<a href="https://biblicalmissiology.org/author/adaoud/" target="_self">Abu Daoud</a>

Abu Daoud

Abu Daoud served as a missionary to Muslims for eight years in the Middle East, and has recently returned to the USA to continue with the same ministry. Married with thre children, Abu Daoud is a patronym, not a birth name. You can read his blog at Islamdom.blogspot.com. He is a contributing director of St Francis Magazine. He can be contacted via his blog.

2 Comments

  1. Avatar

    Hello Rebecca:
    My friend Abu asked me to convey the following to you. It is unedited.

    …..Thank you for reading my article, and I look forward to hearing your responses to my main point, namely that theoloy of IM, if indeed correct and biblical, must lead us to the conclusion that the Apostles, all Jews, should have remained within their oikos, rather than contributing to the formation of a new body that reached across ethnic boundaries, regardless of ‘cultural forms’.

    To answer your question, though, I cannot disclose the name on my passport for reasons you surely understand. I am a missionary working with Muslims, often in creative access countries.

    But you will respond: exactly, IM-proponents have security issues too, so are you not being hypocritical by expecting others to be transparent while you are not?

    The answer is no, I am not being hypocritical. Here is why:

    First, I am not using my own experiences or field research as data to prove my point. Because of this, my birth name does not matter. Nor, for that matter, does anything else about my biography. The battle ground is even because it is openly available for all, namely Scripture and some historical realities. If my own personal experiences were used as evidence in favor of my argument then my biography would indeed be important.

    Second, I am not arguing for a radically novel approach to mission. No one has ever read Scripture like you and other IM proponents do, to my knowledge. You are claiming to have rediscovered the true meaning of what the Bible proposes in terms of theology of mission and ecclesiology. In arguing for a radically novel interpretation and application of Scripture you and your fellow proponents have a very high standard of research which you must provide, and I am certain you all have not succeeded. This is how things work in all fields of knowledge, whether theology or physics or economics. A novel theory that upends established consensus must provide documentation and evidence, time after time, in order to really become the new orthodoxy. This has happened from time to time in theology, as when Luther and friends brought about a revolution (in some places, at least) in relation to what Paul meant by that mysterious word justification. This is why people who purport to have witnessed genuine IM’s initiated and sustained indigenously by the Holy Spirit without American money and support cannot simply provide vague anecdotes from somewhere in the Arab world or what have you.

    Third and last, I want to assure you that I have done research of the highest order among MBB’s. So when it comes to balancing research and security I do know what I’m talking about. That last point is not important to my first two points above, which establish why I can use a patronym while IM folks who say, “I’ve seen this, trust me, I know,” cannot. So by all means feel free to discount it. That is fine. Even without that my point stands: IM proponent must produce actual evidence that IM’s exist, IM’s not funded and supported in some way by American money and personnel, and initiated without the coaching of Christians.

    I for one am thankful to be a Christian. My ancestors were pagans who worshiped false deities and forces of nature. I am very thankful that they heard the Gospel, maybe through medieval monks, maybe through Franciscans, maybe through their neighbor who was a cobbler or cooper or whatever. I am very thankful that they did not remain within their pagan oikos, but were brought into the Body of Christ, the Church, which one, holy, and Apostolic.

    Sincerely,

    Abu Daoud

  2. Avatar

    For the sake of the transparency you recommend: You say Abu Daoud is not a pen name but is a “patronym” not a birth name? What is your birth name? Do you write under any other name? Are you an American citizen, and if so, what is the name on your passport?

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: