The tension between isolation and involvement for the Church in the Middle East

Reflecting on the relationship between the Church and society is a demanding task, especially for those who belong to the church of the Middle East. The task’s weight increases as awareness grows of the Church’s role and responsibility toward its surrounding context.

The deeper this understanding becomes, the stronger the sense of disappointment due to the difficulty of changing to a more healthy engagement with society. This struggle is intensified when such awareness is coupled with sincere faith, genuine love for the Kingdom of God, and zeal for the ministry of the Church.

What is written here emerges from a love for God, a conviction about the importance of the Church’s presence in society, and an ongoing observation of its current reality.

I notice various attempts by the Church to isolate itself from its surrounding society.

Every time I am inside a church or one of its affiliated institutions, I notice various attempts by the Church to isolate itself from its surrounding society, whether intentionally or unintentionally, which has led me to reflect deeply on this stance. I will later discuss some manifestations of this isolation.

Today, some churches are experiencing a state of alienation from their mission and an ongoing struggle between isolation and engagement. The cost of this struggle is often borne by church members, who are frequently excluded from shaping their church’s stance and are instead guided by leaders to just adopt it in good faith, under the assumption that it is in their best interests.

A miserable attempt at escape

At times, we observe that some of our churches adopt a posture of isolation from the world for several reasons. Chief among these is their view of the world as absolute evil, devoid of any good, and their fear of losing their identity by dissolving into foreign identities.

As leaders become increasingly aware of the growing evils around them and the threats facing the identity of their people, they choose withdrawal as a means of self-protection. This tendency may also be reinforced by a sense of being a minority within a context dominated by non-Christians, making fear their primary justification.

The persistence of this stance has left the Church captive to fear.

However, the persistence of this stance has left the Church captive to fear. As a result, it has lost its mission to be light, salt, and a blessing to its society. It has become alienated from the very purpose of its existence: to be a transformative, discipling, and proclaiming community. By hiding its light from the world, its influence has diminished and its resolve has weakened.

Scripture calls the Church to a discerning and cautious engagement. This is precisely what gives meaning to Christ’s prayer for the Church: “I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15, ESV). In this light, isolation becomes not a form of protection, but a loss of mission.

Manifestations of isolation

There is a strong effort to protect the identity of their people from dissolving into the surrounding society.

The isolation of some of our churches in the Middle East takes multiple forms. Most notably, there is a strong effort to protect the identity of their people from dissolving into the surrounding society.

As a result, churches have created within their walls a self-sufficient world with cafeterias, clubs, sports fields, and private outings. In this way, a generation of children has grown up in a closed environment that limits interaction with the diversity of the surrounding society, shaping in them a narrow worldview.

Families have also contributed to reinforcing this trend. Many have grown up with a false feeling about security that causes them to view the world around them with suspicion. Isolation is further expressed in the tendency for Christians to live near one another, forming inherited residential clusters that conceal a deep-seated fear beneath the banner of safety.

This inward posture also extends to a cognitive gap toward non-Christians, as many young people remain unfamiliar with their cultures despite daily contact with them, thus deepening intellectual and social isolation.

A believer’s awareness is shaped by the word of God and by the knowledge of his nature.

I do not claim that the world outside the Church is ideal or free from evil, nor are we called to submit to its intellectual dominance. A believer’s awareness is shaped by the word of God and by the knowledge of his nature, not by human societal thinking.

Christ himself made it clear that the world would hate His followers. We live in the world physically, but our spiritual belonging is to the heavenly homeland (John 15:19).

And while we carry a divine mission within it, our path is marked by tribulation and persecution, just as Christ promised (John 16:33). Nevertheless, our hope and confidence remain in the Lord who has overcome the world, enabling us to live out our witness with peace and hope in the midst of it.

What we describe in Church terms as isolation or engagement also has human and philosophical definitions. The condition of isolation and human alienation is an existential reality that has been shared by people throughout history.

Philosophers, especially those within the existentialist tradition, have addressed this condition with depth and analysis. Therefore, it becomes necessary to introduce a philosophical perspective within our theological reflection, in order to discern the various intellectual dimensions of the concepts of “isolation” and “engagement”. Philosophy has always intersected with theology in seeking to understand the nature of human existence.

Philosophical perspectives on isolation

Some have viewed it as a form of deliverance from the evils of society, while others have regarded it as a means of preserving psychological, spiritual, and even intellectual well-being.

Throughout the history of philosophy, philosophers have consistently addressed the theme of isolation. Some have viewed it as a form of deliverance from the evils of society, while others have regarded it as a means of preserving psychological, spiritual, and even intellectual well-being. For example, the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche praised isolation, saying:

“You are my homeland, O solitude; I have lived too long amid the wild lands of strangers. Now I return to you, my homeland, with tears in my eyes.”

Nietzsche retreated into isolation within his own metaphorical cave, rejecting the ideas and people around him. He encouraged resistance to the intellectual dominance of society and once remarked:

“The individual must always struggle in order to remain free from society’s domination. You will be lonely, and at times afraid; but the price is not too high to pay for possessing yourself.”

What the Church may be doing in adopting a posture of isolation can, in this sense, be understood as a form of resistance to societal domination.

On the other hand, Nikolai Alexandrovich Berdyaev argued that isolation from society is a rejection of the self. He maintained that our sense of self and the realization of our existential value are achieved through our relationships with others, and that refusing relationship with the surrounding world amounts to a form of moral suicide. He wrote:

"Self-consciousness presupposes an awareness of others; it is social in the deepest depths of its metaphysical nature. Since human life is an expression of the ‘I,’ it presupposes the existence of others, the existence of the world, and the existence of God. The absolute isolation of the self, and its refusal to relate to anything outside itself or to the ‘Thou’—that is, to others—is tantamount to suicide. The existence of the ‘I’ becomes threatened whenever it denies the presence within it of another self or a ‘Thou.’"

Berdyaev identified four types of isolation between the individual self and the social environment, which may be briefly explained as follows:

Type one: complete social harmony or total assimilation into society

This is the person who does not feel isolated and lives in full integration with society. Such a person imitates others, lacks originality of thought, and lives a socially stable life without inner conflict.

Many who identify as Christians... live in the world alienated from their heavenly identity.

When reflecting on this type, we unfortunately find that many who identify as Christians live in this way. They live in the world alienated from their heavenly identity, fully assimilated into worldly currents without resistance or discernment—an utter surrender to the mindset of the world.

For this reason, Holy Scripture warns us: “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14–18, ESV).

Type two: compatibility without emotional integration

This is the person who has not experienced isolation, yet is also not genuinely engaged with the surrounding society. Such a person exists within the community without any real emotional attachment.

This type clearly reminds us of the behavior of the Pharisees and Scribes in the time of Christ. They were part of Jewish society and active within the religious and social community, yet lacked genuine emotional connection with the people around them or with the true essence of spirituality proclaimed by Christ (see Matthew 23).

Type three: a sense of isolation without social rebellion

This person experiences inner isolation but is not particularly concerned with social engagement. They live with an internal division, do not rebel against society, and often withdraw into small circles of intellectuals. They are generally willing to adapt to their environment without embracing firm principles or engaging in serious struggle.

This type suffers from an internal personal division, making peace with society without resistance, while simultaneously experiencing inner isolation. 

The believer is called to distinctiveness not through rebellion, but through the renewal of the mind.

For this reason, Holy Scripture encourages continual renewal of the mind and vigilance against worldly thinking, so that we may not conform to the world: “Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Romans 12:2, ESV). Here, the text reminds us that the believer is called to distinctiveness not through rebellion, but through the renewal of the mind that brings internal transformation.

Type four: the duality of isolation and engagement with society

This is the person who experiences both isolation and connection to society at the same time. This type represents the spirit of creators, prophets, and reformers—those who carry a message. Such individuals live in continual tension with the religious or social community and rarely find harmony with public opinion or the surrounding environment.

This concept is clearly evident in the lives of the Old Testament prophets, such as Jeremiah, Daniel, and others, who felt isolated because society rejected their message, yet remained deeply connected to it for the sake of reform and calling.

For this reason, Jesus said, “A prophet has no honor in his own hometown” (John 4:44, ESV). In another passage, Jesus encouraged His followers to face feelings of alienation and rejection by society, saying, “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.” (John 15:18, ESV)

The types of isolation identified by Berdyaev—from superficial harmony and assimilation, to inner separation, and finally to conflict undertaken for the sake of societal renewal—reveal the complexity of the relationship between the individual self and the surrounding society.

Participate in the advancement of God’s kingdom on earth.

All of these types reflect diverse spiritual and social experiences, ultimately encouraging us to remain conscious of our spiritual identity, to hold fast to our heavenly homeland, to remain faithful to the divine calling, and to participate in the advancement of God’s kingdom on earth.

The temple: a point of encounter

We are all familiar with the story of Christ driving the merchants out of the temple, commonly known as the cleansing of the temple, recorded in the Gospel of John (John 2:13–16) as well as in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt 21:12–17; Mark 11:15–19; Luke 19:45–48).

A surface reading of the text may lead us to conclude that Christ expelled the merchants simply because they had turned a place intended for worship into a place of trade. However, when we examine the background and design of the temple more closely, we discover that the portico or outer court where the merchants gathered was a space specifically designated for those who were not part of the people of Israel that is, foreigners or Gentiles.

Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple foresaw this. He prayed: “Likewise, when a foreigner, who is not of your people Israel, comes from a far country for the sake of your name... when he comes and prays toward this house, hear in heaven your dwelling place and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to you” (1 Kings 8:41–43, ESV). 

This area was intended to be a space where the nations could come to know the God of Israel.

It becomes clear that this area was intended to be a space where the nations could come to know the God of Israel. However, the filling of the court with merchants effectively excluded the Gentiles from it. For this reason, Christ’s protest came as a defense of their right to draw near and to worship.

Now, the Apostle Paul reminds us, believers themselves are God’s temple, and his Spirit dwells within them (1 Corinthians 3:16, ESV). The temple is no longer a stone building as it once was; it is a living reality pulsating with the presence of God.

Do we leave space in “our temple” for the nations (the other)?

The question then arises: Do we leave space in “our temple” for the nations (the other)? How can we manifest God’s presence to the world if we live in isolation, without interaction or service that embodies divine love?

I desire to express my love for the Church and my faith in its mission in the Middle East. Every individual bears responsibility and a role as a Christian. Excessive engagement with society can cause the Church to lose its identity, while isolation weakens its witness and distances it from its mission.

The Church is called to be a moral standard guiding both society and individuals—but this role cannot be fulfilled through isolation from the world, nor through excessive immersion in it.

Excessive engagement entails over-involvement with worldly teachings and culture that conflict with the values of the Kingdom, leading to compromise of biblical truth and loss of spiritual identity.

The Church is called to faithful, conscious engagement without submission or compromise.

In summary, the Church is called to faithful, conscious engagement without submission or compromise.

Based on these reflections, I offer the following practical advice for the Church in our region. Perhaps it applies to yours as well...

• The Church must balance between isolation and engagement by building a community that upholds its biblical principles while demonstrating Christ’s love in all aspects of life beyond the walls of the church.
• The Church should encourage its people to participate in societal concerns such as justice, mercy, and development, while maintaining Christian values.
• The Church should foster genuine relationships with non-believers, without compromising its principles, providing a model of Christian life that balances witness, service, and the manifestation of God’s presence.

As scripture reminds us:

“You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people’s feet.” (Matthew 5:13, ESV)

Originally published on the ABTS website. Republished with permission.

Sharaf, from Egypt, holds a BTh from Arab Baptist Theological Seminary (ABTS). He is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in Theology at ABTS. He participates in ministry through social media platforms, facilitates the educational process in the Certificate in Ministry program, and provides mentoring within the seminary’s Bachelor’s program.