surely cannot be enough. Denying Christ as what? What constitutes denial? It seems that denial should include the denial of Christ’s divinity, his eternal pre-existence as God the Son, the Trinity, his visible body, the catholic (Universal) visible church. Some Insiders, like the emergent Church Movement and Openness theism try to insinuate that received church doctrines such as Trinity and high Christology along with creeds and confessions are the corrupt seed of biblical Hebrew faith mixing with Greek philosophy. It is a poisonous cocktail consisting of bad theology, mixed with bad history. It is a denial of the standards for faith and life laid down by the Bible, the essence of which contradicts every other faith system. Insiders see the joining of a church and separation from the mosque as an extra step. It is not. Claims to be Christ-centered rather than church-centered create a false dichotomy. The church is an essential part of gospel transformation. All too often messianic Muslims are left to their own devices after professing faith or they receive a splash of rudimentary training. The instruction received may be sufficient for a “decision” but it falls far short transformational change. In the absence of clear teaching that connects messianic Muslims to the Bible and the universal, visible church through time, what safeguards are there to prevent Insiders from becoming something that is a syncretistic amalgam of Islam and liberal evangelicalism? Sadly, missionaries commonly cordon off the insider community from the larger church where they belong.

            Deceptive practices: Do Insider practices mislead people or illuminate Christ? People go for life to the mosque, retain a self-identity as Muslims, pray the salat, affirm the prophethood of Mohammed and go on Hajj. They may eventually be seen as heretical Muslims by their communities, but they present themselves as mainstream Muslims, as though Islam has room for a fully-realized Christ (which it does not). Paul became all things to all people (1CO 9), but he publicly announced his allegiance to Christ. There was no doubt concerning what he really stood for. Practices condoned by Insiders such as the ritual prayers are not seen for what they really are. The salat is not simply seen as a prayer, but more accurately as a binding act of loyal, exclusive worship. It necessarily excludes Judaism and Christianity. “He joins with Muslims all over the world in facing the same centre; all his words and actions, except for some trivial differences among different schools of thought, are the same. Thus he expresses his spiritual unity with the community of Mohammed.”⁴ It is also deceptive in the sense that its practitioners often receive support from churches in the West on the basis of their presenting themselves as “Christians” while they live on the field as Muslims.⁵ People routinely use terms such as “church planting”, “church”, “Christian”, “pastor” etc., in the USA, not on the field.

            Confusion over identity: Are messianic Muslims, related to Muslims or Christians? Missionaries are quick to associate them with Christians. The confusion stems from Insider movement attempts to avoid any categorization that forces it to submit fully to a larger body, either mosque or church. The description of Insider movements as “movements to Christ” sums up the problem. Where is a movement? Proponents think the attempt to locate it is misguided, but they ultimately miss the point. Ekklesia (where we get the word “church”) and qahal are Greek and Hebrew terms signifying actual assemblies of god’s people, connected together through time and space in one covenant with God. It is not simply a “movement.” Interestingly, this is the same mistake the Emergent Church movement makes. To say you are a church also implies that you can not simultaneously belong to two different faith systems. God established the church and the Bible defines it. To say that you constitute a Muslim church or are a Muslim Christian is therefore a contradiction in terms. Islam is an anti-Christian world and life view.

            Conclusion: Insider movements claim the desire to avoid syncretism, but this is trying to close the barn door after cows has already gone. Its divided loyalties, deceptive religious practices, poor theology, and separatist impulses such as a redundant Muslim-background Bible all indicate movement away from a biblical understanding of faith rather than a biblical movement to Christ. How can someone who believes he is a true Muslim attend the mosque, consult the Qur’an, and acknowledge Mohammed as God’s prophet, all of which contradict the core of biblical teaching, without being mired in syncretism?⁶ On the other hand, perhaps Messianic Islam is in fact a seeker movement. Classified as such, we can see Insider communities as a real springboard for the Gospel.

            A careful examination of Insider movements suggests the critical need of churches to assess the role of missionaries engaged in Muslim-focused ministry. Insider movements could scarcely have arrived at the present point without the active support of both churches and individuals. It would be in the direct interest of the worldwide church for it to more directly engage in the missionary endeavor. The church and the field are far too distant from one another. Far greater accountability, especially doctrinal, is called for.