I appreciate your thoughtful defense of why you chose to sign the Yale Center for Faith and Culture’s 2007 open letter entitled “Loving God and Neighbor.” My purposes here today are to flesh out some of the important ideas that divide America's people at large, and more specifically, her Christian population (i.e. how to best interact with and reach out to Muslim moderates, theological differences inside the Church and in relation to other religions such as Islam, etc.), which both Yale's letter and your defense of it lend themselves to the discussion of.

For the sake of full disclosure, I present myself as a Christian-American-Conservative-Cubs Fan, whose politics are best represented by those of Ronald Reagan, and whose theology is most in line with C.S. Lewis. I attend an Evangelical Free Church in Chicago, and have yet to find a Democrat at any level I would feel comfortable voting for. I believe that America, despite its numerous mistakes, has been an unparalleled force for Good in the world since its inception. I furthermore believe that the two greatest current threats to the United States are radical Islam (and the leaders and nations who sponsor them), and the pluralistic relativism that now permeates our culture, and in some cases, my faith.

With my worldview now more clearly revealed, Brent, I must say that I found the letter you signed your name to and the name of our Alma mater (Taylor University) to be misguided and naive. While you were correct to admit that “Loving God and Neighbor” is nothing more than words on a page, written (at least on your part) from worthy motives, this does not make it any more worthwhile or prudent in its content or impact. It is possible for us to be sincere and at the same time be sincerely wrong.

You acknowledge that little practical good has come of the letter, including no known lines of dialogue opened between the two religions nor any measurable decrease in violence. I would point out that the only positive sign of a reduction in violence in the Muslim world has occurred in Iraq, where General David Petraeus’ “surge” has helped reduce violent acts some 80% since April of 2007.

Results, like facts, are stubborn things to ignore, and “Loving God and Neighbor” has failed to produce any tangible success. I am disappointed that those who signed their name to it did not see this failed result ahead of time. Any attempt to find meaningful common core theological ground – when none in reality exists -- can only end in frustration. Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God, and this was never clearly asserted in Yale’s letter that you signed. It seems to me to be a fairly important point to raise, or at the very least, acknowledge.

You cited the Old Testament Covenant between God and His chosen people, the nation of Israel, as proof we should be a blessing to our hostile neighbors. Yet, you should have included the very next verse: “I bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse.” (Genesis 12:3) God’s ultimate blessing through Israel was reserved for Christ a few thousand years later, and until that time, Yahweh commanded the Hebrew people to consecrate themselves to the land and to Him. While they were to engage in missions they were to do so from a position of holiness and uniqueness, not accommodation and syncretism. That in some cases required them to keep their distance from the practices and beliefs of the surrounding cultures and peoples (many of whom make up their Arab-Muslim enemies today). Under the Old Covenant, God, in some cases, even insisted that the Jews decimate entire towns inhabited by those same then-pagan neighbors (e.g. Jericho) to maintain their own spiritual uniqueness and separateness. As uncomfortable as this may make some people in our current politically correct culture, it is a reality we must wrestle with if we are to fully appreciate our God and His immeasurable attributes.

When Abraham sired a son named Ishmael (ancestor of certain Muslim groups today) with his wife’s maidservant Haggar, God warned him that his legitimate son, Isaac, would be in conflict with his half-brother until the end of time. It would be safe to say this prophecy has held up to this day. Here in America, we think it’s been tough having radical Muslims as our enemies for six years while Jews have withstood this assault for nearly four thousand years. While this enmity is regrettable, ultimately Scripture teaches it can only be solved by the exaltation of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel to all the nations of the earth, and not through theological accommodation under the guise of “dialogue.” Our fight is not with Islam, but with the irreconcilable wings inside it.

I also found the misapplication of New Testament theology in your letter. Again, we do not worship the same God as all other religions, save Judaism, and even then the “stumbling block” remains the Person and work of Jesus Christ. His Name and deity is the most important aspect of our faith. The Muslims are fervently devoted to Allah and his Prophet Muhammad and they saw fit to remind us of this fact at the very top of their original letter to Pope Benedict. Why would a group of Christians -- intent on opening honest dialogue with a people group they claim to care so deeply about -- fail to mention that Jesus Christ and His finished work on the Cross alone is the only hope for the salvation of mankind?

If we really do love moderate Muslims, do we do them any favor by avoiding the “offense” of the Gospel? The Apostle Paul said if his goal was to please men (perhaps by opening a dialogue that avoids controversial truth) would he still be suffering for the Cross? If we avoid the very doctrines that make us who we are how can we expect “good” to come of it? Yes, we are to be peacemakers but at the same time that involves being bearers of the truth and light. If we compromise that truth for short-term social-political objectives will we shine bright enough to ever be useful?

While it is commendable for us to do what we can to create harmony among diverse religious communities, I find it curious that the only places on earth where Muslims truly live in peaceful co-existence with their non-Muslim neighbors are nations where Islam is not the dominant religion (most often “Christian” nations). Their record of reciprocating true religious tolerance is an unmitigated failure to date.

In the Yale letter you collectively apologize for the “excesses of the War on Terror.” Only modern liberalism could possibly discover moral equivalency between making Iraqi prisoners pose for a “naked pyramid” at Abu Grahib (which led to the swift and immediate punishment for the guilty) and the thousands of car bombings, IED attacks, and beheadings posted on the Internet while Muslim jihadists proudly chant “God is great!” It would be likened unto claiming we deserved everything we got at Pearl Harbor because we refused to sell oil to the militant Japanese in 1941.

You furthermore make the assertion that we’ve confused liberation for colonization in Iraq. Where’s the proof? I find quite the opposite to be true. Fifty million people are now free from tyrannical governments and dictators in Afghanistan and Iraq. The recent NIE report says that Iran halted its clandestine nuclear program in 2003 because of pressure from U.S. and Coalition troops on the ground that surrounds that nation. Iraqi and Afghani girls are now allowed to vote and go to school, newspapers in those countries are now free to print what they believe, and as a result of our War on Terror we have not been attacked since 9/11. Iraqi provinces are being turned over one after another to local indigenous authorities and police forces as they reach the required level of training and professionalism needed. This is colonization?

While there is value in honestly admitting and apologizing for our mistakes, it is both a failure of logic, history, and theology to assume a moral equivalency between those who believe and practice freedom of religion (America) and those who jail, imprison, and even execute the infidel (in virtually every Muslim nation). We in the West believe in the freedom and tolerance of other faiths that Sharia Law-dominated nations do not. Something I cannot get over is how frustrating it is to see so many Christian scholars and intellectuals wasting their time on something that fails theologically, as well as politically, and does little good in any tangible or even existential way.

If we continue this self-defeating and theologically irresponsible line of thinking -- hoping that writing irenic letters that obscure our key doctrines will somehow win the hearts and minds of the moderate Muslims – we are destined for failure. Because if the Muslim clerics don’t already know it, we have nothing in common when it comes to core theological truth, and our societies and governments embody immensely different ideals and values. By trying to convince them we are just like them when we are not is spiritual and intellectual fraudulence.

If this is the best those who claim to represent my faith in the academic and intellectual community can come up with, my hope and suggestion would be that they turn their attentions to a better learning and preaching of the Gospel message rather than the writing of misguided puff pieces that do little more than give the illusion of genuine spiritual and geo-political progress.

We’re all better than this.

-RJM