A friend of mine helped me think though some issues
regarding whether Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The issue is
currently a hot potato in some circles because of professor Harris, her
comments regarding wearing a hijab, and Wheaton’s reaction. It seems to me that
the simple understanding of the issue is that Christians and Muslims (and all
other worshipers of drastically different religions) believe in different Gods,
but my friend raised a point held by the Catholic church and many philosophers
and theologians that is helping me clarify the issue for myself.
[In addition to that, I have removed a previous post, not
because I disagree with my conclusions, but because I have decided I was a bit
strident. In reading several of the reactions against Wheaton’s actions against
Harris, some of them have become simply disingenuous. Some are talking as if
NOBODY EVER has actually held the ridiculous belief that Muslims and Christians
worship different gods. I didn’t want to be one of those kinds of voices. So I
wrote something much more involved and hopefully more thoughtful.]
This point of view is that Christians and Muslims believe
in the same God and that this is the most obvious understanding of this issue.
In two recent articles, both written by respected theist philosophers, the
position is defended with the argument that Christians believe there is
actually only one God, so therefore everyone who believes in God or worships
God believes in the same God, but has different beliefs about that God [Beckwith, Rae]. And
Protestant theologians, one no less than Mirislav Volf in a recent article and
several tweets, have expressed the same opinion. It is commonly accepted, and
not controversial in many circles, to say that two people can have two
different sets of beliefs about the same thing or person (and one of them even
be very wrong) and for both of them to be referring to the same thing or
person. Two people can "point at" the same thing/individual, have
conflicting accounts of what attributes belong to them, and yet refer to the
same thing/individual. Both articles linked above raise this point and give
examples.
My position is still that Christians and Muslims “believe
in different Gods,” but that statement needs some work to make sense in light
of the Same God (SG) position described above. I want to try to make two basic
points, the second leading to a third. First, which is the simplest
understanding of what two people believe - that they believe in the same God
though with conflicting accounts, or that they believe in two different Gods?
Second, what is the theological data we have to work with in the Christian
scriptures? And third, what of worship and conversion?
It was argued in both Rae’s and Beckwith’s articles that
the simplest position to hold is that two worshipers are pointing at the same
God and yet hold differing beliefs about that God. My intuition is exactly the
opposite. In one article written by a theologian who happens to be a convert
from Islam to Christianity, he said his first intuition about this issue was
that when converting he was still worshiping the same God but with a different
understanding, but the more he came to know the God of the Christian Bible he
changed his mind. Rae and Beckwith argue that in order to hold the position
that we worship different Gods, one would have to do some pretty significant
semantic work and even develop a robust theory of worship and how it works.
It seems to me that the semantic work is applied one step
beyond the assertion, "they believe in different Gods." The
conclusion, “they believe in different Gods,” can be arrived at by a very simple
question like, “do you believe Jesus is God?” The rebuttal is the semantic
move, "No, in fact, because Christians believe there is only one God, they
actually worship the same God, but often attribute different attributes to
God." The rebuttal relies on the train of thought that because two people
can apply different attributes to the same person and still refer to the same
person, and that there is actually only one God, these religions are pointing
to the same God in different ways. But what if they are not pointing to the
same God, but using the word "God" to talk about what they believe
in? This, it seems to me, is just as easily the case, and can be discovered
given some fairly straightforward inquiry regarding what different religions
sincerely believe about what they refer to when they talk about God. Using one
example cited in the articles linked, it is entirely possible for two people to
talk about "Thomas Jefferson" using different attributes, and given
the chance to point to the person they mean, they will point to two different
people. In this case they both used the same word/phrase as their referent, but
one (maybe both) were actually wrong about the referent, not the attributes.
Pointing to two different Thomas Jeffersons has its theological equivalent in
describing conflicting and contradictory attributes of God.
Referring to the same thing with different attributes is
not the only way people disagree. They can refer to two different things with
the same attributes or two different referents with overlapping attributes. To
reduce religious propositional conflict to just the first form of difference
might oversimplify the situation.
In addition, some semantic work might need to be done to
explain how the phrase, "believe in," works in order to support the
assertion that Muslims and Christians "believe in the same God." The
articles linked above deal with the "same God" portion of the phrase,
and I am sure someone somewhere has worked on the first phrase. Whether someone
has or not, it needs to be done. Belief, roughly speaking, is an internal
adherence and some significant level of commitment to a proposition. Christians
and Muslims propose very different things about God, so from the start it
should be pretty easy to see that they literally do not "believe in"
the same God. Now are we at a place where the burden of work is on SG to tell
us why two people who believe in different things actually believe in the same
thing whether they say so or not?
Second, the theological data, it seems to me, allows for
both to be possible.
"You shall have no other gods before me." God,
Exodus 20:3.
Thinking primarily about a theology of idolatry, the
worship of idols seems to be treated in two broad fashions in Scripture. First,
it is the case the God warns against worshiping him so badly that a person has
slipped into idolatry (Malachi 1 and 2 are examples). In this case, we may be
able to say that two people can worship the same God and say they believe in
the same God while at least one of them has so perverted worship that they have
slipped into idolatry.
But the second, and what seems to be the primary warning,
is idolatry in the sense that people literally worship other gods. In this case
people can worship things, other people, themselves, or spiritual beings as
god. In any event, the theological data regarding idolatry is focused in the
first of the Ten Commandments, "You shall have no other gods before
me." The commandment is not (and I don't believe can be interpreted to
mean), "You shall not assert false attributes to me when actually
worshiping me." The biblical worldview posits a universe of spiritual
beings that humans have often mistaken as "God" and believed in and
worshiped as gods. So, of course, people can believe in/worship different gods
in the sense that they attribute ultimate divine worth to beings who are not
God. They have been doing that for millennia.
This raises another point that Rae mentioned in his
article. He stated that to assert that religions worship different gods would
require a well-developed theology of worship. While that ought to be done
regardless, I wonder if the case is exactly the opposite. The debate right now
is about Muslims and Christians, and seems to be fuzzy around the edges because
they are both Abrahamic faiths. Add Judaism to the list, and it seems fairly
easy to say that these religions worship the same God, just differently. Given
SG can we justifiably take it another step to say that Hindus and Christians
worship the same God? If so, then Hindus substitute billions of gods with
conflicting personalities for the unity of the Christian deity. That difference
is pretty drastic, and worship in those two very different faiths would need to
be explained to hold to SG. What about belief systems that straddle the
religious/philosophical fence such as Buddhism and Confuciansim? In these systems
ultimate reality is at direct odds with Christian beliefs about ultimate
reality, leading some to even label these systems as atheistic. And yet (at
least Buddhism) has a form of worship and beliefs about ultimate reality and
salvation. How can both worship the same God? That would need to be explained.
Then, at the extreme end of this train of thought is atheism. Atheism has been
described as a kind of worship by both theologians and thoughtful atheists, and
not without merit. If atheists worship (human potential, science, technology,
transhumanism, etc.) and Christians worship, then SG implies that they worship
the same God.
Are we at a point with SG where there is an inherent
conflict, if not internal contradiction? A Christian who says there is a God
and an atheist who says there is no god both worship the same god.
This raises a fascinating question for me- what about
conversion? Does a convert believe that they are now worshiping the true God as
opposed to a false god? Or do they believe they are worshiping the same God,
only now they are worshipping more properly? And if SG is true it seems we are
stuck with saying that in reality they were worshiping the same God all along
and this seems incongruent with how both the OT and NT treat other religions
and the move from one to another.