MAISHA YENYE MALENGO: 2018

NOTES ON

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RELIGION

Introduction

“Religious studies” is the academic field of multi-disciplinary, secular study of religious

beliefs, behaviors, and institutions. In these studies, the student describes, analyses,

compares, interprets, and explains religion in order to make more it understandable to

many. Never before were there more urgent reasons to learn about the religious faiths

and practices of other people, beyond the universal instinct to know all we can about

our fellowman in order better to know ourselves. We wetness massive translations of

sacred books, numerous trips, and serious studies of religious doctrines are taken place

more than ever in order to facilitate the appreciation of other religions (John A. Hardon,

Religions of the world, 1963, p. 7)

The study of religion is principally divided into five major areas:

1. Philosophy of religion which concentrate on the meaning and the truth of religious

experience. It is a reflection of the nature of God not as he is in himself but as he is with

his created beings. It is also an investigation into the logical relationship between faith

and reason in order to explain our beliefs with reasonable arguments.

2. Psychological of religion which is an effort to identify the human experience of the

divine, to distinguish idolatrous ideas from real religious experience, deceptive elements

from transcendental religiosity in order to give appreciation to the idea of the holy in

human life and to keep experiences of the religious consciousness down to earth.

3. Phenomenology of religion is an analysis and systematization of the objective and

institutionalized aspects of religion. This involves comparative of religion, sociology of

religion since it examines the empirical state of any given religion and provides an

objective basis for comparison. No one compare different religions with objectivity and

coherency unless he or she has at least the basics of each.

4. History of religion deals with the process that has led to the form of each religion as

we know it today. As religions evolve or develop, there great need to study their origin,

how they evolved, what has been dropped and what was borrowed as time goes on,

what is essential and what is avoidable.

5. Theology of religion represents an attempt by the adherents of one particular religion

to define their relationship to other religions, to evaluate the validity and the truthfulness

of the claims of other religions.

All these areas constitute what is commonly known as the academic approach; it is

employed in the departments of Religious Studies. The academic study of religions is

indeed a collective way of reading the following features: 1. The functional features of

religions; that is how religions meet the emotional, social, intellectual needs of people.

Here we study different beliefs, social organizations, moral and ritual practices,

individuals in a given believing community, man’s desire to know the how and the why

Page 2 of 18

of things. 2. The substantial features since we believe that, in spite of their differences

and views, religions have an essential nature manifested in two aspects: a) there is a

strong conviction that there is something supernatural. b) There is the belief that human

existence, if it is to be fulfilled, must be harmonized with or subrogated to what people

experience as beyond. This is what distinguishes religious people from nonreligious

groups, if there are. 3. The formal features which function in relation to the

supernatural, such as arts, ceremonies, languages, morality, and science…

Therefore, as we use a collective method, religious studies embrace the history of

religions (origin and development of religions), philosophy of religions (analysis of the

truth-claims and logical consistency of religious beliefs), sociology of religions (the role

of religions in the society), phenomenology of religions (the way religions appear to us),

psychological of religions (the inner character of religious experiences and the ways

individual needs are met through religion).

Note that in the expression “Religious Studies”, the word “study” modifies religion and

gives it a new direction. Though those in Religious Studies are meant to identify an

objective, scientific, nonbiased study of religions, personal belief or piety is necessary

for the inquiry, academic study of religions is not synonymous to irreligion or paganism.

Religion serves to give life meaning and to bind humans together.

Nonetheless, even when it is well known that all peoples have a religion, the following

question remains: how could investigation be carried on if the investigators had no

precise idea of the object of their research? Therefore, we need to know what religion is

all about.

Definition of “Religion”

We know that the concept “religion” is familiar to us as much as the people of humanity

are religious people. But a definition of religion is yet to be found. Because of this, we

talk about definitions because “religion” is defined in different ways. In other words, a

comprehensive definition of “Religion” is hardly to be found but we can give some views

of different scholars. Even in its etymology, the term “Religio” refers to four Latin verbs”

relegere, religare, reeligere, relinquere. These approaches influence, in one-way or the

other, the definitions of scholars. Religion could be defined as a reading over of things

or phenomena, which pertain to the worship of God (relegere). It could be defined as a

bond, which binds the visible, and the invisible worlds (religare). It could be taken as a

repeated choice of what has been neither lost nor neglected. Being created (first

election), man is chosen again to enter into relationship with the Creator (reeligere).

Religion is also considered as an act of leaving certain things in order to be submitted to

others, maybe to a Supreme Being (Relinquere). All these ways are nominal and

etymological definitions; they are important but not sufficient. Note that definitions of

religions can be nominal, theological, or historical.

Philosophers have come up with some definitions too. For many of them, religion is

man’s awareness to moral law (Kant); religion is one form of knowing the absolute

(Hegel); religion is an illusion, a dream of human mind; the essence of religion lies in the

Page 3 of 18

feelings of dependence (Schleiermacher); religion of humanity has replaced the worship

of God; religion is the encounter of an individual with God; religion is based on the Ithou

relationship; religion is the bridge between the supernatural and the natural

(Maurice Blondel).

Whitehead defines religion in this way: “religion is the vision of something which stands

beyond, behind and within the passing flux of immediate things; something which is

real, and yet waiting to be realized; something which is remote possibility, and yet the

greatest of present facts; something that gives meaning to all that passes, and yet

eludes apprehension…” (Roger Schmidt, Exploring religion, p. 15).

In trying to define the concept “religion”, theologians have made a very tremendous

contribution but it is more or less limited to those so-called revealed religions.

According to them, religion is a virtue that leads man to render to God the homage that

is due to Him. This homage comprises belief in one God, personal and infinite in his

attributes, an attitude of absolute respect and submission, external acts that express his

belief. Though theologians are talking about revealed religions, this definition could be

extended to non-revealed religions.

For Saint Thomas Aquinas, for instance, religion denotes properly a relation to God.

For it is He to whom we ought to be bound as to our unfailing principle; to whom also

our choice should be directed as to our last end; and who we loose when we neglect

him by sin, and should recover by believing in Him and confessing our faith. He adds

that religion is a virtue since it directs us to good, the supreme good, God.

Now, Paul Tillich gives the differences found between theology and religion. He said,

“Concepts such as “revelation” and “redemption” stand in clear opposition to religion.

They express an action happening only once, transcendent in origin and transforming in

its effect on reality, while religion subordinates a whole series of spiritual acts and

cultural creations under a general concept. Revelation speaks of divine, religion of

human action. Revelation speaks of an absolute, singular, exclusive, and self-sufficient

happening; religion refers to merely relative occurrences, always recurring and never

exclusive. Revelation speaks of the entrance of a new reality into life and the spirit;

religion speaks of a given reality of life and a necessary function of the spirit. Religion

speaks of culture, revelation of that which lies beyond culture. (What is religion, pp.27-

28).

Moreover, let us know that religions are not the same. Historians note that not even

one religion is the same, century after century, or from one country to another, or from a

village to a city. Surely, they have both similarities and differences. Some religions hold

many principles and components in common but we do not see them because we have

been trained not to see them or think of them.

Page 4 of 18

Comparative Study of Religion: A Definition

The comparative study of religion, also called comparative religion (s) is, strictly

speaking, the branch of the non-normative study of religions that investigates

scientifically the similarities and differences between various religions or religious

phenomena, in order not only to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of its object

but also to determine the various interactions of religions; that is how they relate and

influence each other

(New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XII, 1966). It is more or less a detailed and objective

presentation to world religions where students encounter define, analyze and reflect on

the major or the principal beliefs, doctrines, practices, rites, found in the major religions.

John F, Wilson and W. Royce Clark wrote: “if scholars are truly open to the actual data

of various religions’ practices as well as ideas, they cannot assume that one or more

religions will not be superior to others. Understanding and appreciation must precede

judgment” (Religion. A Preface, 1973, p. 191). Comparative study of religions attempts

to understand and appreciate various themes in religions

Unlike philosophy of religion, comparative religion is a non-normative (norms) discipline

because it is not a set of rules which could be used to make a judgment on the

truthfulness of each religion or each religious phenomenon. Comparative study of

religion is not a deposit of laws which could help to examine what is false or right in the

fundamental questions raised by different religions. That is why this discipline is

considered in the area of phenomenology because it only analyses the phenomena just

as they are, situate them in their contexts (in this case, each religion is a context), bring

out the importance of each theme in a given religion and then compare or contrast it

with similar themes found in other religions. Similarities and differences will surely

become visible. Note that similar themes in different religions do not forcefully imply

influence and dependence because apparent similarities may hide profound differences

and superficial differences may hide important similarities. It is exactly one of the major

tasks of comparative religion to equip students with a prudent approach to appraise

similarities and differences found in religions.

Comparative religion does not claim to be self-sufficient; it borrows a lot from sociology

and philosophy of religion for its growth.

In the field of comparative religions, many westerners classify the main world religions

as abrahamic and Indian. Abrahamic religions consist of the three monotheistic

religions namely Judaism, Christianity and Islam because the three claim Abraham as

their ancestor. Their sacred history begins with the life of Abraham. The original belief

in one God of Abraham sets the foundation of their doctrine in one God. However,

Baha’I Faith is sometimes included in this.

Indian religions originated from the Indian sub-continent; they include Hinduism,

Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism.

But as Africans, we cannot ignore or neglect the African Traditional religions which, to

some extent, continue to direct the life of some Africans. So comparative study of

Page 5 of 18

religion done in Africa and by Africans includes these African Traditional religions in the

classification. It seems to me that, although many Africans have embraced the

abrahamic as well as Indian religions, their background remains in the African

Traditional Religions.

Jeff Haynes says:”The emergence of Africa’s new religious movements during the

twentieth century, and especially since the World War II, reflects a continued popular

adherence to traditional religions ideas, symbols and rituals, juxtaposed with modernist

accumulations from outside region…The emergence of the new movements is a further

indication that sets of religious beliefs continually develop over time, melding religious

and cultural resources in response to changing socio-political and economic conditions.

A particularly important factor in the appeal of any religion in Africa is that it functions as

both a material and a spiritual-healing force. Peel argues that the most tenacious

elements of traditional religion, the most likely to survive migration to towns, were those

that touched common bedrock of African Traditional Religions: the individual’s concern

for divinatory and magico-medical assistance (Religion and Politics in Africa, 1996, p.

171)

Although African Traditional religions seem to be eliminated by the abrahamic religions,

their ideas survive in the hearts of many Africans. They continue to influence the

behaviors as well as the attitudes of many Africans.

Yet, when we focus on doctrines and beliefs, world religions could be divided into

revealed (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and non-revealed (African Traditional Religions,

Hinduism, Buddhism) or monotheistic (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and polytheistic

(Old Greek and Roman religions and Hinduism) religions. But based on their origin,

religions are African, Asian, Semitic and European

Brief history of comparative religion as a discipline

We should know and know quite well that the study of religion is not a new discipline, for

many scholars studied religions to find the causes, other than revelations, of man’s

irrational and moral ideas. Bu all agree that Max Muller (1856-1900) was the real

founder of the comparative religions a formal and independent field (New Catholic

Encyclopedia, vol. XII).

The method of investigation and its well-defined nature, that not being normative,

consecrated study of religion as an independent discipline. As said above, comparative

religions; sometimes they become so fanatical of a particular religion that everything in

their religious fields is exempted from any mistake or error. Everything is praised and

presented as the best of all.

From what is said above, we could study of religion passes no sentence on the truth of religions, it does not determine

whether or not the object of the religious intentionality in a specific religion exists outside

of this human experience.

As we study religions in this discipline, we need avoid the dangers that could falter our

enterprise:

Reductionism: Everything in religions is reduced to one particular phenomenon, which,

perhaps, appears, objective.

Page 6 of 18

Limitation: We can think that there is only one religion or one family of religions;

consequently other religions are denied or ignored. Again related to this point, there is a

danger of limiting a particular religion to what is practiced in a particular zone or area or

by particular people.

Neglect: There is a great tendency of neglecting some truths that do not seem to be

rational to us. It is widely noted that rationality is the only instrument of true assessment.

Subjectivism: Many times and in many occasions, we fail to describe or reflect

objectively on others’ doctrines. Subjective opinions are welcome but too much

subjectivity overlooks the truth of the matter; it leads to a wrong assessment, for here

the truth is evaluated according to my religion not according to the truth of those

religions. Philosophy of religions must, therefore, be applied since it deepens our

reflection.

Fanaticism: We notice a very remarkable tendency in the life of many scholars of

venture with certitude into an initiation to

comparative study of religion where we, first reflect on some guidelines and secondly go

into comparing some aspects of the world major religions. This will help us understand

some of their similarities as well as their differences.

Importance of comparative study of religion

First, it is commonly said that man is a religious being, for religion is at the center of

civilizations. In other words, we cannot encounter man unless we meet hi as a religious

being. Thus by deepening our insight into the mode of being in the world of religious

man, we get to the roots of our own existential situation. This helps to shape our

culture.

Secondly, as we take part in our world of a multitude of religions, there is need to know

the substance as well as the functions of each religion; then we shall also know what

each religion offers to our life. This could prepare us to participate with sincerity to the

on-going interfaith or interreligious dialogue.

Religion, considered by some as a private affair and by others as a minor worldly

nuisance or a personal option, has become an integrant part of the society (Owen C.

Thomas (ed), Attitudes Toward other Religions: Some Christian Interpretations, 1969,

pp. 1-4), especially today. This truth is confirmed by the history of many countries, more

so in the last five decades in which religion has become not only a divisive force and a

decisive source of political legitimacy but also a tool for mass appeal and mobilization

(Iheanyi M. Enwerem, A Dangerous Awakening: The Politicization of Religion in Nigeria,

1995), p. 13). This has given greater urgency to the on-going dialogue among world

religions

Page 7 of 18

Dialogue is first and foremost an attitude that someone acquires or the kinds of options

open to him in developing his own point of view of other religions. An attitude could be

defined the manner of his acting or his thinking; one’s disposition, opinion or mental set.

Some believe that all other religions are false except theirs. Some others assert that

each religion is the appropriate expression of its own culture. Still others think that all

religions are the same. So people may have different attitudes towards other religions.

Here are the most well known: rationalism, Romanticism, relativism, exclusivism,

dialectic, reconception, tolerance, dialogue, Catholicism and presence. The attitude of

African Christians towards other religions these last decades is of special concern

because the future of Africa that should be shaped in a way that promotes harmony for

the avoidance of religious conflicts partly depends on this.

Dialogue is an encounter of people of different religions and faiths in an atmosphere of

freedom and openness for each partner to listen and understand himself and the other.

One person speaks and another listens and responds and vice versa. Dialogue is no

more than this respectful communication of two different subjects. Now we need a

forum whereby African Christians will speak and African non-Christians will listen and

respond; African non-Christians will speak and African Christians will listen and

respond.

Dialogue is a sharing -conversation- of the truth found in different religions and faiths.

Thought the truth must be said, we need to know how, when and to whom to articulate

it.

Dialogue is working and walking together in search of what is good and right with the

desire of living together and in communion. Dialogue is living together in spite of our

differences. Differences make sense when they are well understood.

We cannot truly call on God, the Father of all, if we refuse to treat in a brotherly way any

man, created as he is in the image of God. Man's relation to God the Father and his

relation to people his brothers are so linked together that Scripture says: "He who does

not love does not know God" (1 John 4, 8). No foundation therefore remains for any

theory or practice that leads to discrimination between man and the man or people and

people, so far as their human dignity and the rights flowing from it are concerned. The

Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against people or

harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion. On the

contrary, following in the footsteps of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, this Sacred

Synod ardently implores the Christian faithful to "maintain good fellowship among the

nations" (1 Peter 2, 12,14,15), and, if possible to live for their part in peace with all

people, so that they many truly be sons of the Father who is in heaven (Vatican II

Council, Nostra Aetate, no.5).

Areas of study

We cannot exhaust the number of areas that could be considered when we venture into

this study for they are numerous. The heritage of each religion is wide and rich; this

Page 8 of 18

covers doctrines and beliefs, practices and rites, scriptures and other fundamental

sources, people and objects. Although we only give a concise summary of the

conception of God in African Traditional Religion, Christianity and Islam in these notes,

the following areas seem to be fundamental because they illustrate a lot in all religions:

God, Scripture, End of time and life after death, Worship and religious rites, Proselytism.

Some views on God in African Traditional Religion

John S. Mbiti, Introduction to African Religion (second ed.), Nairobi, 1991, 216

pages

p.45: All Africans belive in God. They take this belief for granted. It is at the centre of

African Religions and dominates all its other beliefs. But exactly how this belief in God

originated, we do not know. We only know that it is a very ancient belief in African

religious life. There are three possible explanations on its origin. (1) People came to

believe in God through reflecting on the universe (2) People realized their own

limitations (3)People observed the forces of nature

p.47: names of God

Angola Kalungu, Nzambi, Suku

Burkina Faso Na`angmin

Burundi Imana

Cameroon Njinyi, Nyooiy

Central African Republic Nzapa, So, Mbori

Gabon Anyame, Nzame

Ghana Bore-Bore, Mawu, Nyame

Botswana Modimo, Urezhwa

Ethiopia Arumgimis, Yere, Tel

Ivory Coast Nyame, Onyankopon

Kenya Akuj, Mungu, Ngai, Nyasaye, tororut, Akuj, Mulungu,

Wele,

Liberia Yala

Nigeria Ondo, Chuku, Olodumare, Olorun, Osanumbua,

Osowo

South Africa Inkosi, Modimo, Unkulunkulu

Sudan Ajok, Bel, Kalo, Mbori

Tanzania Enkai, Kyala, Mulungu, Mungo, Ruwa

Uganda Akuj, Katonda, Kibumba, Ori, Rugaba, Ruhanga, Weri

DR Congo Akongo, Arebati, Djakombo, Nzambe

Zambia Mlengi, Chiuta, Lesa, Nyambe, Nzambe, Tilo

pp. 49-52 : African people believe that God does many things in the universe: God is

the Creator of all things, God sustains his creation, God provides for what he has

created, God rules over the universe

Page 9 of 18

pp. 53-54: Since God is considered to do the things we mentioned in the previous

section, and since many of these activities are similar to those carried out by people, it

is helpful to the imagination for people to picture God as if he has human

characteristics...God as Father, mother and parent; God as friend,

pp.54-59: African people are agreed that nobody has seen God. Therefore nobody can

really describe him. Yet, through their religious insights, they have formulated ceratin

ideas about the nature of God...God is good, God is merciful, God is holy, God is allpowerful,

God is all-knowing, God is everywhere, God is limitless, God is self-existent,

God is the first cause, God is spirit, God never changes, God is unknowable.

J.N.K. MUGAMBI, the African Heritage and Contemporary Christianity, Nairobi,

Longman, 1989, 218 pages

p. 140: There is at the present no consensus among scholars with regard to the terms

which are appropriate for designating the study of religions in Africa. Some scholars

prefer the plural, African Religions...other scholars prefer the singular terms African

Traditional Religion and African Religion.

p. 141: While affirming the view that the cultural and religious homogeneity of African

peoples justify their being studied and an entity; this study has avoided the use of the

Traditional African (s). Instead, the term African (religious) heritage is preferred and

considered sufficiently descriptive.

p. 143: The old prejudice against the African religion heritage remained entrenched

among this generation of missionary anthropologists. Edwin Smith, for example,

believed that African peoples had concept of God but this was a God who created the

world and then disappeared from it. Therefore, he maintained, the Christian faith had

come to teach Africans that God had not disappeared from the world, that he was still

active in it. Missionary anthropology was a means to an end. It was a means of

identifying the weaknesses of the African culture and religious heritage in order to justify

the missionary enterprise. The African concepts of God as portrayed by this generation

of missionary anthropologists are being increasingly criticized by African scholars,

including African Christian theologians. J. S. Mbiti, for example, has shown that the

immanence of God was not taught to Africans by Christian missionaries from the

western hemisphere. It was integral part of traditional African religious beliefs. S.G.

Kibicho has come to the same conclusion and emphasis that God was known to African

peoples, contrary to the view of most of the western anthropologists that Christianity has

been introduced to teach Africans to know God. Bolaji Idowu also came to the same

conclusion in his study of the Yoruba people in Nigeria. The view is also shared by

Wiredu D. Awalalu, M. Kunene and G. Setiloane.

Oliver A. Onwubiko, African thought, religion and culture, in the Christian Mission

and culture in Africa (vol. 1), Nigeria, Snap Press LTD, 1991, 193 pages

p. 87: Effective enculturation through the African concept of evil habits must come

through the correction of the traditional African notion of evil and the use of the same

notions, when suitable, for instilling Christian ones. For instance, the notion that God

Page 10 of 18

does not commit evil against his creation does not imply that God does not punish and

is very useful in correcting the notion which presented the devil to an equal but opposed

status with God.

Bruno Novelli, Karimojong Traditional Religion. A contribution, Kampala,

Comboni Missionaries, 1999, 470 pages

p. LVI: (confusion between shy and God because the power which assigned to both)

This power can do whatever it wants, and when it wants, independently from human

requests, in a mysterious way, too complicated to be understood by human minds. And

it is only through the agent with characteristics like these that it is possible to explain

why mysterious facts are taking place here on earth. This connection between the sky

and the power led the Karimojong to call also this power “Akuj”. They are adamant in

saying that there is no confusion between akuj-sky and the Akuj-power, because while

the sky can be seen by everybody, nobody has ever seen this power. And again they

give the Akaj-power attributes, like: ekasuban (Creator), Ekayaran (giver of life, genitor),

papa (Father), ekatubon (Judge).

p. 10: Not only is the sky shaped like the earth and alive with animals and humans, but

for the Karimojong it is the place where the agents of the mysterious events which affect

their lives actually reside. The intriguing point in this field is to consider the relationship

between the sky itself and these mysterious powers. They call God and the sky

basically with the same name: akuj very much in line with the other pastoralist peoples

of East Africa, but they make a clear distinction between the two concepts. In order to

understand this problem, we must consider the value of this terminology concerning the

words coming from the same root of “akuj”. Kuju means overhead, above, high, on top,

in heaven, north; But the adjective £akujuana/ ekujuaka” means powerful, omnipotent,

miraculous,; the verb “akujuan” means to become skilful, supernatural...What we gather

from this terminology is the fact that the Karimojong have a basic feeling as far as the

sky is concerned: that whatever affects human life in a mysterious way, is felt as having

its origin in the sky, it is powerful and cannot be influenced directly by human beings; it

acts independently from them. Normally when they refer to the sky, they use the noun

with the feminine locative prefix “na” (nakuji)...When, instead, they use it simply as it is,

they usually mean something else: the mysterious power (s) affecting in many ways

those who are living on earth, which for reasons which we will see later on, we already

called respectively God and spirits. Fr. Farina in his book reports a dialogue about God

between Fr. Molinaro and an elder:

-Who is Akuj? Asked the father

Akuj is Akuj, answered the elder

Who created him?

He created himself

But he is not Akuj the sky where the sun shines during the day, and the moon and the

stars shine during the night?

No, the sky is another thing

Who created you?

Akuj

The sky?

Page 11 of 18

No. Akuj. You can see the sky, but you cannot see Akuj.

Who created all things and the animals?

Akuj

The Sky?

No. Akuj. He is the creator whom nobody can see. He has created everything, knows

everything, sees everything. He is Akuj and he does whiter he wills. He gives us life.

He keeps us, he protects us.

Joseph Healey & Donald Sybertz, Towards an African narrative theology, Ney

York, Orbis Books, 1996, 400 pages

p. These names provide an insight into how Africans feel, think and believ about God.

They help construct a functional African Christianity, in particular a functional African

Christology. Of these 631 names, titles, images, descriptions and attributes, many

designate God in general. Many other African names designate individual persons in

the blessed Trinity.

Isaac D. Osabutey-Aguedze, The African Religion and Philosophy, Nairobi, Mailu

Publishing house, 1990, 249 pages

p. 59: In like manner sculpture and painting grew out of the African’s inherent love to

adhere closely to nature. The former had its rise from imagination. Speculative, the

African believers (and that belief is not puerile) that the divinity is unnameable,

indescribable, and illimitable. It is blasphemous to say God is this or that. All objects

and feelings are forms of his manifestation.

E. Bolaji, African Traditional Religion. A definition, Great Britain, SCM Press LTD,

228 pages

p.140: In discussing revelation, we have remarked that there is no place, age, or

generation, which did not receive at some point in its history some form of revelation,

and that to deny this fact is either to be deliberately blind to facts or to betray a gross

ignorance of facts.

p.140: Quoting Pere Noel Baudin “In these religious systems, the idea of a God is

fundamental, they believe in the existence of a supreme, primordial being, the Lord of

the universe, which is his work...and notwithstanding the abundant testimony of the

existence of God, it is practical only a vast pantheism –a participation of all elements of

the divine nature which is as it were diffused throughout them all... Although deeply

imbued with polytheism, the blacks have not lost the idea of a true God: yet their idea of

him is very confused and obscure...God alone escapes both androgynism and conjugal

association; nor have the blacks any statue or symbol to represent him. He is

considered the supreme primordial being, the author and the father of the gods and

genii...However, notwithstanding all these notions, the idea they have of God is most

unworthy of the divine Majesty. They represent that God, after having commended the

organization of the world, charged Obalata with the completion and government of it,

retired and entered into an eternal rest, occupying himself only with his own happiness:

Page 12 of 18

too great to interest himself in the affairs of this world. He remains like a negro king, in

a sleep of idleness...

p. 141: quoting R.S Rattray: “ I had some years ago taken stand against a school of

thought...which denied that the conception of a supreme Being in the West Africa mind,

and his place in their religion, were due to any cause deeper or more remote than the

influence of Christian missionary teachings...Further research, embodying a much fuller

investigation into Ashanti religious beliefs than was before possible, has only served to

strengthen the opinion which I formally expressed...I am convinced that the conception,

in the Ashanti mind, of the supreme Being has nothing whatever to do with missionary

influence...contact with Christians or even.

p. 143: Those who take one look at other people’s religion and assert that such people

have no clear concept of God, or no concept of God at all, should first look within

themselves and face honestly the question, How clear is the concept of God to me?

How clear is it to my own people, the generality of them and not a few leading thinkers

among them?

Some views on God in Christianity:

Christianity affirms God’s existence, makes known his nature and attributes; it explains

who he is in a way that we might know, love him and look for him. Christians believe

that God is the Creator of heaven and earth; he guides the world, loves the world and

directs it to himself. However, Alan Schreck warns that before asserting that God

created the heavens and the earth in the beginning, we need to ask some more

fundamental questions: how do we know there is God? And if there is a God, what is he

like? Thus the attributes discussed below respond to these questions and illustrate this

truth. Perhaps the Christian Creed states everything in the first article; it says what he is

and what he is not: We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, and the Maker of all

things visible and invisible. This is what is found in the first sentence of the Bible: In the

beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth…(Gn. 1,1). The expression

“then God said” tells us that he is the creator of all that exists (Gn. 1, 30)

The writer of the book of Deuteronomy warns the Israelites of the danger of falling into

idolatry: You saw no form at all on that day the Lord spoke to you at Horeb from the

midst of fire. Be strictly on your guard, therefore, not to degrade yourself by fashioning

an idol to represent any figure, whether it be the form of a man or a woman, of any

animal on the earth or any bird that flies in the sky, of anything that crawls on the

ground or any fish in the waters under the earth (Dt. 4, 15-18). This became the basic

law of the covenant between God and man: I, the Lord, am your God, who brought out

of the land of Egypt, the place of slavery. You shall not have other gods besides me

(Dt. 5, 6-7). So all people are invited to sing his praises: All you peoples, clap your

hands; shout to God with joyful cries. For the Lord, the most High, inspires awe, the

great King over all the earth (Ps. 47, 2-3).

Page 13 of 18

It is the same true God that the prophets proclaimed and the apostles preached.

Matthew wrote: And concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you read what was

said to you by God, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

He is not the God of the dead but of the living (Mt. 22, 31-32). Again Saint Paul

testified: So about the eating of meat sacrificed to idols; we know that there is no idol in

the world and that there is no God but one. Indeed, even though they are so-called

gods in heaven and on earth, yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom we

exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we

exist (Cor. 8, 6).

However God in Christianity is one in three persons: Father, Son and the Holy Spirit.

Sometimes this is not well understood by many non-Christians. Eugene Kevane says:

The fact that the profession of faith opens by stating the mystery of one God and three

as a point of departure constitutes a guideline in method for catechetical teachers. The

one only God, the Lord God of the Old Testament and of the Jewish people to this day,

is the Father, Son and the \holy Spirit (Creed and Catechetics. A Catechetical

commentary on the Creed of the people of God, 1977, p. 99)

It is the same God that the theologians attempt to understand as they discuss his

attributes. Her, we present a few.

God is simple

Thomas Aquinas speaks of God’s simplicity for many reasons. According him, the

simplicity of God is both a denial and an affirmation. It denies the fact that God has any

composition. Therefore, he has no body, matter or form or accidents. At the same time,

it affirms that the essence of God is the same with his existence. The absolute

simplicity of God may be shown in many ways. There is neither composition of

quantitative parts in God, since He is not a body; nor composition of form and matter;

nor does his nature differ from his suppositum; nor his essence from his existence

(Summa Theologiea, Part I, question. 3, article. 7.)

What would God have been if he were a body or matter? Surely, he would not be the

first mover from whom all movements come; he would be subject to the principles of

potency and act, which imply change. Yet God does not change; he is not caused by

any cause because he is the primary cause. Thus, he cannot have accidents since

accidents are caused.

The simplicity of God shows that his essence and existence are the same. When

existentialist philosophers stipulate that in man existence precedes essence, they affirm

a separation of existence from essence. In God, his essence is his existence. Thomas

Aquinas, talking about the simplicity of God, writes in his Compendium of Theology: A

similar course of reasoning clearly shows that the first mover must be simple. For any

composite being must contain two factors that are related to each other as potency to

act. But in the first mover, which is altogether immobile, all combination of potency and

act is impossible; whatever is in potency is, by that very fact, movable (Thomas

Aquinas, Compendium of Theology, 1947, p. 14)

Page 14 of 18

God is who he is; he is above time and space. Things that are within time and space are

temporal; they can be and become something else because they are in constant

change. Basically, man changes (having both potency and act) but God never changes

because, as said above, he is simple.

The doctrine of the simplicity of God is set forth as a solid foundation for the knowledge

of God. Any epistemological development of the nature and attributes of God is

founded on his simplicity. In other words, in order to know God, someone must take his

simplicity as a pre-condition. Thomas’ sophisticated interpretation of God’s simplicity

establishes a basis for further knowledge of God. It is when the simplicity of God is

established that we can think of the other attribute (Burton Cooper, The Idea of God: A

Whiteheaddian Critique of St. Thomas Aquinas’ Concept of God, 1974, p. 74).

The power of God

Christianity acknowledges the power of God and that he has it to the highest degree. He

is all-powerful. The power of God flows from his simplicity. God is powerful because he

is not a body, which could have some defects. We are talking here about the active

power that God has for he does whatever is possible absolutely (Summa Theologiae,

question. 25, article. 5). That is why we say that he is omnipotent. All confess that God

is omnipotent; but it seems difficult to explain in what his omnipotence precisely

consists: for there may be doubt as to the precise meaning of the word “all” when we

say that God can do all things. If, however, we consider the matter aright, since power

is said in reference to possible things, this phrase, God can do all things, is rightly

understood to mean that God can do all things that are possible; and for this reason He

is said to be omnipotent (Thomas Aquinas, part 1, question 25, article 3)

There should be, therefore, a distinction between the active power, which belongs to

God in the highest level from passive power. Because of this highest level of active

power, Aquinas concludes that such power must be infinite. He says: As stated above,

active power exists in God according to the measure in which he is actual. Now his

existence is infinite, in as much as it is not limited by anything that receives it, as is clear

from what has been said, when we discussed the infinity of the divine essence.

Wherefore, it is necessary that the active power in God should be infinite (Thomas

Aquinas).

The unity of God

The unity of God is strongly affirmed in Christianity. The oneness of God is stated,

professed and explained. God is one because, since he is simple, his nature is

incommunicable with anyone else. So there is no doubt that God is one; he is

supremely one because he is subsistent, absolutely undetermined. It can be shown

that God is one. First from his simplicity. For it is manifest that the reason why any

singular thing is this particular thing is because it cannot be communicated to many:

since that whereby Socrates is a man can be communicated to many; whereas, what

makes him this particular man, is only communicable to one... Secondly, this is proved

from the infinity of his perfection. For it was shown that God comprehends in Himself the

whole perfection of beings... Thirdly, this is shown from the unity of the world. For all

Page 15 of 18

things that exist are seen to be ordered to each other since some serve others. But

things that are diverse do not harmonize in the same order, unless they are ordered

thereto by one. And this one is God (Thomas Aquinas)

The goodness of God

The goodness of God and its meaning have a great importance in Christianity. Even

though the goodness of God is taken as granted, Thomas Aquinas stresses one aspect

of it that we must understand. Garrigou-Lagrange says: This truth is revealed in

countless passages of the Holy Scripture, and is, so to speak, more than of the faith; for

if God’s Goodness is denied there would be nothing left of Christian faith; this denial

would be, in a certain sense, something more than heresy, for the heretic denies

something and retains something; but with the denial of God’s goodness there would be

nothing left of the Christian mysteries (Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, The one God: A

Commentary on the Part of St. Thomas Theological Summa,1943, p. 130).

For Lagrange, goodness is considered a fundamental element of the Christian faith.

Now what is the essence of God’s goodness? Aquinas explains that the very nature of

God is goodness. Hence, what belongs to the essence of goodness befits God. But it

belongs to the essence of goodness to communicate itself to others. Hence it belongs

to the essence of the highest good to communicate itself in the highest manner to the

creature (Thomas Aquinas)

Some views of God in Islam (the Qur’an)

The formula "La ilah illa allah, Muhammad rasul Allah" (there is no god save Allah and

Muhammad is His prophet) is the most concentrated profession of faith of the Islamic

belief in one God. It is called the shahada. Obviously, many people have heard that

Islam, the religion preached by Muhammad, is one of the monotheistic religions in the

world. And most of those who study the religions of the world have certainly read the

shahada but do not realize the depths of that expression of faith. Thus, based on these

statements, I wish objectively to present in this essay the Islamic conception of God.

For the Muslims, God (Allah) is the one and only deity. Right from Muhammad's

preaching, Muslims worship only one Supreme Being who is the Creator of heaven and

earth. This is what the Qur'an preaches, the theologians defend and explain in different

ways, and the philosophers attempt to purify with the use of Hellenistic thinking. In the

Qur'an, the unity of God is noted almost in each sura (chapter) in order to show its

importance in Islam. The Qur'an gives sufficient testimony to Muslim lifeef. At the

beginning of the seventh century of the Christian era, precisely from 610 to 632,

Muhammad claimed to have received the revelation from Allah and started proclaiming

the word of Allah as he claimed to be told.

A Muslim tradition tells us that sûra XCVI was the first to come down to the prophet

Muhammad; so the mission entrusted to him was from the first the preaching of the

word of Allah. Allah, as is said to Muhammad in this first sûra, is thy Lord, creator of

man, the very generous, who teaches man that which he knew not (The Encyclopaedia

of Islam, vol. 1, 1960).

Page 16 of 18

Though Allah was known before the rise of Islam, with Muhammad, the conception of

Allah changed. We know that Allah was one of the Makkan deities, even the supreme

deity but the preaching of the Qur'an conceived Him as universal, one and

transcendent. In fact, Muhammad did not try at all to prove the existence of God.

The existence of God is strongly affirmed in all the suras. Muhammad talked about God

who is and was revealed himself to him. Montgomery Watt asserts that the first sura (of

the present text of the Qur’an) which is called the "the opening" al-Fatiha because of its

importance in salat and in many other forms of Islamic prayers, gives the most precious

substance of Islamic doctrine (Companion to the Qur'an, pp. 13-14). The formula "In the

name of Allah, most Gracious, most Merciful " Bi-smi-llahi ar-Rahmani ar-Rahim, which

is placed before all the suras except sura 9, shows that the God that Muhammad

proclaimed not only exists but also is the most Gracious and the most Merciful.

Muhammad believed in the living God; that is why he praises him "Praise to Allah, the

Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds" (sura 1:2), and worships him: "Thee do we

worship and thine aid we seek" (sura 1:5). Moreover, Muhammad calls God the

"Master of the day of judgement" (sura 1:4).

Nowadays Montgomery W. Watt tells us that some Muslims considered al-Fatiha as an

individual prayer of Muhammad (Companion of the Qur’an, p.5). On realizing this, we

see more or less how Muhammad was convinced that his call was real and true and

that it came from the living God. sura 3:2 says: "Allah! There is no God but He, the

Living, the Self-Subsisting, Eternal". He is unseen; He exists: "This is the book; in it is

guidance, sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; who believe in the unseen, are

steadfast in prayer, and spend out of what we have provided for them" (sura 2:2-3). He

is present among us; He gives signs to those who obey Him. It is what is said in sura

2:251-252: "By Allah’s will they routed them: And David slew Goliath; and Allâh gave

him power and wisdom and taught him whatever (else) He willed. And did not Allah

check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief:

but Allah is full of bounty to all the worlds".

By analysing all these verses mentioned above, we realize that Muhammad, instead of

proving the existence of God, presented the attributes, the will and the nature of God in

whom he believed. His preaching on which all Islamic doctrines are built was to tell his

contemporaries that Allah is the creator of the universe, that he is one. In other words,

the Qur'anic preaching shed light on the vague knowledge that the pre-islamic Arabs

had. Louis Gardet asserts: But the vague notion of supreme (not sole) divinity, which

Allah seems to have connoted in Makkan religion, has to become both universal and

transcendental; it has to be turned by the Qur'anic preaching, into the affirmation of the

living God, the Exalted one (Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1960)

In Régis Blachère's periodization of the Qur'an, we find that, among the themes

developed in the three Makkan periods, the preaching of God's oneness is emphasized

implicitly or explicitly everywhere (cf. suras 112, 52, 73, 70). The oneness of God is

also stressed in the Madinan period (Regis Blachere, le Qur’an, 1966, pp. 32-63). For

Page 17 of 18

instance, in referring to Judaism and Christianity, the Qur'an denounces their sin against

the belief in one, unique and transcendental God. The Qur'anic preaching hinges on

the oneness of God.

It is evident that Islam is a monotheistic religion. Some scholars may even say that

Muslims practice a strict monotheism. Indeed Islam is one of the three great

monotheistic religions beside Judaism and Christianity. A Rahman I. Doi says: Islam

teaches and preaches monotheism the belief in one God. This belief is known as the

unity of Godhead. The belief is the foundation stone of Islam. It governs the religious

faith, designs the social pattern and gives life to the oral codes (The cardinal principles

of Islam, 1972, p. 38). We can imagine that monotheism is the central feature of Islam.

The statement quoted above shows how it governs both the internal and external

expression of Islam. Robert Caspar expresses this as follows: Belief in the one

transcendent God is undoubtedly the specific feature of Islam in two senses. First, it

distinguishes it from the other great monotheistic religions: If Israel is rooted in

hope and Christianity vowed to charity, Islam is centred on faith... Secondly, belief in

the one transcendent God is the axis around which all Islam's doctrine and practice is

organized (The permanent significance of Islam's monotheism," in Concilium, 1985, pp.

67-68).

By emphasizing the importance of the Qur'an and how it expresses monotheism, Robert

Caspar adds: The whole Koran is nothing other than an urgent and reiterated repetition

of that faith, of its history in humanity and its consequences in personal and social life.

It could be called the one, sufficient dogma (1985).

One dogma, one God: the Qur'an repeats this in many places. Thus, in the following

sub-sections, we shall point out two main factors that clarify the meaning of Islamic

belief in one God.

The unity of God (tawhid)

"La ilaha illa allah, there is no god save Allah" is the digest of Islamic unity. This is the

first article of the Islamic creed, which describes the God in whom Muhammad believed.

It is called the shahada. As Muhammad was to challenge the beliefs of his

contemporaries, he was to define the God in whom he believed by differentiating his

conception of God from that of his contemporaries, thus giving the real meaning of his

call. Kenneth Graff reports: As for the question which might be asked, that is which you

have asked, as to "He is God", it is narrated that the Quraish said; "O Muhammad,

describe your Lord to us, the one to whom you call us." It was then that these words

were given in revelation. "One" here is in opposition (to God) or may be taken as a

second predicate. It indicates the manifold attributes of God's majesty and points to all

the elements of (his) perfection. For the truly one is transcendent in essence above all

multiplicity. He has no need of these as physical, partial and participant entities

certainly do (Kenneth Cragg, p. 63).

We now know that Muhammad taught his followers belief in one God. Thus it is certain

that Muhammad had a monotheistic conception of God, though some scholars say that

Page 18 of 18

at the beginning, the expression "Allah akbar" meant henotheism not monotheism. But

what kind of monotheism did Muhammad preach? Was it a simple idea? H.A.R. Gibb

and J.H. Framers answer this question as follows: But unity is far from being a simple

idea; it may be internal or external; it may mean that there is no other god except Allah,

who has no partner, it may mean that Allah is a oneness in himself; it may mean that he

is the only being with real or absolute existence, all other being having merely a

contingent existence; it may even be developed into a pantheistic assertion that Allah is

all (Encyclopaedia of Islam)

The transcendence of God

We explain a little about the transcendence of God in the Qur'an. Indeed, the Islamic

monotheism also includes the transcendence of God. God is one and transcendent.

Being the creator of all things, God is not only different from all creatures but he is

above all. "And there is none like unto him" (sura 112,4). Robert Caspar is explicit on

that: This one God is transcendent, in the exact sense of the term. He is the totally

other and nothing is like Him. The idea of creation introduces a radical division between

the creator and creatures, in contrast to religions based on emanation or mystical

experience (Robert Caspar, 1985).

While we talk about transcendence, we do not mean distance, for God is close to man

and the Qur'an says that God always invites man to come close to him. But what the

transcendence of God rejects is the concept of any intermediary or mediation other than

the Qur'an. Robert Caspar proclaims: While the Koran seems to accept some cases of

intercession (the angels, the prophet), both ancient and modern Islam make a boast of

this rejection: no meditation, still less if there is question of incarnate God, no church, no

sacraments; an extremely sober liturgy in bare mosques, where the believer is alone

before God, even at the Friday common prayer (Robert Caspar, 1985).

If God sometimes allows angels (e.g. the angel Gabriel) and prophets (Moses, Jesus

and Muhammad) to bring his word to man, He cannot permit at all the reality of the

incarnate son coming down from Heaven as the mediator between God and man. The

incarnation of God preached in Christianity is denied in the Qur’an and indeed in Islam.

Monday, 5 November 2018

Wednesday, 19 September 2018

Monday, 21 May 2018

Sunday, 20 May 2018

Saturday, 12 May 2018

Tuesday, 8 May 2018

Wednesday, 2 May 2018

Friday, 27 April 2018

Saturday, 21 April 2018

Friday, 20 April 2018

Wednesday, 18 April 2018

Tuesday, 17 April 2018

Monday, 16 April 2018

Sunday, 15 April 2018

Thursday, 12 April 2018

Wednesday, 11 April 2018

Monday, 9 April 2018

Saturday, 7 April 2018

About Me

Blog Archive