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 1 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 2 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.2728).
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 3 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 4 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
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 5 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
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 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 6 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 7 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
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Gabon
Ghana
Botswana
Ethiopia
Ivory Coast
Kenya
Liberia
Nigeria
South Africa
Sudan
Tanzania
Uganda
DR Congo
Zambia
Kalungu, Nzambi, Suku
Na`angmin
Imana
Njinyi, Nyooiy
Nzapa, So, Mbori
Anyame, Nzame
Bore-Bore, Mawu, Nyame
Modimo, Urezhwa
Arumgimis, Yere, Tel
Nyame, Onyankopon
Akuj, Mungu, Ngai, Nyasaye, tororut, Akuj, Mulungu,
Wele,
Yala
Ondo, Chuku, Olodumare, Olorun, Osanumbua,
Osowo
Inkosi, Modimo, Unkulunkulu
Ajok, Bel, Kalo, Mbori
Enkai, Kyala, Mulungu, Mungo, Ruwa
Akuj, Katonda, Kibumba, Ori, Rugaba, Ruhanga, Weri
Akongo, Arebati, Djakombo, Nzambe
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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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 14 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 15 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 16 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 17 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.
Frederic Ntedika Mvumbi
The Catholic University of Eastern Africa
Page 18 of 18