fbpx
Articles

What’s Wrong with Wheaton?

/
December 18, 2015

This week on Twitter, a thousand theological experts emerged in a discussion over an evangelical school that, surprise, enforced a rule that their faculty adhere to evangelical doctrine. At the center of this debate was a statement by political science professor Larycia Hawkins on Facebook. In a well-meaning attempt to identify with the struggles of Muslims, who live as a misunderstood minority in America, Hawkins said: “We worship the same God.”

Wheaton College suspended Hawkins, not for her neighbor love for Muslims, but for her confusing theological statement. Some evangelicals, including many Wheaton alums, angrily denounced the school for intolerance. Wheaton grad Tobin Grant, a columnist for Religion News Service, called the move an “overreach” and defended Hawkins’s statements on the basis of her signing of the school’s statement. Religion columnist Jonathan Merritt pointed to this move and Wheaton’s refusal to endorse same-sex marriage as signs that the evangelical school was in danger of losing its identity as “The Harvard of evangelicalism.” In perhaps the most caustic criticism, respected theologian Miroslav Volf saw only anti-Muslim bigotry at Wheaton.

Many who oppose the suspension of Hawkins, find no problem with her claim that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, pointing to Volf’s own parsing of this phrase. While I highly respect Volf and don’t question his (or Hawkins’s motives), I agree with Scot McKnight:

I have said this before and will say it again: we can agree to some degree at a generic level, but we don’t worship God in the generic. We worship either the God of Abraham and Moses, the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, or the God of Mohammed. The God in each of the faiths is understood differently enough to conclude that saying we worship the “same” God muddies the water.

E.g.,. we could say these things that show they three are sufficiently dissimilar:

There is only one God and he has taken on human form in one person, Jesus Christ.
The one God has revealed himself most completely in Jesus Christ, who was crucified and raised, so that cruciformity is central to Who God is.

3. The one God is revealed in Three Persons, Father, Son and Spirit.

Neither Judaism nor Islam embraces any of these, so there is good reason to say they are not the same.

If Christ is the “image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15), if God has “in these days spoken to us by His Son” (Hebrews 1:12) and if “no one who denies the Son has the father,” then faithful Christians can’t conflate the Muslim conception of the divine with the Triune God of the Bible. Faithful Muslims not only reject the idea of the Trinity and the divinity of Christ, they are abhorred by it. To conflate the two religions is disrespectful to both Islam and to Christianity, says Thabiti Anyabwile, a former Muslim and author of The Gospel for Muslims. So while Islam and Christianity share some mutual characteristics, such as monotheism, at the most basic level, it is incorrect to say we “worship the same God.” As Trevin Wax says, “God is not God apart from Jesus.”

I believe the motives of Volf and Hawkins are pure: to help Christians see the human dignity of their Muslim neighbors and for adherents of both religions to live together in peace. This should be the desire of every follower of Christ. However the best starting point for discussions with our Muslim neighbors is not conflating Christianity and Islam, but by discussing our differences. This is what Paul is doing at Mars Hill (Acts 17:22-31). He uses the Athenians longing for transcendence as a starting point to then contrast their false deities with the Triune God of Scripture.

What’s more, it is the very uniqueness of Christianity that supplies the catalyst for Christians to work for tolerance, religious liberty, and justice for Muslims.

Followers of Jesus should love, serve, and protect the freedoms of their Muslim neighbors, not because they worship the same God, but because our distinctly Christian theology teaches us that every human being was created in the image of the Triune God (Genesis 1:26) and is worthy of respect and dignity (James 3:9). There is not a single human being who is not an image-bearer of God, therefore every life has intrinsic value and dignity.

Conflating Islam and Christianity makes it more difficult for Muslims to embrace a more wonderful God. Only the Christian story offers a God who entered our world as a baby and who, by his sacrificial death and resurrection, defeated sin’s curse. Only the Christian story offers hope in a world where men strike at the image of God with violence and bloodshed. Christ, who is both God and the perfect image of God, by his death and resurrection, restores a distorted image in His people and calls them to fruitful mission of both gospel proclamation and justice, to champion human dignity for the most vulnerable.

This is why Christians should not be ashamed of the distinction between Christianity and Islam. It is a feature, not a bug. We should love Muslims as neighbors and image-bearers of God. We should fight, earnestly, for their religious liberty. But we should do this, not in spite of the reality that we worship different deities, but because we do. And ultimately, our public and private witness should invite them to explore a wholly different Christian story that not only offers the best case for human flourishing, but access to God by faith in Jesus Christ.

Daniel Darling
Daniel Darling is the Vice President for Communications. He previously served five years as Senior Pastor of Gages Lake Bible Church. He is a contributor to a variety of other evangelical publications. He has written several books, including his latest, Activist Faith. He personally blogs at danieldarling.com.

Daniel Darling

Daniel Darling is the Director of the Land Center for Cultural Engagement at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is a columnist for World Magazine and a contributor to USA Today. Dan is a bestselling author of several books including, The Dignity Revolution, A Way With Words, and The Characters of … Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24