Long-time reader, though I know I rarely comment. Still, there's a lot here, I'm really grateful for the thoroughness, generosity and as always appreciate your warmth, rigor and wit. But I have to say, a lot of this seems to hang on a particular description of God, namely how Islam understands the Divine, except that I don't recognize the theology here. Myself included, but additionally at least the Muslims I know, read, and study with, wouldn't recognize this conception of Divinity, either. Consider this passage
"As much as I believe in Christianity, I cannot deny that I’m attracted to the path proposed and foundational claims made by Islam. As I told Shadi, there is something very attractive about foregoing one’s “human logic,” one’s subjectivity, and surrendering it completely to this absolute Being who exists on a plane that totally transcends your own. In a sense, it leaves me off the hook from having to engage my subjectivity…from having to do the work, from having to let him—a fellow human—in and see my in all of my woundedness and vulnerability, to allow him in to share life with me. I wish he could stay up there and I stay down here submitting to his will"
...
The idea that Islam requires us to forego our "logic" and "subjectivity" is itself a cliche, but arguably is just as true of Christianity (the Trinity, after all, is hardly more "rational" or "logical" than unitarianism). In fairness, after all, I could ask why God needs to be human in order to see our woundedness and vulnerability; difference from God does not imply distance from God. Yes, we believe God is above and beyond us, but that does not mean God is not with us, intimately aware of us, present with us at all times; from the folk wisdom of Islam to the deepest traditions of the normative period of the faith, no Muslim believes God is far away, indifferent to her, unaware of her, or not intimately concerned with her life
There seems to be a confusion of a kind here, a partial understanding of tawhid that needs to be engaged--because God transcends our material realm, and is apart from it, does not mean God is remote; we as Muslims believe God transcends time and space. To believe this implies distance, however, is to reintroduce time and space precisely after God denies these categories are relevant. Nothing can contain God, the Islamic tradition teaches... which is where the above seems to stop, forgetting that there's more to this specific tradition: "except the heart of a believer."That, however, is the part I'm not hearing. In other words, we as humans can and must let God in, as Muslims; more to the point, God being God, God is already "in".
We either come to terms with that or we do not, whoever we are and however we are. But none of this warmth, intimacy and presence are found above, conveying a rather dated perspective on Islam, that in fairness some Muslims also hold to, but I hardly think this is due to deep reading and more because we wander through the detritus of our tradition, often picking at the pieces we can find, the larger narrative inaccessible. Of course, if I'm misunderstanding your point, let me know. Maybe this works better as an in-person conversation, but I thought I'd at least raise some immediate reflections and concerns
I would love to discuss this more. Everything I say about Islam should be taken with a grain of salt given that I'm an outsider, not a practitioner. When I emphasize God's transcendence in Islam, I don't mean to say he is indifferent, but I am trying to emphasize the extent to which the Incarnation implies a certain intimacy--since God shares in our human condition--that exists in Christianity and is absent from Islam. But that doesn't mean Muslims don't have a relationship with God, of course. But yes, let's please discuss more at some point.
This is certainly worth a longer conversation: How? When? Where? Good news is, I have options (think podcast in the works). More to come on that soon, because the kind of nuance we need probably can't come easily through comments. But where I'll offer a counterpoint: First, God being God, wouldn't the same intimacy hold even if God did not physically, literally, substantively share in our human condition? (That is to say, I'm hardly anyone special, but as it would go for anyone else, wouldn't God know what we're facing and enduring?) And on the point of intimacy, Muslims make that connection through Muhammad (peace be upon him), which you hinted at -- while we're not supposed to make graven images as Muslims -- we also spend our lives trying to look like Muhammad (p), within and without. In effect, we become walking paeans to the Prophet, but we believe his love and mercy reflects God's, and through him, God loves us all the more so
Imagine if a Christian in the Roman Empire wrote an essay titled "confessions of a wannabe pagan" where they frothed at the mouth about the "beauty", "ritual", and "spirituality" of the Roman cult. All the while their brothers and sisters in Christ were being persecuted and murdered by the pagans. This is no different to what you are doing. Our fellow Middle Eastern brothers and sisters in Christ are currently being persecuted and murdered in Muslim countries. Don't talk to me about how "appealing" Islam is to you when it has been the cause of so much of our suffering and martyrdom.
Every time you froth over your "attraction to Islam" you are doing nothing more than celebrating a disordered inclination towards heresy. Islam, which is a religion that denies the divinity of Christ, His incarnation, His passion, and glorious resurrection, is simply and obviously not of God, and you cannot talk about "lived experience" as if it somehow is relevant to objective and dogmatic Truth. Despite how "orthodox" you try to appear you seriously sound like the "spirit of V2" "interfaith" libs (Rohr, Kung) when you spouse nonsense like this. Even pagans and witches have forms of "mysticism", and some aspects of what they practice ("lived experience") are superficially and aesthetically appealing. But that will never change the fact that they worship false gods and idols. In a similar way, Islam worships a false god that is identified by "oneness", which is completely anathema to revealed Truth. And it's not a little difference. It has everything to do with the fundamentals, which I'm sure you know. The problem is, how can you be so conciliatory to what is plainly not of God? Catholics have never conciliated evil.
Then you say, "I don't care about the good or bad aspects" and complain about "moralizing Catholics" without actually providing a reason why it is wrong to be concerned with morality in this very important question. Do you not see how problematic this is? Whether you admit it or not, you are subtly relativizing religious truth, pretending that its "aesthetic and ontological" aspects are in any way relevant, while being intentionally vague and opaque about it.
You're a Catholic, not a "wannabe Muslim". This isn't a light matter. Get your head out of the clouds and stop flirting with heresy.
God is immutable. God doesn't undergo any change. Because a change always happens between two states, good and bad. If God incarnates in a human, He changes HIS state from the divine to the human. That's a lower state, that's mortal, and God is immortal.
Incarnation is contradictory. It starts with a postulate that God is immutable, then suddenly finds itself pointing out that God died as a human. It justifies the fallacy with illogical claims, such as He did it to save us.
He didn't have to. Islam teaches us that God can save you and forgive you without any mediator. You just need to repent sincerely.
This is the most gracious celebration God has offered humankind; he forgives them by something as simple as a sincere request for forgiveness.
It's definitely an easier path to take than that of Christianity, where for someone to have forgiveness, they need to visit a priest.
No. The Incarnation does not make God mutable, it just means that He took on a different form. Since there is a natural distinction between form and essence, it is true that in the Incarnation, God assumed a different form, a human form, but remained God in essence.
St. Thomas Aquinas actually speaks on this specific matter. "The mystery of Incarnation was not completed through God being changed in any way from the state in which He had been from eternity, but through His having united Himself to the creature in a new way, or rather through having united it to Himself. But it is fitting that a creature which by nature is mutable, should not always be in one way. And therefore, as the creature began to be, although it had not been before, so likewise, not having been previously united to God in Person, it was afterwards united to Him." (ST III, q. 1, a. 1)
All this is to say that through the Incarnation, the divine nature remained unchanged. God did not become man by ceasing to be God. In the Incarnation, He united two natures, man and divine, in one Divine Person, the Son of God. This is what is referred to as the Hypostatic Union.
The phrase you said: "He took a different form," is, by essence, not immutable. According to this, before Jesus was in the flesh, there was no human-God, and after Jesus, God "assumed a different form."
If all these are not mutable to you, then what is? Didn't Jesus eat and drink and continue his life as a human? So, like any other human, what happens after we eat? Did God do that, too?
Didn't the Christian scholar Thomas Aquinace say, "Not having been previously united to God in Person, it was afterward united to Him"? So, a change has happened.
In Islam, God doesn't undergo any kind of change, neither in essence nor in state,
Now you said, "God took a different FORM." By definition, all monotheistic theologies hold that God (or the Father in Christianity) doesn't take a form; God is unbound by space and time. Therefore, God has no form; therefore, God doesn't change form, as that would be a logical fallacy.
So, the Hypostatic Union is not but a fancy name to make sense of an illogical fallacy.
If God is immutable then how does men who are inherently mutable reach up to the immutable God? You cannot add numbers to a finite set until it becomes infinity!
This is i think is at the heart of the three abrahamic religions. Despite all three fighting each other the central narratives of the religions, be it God approaching Abraham, God becoming Jesus according to the Christians or God giving revelations to the Prophet of Islam in the cave of Hira, the point is to reconcile this dilemma by making God himself reach down into and being understood by mutable human history
You asked how the mutable can reach out to the immutable.
Well, that's easy. It's through the Spirit. That's the point that Christians tried to understand but couldn't. The Spirit is the missing link in the equation, but that is not to say that it's also part of God, but rather a creation of God that serves as this medium to allow the mortal to connect with the Immortal.
If you're really interested to know more, i have a newsletter where I talk about Spirituality in Islam.
I'd like you to have a look at it. It's for Truth Seekers.
This was a very interesting read. While I cannot comment whatsoever on what Muslims believe or experience in their relationship with God, the very last part of your piece caught my eye (and heart). I came into communion with the Catholic Church (partly) because I was hungering for a deeper, robust, sacrificial way of worshipping Christ. Visceral, and very drawn to the Carmelite spirituality. It led me into the turbulent waters of the TLM’ers for a bit, but I didn’t find what I was looking for there. Whether or not the institutional church lets your students down, one thing that is abundantly clear to me is that Christianity itself is beyond rigorous (love your enemies, bless those who curse you), demanding (offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God), living in communion with God’s word (Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow) and allowing it to shape you as you submit your will to the Triune God will absolutely challenge everything about your Reality. But I’m not sure people are willing to go that far. I think the people dissatisfied with Christianity have become bored and/or have left it untried (and I’m sure a lot of hurt people have experienced in their various communities causes them to leave). Not to mention we have an enemy of our souls who, of course, would like nothing more than to distract us off the path. Also the section of the Qur’an that you cited as one of your favorites has very interesting parallels with James 4: 13-15:
“Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit.” Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. For you are just a vapor that appears for a little while, and then vanishes away. Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.”
Thanks for sharing your thoughts as always, and I’m looking forward to the next piece you will write on this topic.
Long-time reader, though I know I rarely comment. Still, there's a lot here, I'm really grateful for the thoroughness, generosity and as always appreciate your warmth, rigor and wit. But I have to say, a lot of this seems to hang on a particular description of God, namely how Islam understands the Divine, except that I don't recognize the theology here. Myself included, but additionally at least the Muslims I know, read, and study with, wouldn't recognize this conception of Divinity, either. Consider this passage
"As much as I believe in Christianity, I cannot deny that I’m attracted to the path proposed and foundational claims made by Islam. As I told Shadi, there is something very attractive about foregoing one’s “human logic,” one’s subjectivity, and surrendering it completely to this absolute Being who exists on a plane that totally transcends your own. In a sense, it leaves me off the hook from having to engage my subjectivity…from having to do the work, from having to let him—a fellow human—in and see my in all of my woundedness and vulnerability, to allow him in to share life with me. I wish he could stay up there and I stay down here submitting to his will"
...
The idea that Islam requires us to forego our "logic" and "subjectivity" is itself a cliche, but arguably is just as true of Christianity (the Trinity, after all, is hardly more "rational" or "logical" than unitarianism). In fairness, after all, I could ask why God needs to be human in order to see our woundedness and vulnerability; difference from God does not imply distance from God. Yes, we believe God is above and beyond us, but that does not mean God is not with us, intimately aware of us, present with us at all times; from the folk wisdom of Islam to the deepest traditions of the normative period of the faith, no Muslim believes God is far away, indifferent to her, unaware of her, or not intimately concerned with her life
There seems to be a confusion of a kind here, a partial understanding of tawhid that needs to be engaged--because God transcends our material realm, and is apart from it, does not mean God is remote; we as Muslims believe God transcends time and space. To believe this implies distance, however, is to reintroduce time and space precisely after God denies these categories are relevant. Nothing can contain God, the Islamic tradition teaches... which is where the above seems to stop, forgetting that there's more to this specific tradition: "except the heart of a believer."That, however, is the part I'm not hearing. In other words, we as humans can and must let God in, as Muslims; more to the point, God being God, God is already "in".
We either come to terms with that or we do not, whoever we are and however we are. But none of this warmth, intimacy and presence are found above, conveying a rather dated perspective on Islam, that in fairness some Muslims also hold to, but I hardly think this is due to deep reading and more because we wander through the detritus of our tradition, often picking at the pieces we can find, the larger narrative inaccessible. Of course, if I'm misunderstanding your point, let me know. Maybe this works better as an in-person conversation, but I thought I'd at least raise some immediate reflections and concerns
I would love to discuss this more. Everything I say about Islam should be taken with a grain of salt given that I'm an outsider, not a practitioner. When I emphasize God's transcendence in Islam, I don't mean to say he is indifferent, but I am trying to emphasize the extent to which the Incarnation implies a certain intimacy--since God shares in our human condition--that exists in Christianity and is absent from Islam. But that doesn't mean Muslims don't have a relationship with God, of course. But yes, let's please discuss more at some point.
This is certainly worth a longer conversation: How? When? Where? Good news is, I have options (think podcast in the works). More to come on that soon, because the kind of nuance we need probably can't come easily through comments. But where I'll offer a counterpoint: First, God being God, wouldn't the same intimacy hold even if God did not physically, literally, substantively share in our human condition? (That is to say, I'm hardly anyone special, but as it would go for anyone else, wouldn't God know what we're facing and enduring?) And on the point of intimacy, Muslims make that connection through Muhammad (peace be upon him), which you hinted at -- while we're not supposed to make graven images as Muslims -- we also spend our lives trying to look like Muhammad (p), within and without. In effect, we become walking paeans to the Prophet, but we believe his love and mercy reflects God's, and through him, God loves us all the more so
More to come soon, inshallah
Thank you for writing!
Imagine if a Christian in the Roman Empire wrote an essay titled "confessions of a wannabe pagan" where they frothed at the mouth about the "beauty", "ritual", and "spirituality" of the Roman cult. All the while their brothers and sisters in Christ were being persecuted and murdered by the pagans. This is no different to what you are doing. Our fellow Middle Eastern brothers and sisters in Christ are currently being persecuted and murdered in Muslim countries. Don't talk to me about how "appealing" Islam is to you when it has been the cause of so much of our suffering and martyrdom.
Every time you froth over your "attraction to Islam" you are doing nothing more than celebrating a disordered inclination towards heresy. Islam, which is a religion that denies the divinity of Christ, His incarnation, His passion, and glorious resurrection, is simply and obviously not of God, and you cannot talk about "lived experience" as if it somehow is relevant to objective and dogmatic Truth. Despite how "orthodox" you try to appear you seriously sound like the "spirit of V2" "interfaith" libs (Rohr, Kung) when you spouse nonsense like this. Even pagans and witches have forms of "mysticism", and some aspects of what they practice ("lived experience") are superficially and aesthetically appealing. But that will never change the fact that they worship false gods and idols. In a similar way, Islam worships a false god that is identified by "oneness", which is completely anathema to revealed Truth. And it's not a little difference. It has everything to do with the fundamentals, which I'm sure you know. The problem is, how can you be so conciliatory to what is plainly not of God? Catholics have never conciliated evil.
Then you say, "I don't care about the good or bad aspects" and complain about "moralizing Catholics" without actually providing a reason why it is wrong to be concerned with morality in this very important question. Do you not see how problematic this is? Whether you admit it or not, you are subtly relativizing religious truth, pretending that its "aesthetic and ontological" aspects are in any way relevant, while being intentionally vague and opaque about it.
You're a Catholic, not a "wannabe Muslim". This isn't a light matter. Get your head out of the clouds and stop flirting with heresy.
God is immutable. God doesn't undergo any change. Because a change always happens between two states, good and bad. If God incarnates in a human, He changes HIS state from the divine to the human. That's a lower state, that's mortal, and God is immortal.
Incarnation is contradictory. It starts with a postulate that God is immutable, then suddenly finds itself pointing out that God died as a human. It justifies the fallacy with illogical claims, such as He did it to save us.
He didn't have to. Islam teaches us that God can save you and forgive you without any mediator. You just need to repent sincerely.
This is the most gracious celebration God has offered humankind; he forgives them by something as simple as a sincere request for forgiveness.
It's definitely an easier path to take than that of Christianity, where for someone to have forgiveness, they need to visit a priest.
(Btw I loved reading your post)
No. The Incarnation does not make God mutable, it just means that He took on a different form. Since there is a natural distinction between form and essence, it is true that in the Incarnation, God assumed a different form, a human form, but remained God in essence.
St. Thomas Aquinas actually speaks on this specific matter. "The mystery of Incarnation was not completed through God being changed in any way from the state in which He had been from eternity, but through His having united Himself to the creature in a new way, or rather through having united it to Himself. But it is fitting that a creature which by nature is mutable, should not always be in one way. And therefore, as the creature began to be, although it had not been before, so likewise, not having been previously united to God in Person, it was afterwards united to Him." (ST III, q. 1, a. 1)
All this is to say that through the Incarnation, the divine nature remained unchanged. God did not become man by ceasing to be God. In the Incarnation, He united two natures, man and divine, in one Divine Person, the Son of God. This is what is referred to as the Hypostatic Union.
The phrase you said: "He took a different form," is, by essence, not immutable. According to this, before Jesus was in the flesh, there was no human-God, and after Jesus, God "assumed a different form."
If all these are not mutable to you, then what is? Didn't Jesus eat and drink and continue his life as a human? So, like any other human, what happens after we eat? Did God do that, too?
Didn't the Christian scholar Thomas Aquinace say, "Not having been previously united to God in Person, it was afterward united to Him"? So, a change has happened.
In Islam, God doesn't undergo any kind of change, neither in essence nor in state,
Now you said, "God took a different FORM." By definition, all monotheistic theologies hold that God (or the Father in Christianity) doesn't take a form; God is unbound by space and time. Therefore, God has no form; therefore, God doesn't change form, as that would be a logical fallacy.
So, the Hypostatic Union is not but a fancy name to make sense of an illogical fallacy.
If God is immutable then how does men who are inherently mutable reach up to the immutable God? You cannot add numbers to a finite set until it becomes infinity!
This is i think is at the heart of the three abrahamic religions. Despite all three fighting each other the central narratives of the religions, be it God approaching Abraham, God becoming Jesus according to the Christians or God giving revelations to the Prophet of Islam in the cave of Hira, the point is to reconcile this dilemma by making God himself reach down into and being understood by mutable human history
You asked how the mutable can reach out to the immutable.
Well, that's easy. It's through the Spirit. That's the point that Christians tried to understand but couldn't. The Spirit is the missing link in the equation, but that is not to say that it's also part of God, but rather a creation of God that serves as this medium to allow the mortal to connect with the Immortal.
If you're really interested to know more, i have a newsletter where I talk about Spirituality in Islam.
I'd like you to have a look at it. It's for Truth Seekers.
Https://roohle.substack.com/
This was a very interesting read. While I cannot comment whatsoever on what Muslims believe or experience in their relationship with God, the very last part of your piece caught my eye (and heart). I came into communion with the Catholic Church (partly) because I was hungering for a deeper, robust, sacrificial way of worshipping Christ. Visceral, and very drawn to the Carmelite spirituality. It led me into the turbulent waters of the TLM’ers for a bit, but I didn’t find what I was looking for there. Whether or not the institutional church lets your students down, one thing that is abundantly clear to me is that Christianity itself is beyond rigorous (love your enemies, bless those who curse you), demanding (offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God), living in communion with God’s word (Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow) and allowing it to shape you as you submit your will to the Triune God will absolutely challenge everything about your Reality. But I’m not sure people are willing to go that far. I think the people dissatisfied with Christianity have become bored and/or have left it untried (and I’m sure a lot of hurt people have experienced in their various communities causes them to leave). Not to mention we have an enemy of our souls who, of course, would like nothing more than to distract us off the path. Also the section of the Qur’an that you cited as one of your favorites has very interesting parallels with James 4: 13-15:
“Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit.” Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. For you are just a vapor that appears for a little while, and then vanishes away. Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.”
Thanks for sharing your thoughts as always, and I’m looking forward to the next piece you will write on this topic.