The following is the opening statement in the debate I with Dr. Shabir Ally (a Muslim), on 10/12/2021. The debate was “Is God one divine person or three?” If you want to watch the debate, then go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDykaiFHxCw.  A few of us did an after-show where Anthony Rogers showed up a little later.  That is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjDrvG5PjNg.

Shabir was polite and likable. Our debate went well.  My debate approach was from a different angle than most might address it.  I not only defended the Trinity, but I attacked the unitarian idea of God. He was not able to respond to those criticisms I raised. 1) Unitarianism and the problem of the full expression of the personhood of God throughout eternity before creation. 2) Eternal solitude without fellowship, as a form of torture. 3) The problem of the One and the Many where unitarianism fails, and trinitarianism succeeds in providing an explanatory background. He admitted he was not familiar with these three topics and that he couldn’t comment on them. That’s fair.

I told him that I would publish my opening statement and that he could then study the topics and respond. He didn’t guarantee he would, but he said he would try. I told him if he did respond, then I would publish his responses (with his permission) and then answer those as well – and he, in turn, could also respond and we could have a bit more interaction that way. He did not commit himself to this.  So, let’s see what happens.

We discussed aspects of the Trinity and how it is arrived at systematically. Of course, I do not believe he was able to refute the approach I presented. I’m sure he thinks he did well in that area. But, of course, I’ll leave it up to you to decide for yourself.

One more thing. When I would read through my debate opening statement, I would sometimes alter sentences as I felt were necessary according to the flow of the presentation.

Update:  Shabir emailed me on 10/13/2021 requesting my copy of the opening statement.  I directed him to this page.  Praise God.

 

---

Our debate is titled, “Is God one or three divine persons?” Both of us will use Scripture and logic to defend our positions.

Now, I will attempt to show problems with the idea that God is one person and that Trinitarianism solves these problems. I’ll then demonstrate how the Trinity is derived from Scripture. If Dr. Ally, cannot answer these challenges to Unitarianism nor defeat the way the logic of the Trinity is derived from scripture, then he has not established his position.

Let me begin by defining our terms. According to Stephen C. Evan’s Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics and Philosophy of Religion,

“personhood. The unique status shared by human beings, angels, and God that involves the power to think, act and value. Traditional theories of personhood stress that persons are substances of a rational nature. More contemporary theories emphasize the ability to act and have emotions, and these often link personhood to the ability to use language and relations to other persons.”¹ Evans, C. Stephen. Pocket Dictionary of Apologetics,  Philosophy of Religion (The IVP Pocket Reference Series) (p. 91). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition

The characteristics of personhood include self-awareness and awareness of others, having a will, being able to love, being able to speak, fellowship, reason, etc.

GOD IN THE BIBLE AND THE QURAN

I did a comparison between the Bible and the Quran, concerning Yahweh and Allah.  I have the references in both books to demonstrate what I discovered – if Ally asks for them. In both books, God has nothing against which he can be compared. In each work, God exhibits the attributes of personhood when He speaks, is aware of others as well as Himself, has a will, shows loving-kindness; loves, hears, knows, and is someone with whom believers can fellowship.

Clearly, both the Bible and the Quran present their respective Gods as possessing the attributes of personhood.

Our personhood is a reflection of the personhood of God. In Christianity, we affirm this because we are made in God’s image (Gen. 1:26). Likewise, in Islam, Adam was made in God’s image (Hadith, Al—Bukhari 6227, “Allah created Adam in His image, and he was sixty cubits tall.”)

TRINITY

Now I offer a definition of the Trinity found in my article titled the Trinity Chart on my website carm.org, which I released on October 15, 2016.

“The Trinity is one God in three distinct, simultaneous, persons:  the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is not the same person as the Son; the Son is not the same person as the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit is not the same person as Father.  They are not three gods and not three beings.  They are three distinct persons, yet they are all the one God.  Each has a will, can speak, can love, etc., and these are demonstrations of personhood.”

A word or phrase doesn’t have to be in the Bible, for the concept to be there. For example, the word “atheism” is not in the Bible, but the concept is.  Psalm 14:1 says, “The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”   Likewise, it is not necessary to find in the Bible the phrase that goes something like this, “There’s only one eternal God who exists is three simultaneous coeternal distinct persons.” The issue is not if specific sentences occur in the manner that critics of the Trinity would like to see them constructed. The issue is whether or not the doctrine of the Trinity is coherent and revealed in Scripture over and against Unitarianism.  It is.

To demonstrate this, I will show that a god of one person is ultimately incoherent and that the Trinity is coherent.

UNITARIANISM, BINITARIANISM, TRINITARIANISM

I hope that Dr. Ally will agree with me that God is perfect in His essence, efficiency, knowledge, judgments, freedom of will, and that He is also eternally self-sufficient and non-contingent.  He has no capacity for improvement.  He is maximally perfect and there is nothing against which He can be compared.

I suspect that he would also agree that God reveals himself to us and communicates with us in Scripture. This means, at the least, He is aware of himself and of others.

Biblically speaking, Gen. 1:26 says, we are made in God’s image. Therefore, we experience our personhood as an analogy to God’s personhood.

Our personhood consists of self-awareness, awareness of others, fellowship, love, communication, emotions, reciprocity, contemplation, knowledge, reason, and the exercise of free will. In the Bible, God exhibits these same attributes, and we recognize the attributes of personhood within His nature.

If God were a single person, as Dr. Ally teaches, then from eternity past, though he could have expressed some attributes of personhood, like self-awareness and contemplation, but he could not have exhibited the full characteristics of His personhood, including such things as fellowship and love. There would be no one with whom to have fellowship, or express loving-kindness, or be loved by, etc. There would be no reciprocity and no fellowship. This means that such characteristics would not be essential and necessary qualities of his nature – because their actuality would be dependent upon creation for their manifestation. This in turn means that God’s complete expression of personhood, which includes fellowship, loving-kindness, communication, etc., would be dependent on interactions with those outside of Himself; namely, his creation. But if God’s full expression of personhood depends upon other beings, then how is he perfect and lacking in nothing? This, I believe, is just one of the major flaws with the unitarian god of Islam.  I hope Dr. Ally can offer a cogent response to this challenge.

If God were two persons, then there would be no characteristics of personhood dependent on something other than himself. He would be able to express fellowship and loving-kindness as well as communication.  However, it would mean that fellowship, communication, love, etc., between the two persons, would necessitate impersonal characteristics as part of the binitarian god. Love, for example, is something exchanged and expressed. Love is not self-aware. Therefore, it is an abstraction. This would suggest that there would be a fundamental part of God’s nature of personhood that is impersonal; namely, love, the thing exchanged. But, this is problematic since God is, by nature, personal. How could there be an impersonal aspect that creates the context of the personal relationship? This is problematic.

If God were three persons, then each of the persons could mediate the fellowship, love, and communion between the other two. The Father would mediate the fellowship, love, and communion between the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Son would mediate the fellowship, love, and communion between the Father and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit would mediate the fellowship, love, and communion between the Father and the Son. There would be no impersonal aspect that creates the context of the personal relationship. Everything is personal in the Trinitarian God who is, by nature, personal.  This Trinitarian context would also demonstrate the most efficient and minimal actuality of personhood because it is the context that actualizes the fullness of personhood without a non-impersonal characteristic. Therefore, four or more persons would not be minimally efficient for a Perfect Being.

Furthermore, if Dr. Ally, asks why the Christian God isn’t four or more persons, not only would he be ignoring the previous analysis, but he would be offering an external critique.  In other words, he would not be challenging the Christian God – which is, trinitarian. Instead, he’d be arguing against something that Christians do not affirm.

SOLITUDE

Another potential problem of Unitarianism is solitude. By analogy, since we are made in God’s image, if we take a person and put him in a room with no light, a neutral temperature, no communication with anyone, no fellowship, no loving-kindness, etc. and left him there by himself for his entire life, this a form of torture.  How then is an eternal god of one person who cannot fully express his personhood and is eternally alone with ‘nothingness’ not analogously to the same kind of torture?  It is a question worth discussing.

But, Trinitarianism, solves this problem since the members of the Godhead would be having fellowship with one another, in eternity past.

Add to this the concern of eternal solitude and the single-person god, concept faces serious challenges.

ONE AND THE MANY

Yet another problem with the God of Islam is the problem of the One and the Many. This is a serious topic that has plagued proponents of philosophy and theology for centuries.  It deals with the justification of knowledge when dealing with universals and particulars. Let me explain.

In the context of God, is the ultimate truth that reflects God’s nature, an issue of the “one or the many”? From God do we derive universals and particulars as separate things or unity and diversity as a unified actuality? Which reflects His nature better and thereby provides further justification for knowledge?

We might recognize the universal concept of duckness (unifying concept) but we can count four particular ducks swimming in a pond (particulars).

We then ask, what is the most fundamental thing?  Is it universals or particulars, unity or diversity?  Is it duckness or, in this case, the four ducks?

If unity is ultimate, then there is nothing that differentiates particulars.

If particulars are ultimate, then there is nothing that justifies their unity.

I won’t delve into the depths of this serious logical and theological issue which are many. But, let me point something out.

If Allah is a single person, then how does his unitarian nature provide a cogent precondition for dealing with the problem of one and the many? You see, Allah is one person. Then that would mean that his unity is ultimate. But this would mean then that Allah’s nature could not be the grounding to explain particulars. This is a problem concerning the justification of knowledge of the things we observe in the universe.

But, in Trinitarianism, both unity and diversity are equally present. The one unity of God is expressed as three particulars, known as persons. Therefore, the Trinity provides coherence to the age-old issue of the relationship between the one in the many, universals and particulars.  This then supports the justification for knowledge.

I would like to know if Dr. Ally can address this issue using the presupposition of his unitarian God.

THE BIBLICAL DERIVATION OF THE TRINITY

The biblical doctrine of the Trinity is not derived from a single verse nor refuted by a single verse. Nothing in the Bible says that God is only one person. But we do find where God speaks as a single person, yet also speaks in plurality. This is consistent with Trinitarian theology.

For example, in Genesis 1:26 God says, “let us make man in our image.” But Isaiah 44:24, says God makes all things by himself. Therefore, the “us” cannot be any angelic realm that would assist in the creation of man.  The same occurs in Genesis 11:7 where God says, “let us go down and confound their language.” Genesis 19:24, says “Yahweh rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah from Yahweh out of heaven.” There are many such instances of plurality mentioned in Scripture, but I don’t have time to go through them all.

Nevertheless, the doctrine of the Trinity is arrived at systematically. If Dr. Ally wants to discredit the Trinity, then he must not only deal with my previously mentioned challenges to Unitarianism, but he must also invalidate the logical system by which the Trinity is derived. Let explain.

The Bible teaches that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8; 45:5). But the Bible also says of the Father is called God, the Son is called God, and the Holy Spirit is called God. In addition, all three exhibit attributes of personhood. Each is all-knowing. Each has a will. Each loves. Each speaks.  And we can have fellowship with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

To deny the Trinity is to deny these truths which are clearly taught in Scripture.

Therefore, if the Trinity is derived systematically from the whole of Scripture, then that system needs to be addressed and shown to be false. If my opponent does not do that, then he has not refuted the doctrine of the Trinity.

IN CONCLUSION

There is a problem with an eternal being who is a single person who cannot manifest the fullness of his personhood unless there’s a creation with which to fellowship, love, speak to, etc. This shows an insufficiency and incompleteness in his nature which is expressed in his personhood.

The Trinity solves this problem.

There is the problem of eternal solitude where the unitarian god of Islam, would be alone in ‘nothingness’ forever, something that we, by analogy, would consider torture.

The Trinity solves this problem.

The issue of the one in the many is a huge philosophical and theological issue that has perplexed many people throughout history. Unitarian theology cannot provide the necessary precondition that can account for the relationship between the one the many.

The Trinity solves this problem.

Furthermore, biblically speaking, there’s only one God. The Father is called God, the Son is called God, and the Holy Spirit is called God. Each is all-knowing, possesses a will, can love, speaks, and can have fellowship with us. In this is the eternal manifestation of the fullness of personhood and without the issue of torture related to eternal solitude.

The Trinity makes more logical sense and is based on Scripture.

 

 

---

The following information was part of the original opening, that I moved to the end of the opening statement and did not use due to time constraints.  It was ready for quoting and I referenced it if Shabir Ally needed it.

In the Bible

In the Bible, there is nothing against which Yahweh can be compared (Isaiah 40:18; 44:7).  So, it is only possible to know Him through His self-revelation.  In the Bible, Yahweh exhibits the attributes of personhood when He speaks (Gen. 1:3; Exodus 34:10), is aware of others as well as Himself (Genesis 12:3; Exodus 3:10), has a will (Luke 22:42; John 6:39), shows loving-kindness (Genesis 19:19; Exodus 20:6); loves (Deut. 7:7; John 3:16), hears (Exodus 2:24; Psalm 78:59), knows (Luke 16:15; 2 Cor. 12:2), and with whom Christians can have fellowship (2 Cor. 13:14; 1 John 1:3).

In the Quran

In the Quran, there is nothing against which Allah can be compared (42:11). So, it is only possible to know him through his self-revelation.  In the Quran, Allah exhibits the attributes of personhood when he speaks (3:55; 5:12), is aware of others as well as himself (5:110; 7:143), has a will (10:100; 43:20), shows loving-kindness (11:90; 85:14), loves (2:195; 2:222), hears (2:181; 18:26), knows (2:181; 24:21), and with whom Muslims can have fellowship (5:56).

 

T H E    T R I N I T Y
	FATHER	SON	HOLY SPIRIT
Called God	Phil. 1:2	Heb. 1:8	Acts 5:3-4
All-knowing	1 John 3:20	John 21:17	1 Cor. 2:10-11
A Will	Luke 22:42	Luke 22:42	1 Cor. 12:11
Loves	John 3:16	Eph. 5:25	Rom. 15:30
Speaks	Matt. 3:17	Luke 5:20	Acts 13:2
Fellowship	1 John 1:3	1 Cor. 1:9	2 Cor. 13:14