Coffee Talk

There seems, especially lately, to be ideas that have confused the concepts of "toleration" and "identity."

While it is right, I believe, to tolerate various theological and ideological concepts in a free society, that "toleration" should not be confused with "identity." Furthermore, toleration should not be confused with acceptance.

So, I can tolerate the free exercise of other religions in our free society. But, while I can (and should) believe that these "other people" are worthy of my respect, and they have the right to every aspect of human dignity, I do not have to believe that their "god" and my God are the same God. And, while I can accept them as co-workers, neighbors, and even friends, I do not have to accept their religion as "a correct way" to heaven, nor as being compatible with Christianity.

However, many people of various religious backgrounds are now attempting to say that mutually differing religious viewpoints are ultimately the same viewpoints. This is simply irrational and in some cases morally wrong.

In our American PC (politically correct) world, I fear that even well meaning Christians (who want to treat all people with dignity and respect) do not comprehend the magnitude that the PC ideology has infiltrated their thinking.

If we start with the premise, even subconsciously, that it is not PC to "exclude" anyone for any reason and that all ideologies are equally good, right, and true, then it follows that we must somehow make allowances for all people in every religious category so that we can come together as one large lump of homogenized spirituality.

Then, the "god' that emerges from such a homogenized spirituality is a confused, blended "god" with no distinct qualities that identifies him as the God of the Bible. This homogenized, blended god is what I call the Religiosity Monstrosity .

"It takes a fundamental breakdown in Christian theology to believe that."

These were my words to a Christian missionary who had just announced that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

I know that there are some ill-informed Christians who accept the idea that Christians and Muslims worship the same God (i.e., the Religiosity Monstrosity). And, some ill-informed Christians do not just accept it but they actually promote it.

This is so fundamentally in error that is simply astounds me that anyone who claims to be a Christian and who has completed basic Theology 101 would make such an elementally erroneous statement.

It is an elemental act of discernment that keeps these "two gods" from being confused and undergoing some sort of metaphysical metamorphosis into a single supreme being.

Discernment
One of the problems people have is with the word "discern." It is sometimes considered a lofty representation of a deep ability to reach into our inner being and somehow mystically pull out the nebulous ability to qualify items for minute classifications. Well, the word discern is simply not that esoteric. Its definition and application are really quite pedestrian. It means simply, "To perceive or recognize as being different or distinct; to distinguish."

So, discernment is not some nebulous, mystical ability that only a few people have and is subject to all sorts of debate and review. Those who need to debate and review before they can conclude that a fish and a frog are different are being either incredibly boorish or incredibly stupid.

Discernment is the basic (instinctual) ability to distinguish between things. The two words "discernment" and "distinguish" are synonymous terms.

Now, let's get really simple about this. Things that are not alike differ from one another in some ways . . . some of those "ways" are (1) essential elements, and (2) constructs.

Let's Turn to Logic and Chemistry
An example: A sheet of metal is not a sheet of plywood. These two differ in essential elements. However, two sheets of plywood may differ in size but not element. But, even when you have two sheets of plywood that differ only in construct (size), it is a simple act of discernment to distinguish between the two. It does not take a genius to know that a 2' x 2' sheet of plywood is not the same thing as a 2' x 6' sheet of plywood. And, no one in his right mind would attempt to argue that these two sheets are the same.

It seems foolish to even have to say this but . . . two compounds can have all the same elements but one, and, thus, they are not the same compounds.

Discerning the Constructs: A Sample of CO and CO2
In this sample, the elements will be the same but the constructs will differ. Compare carbon monoxide (CO) with carbon dioxide (CO2). Note the one element difference is not even in the essential element but in the construct: CO and CO2. These small molecules only differ by the number of oxygen atoms.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is what we exhale from our lungs and is the source of bubbles in pop, beer, and champagne. It is non-toxic.

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a product of incomplete combustion, e.g., when something burns and there is limited air or oxygen like the fumes that come out of a car's tailpipe. It is extremely toxic.

So, while we can inhale the CO2 in the bubbles in soda-pop, beer, and champagne with little or no effect, it is not (read NOT!) advisable to inhale the CO in the fumes from your car's exhaust.

Discerning the Elements: A Sample of CO2 and SiO2
Now, in this sample, the construct will be the same but the elements will differ. Remember the carbon dioxide (CO2) above? Well, using the same construct, we will change one of the elements:

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an odorless nontoxic gas and is the source of bubbles in pop, beer, and champagne.

But, Silicon dioxide (SiO2) is a solid and is insoluble in water. In fact, it is sand.

Note the difference is only the first element. In CO2 the first element is Carbon. In SiO2 the first element is Silicon.

And, just that one elemental difference makes an extreme difference between a non-toxic gas and sand.

Two more brief examples:

1. H2O and H2S: Not a lot of difference there right? Well, H2O is water and H2S is hydrogen sulfide. You can (and should) drink H20, but H2S is extremely poisonous.

2. Next, H2O = water and H2O2 = hydrogen peroxide.

The Point So Far
The point so far is this . . . if two things have different elements or constructs, then they are NOT the same thing. For example H2O and H2O are the same thing. And, H2S and H2S are the same thing. But H2O and H2S are not the same thing, and it's just as simple as that.

Is the number 3 the same thing as the number 1? Of course not.

Example: If an object has three elemental components and another object has only one component, who in their right minds would think that these two items were the same thing? Yet, when people talk of God, they somehow think that they can leave the most basic elements of logic behind. The problem is that when you leave logic behind, you can make anything out of (or into) anything.

Using "formula labels" for the two "Gods" of Christianity and Islam, we can readily see how they differ.

"How great you are, O Sovereign LORD!
There is no one like you, and there is no God but you,
as we have heard with our own ears" (2 Sam. 7:22 )

D1 stands for the fact that God is One Substance. He is divine (or divinity). So, the Christian God has only one substance. The Christian God is also P3. P3 stands for the fact that God consists of (i.e., construct) Three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Thus, the Christian God is (D1P3) One Substance + Three Persons.

D1 stands for the fact that God is One Substance. He is divine (or divinity--according to his followers). So, the Islamic God has only one substance. The Islamic God is P1. P1 stands for the fact that the Islamic God consists of only One Person. Thus, the Islamic God is (D1P1) One Substance + One Person.

The difference between D1P3 and D1P1 is obvious and easily discerned. These two "Gods" are not the same.

Let's Turn to Theology
Now, people can rationalize all they want to; they can argue that there is only one true God so no matter what a person thinks he is worshiping (D1P3 or D1P1) , since there is only one true God anyway, then that person, no matter what he thinks of God, is actually worshiping the one true God; he just calls him by a different name (Allah) or has a different idea of His essence or construct ( D1P1) .

This might have been true had not the one true God (D1P3), made this undeniable declaration:

You see, theologically, you cannot simply call God anything you like. To be "not condemned" you must believe in the Second Person of the D1P3. But, whoever does not believe in the Second Person of the D1P3 stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son, Jesus Christ.

Next, the Second Person of the D1P3 himself made this bold declaration: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me "(John 14:6).

Understand this: there is no worship of God without worship of His one and only Son. So, to say that Christians and Muslims worship the same God--when Muslims deny the Triune God (D1P3) and the deity of Jesus Christ--is to have a most fundamental breakdown in both logic and theology.

No Need of Doctrine and Truth?
Some people argue that as long as your intentions are good, then God will accept you. Doctrine is unnecessary. To these people there is no need of truth. The idea that God is D1P3 is just extraneous data that is only important to theologians.

Of course the problem with this is the fact that Jesus was very big on "truth." In fact, he said, "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24).

The truth is that God is D1P3. And, since Jesus, the 2nd person of D1P3, said that people must worship God "in truth," then it follows that they cannot worship D1P1 or any other construct or essence and be true worshipers of the one true God (D1P3). Furthermore, those who say otherwise are setting themselves above Christ Himself! He's wrong and they're right? Not hardly.

Someone might say, "Ah, com'on. Is God really all that interested in the "P3" portion of the D1P3? After all, as long as we have the D1 down, all the rest falls into place."

This was really already answered above, but notice what the 2nd Person of D1P3 has to say about the P3 part of it:

It is Really Elemental
It is simply amazing to me that we humans discern between things all the time with relative ease, but some people seem to "get mystical" when it comes to discerning who God is.

A Big Mac is not an apple, and anyone with the ability to see or touch and who has an IQ above room temperature can discern the difference.

And, if an object has three elemental components and another object has only one elemental component, then these two objects are not the same thing.

Black is not white and east is not west.

Trees are not rocks and dogs are not cats.

D1P3 (the Christian God) is not D1P1 (the Islamic God).

It really is that simple.

A Rudimentary Understanding of the Trinity
Now, again, I can understand someone who is ignorant of theology making a fundamental error concerning the essence of God. I would not expect a non-Christian nor even a young Christian to be able to point out the essential differences between the false of Islam and the God of Christianity. But, people who have been Christians for years should at least know the basic essence of whom they claim to worship.

However, even many Christians who have been in the faith for years cannot explain even the most rudimentary understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity.

Is it Any Wonder?
In fact, when was the last time you heard a sermon at your church on the doctrine of the Trinity? This doctrine is an elemental doctrine of the Christian church, yet I have known pastors who who (1) do not even understand the doctrine themselves, and/or who (2) never preached it in their churches. Is it any wonder that so many Christians are theologically illiterate?

One Christian leader (a pastor) that I talked with about the fundamental differences between the god of Islam and the God of Christianity could not grasp the basic philosophical difference between the simple, undivided unity of Islamic monotheism and the complex, Trinitarian Unity of Christian monotheism. In essence it is this: the Christian God has a construct of three distinct persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Islamic god has a construct of one solitary person. And, 3 and 1 are not the same thing, not philosophically, logically, nor theologically.

When I asked the pastor the rhetorical question, "Do Muslims accept Jesus as the second person of the Trinity?" he smirked and said, "the second person of the Trinity is a non-issue . . . and just because they don't accept Jesus Christ as the second person of the Trinity does not mean that they do not worship the same God." I was simply astounded at his lack of both logic and elemental theology, but I was even more astounded at his utter lack of respect for his Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ.

The Thalidomide Disaster
I have reviewed some materials on the drug called Thalidomide, and since this is not my field, I still do not completely understand it. But, I'll give you a brief bit of information in my words so you'll get the main idea. (If medicine is your background, then please allow me the leeway of a non-medical person.)

Thalidomide was a drug that was very effective for its purpose. However, it was eventually found that the construct (not the element) was wrong. The drug was "nearly correct." It differed from what it was supposed to be in an exceptionally small aspect of its construct (a wrong optical isomer). But, due to this exceptionally small difference, it produced massive deformities in fetuses of pregnant women around the world. Children were born with missing or truncated limbs. So, something with exactly the same element and formula but differing only in the order they are placed on the central atom (the construct) can have a radical difference in its effect.

I wonder if Christian leaders who think that "gods" who are fundamentally different are really the same would knowingly ingest medicines that are fundamentally the same, except for exceptionally small differences of construct?

Is D1P3 the same as D1P1 ?

Is the God of Christianity the same as the god of Islam?

If we are so cautious about making sure that things in this physical life are correct in all of their elements and constructs (like the medicines we ingest), shouldn't we be all the more cautious about making sure that the God we worship (and promote to others) is the correct God in all of His element and construct?

The difference between believing in D1P3 and D1P1 has a radical effect that goes far beyond missing or truncated limbs. The effect of your choice on this fundamental issue has a radical effect on your eternity.

Other Voices on this Topic
What right-thinking Christian would deny that the doctrine of the Trinity is a significant tenet of the Christian faith? It is what I called a DNA Doctrine in CT # 47 (The term "Cult" defined, and Related Issues). In other words, it is fundamental to who and what God is. Here are a few quotes from other scholars in the field:

"The doctrine of the Trinity reveals to us a God that is vastly different from the 'gods' of the pagans, but also very different from the traditional God of modern day Judaism [and] Islam . . ." (web site of Daniel B. Wallace, Ph.D, professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, see more at http://www.bible.org)

James White, Th.D., (apologist and author) writes: "We withhold fellowship from groups like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses because they reject the Trinity and replace it with another concept. We hang a person's very salvation upon the acceptance of the doctrine." (THE FORGOTTEN TRINITY, published by Bethany House Publishers)

Norman Geisler, Th.D., Ph.D. (apologist and president of Southern Evangelical Seminary) states that, "No doctrine is more fundamental to the Faith than the Trinity." (see, THE FORGOTTEN TRINITY)

Dr. John MacArthur (senior pastor of Grace Community Church) says, "The Trinity is a doctrine where error is especially deadly." (see, THE FORGOTTEN TRINITY)

Kerry McRoberts (M.A., M.C.S., professor of Bible and theology at Trinity Bible College) says, "Non-Trinitarian views, such as Modalism and Arianism, reduce the doctrine of salvation to a divine charade. All of the basic Christian convictions centering on the work of the Cross presuppose the personal distinction of the three members of the Trinity. . . .The doctrine of salvation is contingent upon the cooperation of the distinctive members of the Triune God (e.g., Eph. 1:3-4). Therefore, a conscious renouncing of the Trinity doctrine seriously jeopardizes the hope of one's personal salvation." (Systematic Theology, A Pentecostal Perspective, Logion Press)

Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer (founder and first present of Dallas Theological Seminary) has written: "The denial of Trinitarianism as seen in contemporary unitarianism inevitable affects other vital doctrines including the doctrine of salvation and the whole plan of God for the redemption of mankind." (Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, Victor Books)

Dr. Walter Martin (apologist and founder of Christian Research Institute) explained that when the doctrine of the Trinity was denied, then the second person of the Trinity is perverted, and then he is no longer the same Christ as found in the Bible. Martin points out that the Apostle Paul himself warned that there was "the other Jesus." In fact, Paul says that some people preach a "different Jesus," and that they also preach a "different spirit" and a "different gospel" (2 Cor 11:4). Do Christian pastors really have to be told this? Martin states: "For it is axiomatic that if the doctrine of Christ Himself, i.e., His Person [which includes His being the second person of the Trinity] nature and work are perverted, then the identity of the life-giver is altered, then the life which He came to give is correspondingly negated." (The Kingdom of the Cults , Bethany House Publishers)

Thus, if the 2nd Person of D1P3 is denied,
then the life that He came to give is negated,
and, if the "life" is negated, then salvation is negated.
For Salvation is the life that the 2nd Person of D1P3 came to give.

I could go on and on with quotes from biblical scholars who all agree that the Trinity is an elemental doctrine that is part of the construct of the Godhead, and thus essential to the identity of the One True God.

In fact, the doctrine of the Trinity is so fundamental to Christianity that the burden of proof rests upon those who say that the god of Islam is the same as the God of Christianity. However, this burden of proof is unbearable; i.e., it is simply impossible to prove this thesis by the Scriptures, logic, philosophy, theology, or just good old horse sense.

Concluding Remarks
When people promote the idea that Christianity and Islam worship the same "God," they are not discerning the differences between the two, and they are creating a Religiosity Monstrosity which will lead people to the wrong eternity . . . and, frankly, I fear for both those who accept this notion and for those who teach this eternal disaster.

Too many people in the church promote themselves as "teachers" when in reality they are not well-trained in the Bible or theology, let alone philosophy, historical theology, or even basic logic. Our Lord's brother had this to say: "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly" (James 3:1). Chilling words to be sure.

The Triune God is the One True God and any concept of God that denies the Second Person of the Trinity is a concept of a different god than the God of Christianity. Jesus made it all very clear when He authoritatively proclaimed in John 10:30: "I and the Father are one."

1. You had a point to prove and you proved it well. Very refreshing presentation and an excellent argument.—Jerry M. (Doctor of Theology Student)

2. I enjoyed your latest coffee talk. Logic can be in short supply when people let their emotions rule the roost. Emotions aren't bad, per se, just something you should be careful what you filter through.—Jason V. (B.S. Poly Sci)

3. It is a no-brainer: (a) Jesus Christ is God, (b) Muslims do not except Jesus Christ as God, (c) Muslims do not accept the Christian God (D1P3).—Rob M. (M.Apol. Student)

4. I enjoyed CT #53. It is refreshing to hear the truth presented on a biblical basis. Furthermore, to hear logical arguments based upon biblical revelation blesses my heart, especially when so many arguments are based upon human, fleshly wisdom.—Thanks, Dr. Paul C.

5. Worship the same God? I think not! Isaiah was correct, "before Me there is no God, neither will there be after Me." Thank you for speaking the prophetic truth!—Dr. Larry A.

6. I thought that your latest coffee talk (#53) was so good and such a solid logical argument, that I'm going to forward it to my dad (a member of the Unity church) in the hopes that he will read it.—Thank you. Jeremy H.

7. Your argument is both logical and compelling. There is only one God and Jesus is His unique Son. Muslims and Christians do not worship nor serve the same God. I will be "lifting" your words to use in my lectures and sermons.—Dr. Kirk N.

8. Thanks for Coffee Talk #53. There is an effort underway to make everyone religiously equal. Of course this can only be done by reducing what is believed to the lowest common denominator, as has being done by the statement "Jesus is Lord." The statement is purposely left undefined. Therefore, everyone is free to think of Jesus as Lord in whatever terms he chooses and still be accepted by all.The early believers, however, were exclusivists. They were put to death for refusing to worship Caesar. They were, however, allowed to live if they poured out libations to the image of Caesar. After that, they were allowed to worship Christ as they desired. This was to indicate that Caesar was superior to Christ. Isn't it doing the same thing when it is said that Islam or any other pagan religion is equal to Christianity? Aren't they denigrating the name of Jesus and making him to be no more than a mere man?—Pastor James Walston

The Religiosity Monstrosity: Confused concepts of God's Identity