Miroslav Volf: Allah and the Trinity

Miroslav Volf has written a new article in Christian Century titled, “Allah and the Trinity: A Christian response to Muslims” (coming out March 8, 2011).  This article was adapted from his book, Allah: A Christian Response, which is hot of the press (Feb, 15, 2011).  Personally, I’m puzzled by the big hoopla over Rob Bell’s new book (which is not even out yet), and the relative silence over this book by one of the world’s most influential Christian theologians alive today with proposes such a controversial claim that, “Muslims and Christians worship the same God” (Press Release).

As one who is not well versed in Islamic theology, I humbly offer my initial thoughts, on Volf’s article, “Allah and the Trinity.”  The objective of his article, which is actually revealed at the end of his article is twofold:

1.      “to demonstrate that the rejection of the Trinity in the Qur’an does not refer to normative Christian understanding of God’s threeness, and that the Christian doctrine of the Trinity does not call into question God’s oneness….”

2.      “to remind Christians that Muslim objections to the doctrine of the Trinity and the uncompromising affirmation of God’s oneness from which these objections stem are not in themselves good enough reasons for Christians to think that they have a radically different understanding of God than Muslims.” (p. 24).

Does Volf succeed in his objectives?

Volf does helpfully clear up several misunderstandings and miscommunication between Muslims and Christians.  He addresses the perception of Muslims: “that Christians are not really monotheists.”  Volf defends and upholds the orthodox Christian doctrine that God is One.  He states,

“A basic rule for Christians as they speak about God is this: ‘Never divide divine essence’….  A positive way to make the same point would be to say that Christians affirm ‘numerical identity of the divine essence.’”

Furthermore, Volf explains that the unity of “the divine three who are indivisibly one” is to be properly understood in both God’s act and being.  He states, “God’s acts are undivided and inseparable,” which is due to the perichoretic unity of the divine persons (p. 22).  In expounding upon the theological term “perichoresis,” Volf approvingly uses Augustine’s language: “‘they are always in each other’ and never ‘alone’” (p. 23).  Overall, Volf gives a clear presentation to both his Muslim and Christian readers that they really do hold monotheism in common.

In an effort to highlight this commonality and overcome Muslim perceptions that Christians are tritheists or polytheist, Volf points out that the Muslim’s suspicion is largely due to a number of texts in the Qur’an which seem to object to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.  Volf specifically addresses five texts from the Qur’an and argues that “the Qur’an’s objections do not address normative Christian beliefs about God” (p. 23).  Some of Volf’s response to the Qur’an’s objections are helpful and constructively move the dialogue forward (I won’t rehash the whole article for you, so you’ll have to read it yourself!).

However, I would like to note that two of Volf’s responses seem to fail at supporting his objectives.  First, Volf responds to the following objection, “God cannot be ‘Christ, the son of Mary,’ because then God would be a creature, in need of food and shelter, not the sovereign creator of heaven and earth, beyond all needs,” by saying:

“Christians generally do not say that God was Christ; I know of no significant classical theologian who makes that claim.  Instead, Christians say that ‘Christ was God’—or, to use New Testament phrases, that ‘God was in Christ’ (see 2 Cor. 5:19) or that the eternal ‘Word became flesh’ (John 1:14).  The two claims—that God was Christ, and Christ was God—seem similar but are in fact very different.  Christians believe that Christ was fully human and therefore in need of food and shelter, as well as fully divine and therefore of one undivided essence with God” (p. 22).

Here, the foundational issue with  this  objection of the Qur’an is the deity of Jesus of Nazareth.  Even with Volf’s distinction between the phrases “God was Christ” vs. “Christ is God,” Volf still doesn’t overcome the objection.  The whole point of the objection is that no human being can be God, since this would limit God and make him dependent on other things.  Volf seems to simply assert the Christian belief that Jesus was fully human and fully God.  Therefore, the objection remains.

Second, Volf responds to the next objection, “Christians worship persons they associate with God in denigration of the one true God,” by saying:

“Christians agree that anyone who worships a human being does so in denigration of God; that person is an idolater.  Christians reject worship of Christ or anyone else in place of God.  In worshiping Christ, whom they consider to be fully divine, they are worshiping the one and undivided divine essence” (p. 22).

Again, the foundational issue is in Christology.  Christians do in fact worship Jesus who is a human being.  But he is not merely a human being, he is at the same time fully God.  And, this is what Islam rejects (to my knowledge)–the One True God became a human being in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.  Therefore, the objection remains.

I would have to say that the essential difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians follow Jesus Christ and consider him to be fully God, while Islam follows Jesus as one prophet among others (less than Muhammad) and consider him to only be a human being.   The heart of the disagreement between Muslims and Christians, might in fact be over the Trinity.  Yet, the heart of the dispute over the Trinity is orthodox Christianity’s Christology.

In 451 AD at the Council of Chalcedon, Christians established the orthodox view of Jesus:

“truly God and truly man…consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and the same consubstantial with us in manhood…made known in two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the difference of the natures being by no means removed because of the union but the property of each nature being preserved and coalescing in one person and one hypostasis, not parted or divided into two persons but one and the same Son, only-begotten, divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Roger Olson, The Story of Christian Theology, 231-232).

In his effort to break down the theological obstacles between Allah and the Trinity and bring Muslims and Christians to the common table of monotheism, Volf appears to be side stepping the issue of Christology.  So, I remain unconvinced by the arguments that he makes to support his two objections (stated at the beginning).  I’m sure he will be addressing this issue further in his book (which I haven’t read yet), in which case I await to be convinced by his more complete  arguments!