By Silas

“Actions speak louder than words.”  A man’s actions tell us what he truly believes and what principles he lives by.  If he is a man of faith his actions tell us about his God’s nature.  Bear this in mind because later on I’ll ask you to evaluate a man’s words and actions and what they say about his God.

 

---

Miroslav Volf is a celebrated Episcopalian theologian who has published works on a variety of topics.  I know of him for arguing passionately that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

He inserted himself into the controversy at Wheaton College and accused their leadership of bigotry because they disciplined a professor who asserted that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.  That action touched a sore spot in his personal theology and he attacked them.  You can read his criticisms of Wheaton here: Anti-Muslim Bigotry

Wheaton is a private Christian college and they have the right to set their standards.  You might disagree with their theological positions but implying that they are bigots is dirty and ugly.  In the light of Christ’s command to love one another Volf’s “bigotry” slur is un-Christian.

I have no affiliation with Wheaton.  I know some good brothers who are graduates but that’s it.  I’m not interested in defending them so much as I am interested in countering the “same God” nonsense that Volf and others foist upon the church.  To that end I purchased a used copy of his book, “Allah: A Christian Response”¹ to understand his argument fully.

The book is well written and the Christian theological work fine, but his Islamic work proves he was incapable of making a strong argument based on the Islamic source materials.  Much of his argument is based on a document written in 2007 by a group of “Islamic scholars” called “A Common Word.”²  They wrote it ostensibly to build a bridge of understanding between Christians and Muslims.  However, they also wrote it for a naïve and ignorant Western audience as a way to ameliorate their fears and doubts about Islam and to present Islam in a more humane light.  Events since its writing in 2007 continue to undermine their claim that Islam is a religion of peace and love.  It is also notable that since 2007 there are fewer Muslim “scholars” attempting to write such deceptive documents.

I’m going to highlight key errors in his book and show his argument stands on a false premise.  Further, I will show you, by using his own standards, that Muslims and Christians do not worship the same God.  Perhaps it is bold of me to criticize an award-winning, hyped theologian, but I believe I’m on firm footing.  Plus, I do not buy into the “groupie” style that Christianity has borrowed from the world.  “Superstars” in Christianity rarely are.  All of us make mistakes, all of us have feet of clay, all of us sin.

NOTE:  All bold and underline are mine.

NOTE:  I will at times refer to Islam’s God as “Allah” and Christianity’s God as “God” to differentiate between the two Gods.  I am aware that Allah means God.  At times I will refer to both of them as God in a general sense.

 

---

VOLF’S INTRODUCTORY POINTS

He identifies the argument clearly.  Note that he states that the Quran is the Islamic reference, and his evaluation rests upon the Gods being “sufficiently similar”:

Volf’s “sufficiently similar” is a subjective standard.  Like beauty, it is in the eyes of the beholder.  We’ll examine his argument for “sufficiently similar” and see how high or how low, his standard is.

Volf states his goal clearly:

He claims to be an impartial judge, one that is seeking the truth:

“I want the truth.”  Lots of people say that.  How much do they really want it?  How much does they labor to uncover it?  How open is/are their minds to accept the evidence that goes against encrusted positions and a “same God” stereotype?

He also highlights the ramifications of having the same, or different, Gods:

Also see his good comments on pages 8, 9, 35, and 190.

Volf lays down two guidelines that I agree with for evaluating and determining if the evidence shows yes or no:

Again note that “radical” is also in the eyes of the beholder.

I appreciate all of Volf’s preceding comments.  His thinking is logical and he sees things clearly.  He understands the ramifications of having different Gods.  If you’re not familiar with his background you should know that he comes from Yugoslavia, (he is Croatian), a country which no longer exists, because of the various religious-political ethnic conflicts.  Muslims, Christian Catholics, and Christian Orthodox all waged war against each other.  All sides committed atrocities and people from all sides suffered greatly.  Therefore it is understandable, and admirable, that he wants to build bridges to peace between Christians and Muslims.  All Christians should respect his motive to do so.

 

---

VOLF’S ARGUMENT:  Nicolas and Luther

In the first 76 pages Volf quotes previous Christian theologians, Nicolas of Cusa, and Martin Luther, and uses their arguments in support of his.

Nicolas’s argument, as Volf presented it, is a simple and patronizing argument based on tailored semantics and narrow interpretations.  Nicolas recognized that the Quran’s statements about Christianity’s God are incorrect, or misinterpreted, or both.  He argued that what the Quran condemns about Christianity worshipping three separate Gods Christianity also condemns.  Nicolas then explained the accurate Christian position that is contrary to what Muhammad thought and taught.

That argument fails both to understand the Islamic perspective fully and to take it seriously.  It failed to build bridges and gain traction then just as Christians who use similar arguments today fail.  Muhammad’s objections to and rejections of non-negotiable Christian theological tenets: God the Father, Jesus’s Sonship, and Christ’s deity, etc. are more broad-based than what Nicolas’s technical nit-picking argument addresses.  Nicolas made valid points but they were limited in scope.  Of course the Quran gets Christian theology wrong!  (If God were behind the Quran the least He would have done was to get Christian theology correct!) However the basis of Islam’s rejection stands upon more than a few sloppy and inaccurate Quranic verses.  For example, read the 5:72-77 passage.  Here is verse 75:

Its denial of Christ’s Sonship and deity are strong and clear:  “Jesus was nothing more than a man”,  i.e. He was not the Son of God, He was not God incarnate.  No semantic wrangling is going to make it otherwise.  Christians are obligated to treat other people’s Scriptures honestly, with integrity, so let’s not kid ourselves that playing with semantics is somehow going to make Muslims see the light and admit that Muhammad misunderstood Christian theology.

On the other hand, if you take Nicolas’s and Volf’s argument at face value then it means that Muhammad did misunderstand Allah.  Did Muhammad fail to understand Allah’s technicalities because Allah communicated poorly?

Nicolas’s argument is not a sufficient way to build a common understanding.  Why not state the truth simply:  Islam rejects Christ’s divinity and Sonship based upon the Quran, the hadith, and Muhammad’s teachings and actions.  You can read in Guillaume’s “The Life of Muhammad”³ from page 270 on, the details of how thoroughly Muhammad rejected any notion of Christianity’s triune God, Christ’s Sonship, and Christ’s divinity.  Muhammad’s rejection was no technical formality, rather it was “Hell no! Jesus is NOT the Son of God in any way, shape, or form!”

I am not familiar enough with Luther’s writings on Islam to know if Volf represented Luther accurately.  So I will not attempt to address them.

 

---

VOLF’S ARGUMENT:  SUFFICIENT SIMILARITY

Volf then argues that if both faiths have a common God then their primary doctrines should have “sufficient similarity” (p89).  He does not say that they are the same religion, he does not say that they cannot have differences, he says that their primary doctrines should be similar enough that they reflect the same source.  If they come from the same source then these two faiths worship the same God.

In my own words, perhaps an analogy to Volf’s argument is to think of a father writing two letters at different times, one to an adult son, another to one of his young children.  He’ll give them similar instructions for an overall approach to life but there will be different commands and instructions per their individual needs.

On page 97 Volf begins to lay the foundation of his argument.  He identifies 3 god-traits that both Christianity and Islam have in common:  only one God, almighty Creator, and God as incomparable to all else.  Volf then states that he believes that this simple argument is persuasive, at least for starters.

That argument, one that has such a low bar for claiming “similar” for a single God, is certainly not in any way persuasive to me.  Nor should it be to you.  There are many monotheistic faiths. With such a low bar you can make an argument that they all worship the same God.

On the other hand, if you take Muhammad’s cultural context into account, you can easily understand why his God, and Judaism’s and Christianity’s God, are similar.  Muhammad grew up in a primarily pagan area but Christianity and Judaism were well known.  When Muhammad was still young he interacted with Christian monks, and later in life his cousin-in-law was reputed to be a Christian scholar!  When you take into account the framework of the Quran it is evident that Muhammad had some contact and familiarity with Jews and Christians (more so later in his life).  Since Muhammad fashioned a monotheistic faith after the pattern of Judaism and Christianity I would certainly expect him to borrow from Christianity and Judaism as he constructed Islam.  Corresponding to Muhammad’s lack of knowledge and theological understanding, his construction, the Quran, expresses a jumbled and confused mix of references from the Old and New Testaments, the Mishnah, New Testament Apocrypha, and Paganism.  This is exactly what you would expect to find from a person with limited knowledge and understanding constructing a religion based on other faiths and second hand stories.

In the next several pages Volf lists a couple more traits these Gods have in common and up to this point I agree generally with the “similar God” points he’s made.  His standard is low but the comparisons are accurate.  Islam’s and Christianity’s Gods have common traits.  So do Presidents Barak Obama and Vladimir Putin.  But somehow I don’t think Volf would argue they are the same.  Why not?  Both are men, both are leaders of powerful countries, both are unique, and both have incredible power at their fingertips.  Surely that is sufficient similarity?

 

---

VOLF’S BROKEN ARGUMENT

Now we come to his argument’s hard failure.  On page 104 he argues that God’s two most important commands are:

He states that these are common to both faiths.  This point is foundational to Volf’s argument. 

We know they are primary Christian commands.  But are both of them primary Islamic commands?  I think the first command, to love God, is common to both faiths, but not so the second one.

For evidence Volf starts by quoting the “Common Word.”  At first I thought it odd that he didn’t make his own argument based on the Quran.  Remember, that was the standard he said should be used.

On p187 he repeats the point of one common God who commands to love their neighbor.

Note Volf’s emphasis: these two commandments are the “two greatest commandments.”  If these are the two greatest commandments then it is reasonable to believe that the Scriptures of both faiths should contain many references to those commands.

But as he continues neither does his next evidence come from the Quran.  Instead it comes from the hadith:

Volf’s note 27 references the hadith collection of Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj (Sahih Muslim).⁴  I was unfamiliar with how Volf referenced that specific hadith: “Kitab al-Iman, 67-1, hadith no. 45”,  but I believe I found it, or its equivalent, in a few hadith.  (Note, different translations or compilations of Muslim’s hadith collection may have formatted the numbering differently).  Here they are below.

Volf’s reference also cites Bukhari’s collection of hadith (Sahih Bukhari):⁵

In my collection of Bukhari, (you may also be able to find both Bukhari’s and Muslim’s collections on the internet for free), I found:

The context of these commands is for Muslims to love fellow Muslims, not a non-Muslim.  There is no command to love non-Muslims.

That’s basically all Volf presented as evidence for one of Islam’s “greatest commandments” and a mainstay of his argument.  Please allow me to again point out that he did not cite the Quran.  Neither did he bother to actually study his references because if he had he would have learned that when they are taken in context they imply the opposite of what he is arguing, i.e. that Muslims are not commanded to love non-Muslims.

THE COMMON WORD’S ARGUMENT

Since Volf did such a poor job we need to examine what the Common Word says about this “greatest commandment.”  It cites a beautiful and poetic verse, actually one of my favorite verses, from the Quran.

Clearly this verse says for Muslims to love their families, care for orphans, the poor, and travelers.  However I don’t see any real command to “love thy neighbor as thyself.”  The slaves to be set free are slaves that the Muslims enslaved.  That is like saying the Muslims should return some of the money they’ve stolen and plundered from non-Muslims.  Nothing very virtuous there.  But yes, I must agree that the “wayfarer” might be a non-Muslim.

And that is it!  Out of the entire 114 chapters of the Quran they could only produce one generic verse!  Why is that?  If you look at their work on the command to “love God” they list about a dozen verses.  Certainly many hadith could be added to the “love God” list as well.  How do you explain the paucity of “love your neighbor as yourself” verses?

They’re not there because that command is not a primary, or even a secondary, command.  Lest you think I am short changing their references, check the link above to the Common Word.  Don’t take my word for it.  It’s possible that the current version of the Common Word found at that link is a revision of earlier versions which listed more “love thy neighbor as thyself” verses.  But I kinda doubt it.  The Common Word document contains a lot of lip service about loving others but it is very short on textual content.

Let’s approach this from another direction.  Let’s take a look at some primary Islamic principles.  For example let’s start with the “Five Pillars of Faith.

1) Faith in one God and Muhammad’s prophethood
2) Prayer
3) Giving of alms
4) Fasting
5) The pilgrimage to Mecca

There is nothing related to loving non-Muslims there.

Next, there is the “Seven Articles of Faith” (some scholars list only six).  They are belief in:

1) one God
2) the angels
3) God’s revelations or God’s scriptural books
4) the messengers or prophets of God
5) the final judgment
6) God’s supreme will always being done
7) the final resurrection

There is nothing related to loving non-Muslims there either.

If “loving thy neighbor as thyself” were as important as Volf and the Common Word Muslims argue, perhaps we could find an Islamic “love chapter”?  Or perhaps just a “love passage”?  Or perhaps just one simple verse that says plainly, “love your non-Muslim neighbor as yourself?”  Out of 114 chapters in a book that is about as large as the New Testament surely we could find something?

All you hear is the silence of the desert.

Muslims are required to believe in and submit to Allah and Muhammad.  They are required to believe in and perform their religious precepts and tasks found in the five pillars of Islam and the seven articles of faith.  None of them are “love your non-Muslim neighbor as yourself.”

 

---

THE DEVIL IS IN MUHAMMAD’S DETAILS

MUHAMMAD’S WORDS AND ACTIONS:  NOT LOVING HIS NEIGHBORS

So what exactly did Muhammad and Allah command, and more importantly do, in relating to non-Muslims?  What follows are many references found in the Quran, hadith, and sira.

THE BEST DEEDS
Muhammad was asked what the best deeds were.  Here is his reply found in Bukhari:

I hope that by now all readers know that Muhammad was talking about physical war when he said “jihad.”  If you are ignorant and disagree and believe that he meant “inner struggle” here then I encourage you to read Bukhari’s and Muslim’s chapters on jihad.  They’re all about conducting war on non-Muslims.

KILL HOMOSEXUALS
With the recent massacre of gay men in Orlando I think the reader would be interested in knowing what Muhammad and Islam commands on killing them.  These comes from the hadith collection of Abu Dawud, i.e. the Sunan of Abu Dawud:⁶

Certainly all readers know by now that throughout the Islamic world homosexuals are legally killed.  It isn’t just ISIS or terrorists who murder homosexuals, it is also Islamic governments following Islamic law.

MAKE WAR ON CHRISTIANS AND JEWS
These verses actually kill two birds with one stone.  They come from sura 9, the last chapter to be spoken by Muhammad.  Here are 9:29, 30 from two translations.

Quoting from my article, Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?,

Allah’s (Muhammad’s) command to his followers was to make war not love.  These commands were against Christians and Jews who were not at war with them.  Instead the command was to subject them by force.

Additionally, you can see that Allah denounces Jesus as His Son.  “God do battle with them!”  There is no “sufficient similarity” with Allah denouncing Jesus as his Son.  Instead we have a contradiction.  Either Jesus is, or is not, the Son of God.  I say He is, Muhammad said He isn’t.  Talk to a knowledgeable Muslim if you don’t believe me.  Throw all the technicalities you want at him (as Nicolas tried).  See if it makes a difference.

MAKE WAR ON PAGANS AND IDOLATORS
Similar to 9:29 applied to Christians we have 9:5 applied to polytheists.  Here is an in-depth article focusing primarily on that verse: The Verse of the Sword.

Once again you have Muhammad as a warmonger.  Does this in any way reflect “love your neighbor as yourself”?

 

---

GOD COMMANDED MUHAMMAD TO FIGHT OTHERS, NOT TO LOVE OTHERS

Allah gave specific commands to Muhammad.  Let’s look at one of the more critical:

What did Muhammad say Allah commanded him to do?

TORTURE
Muhammad used torture to get what he wanted. When dealing with a person whom he believed had “wealth” but wouldn’t talk, Muhammad commanded his followers:

Now, when you read about ISIS torturing people you will understand that they are following Muhammad’s precedent.

MURDERING CRITICS
Muhammad could tolerate some things but one thing he hated above all else was being criticized and having his claim of prophethood doubted or mocked.  Those that did this often found themselves being on his personal hit list.  Here are two of the many people Muhammad ordered to be murdered:

1) Abu Afak, a 120 year old Jewish man who criticized Muhammad:

2) Asma bint Marwan, a mother of five children:

When you see Muslims today carrying signs that say to kill those that insult Muhammad, or actually murdering critics, like Theo van Gogh, you’ll understand that they are only following Muhammad’s precedent. 

MURDERING SLAVE GIRLS
When Muhammad lived in Mecca many people mocked his claim to prophethood.  Three of them, Sarah, Fartana, and Qaribah, were slave girls who were probably forced to work as prostitutes.  Years later when Muhammad returned to Mecca and conquered it he order that these three slave girls to be killed:

This is the context:  Muhammad returned to Mecca with a huge army and conquered it via intimidation.  Some groups of Meccans fought the Muslims but they were few and were defeated.  At this point in his life Muhammad reached a new pinnacle of power and glory.  He has crushed his biggest enemies beneath his feet!  What does he do next?  He remembers the three slave girls who many years earlier mocked him and hurt his feelings.  Now it’s his payback time and he orders their deaths.  Does this sound like a loving man to you?

MURDERING CIVILIANS
Muhammad had varying degrees of conflict with most non-Muslims including Jews and Christians.  When he felt at odds with one group of Jews he ordered his followers to kill any of them they could, including defenseless civilians:

In this case a shopkeeper who was a long-time friend to the Muslims was attacked without warning and butchered.  Isn’t this exactly what many Muslims are doing today?  The people who were murdered by the Muslims in San Bernardino, Orlando, and all over the world?  The people in San Bernardino had given a baby shower for the Muslim woman and she repaid their kindness with bullets.  That is Muhammad’s Islam.

RAPE OF FEMALE SLAVES
Attacking and enslaving others is legal in Islam.  Muhammad attacked and enslaved thousands.  He would distribute the females to his soldiers as their reward for fighting.  Those female slaves were property and as such the Muslim men could use them for sex whenever they desired.   If you are offended that ISIS rapes so many non-Muslim females then remember that Muhammad established it.  In fact Muhammad had a slave that he used for sex because, as Tabari states, she was his “property.”  Here is one account of Muslim soldiers raping slaves:

Is raping slave women “loving” them?

THREATENING AND EXTORTING NON-MUSLIMS
Muhammad would tell Christians and Jews that they could either convert to Islam, pay an extortion tax, “jizyah,” or fight and if they lose they die and their women and children enslaved.  Here is an account of how Muhammad threatened a small Christian town:

Note that this event parallels Muhammad’s commands in Sura 9:29.  Muhammad was threatening the Christians with death and slavery unless they converted to Islam or paid extortion (“tribute”, i.e. “jizyah” which was extorted from Jews and Christians).

MUHAMMAD’S LAST WORDS:  CURSES
Just before he died Muhammad asked Allah to curse the Christians and the Jews:

Jesus prayed for forgiveness for those that framed and killed Him.  Muhammad called curses down upon those he hated.

All of these wicked deeds, and many more, are Islamic.  All of them are tied to Muhammad.  All of them were for Islam’s domain to spread.

One of the reasons Muslims were never really commanded to love non-Muslims is because the Muslims were commanded to attack and conquer them, and force Islam’s rule over those that refused to accept Islam.  Attack and conquer, jihad, i.e. holy warfare, was the command towards non-Muslims.  Within 100 years of Muhammad’s death the Muslims had carved out one of the largest empires of the world’s history, reaching from Spain to India.  These were wars of conquest, not self-defense.  Did love motivate these conquests?

---

EVALUATING THE DEEDS; EVALUATING THE GOD

At this article’s beginning I said that I would ask you to evaluate a man’s actions.  What do Muhammad’s actions say?  Do they indicate that he was commanded to love or to fight?

More importantly, what do these commands say about his God?  Is he the same God that commanded His followers to love their neighbor?

These words and deeds that I presented above are not instances of “cherry-picking.”  If you think otherwise let me challenge you to read Guillaume’s “Life of Muhammad” and once you get to where he finally had power, after he arrived in Medina, try to go 10 or so pages without encountering Muhammad’s words and deeds of hatred and violence.

Power corrupts.  When Muhammad obtained power he murdered people.

When you evaluate the evidence based on Muhammad’s actions and teachings found in the Quran, hadith, and sira you can only draw one conclusion:  loving non-Muslims was not Muhammad’s priority, forcing them to submit to Islam was.  Muhammad’s mission was to spread the domain of Islam peaceably or by force.  Tolerating and “loving his neighbor” was not acceptable if they did not fall under Islam’s rule.

 

---

AN IMPORTANT WORD ON SIMILARITIES

Sam Solomon, a scholar who actually knows about Islam, wrote a book addressing the “same God” topic: “Not the Same God.”¹¹  Solomon makes a striking point:

Solomon hits home here:  counterfeit is similar but false.  People take their money seriously, shouldn’t Christians take their faith seriously?

I’ll bet Volf does not use his same low-bar “sufficiently similar” standard to make important decisions.  Otherwise he’d confuse sulfuric acid with water, amanita mushrooms with white mushrooms, and President Obama with Putin.  You would not want your doctor to be this incompetent, you would not want your car mechanic to be this inept, you would not want your financial advisor to be this ignorant, why then would you take the teaching of a sloppy theologian?  Doesn’t your faith deserve a little more intelligence and precision? 

---

KNOWLEDGE OF THE DETAILS: TAKE A CLOSER LOOK

We’ve seen actual details, Muhammad’s deeds and words, that demonstrate that “loving thy neighbor as thyself” is not an Islamic command.  You have to do a little investigation to find these details.  And therein lies Volf’s failure.  His perspective is from a great distance.  Perhaps he was unaware of these details.  From his distant perspective the Gods look similar.  If you were to see a crowd of men from a great distance the men would probably look alike.  But when you zoomed in on their faces the details would enable you to distinguish one face from the other.  Twins look identical from a distance but once you know the details of their faces you can tell them apart.  In this same way when you know the characters of Allah and God you are able to make an intelligent and informed decision and state confidently that they are not the same God.

There is a professor, Dr. Benjamin Hegeman, who has actually studied and collected data on this topic.  What he found was that the more informed a person is about the details of his faith, the less likely he is to believe that the two Gods are the same.  Conversely if a person only knows a few aspects of his faith, the more likely he is to believe that the two Gods are the same.  To that end he created a Venn diagram that depicts this state.

The concept of “Allah” existed long before Muhammad and Muhammad built upon that word.  The diagram shows Muhammad’s Allah, i.e. Muhammad’s specific defining characteristics of Allah on the left, general beliefs about God that Christians and Muslims share are in the middle, and on the right are the defining characteristics of the God of the Christians.

 

 

This is a simplified and general diagram of how concepts of God overlap and differ depending on the knowledge-depth of the believer.  Of course greater refinement can be added but its main point is that when one knows the details the contrasts become greater and contradictory on key points.

 

---

USING VOLF’S ARGUMENT

On page 113 Volf quotes Jesus talking about false prophets:

 
Volf then goes on to say:

I agree with Volf.  Now consider Muhammad’s deeds:

• he ordered followers to attack non-Muslims
• he ordered Jews and Christians to be treated as 2^nd class, humiliated people
• he had non-Muslim civilians murdered simply for criticizing him
• he enslaved non-Muslims
• he justified lying to further his cause
• he tortured people
• he allowed his soldiers to rape female slaves
• he threatened others with death and enslavement unless they paid extortion money

These were not a few aberrations.  These actions were his lifestyle and that is bad fruit.  That is evil fruit.  What then do they say about the kind of God Muhammad worshipped?  Is he the same God that Peter, John, and Paul worshipped?

By Volf’s own criteria his argument fails.  Muhammad’s actions speak louder than, and contradict, Volf’s words.

Back in 2011 Volf was knowledgeable enough to know there was a strong vein of violence in Islam.  But instead of searching for the truth of the details behind that violence he appeased himself by taking a Muslim cleric’s word at face value:

Based upon the examples I’ve provided, quoted from the Islamic source materials, this “cleric” is either lying, or ignorant.  (I have to go with lying.)  Muhammad directed violence against women and ordered the deaths of women and female slaves.  His killing was also indiscriminate:  “kill any Jew that falls into your power” and an innocent, unaware, shopkeeper was butchered by a Muslim.  This delighted cleric duped Volf and pulled the wool over his willing eyes easily.

There are many more errors in Volf’s book such his statements on compulsion in Islam, his sloppiness in muddling Quran and hadith, and his inability to handle and evaluate Islam’s death sentence for apostates.  I won’t address them.

---

FALSE DOCTRINE, SPIRITUAL MYIASIS, DECAY, AND DEATH

WHAT’S THE HARM?  WHAT’S THE PROBLEM?

A fair question to ask is, “Why are you making such a big deal over a doctrine?”  I make a big deal out of the “same God” issue for two reasons.  1) Key doctrine matters, and 2) more importantly, the health of the church matters.  This concept of “same God” is crucial and I’m not sure Volf has thought through the repercussions of his argument and its negative effect on the church.

1)  Key doctrine

Our doctrines and beliefs affect our life and actions.  If we believe God has commanded an action we are more likely to perform that action, whether it is giving food to the hungry (as Christ commanded), or attacking non-Muslims (as Allah commanded).  If Islam’s Allah is God the Father then Christians would be obligated to some degree to evaluate and implement Allah’s commands.  Logically one could argue that the Quran’s commands supersede the New Testament’s commands because it is a later revelation of God’s word.  For Christians, a fundamental starting point is that Christians need to know which God to worship and obey.

Further, God hates and denounces false doctrine.  See Rev 2:6, 3:14, 15, 3:20.  If Almighty God hates false doctrine shouldn’t we?  Would anyone disagree with me that God hates a false doctrine that equates him to an artificial theological construct?  Wouldn’t God judge a false prophet who said that God told him to make war on Christians who believe that Jesus is the Son of God?  (Quran 9:29)

2)  My primary concern however is for the spiritual health of the body of Christ.

I approach this topic in part based upon discussions and experiences I’ve had with Christians who were confused about Islam.  They doubted their own faith, their experience, and their salvation.  If the Quran is true then why wouldn’t Christians doubt that Jesus is the Son of God?  I’ve been in conversations and I’ve received hundreds, if not over a thousand emails, from Christians who had to wrestle with the false doctrine of Islam and they thanked me for helping them.  True Christian leaders should be concerned for the body of Christ and would not want to sicken them.

I love the body of Christ, I love my fellow Christians.  I do not want to see them sick in faith and weak.  Christians are the body of Christ.  They are the bride of Christ.  Who wants to see their bride sick, confused, and doubting?  That is not why He gave us the Holy Spirit.  We are to build up and edify each other.  Why then would we introduce a false doctrine that weakens the church?

Volf damages the church by conflating Islam’s God with Christianity’s God.  For him it’s just an academic question that if answered positively would lead to harmony between the two faiths. Yet I know from personal experience that that doctrine weakens the church.

Any Christian who takes his faith seriously could only say that Muhammad was a false prophet.  Period.

 

---

A Bizarre Comment

On page 199 Volf makes a strange, almost bewildering, comment:

Muhammad a prophet like Martin Luther King!  Muhammad was the opposite of Martin Luther King!  Is this Napoleon from Animal Farm speaking?  Is the spirit of Baghdad Bob speaking through Volf?   Or perhaps Volf could tell us when King married and had sex with a nine year old girl?  Or when King asked his followers to murder people?  Or when King let his followers attack and enslave people and rape the women because they were possessions?  

Volf's comment here, and his casual approach to mixing and matching Islam with Christianity, displays an ambivalence, a carelessness, a disregard, towards the Christian faith.

Any Christian who takes his faith seriously could only say that Muhammad was a false prophet.  Period.

---

SPIRITUAL MYIASIS

Volf’s doctrine of both faiths worshipping the same God breeds confusion and doubt.  Volf is planting a theological parasite, a myiasis, a maggot, into the body of Christ.

Flies will lay eggs on open wounds or vulnerable places on a body.  Once hatched the maggots chew their way beyond the skin into the host’s body.  Pain, sickness, infection, even death occur if untreated.  The maggots grow inside the host while feeding on its tissue.  This is known as myiasis.  (Taken from  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myiasis ).

Here’s a pic of a maggot inside a living cat. 

By Uwe Gille - Own work, CC BY 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7929503

Isn’t this also one of the ways Satan attacks the church?

Volf’s false doctrine is maggot planted on the body of Christ.  It is a deception that confuses Christians and undermines their faith.  This is a deception that whitewashes Muhammad’s sins.

Look!  Either the being that spoke to Muhammad is the same, exact, person that Christians worship, or it is not.  Islam’s God is either totally the same God Christians worship or it is not.  It’s a simple “Yes or No,” “100% or 0.0%” answer.

Take 1^st Cor. 8:4-6 and 10:14-20 as your warning.  Do not drink the cup of demons.  You should reject Volf’s doctrine completely, comprehensively, and absolutely.

  

---

CONCLUSION

The body of Christ deserves better, it deserves our best.  The body of Christ deserves to be fed with better food than Volf’s gruel of compromise and confusion.

I’ve shown that these Gods are radically different with respect to the command to “love thy neighbor as thyself.”  They do not align with each other, they contradict each other.  How much more radically different can you get?

Volf’s goal is noble and admirable but it should not be achieved by ignoring evidence, ignoring facts, and marching ignorantly towards a pre-determined ending.  Volf dresses a wolf in sheep’s cloths.  That does not make it a sheep.  It will still kill you.

We all have pre-conceived ideas, encrusted positions, and strongly held beliefs.  More so when taught to us by a cherished parent.  In that light it is understandable that Volf clings to, and even advocates, the belief that both faiths worship the same God.  Yet we as Christians are called by God to study His word, to seek the truth, and to think logically.  We should go to where the evidence leads us.

Changing one’s mind can be difficult but it should not be impossible.  A great example of changing one’s mind would be found in Anthony Flew.  He was a champion of atheism but as he studied the details of biology he realized that it took far more faith to believe in random chance, i.e. dumb luck, than it took to believe in some type of God.  So he became a deist. He knew it would be a decision that would be attacked and he would lose his prestige and fame.  But he had the inner fortitude, the conviction, to do the right thing.  And yes of course the atheists turned upon him with hatred and vengeance, but he said he had to go where the evidence led.  If Anthony Flew could change his mind about atheism and sacrifice so much in following the evidence, shouldn’t Christians take their faith seriously enough, and have actual strength of conviction, to change their minds in believing that both Gods are one in the same?

Be clear in your understanding of these contradictions.  These are not issues of “different understandings.”  Nor are they issues of “incorrect knowledge.”  These are issues of contradiction.  One God commanded love thy neighbor, the other commanded war and conquest.  One God said, “Yes!  Jesus is my beloved Son!”  the other god said, “Hell No! Jesus is not my Son!”  These are not the same God.

Brethren, do not be deceived by this false doctrine.  Do not conflate your God with Muhammad’s construct.  Do not let the cup of demons be present on your communion table.  Seek the Lord.  Have the attitude  “that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection…,  I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.”

Jesus is the beloved Son of the Father.  He is the Son of God.

Silas

2016, June 21

 

---

APPENDIX A:  OTHER REFERENCES ON THE “SAME GOD” TOPIC.

A debate on this topic between Volf and Nabeel Qureshi:
http://julieroys.com/volf-qureshi-debate-do-muslims-christians-worship-the-same-god/

A Jordanian Christian critiques Volf’s book:
http://biblicalmissiology.org/2011/10/10/book-review-allah-a-christian-response-by-miroslav-volf/

Part 2 of my five part series on whether or not Christians and Muslims worship the same God:
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/silas/same_god2.html

bible-quran.com/volf-miroslav-allah-christian-response/

http://blog.markdurie.com/2011/09/do-we-worship-same-god-review-by-mark.html 

 

---

APPENDIX B:   IF ISLAM’S ALLAH IS NOT GOD THEN WHO IS HE/IT?

One question that comes up frequently in these discussions is “If Allah isn’t God, then who is he?”  Christians have been troubled by this question and seemingly afraid to say, “He’s an idol.”  I’ve always felt that an answer along that line was easy and logical to make.  Christians should think clearly and be bolder.

Muhammad constructed his “Allah” from parts of Judaism, Christianity, Paganism, demonic influence, and his own ideas.  Islam’s Allah is a metaphysical construct created by Muhammad.  Call it an idol if you want.  Some people are troubled that I include “demonic influence” in this construct.  That characteristic is integral and unavoidable.  Just start with Muhammad’s first encounter with that “spirit” in the cave.  Following that Muhammad believed he had become demon possessed or had gone insane.  That encounter left him depressed and suicidal for the next 2.5 years.  That experience has no parallels in our Scriptures.  Experiences with our God do not drive His believers into suicide attempts.  (You can read more about that here: Mo’s suicide attempts)

The other aspect of the demonic component in Islam is that it contradicts every primary doctrine of Christianity except for “One God” and even then there is an infinite gulf between the trinity and Islam’s “tawhid.”

 

---

APPENDIX C:  UNSIGNING THE COMMON WORD DOCUMENT

I had the chance to sign the Common Word document and I refused.  I felt the Holy Spirit telling me “no!” and I knew intellectually / doctrinally that parts of it were deceptive if not outright lies. 

I know that many prominent Christians have signed it.  In general Christians are good people, not perfect, but people willing to lend a helping hand, and wanting to be perceived as good natured, peaceable, and willing to give others the benefit of the doubt.  Some Christians have told them that the Common Word was sound and agreeable and in the interests of wanting to be friendly and “getting along” they signed it.  They were duped into signing a deceptive document.

I would say to all Christians, “Don’t be duped into believing an Islamic falsehood.” If you have been duped into signing it I encourage you to get your signature removed.  A number of Christians have had their signatures removed.  

I will have to answer for my sins before Christ.  I don’t want to have to answer to why I signed a document that confuses my God, a God I claim to know, with a false god.  As John said: