Pantheism/neo-Platonism and Islam

First here's some Webster definitions to refresh your memory:

Pantheism: 

1 : a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe

2: the worship of all gods of different creeds, cults, or peoples indifferently; also : toleration of worship of all gods (as at certain periods of the Roman empire)

neo-Platonism: 

Platonism modified in later antiquity to accord with Aristotelian, post-Aristotelian, and eastern conceptions that conceives of the world as an emanation from an ultimate indivisible being with whom the soul is capable of being reunited in trance or ecstasy

"What about the Middle East? Many of us do not realize that, historically, Islamic thinkers drew on ancient Greek sources just as heavily as Western thinkers did, so that neo-Platonism spread to Arabic cultures as well. During the Golden Age of Islam in the seventh and eighth centuries, Muhammad's armies swept out from the Arabian peninsula, annexing territory from Spain to Persia. In the process, we might say, they also annexed the works of Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, and other Greek thinkers. As a result, the Arab world had a rich tradition of commentary on the Greek philosophers long before Europe did. In college history courses, we often learn that the Renaissance was sparked by the recovery of ancient classical writings. But we rarely learn it was Muslim philosophers who had preserved those texts and who reintroduced them to the West. 

  As a consequence, neo-Platonism became a strong influence on Islamic thought. Today several leading Muslim philosophers have embraced perennial philosophy, with its merging of Western and Eastern pantheism. In fact, the early proponents of this philosophy, who were Europeans, all ended up converting to Islam! To complete the circle, the man who launched perennial philosophy (a Frenchman named Rene Guenon) believed there was actually a common core uniting all three: neo-Platonism in the West, Hinduism in the East, and Islam in the Middle-East. 

  Since September 11, we have heard it said again and again that Islam is just another Abrahamic faith--as though it were not really very different from Christianity. So it may come as a surprise to learn that the god of Islam is actually more akin to the nonpersonal Absolute of neo-Platonism and Hinduism than to the God of the Bible. 

  Yes it is true, and the central reason is that Islam rejects the Trinity. Without that concept, it cannot hold a fully personal conception of God. Why not? Because many attributes of personality can be expressed only within a relationship--things like love, communication, empathy, and self-giving.

  Traditional Christian doctrine maintains a personal conception of God because it teaches that these interpersonal attributes were expressed from all eternity among the three Persons of the Trinity. A genuinely personal God requires distinct 'Persons,' because that alone makes it possible for love and communication to exist within the Godhead itself. 

  Islam denies the Trinity, however, which means there is no way for its conception of God to include these relational attributes. (At least not until He created the world--but in that case He would be dependent on creation). That's why it is correct to say, as some Islamic philosophers do, that Islam is actually akin to neo-Platonism and Hinduism.

  This nonpersonal conception of God also explains why Muslims express their faith in near-mechanical rituals: Muslim believers recite the Koran over and over, in unison, word for word, in the original Arabic. They don't pray to God as a personal being, pouring their hearts out to Him as David did, or arguing with him as Job did. As one Muslim website puts it, 'understanding [the Koran] is secondary' to recitation and ritual, which makes sense only if God is not a personal being. As sociologist Rodney Stark explains, religions with nonpersonal gods tend to stress precision in the performance of rituals and sacred formulas; by contrast, religions with a highly personal God worry less about such things, because a personal Being will respond to a personal approach through impromptu supplication and spontaneous prayer."

-Nancy Pearcey pgs 387-388

from: http://www.amazon.com/Total-Truth-Study-Edition-Paperback/dp/1433502208/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346348621&sr=8-1&keywords=total+truth

One of the Things I Fear the Most

I struggle a lot with the reality of suffering. Who doesn't? Many times I would prefer not to feel anything, so as not to feel the awful things in life. Yet fully running away from it is impossible, especially if I want to continue to have a heart. So I continue to struggle daily, laying my fears at the feet of Jesus and asking Him to help me see the truth about life rightly. Reading this section from "Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from It's Cultural Captivity" brings yet another piece of the truth into my mind and helps me come out of my isolation a bit. I thought I'd share. 

"Idols of the Heart

A pervasive theme throughout the New Testament is that Christ's death and resurrection were not merely objective events that happened in history--though certainly they were that first of all. We should never give up our conviction that the objective truths of Christ's death and resurrection are the basis for our justification. But the next step is to take Christ as the ongoing model for our lives. As the medieval spiritual writers put it, we are called to practice 'the imitation of Christ.' Not in a moralistic sense that our own behavior by certain ethical precepts, but rather in a mystical sense that our own suffering becomes a participation in Christ's suffering. That's why Paul wrote, 'Our old self was crucified with him' (Romans 6:6); and, 'The world has been crucified to me, and I to the world' (Galatians 6:14).

  Only after sharing in Christ's death is there a promise of sharing in His resurrection power. Again, the order is crucial. 'Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death,' Paul writes, 'that, as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so also we may walk in newness of life' (Romans 6:4). It is impossible for us to receive a new life until we have truly given up the old one. We do that at our conversion, of course, in a once-for-all transaction where God, as the Judge, declares us forgiven of our sins and adopts us into His family. But being declared righteous in a judicial sense is only the beginning. After that, we are called to begin a process in which we die spiritually, day by day, to deeply ingrained sinful patterns, so that we can be liberated from sin and grow spiritually into a new person. 

  Moment by moment, we must learn to say no to sin and worldly motivations. In a world of moral relativism, where everything is reduced to personal choice, simply saying no is in itself a very hard teaching. If it does not seem hard, then we are probably accommodating to the world without realizing it. If we are not saying no in ways that bring us to our knees to seek God's enabling power, then it's likely we are not standing against the sinful system of the world as we ought. 

  The principle of dying to worldly systems applies beyond obvious sins. In a culture that measures everything in terms of size, success, and influence, we have to say no to these worldly values as well. In a culture of material affluence, we have to say not to coveting a better house, a sleeker car, a more upscale neighborhood, a more impressive ministry. In a culture that judges people by reputation and achievements, we have to resist the lure of living for professional recognition and advancement. Not that these things are wrong in themselves. But when they fill our hearts and define our motivations, then they become barriers to our relationship with God--which means they become sin for us. As Paul says, anything not of faith is sin, because it blocks our single-minded devotion to God and hinders our growth in holiness. 

  God calls such barriers 'idols of the heart' (see Ezekiel 14:1-11)--and they can even include genuine needs that are completely right and proper in themselves. This is where the principle becomes really difficult. When our natural needs become a cause of anger and bitterness, or a reason to oppress or attack others, then we must say not to them as well. For example, it's perfectly proper to want intimacy and respect in our marriage. But people are sinners, and at times even Christian spouses may find themselves lonely and unloved. Then one of two things will happen: Either we will become angry and reject the other person--or we will learn how to die to even our valid personal needs, and trust God to work good even in an imperfect situation. Again, it is proper and right to want a job that fulfills our God-given talents, where we enjoy the respect of colleagues and supervisors. But in a fallen world, we may have to accept work that is less than fulfilling; we may not be successful; or we may work for bosses who are demeaning and exploitive. What then? Either we will find ourselves shaking our fist at God--or we will put our talents on the altar and die to them, trusting God to honor our sacrifice to Him. 

   Putting our valid needs on the altar does not mean shutting our mouths and closing our eyes to a sinful situation. If someone is truly in the wrong, then the loving response is not to give in but to confront the person. It is not an act of love to allow someone to sin against you with impunity. Sin is a cancer within the other person's soul, and genuine love must be strong and courageous in bringing that sin to the light, where it can be diagnosed and dealt with. 

   Yet it is all too easy to do the right thing in the wrong spirit. Only as we offer up to God our anger, fear, and drive for control do we develop the kind of spirit God can use in confronting others. 'Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps, ' Peter writes--with the ultimate purpose 'that He might bring us to God' (1 Peter 2:21;3:18). So, too, when we suffer, even unjustly, the ultimate purpose is to equip us to bring others to God. Moment by moment,  as we suffer the effects of sin and brokenness in a fallen world, we need to ask Him to use those trials to unite us to Christ in His sacrifice and death--so that we can then be used to bring others to repentance and renewal." 

-Nancy Pearcey (pgs 356-358)

from: http://www.amazon.com/Total-Truth-Study-Edition-Paperback/dp/1433502208/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346122768&sr=8-1&keywords=total+truth