Last week Ekaputra Tupamahu notified me of an article by Miroslav Volf titled “Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?” (Read here) He wanted to know my thoughts on the matter, especially since over a year ago we had a lively discussion on this very subject (see here, here, and here). One thing that I have noticed about myself is that I have become more and more comfortable with ambiguity. While I think this discussion is worth having because it does have implications, I don’t know if I am willing to make a definitive statement on a subject like whether or not two monotheistic religions worship the same God in any meaningful sense.
Volf’s article preludes his new book Allah: A Christian Response. I assume that Volf would affirm that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. In this article he notes that (1) Christianity and Islam are the two fastest growing religions globally. (2) Globalization will cause there to be an interconnectedness between them. (3) The Muslim and Christian understanding of what it means to live life will come together in the public square and there will be tensions.
For Volf we must ask whether or not we can begin some sort of dialog as monotheistic religions because we believe in the same God to some extent. He implies that if we say we do not share the same God that we “have justification for cultural and military wars”, but if we do share the same God we “have a foundation for a shared future marked by peace rather than violence”.
As I ponder this subject there are some things that come to mind. First, I don’t think Volf’s conclusion is correct. Christians have gone to war with each other. Sunni and Shiite Muslims are often in violent conflict. As much as I would like it to be true that some shared vision of God will result in peacefulness between two groups this simply has not proven to be true over history. Maybe Volf provides further reasons to assume this in his book, but I am going with what he wrote in this article. At this juncture I don’t think it is wise to make these types of theological statements based of perceived pragmatic consequences, especially if the consequences are not likely.
Second, whenever we speak of the “same God” there is so much nuance here. Is “God” determined by categories of theological talk that we share? Even if two people share the same religion there can be two radically different views of God present. Could it be that there is a “Christian” whose view of God radically departs from general monotheism (a pantheistic or panentheistic god, for example) in such a way that a more traditional Christian theist would find more common ground with a Muslim? Also, we must ask what active role God has in revealing himself to people and if God’s activity determines who knows and worships him. Does it really matter what we say about God or what God says about us?
Third, do we worship the same God if there are some similarities but not many? Yes, Christians and Muslims worship one God. Yes, Christians and Muslims see their story as going back toward Abraham. But Christians see God as Trinity, and we believe the eternal Logos has become a human, and we believe that this human is incorporated into what it means for God to be God because of the incarnation. Are these aspects of God or are these things central to what it means to understand who God has revealed himself to be? In other words, do we see the singularity of God as the most basic reality of his nature to the point that Christians, Muslims, Jews, Platonist, Aristotilians, theistic Buddhist, Hindus who believe that the many manifestations of deity come from a singular divine source, and any other form of monotheism as being basically the same? We must think seriously about this.
Fourth, do we make a mistake by speaking too broadly on this subject? Is it a case-by-case basis? Scripture does indicate there has been people who are not part of the common, easily identified “people of God”, yet who knew God (e.g. Melchizedek, Job). What does this mean for people of other religions? Can we know and do we have any right to speculate?
Finally, even if we share belief in one God, what does it mean to worship that God? In Jn. 4.1-26 we have Jesus sharing monotheistic beliefs with the Samaritan woman, but saying, in essence, the Jews have it right doctrinally and there would come a day when both Jew and Samaritan would need to worship in “S/spirit and in truth”. What about Israel in Romans 9-11? They have zeal for God yet Paul saw his own people as apostate because they reject Messiah. Can we say that these Jews “worshiped” God, but that worship was not enough? Does this at least allow us to begin dialog if we think Muslims do the same thing? Similarly, in Acts 17. 16-34 Paul says that the Athenians did worship the God whom they did not know (and he even uses one of their idols to make this point!), but that this was not sufficient because God now demands that people know him through the man through whom he will judge the world, the resurrected Christ. These passages may be sufficient for us to say that some non-Christians do worship the true God, but they also indicate worship alone is not sufficient for salvation.
In response it appears that I have asked many questions without giving any answers. I’d be interested to hear what others think of Volf’s statements and the questions that it raised for me.

March 7, 2011 at 11:22 am
I have lived most of last year in and am currently in Saudi Arabia for business. I have had many such conversations with moderate and liberal Muslims and they all agree that the Christian God is the same as the Muslim God, but with a clearer revelation. If there is one thing that I have proven, although my theological leanings are emergent, is that there is a willingness to dialog among the common people, as I have literally spoken to hundreds along the same lines. Muslim leadership, though is a far way off from this, as well as Christian leadership.
March 7, 2011 at 11:25 am
They are a very different “God.” Perhaps Christians have a much clearer revelation of God than Muslims.
March 7, 2011 at 11:33 am
Doug,
I would agree. I’m just giving their perspective which I thought was interesting.
March 7, 2011 at 12:27 pm
@Anthony: The Muslims with whom you spoke saw it as the same God but the revelation of Islam is believed to be clearer, correct? Or are you saying they said Christian revelation is clearer?
@Doug: What would you see as being the major differences between the God of Christianity and the God of Islam? Would you see it as a radical difference, or a difference of aspects? Is there no shared commonality at all?
March 7, 2011 at 12:59 pm
I think that every religion has some aspect of truth about God; though the god whom worship is focused on is not the true God. However I also believe that God knows the hearts of those false worshippers and will at times answer their prayers… and therefore if God answers their prayers…can it be truly said they worship a false God.
I’m thinking here of Cornelius as an example of whose prayers were said to have reached God as a memorial.
The next question to ask though goes deeper and that is how we access God. As Christians we believe (and I believe rightfully so) that Christ taught he is the only way to God. I was surprised in an encounter with an Egyptian Muslim to hear that one of his daily prayers was to Jesus the healer. This allowed me to pray with him for the situation he was in within my role as a chaplain….
Therefore perhaps the argument / discussion is based on the wrong question as to whether we believe in the same God… and should be based on how is it we access God…and if in reality there is other ways.
March 7, 2011 at 1:06 pm
It depends on how the “Christian God” is construed by Christians. So I think that this is of first order importance to establish, before we move to seek an answer on the question of whether or not Muslims and Christians worship the same God.
If we say that Classical theism, the philosophical system that arose from an Aristotelian synthesis with both Muslim and Christian conceptions of how to talk about God, is the “common-ground” upon which Volf’s points are to be adjudicated; then, yes, I think we could say that there is a lot of similarity, metaphysically, between Allah and the “Christian God.” And, in fact, most of Western Christianity has been shaped by classical theistic categories. This means that God is understood in ways that emphasize His “oneness” and think of God from primarily Monadic emphases.
But, there’s another way to think of the “Christian God” as primarily Triune. That his being is shaped by the perichoretic relations between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This eschews any kind of attempt to find “common-ground” between Muslims and Christians on their conception of God.
Beyond that, Muslims hold to the sin of Shirk; which won’t allow God to have any children or Son. Which, from the start, disallows meaningful conversation to take place between Muslims and Christians around the premise that they somehow have the same God. If the Triune nature, if the Son (let alone the Holy Spirit) is a necessary aspect for the Christian God to be the Christian God; then ipso facto, the Muslims and Christians have nothing to commiserate about in regards to their disparate understandings of God.
It’s not enough to try and focus on “common attributes” or something; we could only do this as Christians if we are willing to abstract Jesus out of an idea of “Godness” and make Him a subsistence/accident/attribute of God’s “one being.” This is what classical theism allows for; so if Volf is a Christian classical theist, then I could see how he might think it possible.
March 7, 2011 at 2:05 pm
@Craig: In some sense would you see yourself suggesting that it is not so much our “theology”, as in dogmatics, that matters but our relationship with Christ?
@Bobby: The Triune nature of the Christian God is problematic for any talk about it being the “same” God. And, somewhat like Craig noted, the person of Christ is at the center of this conversation and what it means for him to express the identity of the one God.
March 7, 2011 at 2:23 pm
@ Brian… yes!
March 7, 2011 at 2:23 pm
@Brian,
Yep, it’s the “analogy of being” vs. the “analogy of faith”
.
March 7, 2011 at 3:31 pm
@Craig: When I lived in San Francisco our church was in contact with two Muslim men who said they had come to have faith in Christ yet decided to remain in their mosque without making their confession public. This would seem problematic except it makes me think of how the Fourth Gospel depicts Nicodemus and Joseph as legitimate disciples though they were secret disciples who had not made a public confession.
March 7, 2011 at 3:42 pm
@Brian. That is an interesting scenario… I don’ t have any problems with that; Brother Andrew in his book “Lightforce” writes of those type of issues. I think that our insistence on formal Church membership is more cultural then it is normative and its easy for our insistence to change to come out of our armchair existence / experience.
I do imagine though that your term “In contact” meant ongoing discipleship and fellowship? When I had a cleaning business; I had one contract at a factory for many years and it was only after 18 months that the door opened for me to share my faith with certain people…by then the hard yards had been put in to build good rapport.
March 7, 2011 at 3:55 pm
@Craig: Mostly that these two men were in contact with the pastor of our church on occasion. This is how we knew about them and how to pray for them in their context.
March 7, 2011 at 8:27 pm
We can try to look at various situations from multiple angles, but ultimately, it comes down to what GOD says about it, not you or me. People come up with philosophies. God states truth.
If people deny the Son, then they deny the Father – in which case, they are not following the same God.
1 John 2:21-23
21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
Pingback: Flotsam and jetsam (3/9) « scientia et sapientia
Pingback: Sunday best: from God to Dracula (a story of contested relations)
Pingback: The Trinity around the Blogosphere | Near Emmaus