Why Islam is True-Lesson 8-The Oneness of God

Name

 The First Argument For God’s Oneness (Harmony and Design)

Aldrich says: 'Hinduism believes that gods and idols actually cause things to happen. These are all unbelievable supernatural causes. Science is the opposite, it discovers natural cause-and-effects and explains things rationally. Science. That’s the real way to go. What do you think?” What should you reply?

• “Well of course, I don’t agree with Hindus that their idols actually cause things to happen. That is a supernatural explanation with no evidence at all. But the root problem isn’t that they are not scientific. The root problem is that the idols are contingent, and the Argument From Contingency has shown us that nothing contingent can make anything else happen. But atheists are materialists and materialism also has this same problem. Perhaps everyone should become Muslim and then none of us would have this problem!”
• “Well of course, I don’t agree with Hindus that their idols actually cause things to happen. That would not make any sense. It would be unscientific to believe that pieces of wood in the shape of an elephant could cause rain storms, or the sun to rise. It would go against everything that science has discovered about the universe!

Nathan the Christian also has an opinion. He says, “It’s ridiculous to believe in idols. Idols can’t do anything at all. After all, science has liberated us from worshiping idols. Christianity and Islam are both famous for their advancements of science. You could even say that they are scientific religions because they took people away from believing in things like black cats being bad luck and towards believing in a God that controls everything." What do you say?

• “To be honest, although what you are saying about idols is true, it’s not really about being scientific. Most importantly, it is about realizing that contingent things cannot make other contingent things happen. After all, atheists do science as well. But they also make the same mistake. Just being scientific doesn’t help. Knowing that you need a Necessary Being to make the universe exist, like Muslims believe, that’s what solves the problem."
• "To be honest, what you are saying about idols is true, they are just not scientific. I mean come on, how is a stone statue of a blue elephant going to cause the rain to come down, or allow you to pass your exams!? It’s a joke. Islam is a scientific religion that came to do away with all of this."

The Second Argument For God’s Oneness (Contingency)

Babeesh the Hindu makes an interesting point. He says, “One of the reasons that I became a Hindu is that it has so many gods. Anything that you need or want, there is a god for it. It’s really comforting to know.” Nathan the Christian scoffs at that remark a little and says, “I’m sorry if this sounds rude, but I don’t know how you can believe in so many gods.Science has proved that idols can’t do anything.” Aldrich adds fuel to the fire by saying, “Hmm … Three gods called a trinity or three million called a pantheon, it’s all just as silly to me. I think we should believe in science. It’s based on fact, and science has proved Jesus can’t be God either!” You add your opinion to the conversation. “To be honest, I think that Hinduism, Christianity and materialism are very similar things. They seem like similar beliefs to me.” Your three friends turn to stare at you in disbelief. “What are you talking about!?” They all say in unison. How can you justify your claim?

• “All of you are making the mistake of believing that contingent things make other contingent things happen. In Hinduism, the idols that you worship are contingent. In Christianity you believe that Jesus is God even though Jesus is contingent. And atheists are the worst of all. They believe that everything in the universe is like a contingent idol that makes other things happen.
• “All of you are basing your beliefs on nonsense. Elephant gods with eight arms and the universe growing out of someone’s navel. Think about what you are saying! Or pretending to have three gods that are one but also die and don’t die. You have to stretch logic to breaking point to believe in that. The only one that makes any sense at all is Aldrich. At least he has proof for what he says.”
• Because you are all worshiping different idols. Hindus have a different god for almost everything in their life and the universe. Materialists have their own religion and their idols are called “measurements” and “reason”.

Aldrich looks impressed with your answer. He nods and looks at you admiringly. Could it be that he is beginning to realize the truth? Babeesh looks strange, a mixture of defensiveness and confidence. He says “I don’t believe my gods are contingent. They can do anything!” How can you convince him otherwise?

• “I can show you rationally how that is not true. In polytheism, if you ask a god one thing, and it doesn’t give you what you want then you can just ask another one! That means that your gods have overlapping powers and dominions. They are in competition with each other and that means one of them has to lose. That means that they are not like the Necessary Being, but they are contingent and needy. The only way for God to be necessary is that He is One and doesn’t need anything else, or have any partner.”
• “I can show you that they are false. Science has shown us how the universe works in minute details. We can now see that it is not idols that do things but cause-and-effect”.

The Argument For Divine Oneness in the Quran.

Babeesh poses a question to the group, but he is looking at you. You seem to have moved into a position of authority over the last few meetings. He says “What if a pantheon of gods agreed? That’s possible right? Then there would be no competition, so it would work.” Aldrich looks intrigued by this idea. He says “That seems logically possible”. What is the best way that you can answer this question?

• “No it isn’t possible actually. No pantheon has ever agreed or cooperated, in any religion. There are thousands of religions that have a pantheon, and all of them have gods who are in conflict with each other in some way. It’s because it is from the nature of godhead to dominate and that will always lead to disagreement with other gods.
• “That would still mean that you believe in a god with an elephant with a head, or someone that came from sweat, or something else weird. Is that what you want your god to be?”
• “Well, even if they theoretically did all agree then it wouldn’t matter as they would still all be contingent. If they did exist, they would still need a Necessary Being to make them the way that they are.

Nathan the Christian sits up and looks interested. He says “The polytheistic gods never agree, it’s never happened before. From the ancient Egyptian gods up until the Hindu pantheon, there is always competition and struggle. That’s why monotheistic Christianity is different: there is no competition in the trinity, only harmony.” Babeesh looks a little offended by this comment, but smiles instead of replying. What will you say about Nathan’s comments?

• “No matter how you portray it, Christians are polytheists. That’s why you have paintings of god as a man.”
• “The fact that Jesus was god in the form of a man means that he is contingent. In that sense Christianity is the same as polytheism: they both believe that contingent things make other contingent things happen. Islam shows that everything that exists depends directly on God, the Necessary Being, who we worship, love, and are grateful to.”
• “It is that harmony and the coming into one god that makes Christianity more like Islam than polytheism.”

The Three Worldviews

Aldrich looks a little abashed and says timidly “I have been thinking about what you have been saying over the last few weeks and trying to match it to my beliefs. Here is what I have come up with. I think that religions have just evolved over time. First you have polytheism which gradually evolves into Christianity, which has somehow made three gods into one, and then Islam was the next step in this evolution which just did away with the trinity. What do you think of that?” What do you reply?

• Why does everything have to be about evolution? This is about religion, not dinosaurs!”
• “Perhaps evolution is a loaded term. What about if we think about progression instead? Maybe religions are progression, but that would mean that Islam is the peak. I can agree with that!
• “That is not true. Islam is not a progression but something completely different to the other worldviews. Islam is not of the same worldview because the Argument From Contingency proves that the universe depends on a Necessary Being. There are no contingent gods, but only a Necessary Being.”

Aldrich nods at your response, but he doesn’t seem completely convinced. He says, “It makes sense to think that atheism is the peak of this evolutionary progression.” What will you say to this?

• "Atheism is wrong as it has removed God from people’s mind and culture. How can something be a peak when it has taken away so much?"
• “Atheism is wrong as it believes in materialism. I have shown you that materialism is incorrect because the Argument From Contingency demonstrates that everything in the universe is contingent and needs a Necessary Being to make it the way that it is.”
• "What if everyone thinks that about their own religion? Does that make everybody correct?"