Theism

Hamzah Fanṣūrī’s poem, Asrāru’l-‘arifīn. Theme: Ocean Oneness of Being

Hamzah Fanṣūrī’s poem, Asrāru’l-‘arifīn [The Secrets of the Gnostics].
Excerpt with theme: Ocean Oneness of Being. PCG 3b/4

A. Asrāru’l-‘arifīn

1) Tuhan kita itu seperti Baḥr al-‘Amīq
Ombaknya penuh pada sekalian ṭarīq
Laut dan ombak keduanya rafīq
’Ākhir kedalamanya jua omnaknya gharīq.

2) Lautnya ‘Ālim halunnya Ma‘lūm
Keadaannya Qāsim ombaknya Maqsūm
Ṭūfānnya Ḥākim shu’ ūnnya Maḥkūm
Pada sekalian ‘ālamīn rusūm.

3) Jikalau sini kamu tahu akan wujūd
Itulah tempat kamu shuhūd
Buangkan rupamu daripada sekalian quyūd
Supaya dapat kedalam Diri qu‘ūd.

4) [Pada wujūd Allāh] itulah yogya kau qā’im
Buangkan rupa dan namamu dā’im
Nafikan rasamu daripads makhdūm dan khādim
Supaya sampai kepada ‘Amal yang Khātim. Continue reading “Hamzah Fanṣūrī’s poem, Asrāru’l-‘arifīn. Theme: Ocean Oneness of Being”

Creation as Divine Manifestation. Wahdat al-Wujūd

Creation as Divine Manifestation. Wahdat al-Wujūd. PCG 3/4
Its Central Teachings and a Christian Critique

A. Introduction
Wahdat al-wujūd (WW), the “Unity of existence,” or “Oneness of Being,” represents one of the most sophisticated and controversial metaphysical frameworks within Islamic Sufism. Primarily attributed to the Andalusian mystic and philosopher Ibn Arabi (d. 1240), this doctrine posits that only God (Allah) possesses true existence (wujūd), and that the phenomenal universe is merely a reflection or manifestation of the Divine Attributes. The philosophy reached Southeast Asia during the 16th and 17th centuries through trade routes connecting the Middle East to Aceh. Hamzah Fansuri (d. 1527) and Shamsuddin al-Sumatrani (d. 1630) adapted Ibn Arabi’s metaphysical framework to reconcile God’s absolute oneness with the visible multiplicity of the world. The premier Malaysian philosopher Naquib al-Attas has defended the orthodoxy of Hamzah Fansuri, distinguishing WW from pantheism while integrating its metaphysics to ground his broader project of establishing the Islamic worldview.

This article examines WW’s core teachings as propounded by Hamzah Fansuri and Naquib al-Attas, exploring their ontological foundations, cosmological framework, and mystical implications, and ending with a Christian theological critique of WW. I shall quote liberally from the works of Naquib al-Attas since many Christians are not familiar with his works. Continue reading “Creation as Divine Manifestation. Wahdat al-Wujūd”

Reductionistic Science and the Disenchantment of the World: Paradigms of Creation and God

Reductionistic Science and the Disenchantment of the World: Paradigms of Creation and God (PCG 1/4)

The transformation of Europe—from the heartland of Christianity into a secular modern society during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries—began almost imperceptibly. Yet the cultural consequences of this shift eventually spread across the globe. As Aristotle once observed, “The least initial deviation from the truth is multiplied later a thousandfold.” This multifaceted process was driven in part by the skeptical philosophy of the European Enlightenment and by the rise of a reductionistic conception of science, often termed scientific naturalism. Scientific naturalism rejects supernatural and transcendent realities, viewing the universe instead as a closed system governed entirely by material causes and effects.

The theologian Hans Boersma describes the transition from the premodern, mystery-laden worldview of medieval Christendom to the modern secular outlook as a shift from “sacramental participation” to “univocity and immanence.”Medieval thinkers believed that universals such as truth, goodness, and beauty possessed real existence. Creation was understood as being charged with divine mystery. Earthly realities existed by virtue of their participation in, and reflection of, heavenly realities. Continue reading “Reductionistic Science and the Disenchantment of the World: Paradigms of Creation and God”

Is the Trinity Monotheism? Dr. Ali Ataie vs. Dr. Joshua Sijuwade. A Debate hosted by Blogging Theology

Debate: Is the Trinity Monotheism?

Joshua Sijuwade’s philosophical model of the Trinity is sophisticated and impressive. His analytical model of the Trinity is logically coherent, but as any logician or mathematician knows, one can always construct a consistent philosophical (or mathematical) system based on a chosen set of definitions, assumptions or axioms (so long as it does not claim completeness). More importantly, theoretical models, however sophisticated or coherent, must be grounded in historical reality and divine revelation. In this regard, viewers of the debate need to be convinced that Sijuwade’s splendid system of philosophical trinitarianism is consistent with biblical revelation and the Trinitarian doctrine which was framed in the Nicene Creed (AD 325, 381).

Ali Ataie suggests that the chart or Trinitarian scheme presented by Sijuwade is a form of Sabellianism. He also refers to Origen to suggest that Sijuwade’s monarchical model is not exactly (classical) Trinitarian since his model implies that only the Father has aseity, but not the Son or the Holy Spirit. Even then the Father’s aseity is not intrinsic (which is evidence that Ali does not fully understand the meaning of such a fundamental concept as aseity). Ali even argues that the Father cannot be fundamental since his identity as Father is dependent on another person outside of himself. Continue reading “Is the Trinity Monotheism? Dr. Ali Ataie vs. Dr. Joshua Sijuwade. A Debate hosted by Blogging Theology”

Talk: Signs of Intelligent Design in a Fine-tuned Universe and the God Hypothesis.

Link to video – Intelligent Design & the GOD Hypothesis

This talk was delivered originally at the Christian STEM Nexus Forum in Nov. 2023. It explains why the “God Hypothesis” offers an explanation of the origin of the universe better than chance in the light of new developments in contemporary cosmology. Issues discussed include (1) How the Universe came into existence, (2) Intelligent Design and Irreducible Complexity in fine-tuned universe.

1 The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
2 Day to day pours out speech,
and night to night reveals knowledge.
3 There is no speech, nor are there words,
whose voice is not heard.
4 Their voice goes out through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world (Psalm 19: 1-4).

Originally published on 25 Nov 2023. Updated on 13 June 2024

Christian Monotheism vs Fatalistic Monotheism

Balaam and the Ass – Rembrant (1626)

The Ancient Near Eastern mythological texts may appear to be obscure and irrelevant to us today. In reality, these texts continue to be influential since the structures of these polytheistic myths are embedded in later forms of Arabic monotheism which emerged a few centuries after Christianity & which gained dominance over vast stretches of territories in Asia and Africa.

Since these later forms of “monotheistic” religion developed from polytheism,* they are undergirded by the same polytheistic structure which portrays humans to be helplessly subject to the control of Fate. Note that Fate in ancient polytheistic religion is note fatalism because in the ancient polytheism, Fate can be manipulated through rituals of divination, incantations and sorcery. The rituals have intrinsic efficacy, but their efficacy is enhanced under the guidance and empowerment of the gods. However, such relief from Fate is temporary and limited since ultimately, even the gods are subject to Fate. Nevertheless, in principle, misfortune or ill-fated events can be discovered through divination so that proper rituals and incantations may be implemented to nullify them.

However, when Arabic polytheism later evolved into “monotheism”, that is, when all the gods were merged into one God, divination and sorcery were rendered ineffective since their rituals became deprived of assistance from the gods who have vanished. Furthermore, in contrast to the gods of polytheism, the God of the later forms of monotheism are not involved with the daily struggles of believers because he is supremely transcendent and inaccessible to mere mortals. The consequence is that without recourse to divination and sorcery, Fate can no longer be manipulated so that ill-fated events may be nullified. The ironic outcome of these later forms of monotheism is an equivalent of “Fate is control”. This leads to a sense of fatalism. Continue reading “Christian Monotheism vs Fatalistic Monotheism”

Open Theism Risky Providence is More Blameworthy than Classical Theism Risk-Free Providence

Reading 3
Open theism is the view that God lacks foreknowledge of undetermined future events, such as knowledge of how humans will or would use their libertarian freedom. This has the corollary that God’s providence is risky rather than risk-free. William Hasker, one of the most prominent and philosophically sophisticated proponents of open theism, defines what it would mean for God to take risks: “God takes risks if he makes decisions that depend for their outcomes on the responses of free creatures in which the decisions themselves are not informed by knowledge of the outcomes.” God’s risk-taking just is God’s providential decision-making in the absence of such knowledge…

[In Open Theism, God’s deliberate non-intervention rather than human free will has the final say]
Although open theists reject the view that any particular evil is necessary in God’s providential scheme (as a greater-good enabler or as a worse-evil blocker), it seems they must accept a parallel view: with respect to any particular actual evil, God’s following his general policy of nonintervention in this case was necessary to maximize opportunities for great goods that could only be obtained by God’s following such a non-interventionist policy. That is, given the policy and the essential role it plays in maximizing opportunities for great goods, God’s hands are tied. He must permit the evil, or risk undermining the great goods the policy aims at. Given the policy, which is itself grounded in God’s goodness and is therefore necessarily the best policy God could take toward creation, God had to permit the evil. (Why else wouldn’t he intervene when he is fully able to do so, except for a judgment of this sort on God’s part?) Continue reading “Open Theism Risky Providence is More Blameworthy than Classical Theism Risk-Free Providence”

Critique of Open Theism “Risky Providence.”

Reading 2
Some philosophers [Open Theists] have held that a satisfactory free-will theodicy cannot be developed if we claim God is timeless. Rather, they maintain, God has to be seen as a typical temporal agent, who strives to achieve his objectives within a framework of opportunities defined by the actions of other agents who, like him, are free. He is, of course, immensely powerful and wise, but like us he must await the actions of free beings other than himself in order to know with certainty what they will be, and adjust his own behavior in response. And much that those agents do, most especially their sinful decisions and willings, will not be what God would choose. Not that he is completely in the dark: with experience he may be able to develop probabilistic knowledge of how his creatures will act, and contrive to place them in circumstances designed to elicit if possible whatever behavior will achieve the most good. Moreover, God still has the power to motivate and punish, so his creatures may be guided toward right paths. But on this scenario God’s aims as creator can only be achieved – assuming they will be achieved at all – by taking risks. Inevitably, creaturely free will makes for a setting of uncertainty, and only within that setting can God attempt to bring creation to a happy outcome. Yet he proceeds, and his doing so is a measure of his love for us. [c.f. William Hasker] Continue reading “Critique of Open Theism “Risky Providence.””

Concise Theological Critique of Open Theism

Open Theism asserts that God’s knowledge is limited knowledge and that he is unable to anticipate free human actions. However, the Bible teaches that God is omniscient and knows the heart, the innermost thoughts, desires and intentions of man.

“O Lord, you have searched me and known me! You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thoughts from afar. You search out my path and my lying down and are acquainted with all my ways. Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lord, you know it altogether” (Ps. 139:1-4).

“I the Lord search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds” (Jer. 17:10).

“‘And you, my son Solomon, know the God of your father and serve him with a whole heart and with a willing mind, for the Lord searches all hearts and understands every plan and thought’” (1 Chron. 28:9a).

“O Lord of hosts, who tests the righteous, who sees the heart and the mind …” (Jer. 20:12).

“And they prayed, and said, ‘You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen” (Acts 1:24).

Reading 1: Critique of Open Theism

Open Theism’s Major Claims
Open theists argue that the Christian doctrine of God was influenced by Greek thought. Theology became philosophical rather than biblical. God was seen to be impassible (incapable of suffering) and immutable. Lost was the dynamic interaction between God and the creature. In the Bible, so the argument runs, God responds to human actions and is even said to repent of what he planned. Continue reading “Concise Theological Critique of Open Theism”

God Stoops to Turn Our Resignation to Restfulness

[Life must be imbued with meaning if it is to be worth living. But how can meaning be sustained when the end of life seems pointless? Even if one diligently gathers wisdom for three score and ten years, life must still go the way of the grasshopper. It is hard to keep faith in a good God who orders providence when misfortune strikes and one loses everything that has been regarded as blessings of God. Faith clings precariously to a thread worn thin as one suffers unbearable pain caused by terminal illness…

The defiance of the hard core skeptic or Stoic in the face of pointless and overwhelming suffering seems heroic when he counsels that the best way to find peace is to renounce any hope of finding meaning in life and to submit to fate. But is not the resignation of oneself to everything without complaint nothing more than a capitulation to inscrutable fate? Is life not reduced to groping in the dark where all things are colorless and grey? Without beauty and meaning, one loses the desire to act and sinks into paralyzing resignation.

The Christian believer may seem to share the same kindred spirit with the Stoic when he prays through his suffering, the immortal words of Jesus Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane, “Thy will be done.” But his prayer is a reposeful confession of faith rather than an utterance of despair or resignation. For he knows something that a person without Christ cannot know. He knows that he is entrusting his life into the hands of the heavenly Father rather than capitulating to impersonal and capricious fate.]
Continue reading “God Stoops to Turn Our Resignation to Restfulness”