So who created God?
When every child asks his parents who created him, he is told that all people, living things, the earth, the celestial bodies, the universe and everything that there is and ever will be, is created by a very specific entity with infinitely vast supernatural powers who orchestrates every single occurrence in every corner of existence; God. Then follows years of religious indoctrination which paints an image of an immaculate being who is self-sufficient, eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient. This indoctrination coupled with fear of excommunication prevents us from asking the next logical question in a series of never-ending ventures into the unknown: who created God?
Most of us would angrily respond (after a short spell of damnation) by preaching that the very notion (of God having a creator) is simply ludicrous. We ignore the fact that these so-called fundamental beliefs (leading up to the image of a Creator god) were instilled in us by lifetimes of principles that can only best be described as religious dogmas, instead of even a shred of empirical proof. Questions relating to the nature of God are shunned by both parents and societies as they feel an overwhelming sense of sacrilege. This intentional elusion is perhaps attributed by our desire to preserve our faiths; or simply to avoid the inevitable conflict between religion and science.
When presented with this little personal dilemma, a friend suggested that by opening this particular situation to the scrutiny of science and logical reasoning, we would unleash an infinite queue of doubt and reckoning (as if the entire fabric of existence solely depended on it). After contemplating this for a while, I realized that the daunting sense of uncertainty is the essence and pioneering force of science; an undying sense of inquisitiveness followed almost always by discovery, innovation and understanding. Knowledge existed long before the creation of the universe and it shall continue to exist even after its possible cessation (à la the infiniteness of the mathematical numeral). So why do we still use God as a full-stop on all instances of the natural world (or otherwise) that eludes a conventional explanation? Is all this a mere frailty of the human mind brought about by some evolutionary blunder as one blogger suggested?
A few nights ago, an ongoing joke with a friend to disprove the existence of God led to a personal revelation of a sort. When asked to explain all the suffering on this earth (human and otherwise) despite God’s tenure of all His divine abilities and mercifulness, he presented the standard apologists’ response; God’s divine psyche does not have to be on par with that of the human or more specifically, God does not necessarily have the very human emotion of empathy. I rebuffed this by highlighting the various similarities (that I could draw) between the divine and human ‘minds’: jealousy (conditioning absolute belief in His unity), possessiveness (worshiping /reverence) and the most controversial, vengefulness (dreadful mechanisms of torture) just to name a few. So if God can have these idiosyncrasies which are reflected by our human nature, why not empathy? Would not a compassionate and omnipotent being do all that is in its power to salve mankind (or any other creature) from constant suffering and certain doom? My cornered friend (who is a fellow agnostic theist also sick of organized religion, who shares my belief that there is an individual path to God and eternal bliss) admitted that the face of God is irreparably stained by eons of corruptive religion which has been fabricated from its truest form to benefit just a few individuals who continue to exert their terror, power and influence on the masses. I, for one, totally concur with him.
So to answer myself, I think we created [the perception of] God. Individually, socially and even politically. What we have to ultimately decide is which perception to embrace and then to follow. As far as I am concerned, its an easy choice.
Transitions says...
(June 13, 2007 at 3:17 pm)
random thoughts:
i think god is very benign and indifferent if god exists. Maybe god was created coz we are aware there is something more…Human beings are unable to deal with uncertainty and that’s why we created god. When human beings created god, everything they could not answer was explained using god. im confused myself. Those who are the most happy are those who can find contentedness and answers by knowing uncertainty will always exist and are able to take comfort in being unsure.
you are right, if we use the explanation of god for everything, knowledge seeking will stop on the spot. Like the way present maulanas are doing. Nothing is written on stone. Everything can be reinterpreted and will be reinterpreted the more we seek knowledge. it applies for science, so why shouldn’t the same apply for rights, especially women’s rights?
Monotheist says...
(June 13, 2007 at 4:26 pm)
Due to the influence of Darwinian evolution thought, many historians, social scientists and anthropologists have concluded that religion began with humanity worshipping forces of nature due to their amazement at the cataclysmic and devastating effects of their environments and natural world. Thu, thunder, lightening, earthquakes, tsunamis (?), volcanoes, etc were believed to be conceived of supernatural beings. Thus, humans sought ways to appease the beings through rites, rituals, prayers and sacrifices. The native North Americans , who believe in spirits of the river and the forests are used as examples of this early stage of the evolution of religion, known as Animism.
Thus, according to such views, anthropologists, orientalists and social scientists hold, that Monotheism has no divine origin, but that is was a mere by product of the evolution of early man’s superstitious beliefs based on lack of scientific knowledge.
Though this is held by them, the proofs that humanity began with monotheistic beliefs and later degenerated into idol-worship, man-worship, saint-worship, and minor gods is extensive. Thus, we find amongst all of the so-called primitive tribes that have been discovered, the belief in One Supreme God. The central America Mayans believe in One God who created everything, whom they call ‘Itzamna ’ (John Hinnels dictionary of religions, Penguin Books, p. 93), the Mende people of Sierra Leone in West Africa believe in One God who created the universe, who they call Ngewo (Ibid. p.210), in the ancient Babylon the people believed in Marduk, the Supreme God (Ibid. p.204).
In the Yoruba religion, followed by over millions in West Africa (mainly Niegeria), there is One Supreme God, Olorius/ Oludumare. Nevertheless modern Yoruba religion is characterized by a multitude of Orisha worship rites which thus render the religion closer to polytheism.
Western scholar, Stephan Langdon of Oxford took the view that Sumerians were the oldest historic civilization, he said: “… the oldest civilization of man is a rapid decline from monotheism to extreme polytheism and widespread belief in spirits. It is in a very true sense the history the fall of man” (Mythology of all races in Semitic Mythology Magazine Vol 5, p. 18)
Moreover, The journal of the royal anthropological institute , published a paper by E. O James in which he conclude: ‘thus, it is impossible to maintain a unilateral evolution in religious thought and practices as suggested by the rationalists Frazer, Tylor and Comte’s “three stages”. Nevertheless, neither the speculation that the idea of God arose in ancestor worship as revived by Herbert Spencer, nor the Frazian evolution model of polytheism and animism to monotheism can be reconciled with the On Supreme God, which is a recurrent feature of the primitive concept of God.’(p. 28 of the volume 79 of the journal of the royal anthropological institute)
Monotheist says...
(June 13, 2007 at 4:48 pm)
Causality is foundational to most science. Those who believe that the universe was uncaused are exercising blind faith!
‘Who created God?’?? That is very very illogical, just like ‘To whom is the bachelor married?’
fizan says...
(June 13, 2007 at 5:12 pm)
Thanks for a very informative piece of history on what appears to be the origin of god.
If we are to side with logic, I don’t see how very convincing a god would be in the first place. As for who married the bachelor, we can assume its someone … a person at least in most contemporary societies. Lets try to bring down the number of possibilities to the the creator of God then.
Green says...
(June 14, 2007 at 1:02 pm)
If God was created by another God than he too would have been created and the God who created the first God was too created by a god, and so on and so forth, for infinity. And so for infinity you’ll have one God created by another God who is created by another god who was created by another God. phew!!
However, if you believe this then you have to believe that the past is infinite, since the idea of God being created by another God goes on until infinity. If this was the case then there would be an infinite past and no present, nor would there be a future, since we would never reach the present, as the past is infinite. However, here we are existing in the present. And so we would have to stop at one place because we know that the past cannot be infinite since we live in the present, and the place we stop at is at God. Therefore, God is the ultimate beginning who is not created and from whom all life came into existence, and ultimately cannot have a creator.
Transitions says...
(June 14, 2007 at 4:11 pm)
maybe god was created by human beings and human beings in turn were created by god, it’s all a cycle, Maybe its a question of did the chicken come first or the egg?
rilwan says...
(June 14, 2007 at 4:42 pm)
Isn’t it possible that human biengs don’t have the intelligence to think about its creator? Its not such a complicated theory. If Iam colou blind your red may be different from mine. Just a Simple examples of human capacity.Suppose your phone rang -there is a possiblity that accidentally you hit the ring setting control. Would you rather believe that its someone calling you or conclude that you must have hit the ring setting control accidentally and ignore the phone?? . I would rather think its someone calling me and check the phone. So why should we think every existence is just an accident and chance designed the complexities.
fizan says...
(June 14, 2007 at 11:45 pm)
Green, thanks for an intriguing philosophical viewpoint but I’ve already hinted at the infinite lineage of deities unwittingly created by this question. Call it the infinite god theorem. Besides I am more interested to know about the very first occurrence of a creator god, instead of focusing on what such a notion gives rise to.
Rilwan, you present an old argument that I never bought. That we are intellectually handicapped to think about our creator, due to its perceived greatness and immense complexities… qualities attributed by ourselves, I would think. Think about this from my perspective. Something that we are incapable of wondering about shouldn’t even cross our mind. If God places mental blocks (in our minds) on certain subjects pertaining to His nature and/or existence, I don’t really see how we could be having this conversation. As for the ringing phone, yeah, it probably is someone on the line. I just don’t want to rule out the very REAL possibility that I might have just hit the ring control button.
Transitions, I think you are the first one here who actually contemplated dual possibilities, one of which is that God might be, to quote Homer Simpson “my favorite fictional character” and what a grand allegory you chose to express yourself with. Kudos!
australopithecus says...
(June 15, 2007 at 10:04 am)
Monotheist,
It is my understanding that humanity is different from human civilisation. You mentioned the proofs that humanity began with monotheistic beliefs are extensive. To back this up you presented several ancient tribes and civilisations that believed in one supreme God. The evidence collected so far, on this subject, dates back to ancient civilisations and primitive cave paintings. Humanity stretches way back. This being the case, can we say humanity began with monotheistic beliefs?
As for Marduk being the one supreme God of Babylon, Marduk (a diety back then) emerged from ancient Mesopotamia and was originally associated with limited elements. Later when Babylon became the capital of Mesopotamia, Marduk’s state was raised to one supreme God. Furthermore Epic of Gilgamesh reveals there existed many gods in Babylon. Anu, Ishtar, Sun-god Shamash, Goddess of creation Aruru and so on.
Judas says...
(June 15, 2007 at 5:39 pm)
SO it it possible for god to microwave a burrito so hot that he cant eat it?
fizan says...
(June 15, 2007 at 11:58 pm)
Australopithecus is right! Human history does not begin with the rise of the civilizations. Lets not forget Homo sapiens alone dates back two hundred thousand years. Now I am not nearly as anthropology-savvy as the two of you, but even I recollect coming across many polytheistic deities in both fiction and non-fiction.
Anybody who has seen the Egyptian TV series “Muhammad: The Messenger of God” on TV during the Ramadan would be able to tell that Marduk did not get entertained in a monotheistic ancient Babylonian society. Incidentally, take a look at this picture of Marduk found on a cylinder seal. Kinda looks exactly like the guy Abraham framed for smashing up the rest of his Akkadian god buddies?
For those of you who has no idea what the heck Judas is talking about, see the Omnipotent paradox which some people use to argue on God’s non-existence. Precisely why science and religion can’t go hand-in-hand.
Ned Flanders says...
(June 16, 2007 at 8:33 am)
“Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don’t want to know. Important things”
Judas says...
(June 16, 2007 at 8:48 am)
what in the diddley are you talking about. God gave us a brain to think about the end of the movie.
Judas says...
(June 16, 2007 at 8:51 am)
ps. It wasnt me who framed that guy and ratted him out to the romans.
Green says...
(June 18, 2007 at 6:26 pm)
Here is a translation of Surah, Al-Iklas (Chapter 112) of the Holy Quran…
1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.
“He is begettheth not, nor is He begotten”…now the question is can we validate this verse empirically?
Before proceeding lets me ask is time ethereal? something abstract? Something ever-existing? Many would assume so…But Science gives us a different view on that. Einsteins special relativity shows us that time is a relative construct, a dimension. And contemporary views are that dimensions -the spatial as well as the temporal dimensions- are not abstract at all, they are materialistic (in the sense that they are made of matter, that they consist of a fabric). Time can even be bended by gravity of objects with high mass. Now, this has huge implications for big bang. Because it means that not only the spatial dimension, but also the temporal dimension came into existence during big bang. So “before” big bang there wasn’t even time. That’s a bit of a paradoxical statement because the word “before” is time-dependent and thus has little meaning in that sentence. But that’s where it gets interesting. If you believe in a God who empowered big bang, then you believe he also created time. That means God is not eternal, but instead time-independent. Or to explain that last sentence in other words, rather then having an eternal lifespan stretched over a beginningless dimension of time, God is not enclosed within this dimension of time that by the way does have a beginning. So just as the word “before” was paradoxical in our timeless paradigm, so can we also say that all time-dependent words like: before; after; during; when;beginning and end are meaningless when used in relation to God.
fizan says...
(June 18, 2007 at 10:38 pm)
Aren’t you making a very big assumption here!?! First of all, you assumed there is a God (once again, not even on a tiny sliver of empirical evidence), who created the spatial and temporal dimensions, which led you to conclude that He is time-independent. Only the latter is logical, but yeah, it sure is a paradoxical. Thanks a for pointing out more incompatibilities between religion and science.
I guess we’ll have to rely on blind faith for this one.
australopithecus says...
(June 18, 2007 at 10:42 pm)
Green,
From a philosophical standpoint that sounds OK.
From a scientific standpoint we cannot empirically affirm your notion “That means God is not eternal, but instead time-independent”.
Green says...
(June 19, 2007 at 2:30 pm)
fizan,
Would you be kind enough to empirically prove the non-existence of a God?
fizan says...
(June 19, 2007 at 4:57 pm)
LOL. Precisely why I believe He exists, mate. I am sure you have heard of the Pascal’s wager. Just tryin’ to be on the “safe side” here. Some people may call this argumentum ad ignorantiam though, which is sadly true.
i-ranta says...
(June 28, 2007 at 12:13 pm)
hi fizan, just a thought; you can imagine a lot of ‘things’ whose non-existence can’t be proved empirically; the holy hunk of invisible cheese on pluto, the cataract in the unicorn’s eye etc. but none of these call for belief MERELY because their existence can’t be disproved or so i’m inclined to think, as most do. there has to be a positive reason for us to believe in the existence of such entities…ie some evidence that suggests their existence. Pascal’s Wager is not very convincing because it only works if you grant the (possible) existence of a particular God from a myriad possible others. On an even lighter note, what if God doesn’t like opportunists?
i-ranta says...
(June 28, 2007 at 12:17 pm)
in my haste i forgot to mention that i like your blog.
fizan says...
(June 28, 2007 at 10:23 pm)
i-ranta, I am not aware that the stuff you mentioned (including Cheese on Pluto and something about a unicorn) calls for belief in the first place. I agree there is some obscure positive reason for us to place belief in god-like beings though, but I am not sure that signifies existence on its own. True, like Dawkins (I think) said “We’ve all become atheists to most gods of antiquity, but sadly, most of us goes one god further”. Pascal is just following on that.
To assume that God would detest opportunism is a tricky notion. Maybe one of the reasons why people worship (God or a god) is solely to gain favor in the eyes of the deity. Selfishness? I would think so.
nass says...
(June 30, 2007 at 9:37 pm)
Hi, maybe i’m commenting too late, but after reading the article and comments, I can’t help but think that perhaps u can’t make up ur mind about the existence of God. I mean, in the article you talked about trying to “disprove” God exists. And then in comment no.19 u say to believe He exists so that u’ll be on the “safe side”…. what is the safer side?
fizan says...
(July 1, 2007 at 3:09 pm)
Nass, you missed the bit where I said our argument was a joke. C’mon, lets be realistic here. Like Green (comment #18) rherotically said, there is no way to either prove or disprove the existence of God. As for the “safe side” I tentatively mentioned, I was referring to “the path to Heaven” ;) Cheers
nass says...
(July 1, 2007 at 10:26 pm)
cool.
i-ranta says...
(July 5, 2007 at 9:09 am)
hi again,
just to clarify things here. i dont think a holy hunk of invisible cheese or a cataract in a unicorn’s eye call for belief either. but, going by the criterion of belief as stated in your response to green (you believe in god PRECISELY because his nonexistence can’t be empirically proved) will entail belief in all kinds of absurd ‘entities’, such as those i’ve mentioned.
you might’ve heard of a muslim woman called rabia circa 8th century, who’s supposed to have run through the streets of basra with a torch in one hand and a pail of water in the other, and when asked what she was doing she’s reputed to have said “i am going to torch heaven and extinguish the fires of hell so that i may love god for his own sake”
fizan says...
(July 5, 2007 at 11:56 pm)
The ‘ol argumentum ad ignorantiam jab eh? Let me just put it this way… I don’t see any reason why I should believe in a freakin’ unicorn or leprechaun. I stand to gain nothing for harboring belief in such absurdities. God is a totally different story… I gain spiritual guidance by maintaining faith in Him, and He inspires me to do good (just like He inspires terrorists and crusaders to commit atrocities, I suppose). Get my drift?
There is another reason. I think it was C.S. Lewis who said something to this effect:
“If there is inquisitiveness, there is knowledge, if there is hunger, there is food. If there is a very human desire for an ultimate creator and sustainer, surely, there must be a god”
I must admit I have never heard of this Mesopotamian woman before, but her quote from you prompted me to look her up. What she probably meant was that she abhors worshiping God out of fear (of hell) and/or greed (of heaven), but would rather embrace God, purely out of the love she had for Him. I remember having the same argument with my mom a few years back … if only more people thought like Basra and I ;)
maanasih says...
(July 16, 2007 at 9:58 pm)
“…the face of God is irreparably stained by eons of corruptive religion..”
Amen. I’ve always said that religion is the way of humanizing God. Not that it gets me any closer to understanding anything.
Cleo says...
(November 29, 2007 at 11:30 am)
It is a known fact that every language has one or more terms that are used in reference to God and sometimes to lesser deities. This is not the case with Allah. Allah is the personal name of the One true God. Nothing else can be called Allah. The term has no plural or gender. This shows its uniqueness when compared with the word God which can be made plural, Gods, or feminine, Goddess. It is interesting to notice that Allah is the personal name of God in Aramaic, the language of Jesus and a sister language of Arabic.
The One true God is a reflection of the unique concept that Islam associates with God. To a Muslim, Allah is the Almighty, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, Who is similar to nothing and nothing is comparable to Allah. The Prophet Muhammad was asked by his contemporaries about Allah; the answer came directly from Allah Himself in the form of a short chapter of the Quran, which is considered the essence of the unity or the motto of monotheism. This is chapter 112 which reads:
“In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. Say (O Muhammad) Allah is God the One God, the Everlasting Refuge, who has not begotten, nor has been begotten, and equal to Him is not anyone.”
Some non-Muslims allege that God in Islam is a stern and cruel God who demands to be obeyed fully. He is not loving and kind. Nothing can be farther from truth than this allegation. It is enough to know that, with the exception of one, each of the 114 chapters of the Quran begins with the verse: “In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.” In one of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) we are told that “God is more loving and kinder than a mother to her dear child.”
But God is also Just. Hence evildoers and sinners must have their share of punishment and the virtuous, His bounties and favors. Actually God’s attribute of Mercy has full manifestation in His attribute of Justice. People suffering throughout their lives for His sake and people oppressing and exploiting other people all their lives should not receive similar treatment from their Lord. Expecting similar treatment for them will amount to negating the very belief in the accountability of man in the Hereafter and thereby negating all the incentives for a moral and virtuous life in this world. The following Quranic verses are very clear and straightforward in this respect:
“Verily, for the Righteous are gardens of Delight, in the Presence of their Lord. Shall We then treat the people of Faith like the people of Sin? What is the matter with you? How judge you?” (68:34-36)
Islam rejects characterizing God in any human form or depicting Him as favoring certain individuals or nations on the basis of wealth, power or race. He created the human beings as equals. They may distinguish themselves and get His favor through virtue and piety only.
The concept that God rested in the seventh day of creation, that God wrestled with one of His soldiers, that God is an envious plotter against mankind, or that God is incarnate in any human being are considered blasphemy from the Islamic point of view.
The unique usage of Allah as a personal name of God is a reflection of Islam’s emphasis on the purity of the belief in God which is the essence of the message of all God’s messengers. Because of this, Islam considers associating any deity or personality with God as a deadly sin which God will never forgive, despite the fact He may forgive all other sins.
[Note that what is meant above applies ONLY to those people who die in a state wherein they are associating others with God. The repentance of those who yet live is acceptable to God if He wills. - MSA of USC]
The Creator must be of a different nature from the things created because if he is of the same nature as they are, he will be temporal and will therefore need a maker. It follows that nothing is like Him. If the maker is not temporal, then he must be eternal. But if he is eternal, he cannot be caused, and if nothing outside him causes him to continue to exist, which means that he must be self-sufficient. And if the does not depend on anything for the continuance of his own existence, then this existence can have no end. The Creator is therefore eternal and everlasting: “He is the First and the Last.”
He is Self-Sufficient or Self-Subsistent or, to use a Quranic term, Al-Qayyum. The Creator does not create only in the sense of bringing things into being, He also preserves them and takes them out of existence and is the ultimate cause of whatever happens to them.
“God is the Creator of everything. God is the guardian over everything. Unto Him belong the keys of the heavens and the earth.” (39:62, 63)
“No creature is there crawling on the earth, but its provision rests on God. He knows its lodging place and it repository.” (11:6)
God’s Attributes:
If the Creator is Eternal and Everlasting, then His attributes must also be eternal and everlasting. He should not lose any of His attributes nor acquire new ones. If this is so, then His attributes are absolute. Can there be more than one Creator with such absolute attributes? Can there be for example, two absolutely powerful Creators? A moment’s thought shows that this is not feasible.
The Quran summarizes this argument in the following verses:
“God has not taken to Himself any son, nor is there any God with Him: For then each God would have taken of that which he created and some of them would have risen up over others.” (23:91)
And Why, were there Gods in earth and heaven other than God, they (heaven and earth) would surely go to ruin.” (21:22)
The Oneness of God:
The Quran reminds us of the falsity of all alleged Gods. To the worshippers of man-made objects, it asks:
“Do you worship what you have carved yourself?” (37:95)
“Or have you taken unto you others beside Him to be your protectors, even such as have no power either for good or for harm to themselves?” (13:16)
To the worshippers of heavenly bodies it cites the story of Abraham:
“When night outspread over him he saw a star and said, ‘This is my Lord.’ But when it set he said, ‘I love not the setters.’ When he saw the moon rising, he said, ‘This is my Lord.’ But when it set he said, ‘If my Lord does not guide me I shall surely be of the people gone astray.’ When he saw the sun rising, he said, ‘This is my Lord; this is greater.’ But when it set he said, ‘O my people, surely I quit that which you associate, I have turned my face to Him Who originated the heavens and the earth; a man of pure faith, I am not of the idolaters.’” (6:76-79)
The Believer’s Attitude:
In order to be a Muslim, i.e., to surrender oneself to God, it is necessary to believe in the oneness of God, in the sense of His being the only Creator, Preserver, Nourisher, etc. But this belief - later on called “Tawhid Ar-Rububiyyah” - is not enough. Many of the idolaters knew and believed that only the Supreme God could do all this, but that was not enough to make them Muslims. To tawhid ar-rububiyyah one must add tawhid al’uluhiyyah, i.e., one acknowledges the fact that is God alone Who deserves to be worshipped, and thus abstains from worshipping any other thing or being.
Having achieved this knowledge of the one true God, man should constantly have faith in Him, and should allow nothing to induce him to deny truth.
When faith enters a person’s heart, it causes certain mental states which result in certain actions. Taken together these mental states and actions are the proof for the true faith. The Prophet said, “Faith is that which resides firmly in the heart and which is proved by deeds.” Foremost among those mental states is the feeling of gratitude towards God which could be said to be the essence of ‘ibada’ (worship).
The feeling of gratitude is so important that a non-believer is called ‘kafir’ which means ‘one who denies a truth’ and also ‘one who is ungrateful.’
A believer loves, and is grateful to God for the bounties He bestowed upon him, but being aware of the fact that his good deeds, whether mental or physical, are far from being commensurate with Divine favors, he is always anxious lest God should punish him, here or in the Hereafter. He, therefore, fears Him, surrenders himself to Him and serves Him with great humility. One cannot be in such a mental state without being almost all the time mindful of God. Remembering God is thus the life force of faith, without which it fades and withers away.
The Quran tries to promote this feeling of gratitude by repeating the attributes of God very frequently. We find most of these attributes mentioned together in the following verses of the Quran:
“Allah is God; there is no God but Allah, Allah is the Knower of the unseen and the visible; Allah is the All-Merciful, the All-Compassionate. Allah is the King, the All-Holy, the All-Peace, the Guardian of Faith, the All-Preserver, the All-Mighty, the All-Compeller, the All-Sublime. Glory be to God, above that they associate! Allah is God the Creator, the Maker, the Shaper. To Allah belong the Names Most Beautiful. All that is in the heavens and the earth magnifies Allah; Allah is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.” (59:22-24)
“There is no God but Allah, the Living, the Everlasting. To Allah belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth. Allah knows what lies before them and what is after them. His throne comprises the heavens and earth; the preserving of them oppresses Him not; Allah is the All-High, the All-Glorious.” (2:255)
“People of the Book, go not beyond the bounds in your religion, and say not as to God but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only the Messenger of God, and His Word that He committed to Mary, and a Spirit from Him. So believe in God and His Messengers, and say not, ‘Three.’ Refrain; better is it for you. God is only one God. Glory be to Him.
- http://www.batkhela.com/islam/who-is-allah.shtml
moyameehaa says...
(January 17, 2008 at 6:31 pm)
if there is someone who created the god, then he is the real god.because god is supposed to be the origin of all existence.everything around us have cause, everything we know have an origin or we believe so.First we thought god created man from clay and gave life to it.now we know we are more than clay.more complicated stuff, cells,DNA and all.but still we go on finding what created this if this have created that.what is at the end of this cycle of causes…no need to take this further, this this is the famous argument from first cause.
but this creator does not have to be the god, religions tell us about.This does not prove this cause is even intelligent.other arguments are needed to prove that.but the biblical god or the god(s) or religions were created by humans.Man created god in his own image, not the other way round.but this does’nt disprove the existence of a god.or at least a first cause or a creator.
fizan says...
(January 17, 2008 at 11:07 pm)
First of, you said “god is supposed to be the origin…” so I ask, how did you actually reach this supposition? Then you mention that we thought we were made out of clay, which turned out to be erroneous or way too oversimplified proving not all human thoughts are initially right. Thanks for the link to the causality arguments but I need at least 10 hours of sleep before I go reading on about religious philosophy *yawn*
Yes, exactly. I can agree with you there that the creator (or intelligent designer according to creationists) does not necessarily have to be a biblical god and can be just about anything, including a gigantic, amorphous entity drifting just above the edge of the universe.
Nah, but you must admit there is nothing to prove his existence either. Just take a leap.
angleofdeath says...
(February 5, 2008 at 8:52 pm)
Have you ever been in at the brink of death, due to perhaps a very ugly car accident or maybe lost in the deep sea? I hope you have a computer or a piece of paper when if you ever confront that situation coz eventually we all will. And i am absolutly positive you will have ALL your doubts about god cleared at the point you leave this world.
fizan says...
(February 5, 2008 at 9:23 pm)
Azrael OR عزرای(aka angleofdeath),
I must confess that I’ve never been on the brink of death, due to “..a very ugly car accident” or arsenic poisoning, but you seem to preach with an impressive sense of certainty, almost with first hand experience, which makes me wonder… dude, are you commenting from the grave?
Wishful thinking nevertheless. Ahem…amen?
Waleed says...
(August 10, 2008 at 2:39 am)
Your article sounds okay. But I still would like you to do your research a little better.
deby says...
(August 19, 2010 at 5:21 am)
first of all darwin is wrong. how can all this life form from a single cell??? it doesnt even make sense. the only reason the western society believe it is because it clashes with islamic beliefs.
if you stop for one minute and think about the universe, the human being and everything around you, you will realize there is a mighty power, which we call god.