This issue has come up, not only in relation to contemporary Catholic theology, but also in conjunction with Miroslav Volf’s recent book, Allah: A Christian Response.
STEVE SAID:
DAVID SAID:
“But the theological overlap comes from Islam's strict monotheism, with which we agree…”
No, we don’t agree. That’s fatally equivocal. There’s no overlap between worshipping the one true God and worshipping one false god.
Monotheistic idolatry is no better than polytheistic idolatry.
“…and their identification of the one God as the God of Abraham, with which we also agree.”
They don’t worship Yahweh. They don’t worship the God of Abraham.
God didn’t reveal himself in the Koran. The Koran is not a self-revelation of the one true God. Muhammad was a false prophet. Therefore, the Koranic god doesn’t map onto the OT God. Rather, the Koranic god is just a literary construct–like the Homeric gods.
“They believe in ‘what may be known about God...[His] invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - [which] have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made.’”
Islamic theism falsifies the natural knowledge of God. It superimposes an idolatrous reinterpretation onto natural revelation.
“To the extent that they are not culpable for their ignorance, they are not responsible for being ignorant of doctrines specific to Revelation like the Trinity and redemption through Jesus.”
If we grant your tendentious premise, which begs the question.
“Their fidelity to what can be known by God through nature situates them to fit Paul's category for the Gentiles of his time in Romans 1-2.”
Islam is a Judeo-Christian heresy. Muhammed viewed himself as a religious reformer. In his mind he was purifying and restoring the true religion. Islam is not on a trajectory towards Christianity, but on a trajectory away from Christianity. It stands in conscious opposition to Christian theology. A deliberate repudiation of the Christian faith.
That’s hardly equivalent to pre-Christian gentiles in Rom 1-2. Rather, that’s post-Christian and anti-Christian.
“The teaching on Islam has to be understood in light of the Church's understanding of culpable and inculpable ignorance [of Christian revelation]. I understand this is a major disagreement between Catholics and Calvinists, but I think it's the more fundamental locus of the disagreement.”
It also has to be understand in terms of Rome attempting to paper over internal tensions in her disparate theological traditions–as well as subsequent Rahnerian influences.
"This is, I think, all that the Catechism is trying to say about Muslims."
If (a la Vatican II) Muslims worship the same God as Catholics, then, by converse logic, Catholics worship the same God as Muslims. Hence, Catholics are Muslims.
I think that's Bnonn's basic argument, and it's a pretty straightforward argument.
5/06/2011 9:42 AM
STEVE SAID:
ANNOYED PINOY SAID:
I've heard it said that Arabic speaking Christians (who believe in the doctrine of the Trinity) sometimes refer to God as "Allah" because the word "Allah" is the generic word for "God/supreme being/the Deity". I've even heard it said that Arabic speaking Christians have been referring to God as "Allah" before Mohammed was ever born (circa 570 A.D.) or claimed to be a prophet (circa 610 A.D.). That even Arabic translation(s) of Scripture (whether partial or whole)which ante-date Islam also refer to the Christian God as "Allah". 1. Is there any truth to the above? 2. How does this affect DBN's argument?
i) “Allah” can be used as a synonym for Yahweh, Elohim, or theos (in the NT).
ii) “Jacob” can be used as a synonym for “James.” One could use the same name(s) to denote the same individual. But, of course, every man designated by “James” or “Jacob” is not the same individual!
iii) “Allah” in the Koran doesn’t share the same referent as “Allah” in Arabic translations of the Bible. In one case it denotes the Koranic deity, in the other case the Biblical deity.
iv) We need to distinguish between “Allah” as a common noun for the deity, and “Allah” as a proper noun for the Islamic deity in particular.
As a common noun, the usage is neutral. And Arabic translations of the Bible use “Allah” as a common noun.
v) Since the context of Bnonn’s post was Islamic usage, I don’t think the usage of Christian Arabs is germane to his argument.
Monotheistic idolatry is no better than polytheistic idolatry
ReplyDeleteBut where do you draw the line? You could also say the same about the Arminian god. But would you say Arminians do not really worship the one true God?
In fact you can say that about all of us, since all of us have inaccurate perceptions of God to some degree.
I think the demarcation is best done with a person's response to Jesus. Since Jesus said if you reject him you reject the one that sent him.
Thus, like Judaism, while Islam's perception of God may have a lot of accurate components (more accurate than Arminians in some respects?) they do not truly worship Him, since just like Israel professed to be God worshippers, but denied it by rejecting the prophets, so too Muslims profess to be God worshippers but deny it by rejecting Christ for who he claimed to be.
The Arabic word that translates/renders "Yahweh" is Al Rabb الرب "The Lord".
ReplyDeletesame for kurios in the NT.
the idea / doctrine/ character of Allah in Islam is in many ways similar to the OT concept - invisible, creator of all things, sovereign, eternal, holy, compassionate, etc. However, there is nothing like Romans 5:8 or I John 4:8 in the Qur'an. Several times it says, "Allah does not love sinners" and "If you love Allah, he will love you". They have nothing like, "God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
Also, the lack of Allah as a person, love, father, holy (holiness is there in Islam for Allah, but not emphasized much); and the lack of the NT revelation that interprets His covenant love is a clear lack in the character of the god of Islam.
Most of the "99 names of Allah" are compatible with the Christian God.
they actually have more "names" for Allah than the 99.
One that is not included in the 99 names is "Kheir ol Makareen" - the very best deciever. (Qur'an 3:54; 8:30; 10:21-22)
خیر المکارین
Al Motakabir (the proud one) - المتکبیر
Al Jabbar (the irresistible dictator and tyrant who forces; translated softer to "The Amighty" or sometimes, "the enforcer")
الجبار
from Jabr = force, destiny, where fatalism comes from.
Al Jabr is where we get Algebra from. Al-gebra - mathematical formulas.
Allah is like a mathematical formula - plug in the right numbers, you get good results. Give him rituals and good deeds; you get blessings in your life.
plug in the wrong numbers, you get the tragedies and hardships and trials - curses, etc.
The Allah of Islam is an impersonal force and one cannot know.
That is the emphasis in Islam.
But Muslims have a kind of "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" type of thinking.
Give Muslims the NT (Injeel) in their language so that they can read the word of God and the Spirit will work in some for salvation.
Pray for Muslims and love them, and know that God is drawing some of them from all ethnic groups to Himself and the fullness of who God really is. (The holy Trinity)
Revelation 5:9
HALO SAID:
ReplyDelete"But where do you draw the line? You could also say the same about the Arminian god. But would you say Arminians do not really worship the one true God?"
Well, for one thing, Muslims are unregenerate whereas many Arminians are regenerate.
But if you still think that's a problem, how about this:
Calvinists go to heaven
Arminians go to purgatory
Muslims go to hell
Monotheistic idolatry is no better than polytheistic idolatry
ReplyDeleteAfter one is dead, this is true. It won't help them on judgment day.
But they don't think "Allah" is an idol. And Islam did get a lot of its doctrines and laws and information from Judaism and the OT.
And as long as one is alive, it would seem that God works in some over a period of time in this life, a process; (and He does do this with folks - God is patient and slow to anger).
Monotheism is a step toward the true God (The Trinity, the God of the Bible), when they get the fullness of the Revelation in the NT and the Spirit of God works in their hearts, and they meet Christians who share the gospel and answer questions with gentleness and respect. ( I Peter 3:15)
Let's emphasize evangelism and missions to Muslims.
That is what the RCC Catechism's statement does an injustice to; not only to sound doctrine, but to the missionary / evangelistic task.
Why do people even bring up the use of Allah as a generic word for God, as if that matters?
ReplyDeleteDo we not hear things like that here, on the "Day of Prayer".
Aren't we told to pray to God, however we imagine he/she/it to be?
Does that make all "spiritual" people Christian?
Then why do people think that "allah" makes Muslims possible believers?
HALO SAID:
ReplyDelete"In fact you can say that about all of us, since all of us have inaccurate perceptions of God to some degree."
There's a basic difference between an inaccurate grasp of an accurate source (the Bible), and an accurate grasp of an inaccurate source (the Koran).
Christians can misinterpret the Bible and still be Christians. Conversely, even if a Muslim correctly interprets the Koran, that's an inerrant interpretation of an errant source.
Ken said...
ReplyDelete"Monotheism is a step toward the true God."
Islamic monotheism is explicitly anti-Trinitarian. Defiantly unitarian.
KEN SAID:
ReplyDelete"And as long as one is alive, it would seem that God works in some over a period of time in this life, a process; (and He does do this with folks - God is patient and slow to anger)."
Which is *despite* their Islamic social conditioning.
There's a basic difference between an inaccurate grasp of an accurate source (the Bible), and an accurate grasp of an inaccurate source (the Koran).
ReplyDeleteI think the key point is whether they have an accurate view of God, not whether or not they believe lots of additional fables. Many Christians have believed additional fables down through the ages, and still do.
And if Miroslav is right (which he may not be, I have not read the Quran), there are very substantial similarities between the character of Allah and the God of Scripture (perhaps more similarities than the Arminian god has with the God of Scripture?). So it may be true that many Muslims have a sufficiently accurate perception of who God is.
The question is do they truly worship him? Which is why I think Jesus is the best demarcation for that question. Rejecting Him reveals an unregenerate heart.
But even if you dispute this, what about Judaism? Many Jews have a very accurate conception of what God is like from reading a very accurate book - the OT. So why are they out and yet some Arminian Egalitarians are in??
I think the most simple answer to whether they truly worship the God they profess is determined by what they do with Jesus. That is why an Arminian Egalitarian may be in and yet a Jew with a much more biblical conception of God and male/female roles may be out, IMO.
But then I guess one can begin to question whether an Arminian Egalitarian really does receive Jesus since they perhaps come very close to stubbornly rejecting his messengers (the Apostles) teaching and that gives cause for questioning their hearts. May God have mercy on us.
I should have written,
ReplyDeleteIf a Muslim hears the gospel in the NT from a godly evangelist or missionary, and God is working in their heart for salvation, then
Monotheism is a step toward the true God (The Trinity, the God of the Bible), ( and of course they will have to repent of the wrong concepts of God that had in their heart and mind about who God is) when they get the fullness of the Revelation in the NT and the Spirit of God works in their hearts, and they meet Christians who share the gospel and answer questions with gentleness and respect. ( I Peter 3:15)
"whoever has more will be given, whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away."
Matthew 13:12; Mark 4:25; Luke 8:18
to those who are open to the true God (creation); God gives more specific revelation (NT, preachers, missionaries who take the message - Romans 10:13-15). The elect are out there, but they must hear the gospel - 2 Timothy 2:10
"I do all things for the sake of the elect in order that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, and with it eternal glory." 2 Tim. 2:10
Regeneration and justification are singular points/events in time and space; but in practical ministry in time, from the time one first hears the gospel and wrestling with its truth, conviction, searching, struggling, repentance and faith; is usually a process. With Muslims this is usually a process. Obviously God sometimes converts people immediately, but most of the time, there is struggle and process and suffering and afflictions, both for the missionary preacher and for the one whom God converts.
That is what the "filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions" (Colossians 1:24; context - "Chirst in you, the Gentiles, the nations, v. 25-27 is - or part of it - that the missionary /evangelist/preacher suffers in the ministry to be used by God to see the elect saved and then in the growth process of sanctification. It is the sufferings that come through the preaching and teaching and ministry that fill up or complete the mission of the Messiah.
There is nothing to add to the sufferings of Christ in the power or effect or satisfaction of the atonement; what is lacking is the preaching of the once for all atonement/sacrifice for sins to all the nations.
Isaiah 52:15
For what had not been told them they will see,
And what they had not heard they will understand.
Quoted in Romans 15:21
The mission of the suffering servant/Messiah in Isaiah 53 is not complete until all the nations hear and understand and the elect are brought in.
Revelation 5:9
"some out from every nation, tribe, people, and tongue have been redeemed by the blood of the lamb for God."
Islamic monotheism is explicitly anti-Trinitarian. Defiantly unitarian.
ReplyDeleteTrue.
God the Holy Spirit must work in their hearts to show them the truth, which only comes by hearing the word, which only comes by someone preaching, teaching, missions, evangelism, language learning, love, patience, and suffering.
Which is *despite* their Islamic social conditioning.
ReplyDeleteTrue. One of the saddest things in all history is the social conditioning, the Sharia law that dictates control of how to think and how to do everything in life; and the fear and peer-pressure that holds Muslims in their bondage to the false religion of Islam. "Whoever leaves his Islamic religion, kill him" Hadith Sahih Al Bukhari 9:84:57
Only in recent years has the Sharia social conditioning been breaking up in many Muslim lands to varying degrees.
Daryl wrote:
ReplyDeleteWhy do people even bring up the use of Allah as a generic word for God, as if that matters?
It matters in evangelism, missions, communication, understanding, and helping Muslims understand Christianity. One of the great things Dr. James White just said (again, which he has said for years in dealing with others like Mormons, JWs, atheists, etc.) recently in his discussion with Brian McLaren of the Emerging Church is that he “took the time to understand McLaren and accurately represent what they believe”. We must do the same with Muslims and one of the great tragedies of history is that the “Christian” church ran away from Arabs and Muslims did NOT preach or teach the gospel, did not translate the Bible into Arabic until 900 AD, and did not reach out much to the Persians, Kurds, or Turks, etc. and then there was the Crusades. So it does matter for evangelism. If we through up our hands and say “it doesn’t matter”; that is like saying, “don’t try to evangelize them or understand them”.
Do we not hear things like that here, on the "Day of Prayer".
You make a good point here; there are still lots of false ideas and idols of the mind of who God is in the west. (God is like a grandfather with a long beard and gives his grandchildren everything they want and doesn’t spank them; or other kind of false ideas, “My God is not like that”, etc.
Aren't we told to pray to God, however we imagine he/she/it to be?
Yes; that is the modern pluralistic political view; but the church is commissioned to evangelize and teach and so help people get back and repent to the true doctrine of who God really is.
Does that make all "spiritual" people Christian?
No; but many are deceived in the general culture, even many who go to some kind of church and think they are Christians.
Then why do people think that "allah" makes Muslims possible believers?
Not without the gospel and truth of Christ and who He really is and the total truth of the NT revelation. There are Muslims out there who are not saved yet, but will be in the future, if and when the church and true believers go to them and speak with them and love them and are willing to suffer and preach the gospel to them.
Halo,
ReplyDeleteJust one point: if Arminians keep telling me that the God of Calvinism is worse than Hitler, the Devil, &c., and they'd opt for atheism rather than Calvinism if push came to shove, maybe I should take them at their word.
Ken,
ReplyDeleteThanks for all your fine work in Muslim missiology and evangelism.
The Catholic catechism says that Muslims 'profess' to worship God. It does not say that they DO worship God.
ReplyDeleteAnd indeed Muslims do 'profess' to worship the God of Abraham. Ask a Muslim and he will profess to do that.
Raymond, the catechism says more than that.
ReplyDelete841 states:
The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
Thanks Steve!
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate all your (and the other Triablogers) thought provoking work here; although I have to admit I cannot read it all. It is like trying to drink from a fire-hydrant.
I am still trying to get through Jason's church history series. (smile)
Ken,
ReplyDeleteGive Muslims the NT (Injeel) in their language
I have heard that Muhammad said Muslims should read the Injeel (NT).
Is this correct? If so, what did Mohammed actually say about the Injeel?
Thanks
sorry that was not meant to be a link, I was just wondering what the < a > tag did.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBrother Steve,
ReplyDeleteI am Sam Shamoun from www.answering-islam.org, and just wanted to say that you are right on the mark concerning Allah of the Quran not being the same God of the Holy Bible. Excellent job of refuting those who would claim that they are.
Halo,
ReplyDeleteSorry I did not check back for a few days; I hope you will see my answer to your question.
Ken
Ken wrote:
"Give Muslims the NT (Injeel) in their language"
Halo asked:
I have heard that Muhammad said Muslims should read the Injeel (NT).
Yes, - Qur'an 10:94; 5:46-48; 5:68; 29:46; 2:136. But, unfortunately, Muhammad did not know the contents of the true Injeel. "Injeel" is a corrupted form of "Evangel" which came from Greek Byzantine areas into Syriac and Semitic languages. Muhammad only got things orally and it all got mixed up with other ideas in the Arabian peninsula. The content of Muhammad's idea of the "Injeel" was wrong. Some things were right, but they were mixed with false doctrines.
Is this correct? If so, what did Mohammed actually say about the Injeel?
see above. He thought it included that Jesus was only a prophet, and not the Son of God, nor God in the flesh, but he did say that Jesus is Al Masih (the Messiah) and did miracles and taught wisdom; and was born of the virgin Mary. However, Muslims just say Allah said, "Be" and Jesus "became" into the womb of Mary - like the way God spoke Adam into existence or "let there be light" and "there was light", etc.
Muhammad got info from nominal Christians who made statues to Mary and offered prayers and worship to Mary and other early Christian sects and cults and heresies. Also mixed it up with his own human ideas.
Since the Qur'an unknowingly affirms the Injeel (Gospel) as God's revelation and word, we should give them the NT and let them read it first; pray the Spirit of God works in their hearts and opens their hearts as they read. (Acts 16:14). The word of God, the gospel, can correct their wrong views of who God and Jesus is.
Thanks
Actually, technically the Qur'an doesn't say exactly that "Muslims should read the Injeel";
ReplyDeleterather it says
Muhammad should ask the people of the book (Christians and Jews) who have been reading the revelations that were given by God before him. (10:94)
That Christians should judge by that which is written in the gospel what is the truth. (5:46-48)
That Christians should obey and live out the gospel. (5:68)
That the OT and NT are revelation from God. (2:136)
That the Muslims should not argue with the Christians and they make no distinction between the revelations (29:46)
And that there is no one who can change the word of God. (6:34; 6:116; 10:65; 18:27)
Therefore, Muslims are naturally curious to read the Injeel, since the Qur'an does seem to affirm it; and gives no direct indication that it was corrupted.
The Muslim doctrine that the Injeel and Torah were corrupted by the Jews and Christians arose when later they noticed that the contents contradicted what the Muslims were saying - ie, that Jesus is not the Son of God and was not crucified.
many thanks Ken, that was very enlightening.
ReplyDelete