It is better to ask what is the correct understanding of God instead of asking who is the true God

The exact number of gods that have been worshiped throughout human history is difficult to determine, but it is likely that many thousands or even millions of deities have been revered across different cultures and eras. It is often argued that religious adherents cannot confidently claim to worship the true deity because they have not critically researched the gods of other religions. The response is that this argument generally rests on a particular definition of 'god', which is often defined as any object of worship, regardless of its limitations. This definition, however, seems problematic, as anything could then qualify to be a god. Furthermore, one must ask if a being with limitations is truly deserving of worship.

On the other hand, Islām, as well as many other religions, define God as a supreme necessary being that possesses ṣifāt (attributes) that are free from limits, such as omnipotence and omniscience, among others. Certainly, anyone who affirms the existence of such a being should provide proof or evidence for it, but if the existence of such a being is established, then it logically follows that there can only be one God because the existence of more than one God, as per this definition, would result in logical contradictions [1]. There can only be one God according to this definition, so it is useless to ask who is the true God if only one God exists. Multiple cultures throughout various eras, including those that inclined towards polytheism, have upheld that there is one ultimate God. Within the Islāmic paradigm, only the supreme being would be labelled as Allāh (God), and what is worshiped besides Allāh is a god only in the sense that it is worshiped, but since these gods are not supreme, then they are false gods. If only one supreme being exists, then instead of asking who is the true God, a much more reasonable question to ask is what is the correct understanding and concept of God.

How to discover the true religion?

There have been many thousands of religions that have existed throughout history. Those who oppose the idea of adhering to a religion often cite the large number of religions that have existed, claiming that it is ridiculous for devotees to proclaim their religion as the true religion when they have not studied every religion. However, it is a fallacy to assume that one needs to investigate and research each religion in detail in order to discover the truth. To help explain, imagine if a person was murdered. Given that billions of people exist, do detectives need to interrogate every individual in order to identify the perpetrator? The answer is certainly not; likewise, one does not need to investigate and research every religion in depth in order to determine which one is true.

An effective way to distinguish truth from falsehood in terms of religion is to analyze core teachings and principles. For instance, it can be proven that at least one deity exists, and what is meant by ‘deity’ is an omnipotent and omniscient being, therefore, atheism can be refuted. The next question is how many deities exist. There are numerous polytheistic religions that worship different deities and have a variety of different rituals and practices. A seeker of truth would only need to question if polytheism is rational or incoherent. If polytheism can be demonstrated to be false, then one can reject all polytheistic religions. One does not need to study all of the deities, rituals, and practices of polytheistic religions in order to determine if these religions are true or not. Indeed, polytheism can conclusively be demonstrated to be false, and monotheism can conclusively be demonstrated to be true.

After establishing that monotheism is true, a seeker of truth is left with an array of monotheistic religions. It is still possible to narrow down this list of monotheistic religions by determining what must be true or false regarding God. Even if God is not entirely knowable, there are at least some truths about God that can be discerned. Discerning these truths would significantly reduce the list of monotheistic religions for the seeker of truth. For instance, it can be established that God is immaterial, therefore, if a religion claims that one God exists but then goes on to claim that this God has a physical body, then this religion can be rejected since it would contradict what reason can definitively prove.

However, one could conceive that even if monotheism is true, perhaps God did not reveal any particular religion. If this is true, then perhaps some form of deism or non-religious spirituality would be correct. On the other hand, it is also possible that God interacted with humanity and conveyed commandments and prohibitions. How would one know that God did indeed communicate with humanity? The answer is revelation (waḥy), which is essentially a message from God. God has not spoken to every individual within this dunyā, but some people have claimed that God has communicated with them and revealed waḥy to them. Those who receive waḥy are known as prophets (anbiyāʾ).

The need for revelation

A person born on a remote island living among a primitive community with no access to religious scripture could, through reflection, arrive at the conclusion that God exists and is one. However, reason by itself cannot disclose all types of information, such as what God commands or forbids, nor can it provide knowledge about matters such as the afterlife. To have knowledge on these matters require revelation, as only God can disclose such information. Of course, one must ask if God has actually revealed waḥy or not.

Criteria to determine true revelation

Religions typically claim that their books and scriptures contain waḥy that serve as guides and instruction for humanity. There is a simple yet effective criteria that can be used to determine if these texts are indeed waḥy from God.

1. Correct concept of God: A message that champions an incorrect concept of God cannot be true waḥy. For example, if it can be shown logically that polytheism is false, then any religious text that affirms this ideology can be debunked.
2. Preservation: If God sent a message, and the message is lost, then people cannot be sure of the original content. If the message is corrupted, then it is no longer God’s message.
3. Inerrancy: If God is omniscient, then his word cannot contain errors and contradictions [2].
4. Supernatural attestation: It is not sufficient for a text to be preserved, to teach a correct concept of God, and to be free from error, as any individual could produce such a text satisfying these three conditions. A text can be confidently regarded as originating from God if it satisfies these conditions and also contains miraculous information or if a claimant of prophethood who champions such a text performs miraculous feats, which demonstrates that this claimant is a true prophet of God.

Some may challenge the condition of inerrancy. For example, many Christians do not claim that the Bible is inerrant. Rather than viewing it as the literal word of God, they believe that God inspired human authors to write about ʿĪsā (Jesus) عليه السلام, and these writings are essentially what make up the Bible. They may acknowledge that the Bible contains errors and contradictions, but they do not see this as problematic, claiming that such issues do not affect the central message of the Bible and the core tenets of Christianity. However, the counterargument is that these mistakes do, in fact, have an impact on the foundations of the Christian faith, and it is folly to believe that God has inspired human authors to make mistakes and contradict one another when writing about ʿĪsā عليه السلام.

Some may also object to the condition of supernatural attestation, claiming that miracles are impossible, but this is an assumption. We argue that it can be definitively proven that God exists and is omnipotent. If this is true, then it would not be impossible for a prophet to perform miracles with God’s aid.

Scientific and historical objections

A religious text should not be regarded as false if it contradicts a widely accepted scientific theory or historical account. Scientific theories and historical narratives are not static but are subject to change, as they are based on interpretation of existing data. Data can be interpreted in multiple ways, and new findings and data can challenge or even overturn previous conclusions. Indeed, numerous scientific theories that were once widely accepted were later revised or rejected, and numerous scientific theories that were once widely rejected were later accepted. The same holds true for historical narratives. That said, a critical distinction must be made: if a religious text makes a claim that is clearly shown to be empirically false, such as claiming that humanity will no longer be present after the 20th century CE, then such a claim should be rejected, since it contradicts direct observation. Claims that cannot be directly observed cannot be definitively disproven, unless they involve a logical contradiction. For example, the idea that a species of intelligent elephants exists on another planet does not entail any contradiction. Therefore, such a claim cannot be disproven outright, but due to the absence of any supporting evidence, there is no reason to accept it as true. While the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, a claim should only be accepted if it is supported by evidence. In contrast, contradictory claims are inherently self-defeating and can be rejected as false immediately, such as the claim that a married bachelor exists.

Moral objections

Moral objections also cannot be used to disqualify a message as being from God because notions of right and wrong vary from person to person. For instance, say that there is a religious text that teaches that some people will be punished perpetually in the ākhirah (hereafter). It is fallacious for someone to argue, “This message cannot be waḥy because it teaches that God will punish people eternally, and eternal punishment is evil.” Such a claim rests on the unfounded assumption that God would not impose eternal punishment, and it is highly subjective to claim that eternal punishment is evil. One person may accept that some individuals deserve eternal punishment, and others may reject this. Moral sensibilities alone are insufficient grounds for determining the authenticity of revelation.

GORAP

This process of determining which religion is true can be summarized by the acronym GORAP.

• G (God): By proving that a deity exists, atheism can be refuted.
• O (Oneness): By proving monotheism, polytheism can be refuted. Other attributes may be argued for in this section, such as immateriality.
• RAP (Revelation and Prophets): Once atheism and polytheism are refuted, a seeker of truth is left with monotheistic religions. However, it is possible that God exists but has not revealed a specific religion, in which case a form of deism or non-religious spirituality might be correct. Alternatively, it is also possible that God has revealed a religion. While God has not communicated directly with everyone, certain individuals have claimed to receive messages from God. There are criteria by which these messages can be evaluated to determine if they are genuinely divine revelation (waḥy), as mentioned earlier: correct concept of God, preservation, inerrancy, and supernatural attestation.

The ‘G’ and ‘O’ sections of GORAP can be established using reason alone without the usage of any religious scripture. It is these two sections that demonstrate the correct concept of God, which is used in the criteria of determining if a message is truly waḥy or not. The ‘RAP’ section requires one to evaluate if a particular message is truly waḥy by using the given criteria. If a religion has the correct concept of God and its message or text is preserved, inerrant, and possesses supernatural attestation, then it is a true religion.

Substantiation of Islām

We claim that Islām is true based on the soundness of its monotheistic concept of Allāh (God), which can be proven using pure logic and reasoning without relying on any religious text. Atheism and polytheism can be proven to be false. Once monotheism has been proven, the question then becomes: what is the correct monotheistic religion? This requires evaluating the religious texts of these monotheistic religions. As for the Qurʾān, the central scripture of Islām, it can be shown to have been reliably preserved, and its inerrancy can also be defended. Most significantly, the Qurʾān contains miraculous content, and Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ performed miracles. This demonstrates that the Qurʾān is true waḥy from Allāh and that Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ is a true prophet of Allāh.

[1] Later articles will demonstrate how the existence of two or more deities would result in logical contradictions.
[2] In Islām, there are two main textual sources: the Qurʾān and the ḥadīth corpus. The Qurʾān is regarded as the literal and inerrant word of Allāh. The aḥādīth on the other hand are essentially reports that convey the sayings, actions, and tacit approvals of Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. Although most aḥādīth relate to the Prophet ﷺ, not all of them do; some pertain to the statements or actions of other Muslims. The Qurʾān and Sunnah are waḥy (revelation). The Sunnah refers to the religious teachings, actions, and practices of Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ. It provides context for understanding and implementing the Qurʾān. The Qurʾān itself affirms the authority of the Prophet ﷺ and mentions that he explains the Qurʾān (Qurʾān 16:44). The Sunnah has been preserved through both demonstration and textual transmission. As for demonstration, students are taught the Sunnah through physical demonstration by their teachers, who in turn learned from their teachers, and so on; this chain of demonstration traces back to the Prophet ﷺ. As for textual transmission, the Sunnah is found in many ḥadīth, but not every ḥadīth conveys the Sunnah. For instance, it is Sunnah to urinate while sitting. Modern medical research supports this practice, showing that sitting to urinate can help empty the bladder more completely and reduce residual urine, which may be beneficial for individuals with lower urinary tract symptoms (de Jong et al., 2014). It also minimizes urine from splashing back and reduces the risk of falling compared to standing. Nevertheless, some aḥādīth report that the Prophet ﷺ urinated while standing; this was done to demonstrate the permissibility of urinating while standing, and sometimes the Prophet ﷺ would stand and urinate in situations where sitting was impractical or the sitting area was unclean. Thus, while standing to urinate is permissible, to sit and urinate is Sunnah. Unlike the Qurʾān, which is divinely protected from error, the ḥadīth corpus is not inerrant. Throughout history, fabricated reports emerged, prompting the early ʿulamāʾ (Islāmic scholars), particularly the scholars of ḥadīth (muḥaddithūn), to develop a rigorous science for grading reports. The highest level of authenticity in Islām is mutawātir, which refers to information that is mass-transmitted, meaning it has been transmitted by a large number of independent narrators to such an extent that it is virtually impossible that they all agreed to concoct a fabrication. The Qurʾān is mutawātir, and numerous aḥādīth are mutawātir, though not all reach this level. A mutawātir source undoubtedly traces back to the Prophet ﷺ, so to reject it would take a person out of Islām, although ignorance may at times excuse an individual. (To excuse someone due to ignorance is known as al-ʿudhr bi al-jahl). However, if a person knowingly and persistently rejects that which is mutawātir after being informed of its status, then this person would no longer be a Muslim. As for a non-mutawātir ḥadīth, it is classified as āḥād or khabar wāḥid, which are interchangeable terms. An āḥād ḥadīth requires careful examination and is graded as ṣaḥīḥ (authentic), ḥasan (fair), ḍaʿīf (weak), or mawḍūʿ (fabricated), and these grades have subcategories. Everything that is mutawātir is ṣaḥīḥ, but not every ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth is mutawātir. Whatever is mutawātir does not require much scholarship or investigation, as it is automatically ṣaḥīḥ due to mass-transmission. A mutawātir source conveys information that has certainly been transmitted from the Prophet ﷺ, while a non-mutawātir source that is ṣaḥīḥ or ḥasan may convey information that has likely been transmitted from the Prophet ﷺ. This is why Muslims still act upon āḥād aḥādīth that are ṣaḥīḥ or ḥasan, even though it is not certain that such aḥādīth are truly from the Prophet ﷺ. Āḥād aḥādīth that are ṣaḥīḥ are not contradictory, and any apparent contradiction between them can be reconciled, but for the sake of argument, even if they were contradictory and unreliable, this still would not disprove Islām. The only way one can falsify Islām is by showing that the Qurʾān or mutawātir aḥādīth are contradictory or unreliable.