Biblical Christianity and Islam: Plural Monotheism vs Monolithic Monotheism (Final)
Posted on August 3, 2007
Filed Under Islam & Biblical Christianity |
(Continued from last week…)
“Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” John 17:3
I am increasingly impressed with the centrality of the triune nature of God. It is foundational to almost everything. Because of it we understand why the universe is replete with relational systems. We understand why the social institutions that God created are based upon relationships and roles. And we understand why God can love and communicate and enter into an intimate relationship with His people.
It is toward this last element that we will now (and finally!) turn out attention. We are going to examine how belief in monolithic or plural monotheism effects the relationship one has with God.
First, monolithic monotheism presents a god who has no inherent relational attributes. For all eternity, he is alone and silent; he has no one with whom he can communicate or relate. When mankind is created, he finally speaks, but the communication is primarily one that delivers law and prescribes a relationship based upon obedience to that law. If mercy is shown, it is capricious—it can be granted or withheld, for no one knows if one’s obedience will be pleasing enough. This is also why the promise of eternal blessing, or paradise, is elusive and followers are never sure of where they stand. Love and grace are mostly unknown in a monolithic god.
But consider now, the Plural One, who has for all eternity been in perfect fellowship, perfect unity, perfect communion and love. The triune God has bound up within Himself all of the attributes and characteristics of a relational being who speaks to us because He has eternally spoken; who personally relates to mankind because He has eternally related within Himself; who loves because He has eternally loved. How many more aspects of God’s nature could we consider that spring from His plurality? His goodness or kindness? His listening ear or guiding hand? His patience, grace, authority, submission, humility, respect or gentleness?
What about sacrifice?
What about becoming a man and dwelling among the lost that He might die upon a tree to satisfy the wrath that was justly deserved by a rebellious and unholy people? Where does that love and grace and humility come from? Not from monolithic monotheism but from the Socially Plural One who has bound up within Himself the active nature of love and grace and self-sacrifice.
Here is the awesome reality of the Triune God of the Universe. He grants to us the privilege of entering into relationship with Him. He made that relationship possible because He, Himself, through self-sacrifice, paid the penalty that was due us. We obey His commands, not to gain that relationship, but because He loves us and we love Him.
Jesus defined eternal life as “knowing” God. This is not a clinical knowledge, but it is used in the deepest sense that the Scripture presents “knowing” someone: it is intimate, it is covenantal, it is union. Here is the most astounding aspect of biblical Christianity. Jesus declared that we would be indwelt by God himself and that we would become “one” with Him. Christians have for years referred to this as “unio mystica”—the mystical union.
We are back to the notion of plural oneness. It is found in the mysterious unity that God created when He brought a man and a woman together and made them “one”. How consistent with His nature to do so. Monolithic monotheism will, consequently, tend to produce marriages that reflect its view of god. Normally the man plays the role of lawgiver and the wife’s relationship to him is bound up in how well she pleases him.
Biblical Christianity, however, presents a marriage where the two become “one”. Roles of authority and submission are defined not by law and obedience, but by love and respect and treating each other as “joint-heirs”.
Were we to examine the church, we would find the same contrast. Monolithic monotheism produces monolithic unity, not relational unity. Worshippers worship in clinical unity: times, places, words, actions. Biblical Christianity calls for unity within the body of believers, but that is a unity defined in relational terms: love one another; pray for one another; be honest with one another; bear one another’s burdens; being of the same mind—one Lord and one faith. God calls for the diversity of His people to be one in fellowship, not one in actions. The “hand” is not to tell the “foot” that it should act like a “hand”. Consider the following:
“If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body.”
1 Corinthians 12:17-20
Do you see again the unity and diversity of the Triune God as He has created the church?
Oh, my! What a glorious God we serve!
Here is the God who offers to you and me the reality of a personal relationship with Him. And He can do so, because He is both the One and the Many, the God whose external actions are consistent with His internal nature. A God who can love and personally relate with you and me because He is socially plural and relational within Himself.
Here is the great advantage of biblical Christianity over monolithic monotheism.
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
“Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?”
“Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?”
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.
Romans 11:33-36
Comments
9 Responses to “Biblical Christianity and Islam: Plural Monotheism vs Monolithic Monotheism (Final)”
Leave a Reply
Comments are moderated and will not appear on deltackett.com until they've been approved. While we are eager to facilitate conversation by publishing most comments, we may withhold one from time to time if we deem it offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious. While we encourage you not to make others' misspellings and grammatical mistakes an issue of debate, please do your best to double-check your spelling, use correct capitalization, and use proper grammar.
Dr. Del Tackett is president of the Focus on the Family Institute and Senior Vice President to Focus on the Family. He is also the architect and chief spokesperson for Focus on the Family's The Truth Project--a nationwide initiative designed to bring the Christian worldview to the body of Christ.
Subscribe in a reader
© 2008 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.
Dear Dr. Truth Observer,
Your observations have certainly blessed me! Keep it up!
Here’s an observation of my own that is bugging me rather than blessing me, so please allow me to bug you too…
I attended the first Truth Pro. conference you held in Rockford, ILL with tears in my eyes most of the time. I was overwhelmed, overjoyed, convicted, amazed, etc. etc. I have lead a couple of small groups since that time. I believe that the Truth Project is an answer to a short vision I had while weeping over a Nov. 1999 Focus on the Family newsletter by Dr. Dobson. I was heart-broken by the statistics on marriage and children in single parent homes.
Here’s the bug…
Well I’m certainly no super-saint - I feel more like a super-struggler. It seems that the more truth I see, the more intense the battle for personal righteousness becomes. I’m just wondering if anyone else relates to this. It seems that evidently I have ignored, to my own peril, the gravity of my sinful nature.
Any pointers to the daily attention I should give to this ‘thing’ I carry???
Need help,
Mike Weaver
P.S. Invitation #2, We need a conference in Winona Lake, IN.
This might be a good book review to put proper definition to.
Sam Koontz
samkoontz@sbcglobal.net
The Economist
Books & Arts
The Reformation
In pursuit of the old and pure
Aug 2nd 2007
From The Economist print edition
EARLY participants in what is usually called the Protestant Reformation did not set out to be reformers. Perhaps “The Protestant Revolution”, the title of William Naphy’s book, is therefore a better label for the ecclesiastical rumblings that erupted at the beginning of the 16th century. For, as often seems to be the case, by pouring vinegar onto the theological limescale that the church had accumulated over the previous few centuries, the Reformation’s main protagonists made something new by trying to go back to the beginning.
From the small group that issued a “protestatio” at the Diet of Speyer in 1529, supporting proposals by Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli, a many-headed movement grew. Its main characteristics—an emphasis on a direct relationship with Jesus and a strong belief among members of its various denominations that they alone have arrived at the correct reading of the New Testament—are still common to Protestantism today. These are low barriers to entry, which may help to explain the creative destruction that has characterised Protestant sects. Old ones die out and new ones are born, each convinced that the recent past has been an aberration and that what is needed is a return to an older, purer Christianity.
Mr Naphy believes that this powerful force for innovation can also be detected in the rise of classical liberalism in the 19th century and the civil-rights movement in the 20th (hence the forced symmetry of the book’s subtitle). Maybe. But his story is remarkable enough when confined to the history of religion.
One of the appeals of this kind of long-view history is that patterns show up. In 1505 young Luther was so terrified by a thunderstorm that he vowed that he would join a monastic order if the forks of electricity avoided him. He kept his promise, which turned out to be bad news for monks everywhere. More than two centuries later, an area of low-pressure mixed with a dose of superstition had a similar effect on John Wesley, one of the 18th century’s great religious entrepreneurs. Wesley was caught in a storm while crossing the Atlantic. His English companions were terrified, but a group of Moravians (a German Protestant sect) on board simply knelt before their maker and sang hymns. Their resolve had a profound effect on Wesley, who tried to inculcate the same certainty in his flock.
Or take the weakness for charismatic preachers that is one cause of Protestantism’s institutional instability. Ted Haggard and Jimmy Swaggart, prominent American televangelists who preached piety in public and used prostitutes in private, were hardly pioneers here. Robert Pearsall Smith, a key figure in the Holiness Movement in 19th-century America, was defrocked at the height of his ministry when the gap between his preaching and his doing became public.
Protestantism has not travelled in a straight line but gone round in circles, each time creating something new while trying to get back to where it started. This talent for innovation will surely flourish as the movement grows rapidly outside Europe and North America, where its pioneers have created so many new Israels.
Mike Weaver….
When I read your note, Matt 11:25-30 immediately came to mind. If you haven’t already, commit your life to Christ.
You said
“It seems that evidently I have ignored, to my own peril, the gravity of my sinful nature.”
This is exactly where God wants you to be - broken. But you’re wrong, it’s not to your own peril
Christ died for you and took your peril upon Himself at the cross. When you realize the gravity of your own sinful nature and then give it to Christ, He will replace your weariness and heavy burden with His mantel of love. You only need to ask it of Him and He will do it.
I pray that you will experience His joy in your heart soon. Yes, you will still be heart-broken for the godless in our world, but God will give you power and strength to help them - one at a time.
If you have already given your heart to Christ, then I encourage you to spend more time with Him. I’ve just learned to quiet myself before Him - just to sit quietly and wait (think on Him). Couple this with prayer and being in the Word - regularly throughout the day, then He WILL lift your burden and guide you. He will give you answers.
I would also ask Him to reveal anything in your heart that is not in line with His Truth - Psalm 139:23-24. There might be hidden (or blatant) sin that is preventing you from being closer to Him. He will flush it out and heal you of it, but you must first let it go and trust Him.
He is faithful, and He will do what His Word says He will do!
In response to Mike Weaver’s super-struggle…
All those who profess Christ as their Lord and Savior are locked in the same struggle, Mike. It’s the old vs. the new. It’s the struggle of Paul in Romans 7:15. And yes, as we grow closer to our Lord (The Way, the Truth and the Light), we become more aware of our sinfulness because of the light He sheds.
We don’t despair. We don’t give up. We daily continue in the Word because it is the Word that sanctifies us (John17:17). We do not rely on our own efforts, but on the promise of the One who loves us and have promised that He will complete the good work He has begun in us (Phil. 1:6)
From your post, I am struck by your tenderness toward those things that grieve the heart of God. In my own experience, I’ve found that growth does bring on the “fellowship of suffering” (Phil. 3:10) with the Lord Jesus.
I’ve also found that as I realize how hopeless I am without Him, I experience the joy of glimpsing “just how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ” (Eph. 3:18).
If you do not already have someone, I pray that God will put into your life a godly brother to partner with you on your spiritual journey. Someone to pray with you and encourage you.
“May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it” (1 Thess. 5:23,24).
Dr. Tackett,
I’ve just read your comments on Biblical Christianity and Islam in its entirety. Thank you for presenting such a clear argument for plural monotheism. Your comments have greatly aided my understanding of our triune God.
I was especially struck by the ramifications the differences in belief have on marriage, social order, and worship.
I am rejoicing in our relational God and blessed to be a part of the body of Christ!
Dr. Tackett,
I value your blog–and pray you have the God-given wherewithal to keep it up for the encouragement of God’s people. Ditto the Truth Project.
Would you consider posting the entire Montheism series in one file, such as a PDF? I’d like to be able to read it all at once and perhaps highlight it.
Also, I loved the fox photo you posted. I have been recently thinking of making a fox-related quilt and your brother-in-law’s picture was just a perfect classic fox. I would like to know if he has any of your bold fox running/walking in profile and if he would consider sharing the pictures and/or granting permission to use the one you posted. Certainly if he is the brother-in-law with the heart surgery, this is by no means an urgent matter should you choose to ask him! (And in any event I pray he is recovering quickly…)
I grew up in Colorado Springs and was elated one night when I saw the profiles of three foxes crossing highway 115 between Ft. Carson and Cheyenne Mountain. Which is where we lived, by the way–my Dad worked at Norad and we lived at the base of the mountain near Rock Creek. It was interesting to find that you used to work there too!
God Bless,
Ruth Chow
Dr. Tackett:
I must admit, at this point, I have only read this very last entry concerning monolithic and plural monotheism. I plan to read the other entries right away. However, after just reading this entry, I have a concern…
Using your last paragraph, before the last scripture; I will explain my concern:
“Here is the God who offers to you and me the reality of a personal relationship with Him. And He can do so, because He is both the One and the Many, the God whose external actions are consistent with His internal nature. A God who can love and personally relate with you and me because He is socially plural and relational within Himself.”
Maybe I’m being ignorant, but it’s my understanding God can “love and personally relate” with us, not because He is socially plural or relational within Himself, but simply because He is God.
In the same way, we can have a personal relationship with God, not “because He is is both the One and the Many”, but simply because He is God.
The Bible tells us that there is One God. It does not explain God as being “separated” in three or any number of “persons”. The terms “trinity” or “triune” are never used in the Word of God. It does, however, explain that God is a Spirit, and that Jesus is God in flesh. It says that in Jesus dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily (notice it says the Godhead in Jesus, not Jesus part of the Godhead). And really, does the Bible explain the Godhead as being “the Father, the Son, and the Spirit”? From my study, it has not.
There is so much to be shared, but to stick with my afore mentioned concern: it seems to me, we are reversed in our logic and in doing so; we limit the omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God.
You mentioned, Sir, that God can relate to us because He is socially plural. Is this true? If God is NOT socially plural, does this then mean He cannot relate to us? Of course not.
God created us and He knows us and loves us…that is how He can relate to us: because we are made in His image.
You mentioned also, that God can have a personal relationship with us because He is both the One and the Many. Again I ask, is this true? If God is simply One being, could He not have a relationship with us all? Of course He can! His Word tells us He is omniscient and omnipresent.
God created us and He knows all about us and yet still loves us. He loves us enough to limit Himself in flesh as the Jesus Christ and sacrificed Himself; to fulfill the system of judgment He set up; to graciously allow us the receive His Spirit and personally know Him more and more…
Please, please do not change who God is to fit a pre-conceived idea of who we think He should be; to fit our limited understanding of why things are the way they are. Please consider my concern, search those scriptures with a fresh perspective and allow God to reveal who He is to you.
Thank you for reading my concern and I pray that God will bless you and your ministry,
With all sincerity,
Rob Warlick
Well, Sir, I read the other entries on this subject. And I do have a better understanding of what you meant in your closing comments.
However, the concern still stands. I’m afraid we have great observations, but wrong conclusions.
The heavens do declare the glory of God and yes, His nature is reflected in His creation. However, your suggestion that it is obvious that God is comprised of three persons because there are relationships in the universe is bit far-fetched. Below is your comment from part two of this series:
“And although we would be talking about a God who is infinite and unfathomable, it would be reasonable, looking at what He had made, to conclude that this God must have internal elements that are somehow working together in perfect relationship and harmony. Otherwise, we have no basis for real diversity and unity; no basis for relationships; no basis for communion or fellowship or intimacy.”
“Otherwise, we have no basis for real diversity and unity; no basis for relationship, no basis for communion or fellowship or intimacy” ??? Sir, could these adjectives or verbs have been created by God Himself? The Word says God is Love. That is the basis of relationships: God. The existence of diversity or fellowship does not require God to be pluralized.
As I have mentioned, we have great observations, but wrong conclusions. Could not the relationship of men and women stem from God’s very nature? We are made in God’s image: men in His masculine image and women, yes, in His feminine image. There is so much more here, but to put it quickly, God is a God full of Grace and Truth. And that is reflected in His creation, according to His Word. Such nature does not require separate persons in a deity.
The One true God manifests Himself in many ways. Our Lord God is one being who revealed Himself as Jesus Christ, as an Angel, as a burning bush, and so on. God is not limited by time, space, or matter. He truly is an awesome God.
Again I close, with a challenge to read these scripture with a fresh perspective and I will do the same.
I pray God will reveal Himself to the hungry; and open our eyes to who He is and who we are in Him. In the name of Jesus, amen.
God Bless you,
Rob Warlick
My thanks to Dr. Tackett for providing his thoughts in this way.
Following are my comments to Mr. Warlick.
God bless!
Mike Corum
To Rob Warlick,
Rob, I only read your comments today. I would encourage you to read the Scriptures again. You are correct in stating that the words “trinity” and “triune” do not appear in Scripture. We cannot overlook the Scriptures Dr. Tackett referenced where God refers to Himself in the plural. This was not by accident on God’s part.
Admittedly, the Trinity is not a concept that the human mind can easily embrace. An infinite, all powerful, all seeing, everywhere present God is not easy to get our minds around, either. The fact that this God can abide in the heart of man is even more incredible. But true!
I ask you to consider the event of Christ’s baptism. It is here we see the three persons of God represented at once in space and time: The Father speaks from heaven, the Son is physically present and baptized, and the Spirit descends in the physical form of a dove. Three persons, one God.
Jesus spoke of the Father often. He said “I didn’t come to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me.” When He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane, Christ said, “Not My will but Thine be done.” These verses point to two wills, which I do not believe to be consistent with a one-person God.
The most incredible event, though, to me, is the moment on the cross when Jesus cried, “Father, why have you forsaken me?” Can one forsake himself? I hardly think so.
I’m sure there are many more evidences, and I am certainly not a Bible scholar. However, I believe there are enough references to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for us to know that God is indeed a triune God.
In closing, I submit your adivce to Dr. Tackett for you to consider for yourself: “Please, please do not change who God is to fit a pre-conceived idea of who we think He should be; to fit our limited understanding of why things are the way they are. Please consider my concern, search those scriptures with a fresh perspective and allow God to reveal who He is to you.”
May the Spirit of Truth lead you into all truth.
In Christ,
Mike