If No One Had Told You About Allah.... Would You Still Believe In Him?

DrumSteve

Just thought i'd re-visit this thread and read over it again. Some fascinating points we made over the course of it but to be honest it has in no made me change my mind about the nature of my own beliefs.

Also want to say thanks to the mods for leaving this open.

hivizman

DrumSteve wrote: »

Just thought i'd re-visit this thread and read over it again. Some fascinating points we made over the course of it but to be honest it has in no made me change my mind about the nature of my own beliefs.

Also want to say thanks to the mods for leaving this open.

You are very welcome. This has so far been the third most popular thread in the forum measured by number of replies, so the original post has generated a good debate.

DrumSteve

hivizman wrote: »

You are very welcome. This has so far been the third most popular thread in the forum measured by number of replies, so the original post has generated a good debate.

Always good to see as it was a question that had been bugging me for a while i.e. what would we believe in if no one told us what to believe in and additionally what does that say about the nature of God?

Tried to ask the same thing elsewhere and was basically told to take a hike haha

hivizman

DrumSteve wrote: »

Always good to see as it was a question that had been bugging me for a while i.e. what would we believe in if no one told us what to believe in and additionally what does that say about the nature of God?

Something I think should be mentioned is the Islamic concept of fitrah. This word comes from the root ف ط ر = fā tā rā, which has a sense of separation or cutting/tearing apart. Words with this root appear 20 times in the Qur'an, and are usually translated as referring to creation or the Creator.

In Sūrat ar-Rūm ("The Romans" - surah 30), ayah 8 has two occurrences of this root. In Pickthall's translation, the verse is as follows: "So set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created man. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah's creation. That is the right religion, but most men know not." Pickthall translates the noun form fitrah as "nature" and the verbal form fatara as "he hath created". Interestingly, the verse also includes a form of the root خ ل ق = khā lām qāf, which is used over 260 times in the Qur'an. The verb form khalaqa is usually translated as "he has created", while the noun form khalq is usually translated as "creation" (as in Qur'an 30:8).

Anyway, enough of the linguistics!

Muslims believe that all humans have a God-given nature, their fitrah, and an aspect of this is that belief in God, and indeed that God is One (tawhid), is an innate part of human nature. Indeed, Muslims believe that all human souls have already given testimony of their submission to Allah around the time of the Creation. This implies that we are all born Muslim. However, the influence of first our parents, then our teachers, and then society in general, leads us to adopt other religious beliefs, or no religious belief at all.

So if humanity were suddenly to be put in a position where all previous evidence of, or belief in, God was completely wiped out, Muslims would, I think, argue that our fitrah would lead many of us to develop belief in a monotheistic divine being with substantially the characteristics attributed to Allah.

I hope that this goes some way to answering the original question.

DrumSteve wrote: »

Tried to ask the same thing elsewhere and was basically told to take a hike haha

I think you caught the Christianity forum moderator (Fanny Cradock, was it?) on a bad day.

DrumSteve

hivizman wrote: »

Something I think should be mentioned is the Islamic concept of fitrah. This word comes from the root ف ط ر = fā tā rā, which has a sense of separation or cutting/tearing apart. Words with this root appear 20 times in the Qur'an, and are usually translated as referring to creation or the Creator.

In Sūrat ar-Rūm ("The Romans" - surah 30), ayah 8 has two occurrences of this root. In Pickthall's translation, the verse is as follows: "So set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created man. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah's creation. That is the right religion, but most men know not." Pickthall translates the noun form fitrah as "nature" and the verbal form fatara as "he hath created". Interestingly, the verse also includes a form of the root خ ل ق = khā lām qāf, which is used over 260 times in the Qur'an. The verb form khalaqa is usually translated as "he has created", while the noun form khalq is usually translated as "creation" (as in Qur'an 30:8).

Anyway, enough of the linguistics!

Muslims believe that all humans have a God-given nature, their fitrah, and an aspect of this is that belief in God, and indeed that God is One (tawhid), is an innate part of human nature. Indeed, Muslims believe that all human souls have already given testimony of their submission to Allah around the time of the Creation. This implies that we are all born Muslim. However, the influence of first our parents, then our teachers, and then society in general, leads us to adopt other religious beliefs, or no religious belief at all.

So if humanity were suddenly to be put in a position where all previous evidence of, or belief in, God was completely wiped out, Muslims would, I think, argue that our fitrah would lead many of us to develop belief in a monotheistic divine being with substantially the characteristics attributed to Allah.

I hope that this goes some way to answering the original question.



I think you caught the Christianity forum moderator (Fanny Cradock, was it?) on a bad day.

Thanks for the excellent response, Particularly the bit in bold.

It's pretty much exactly the answer I was looking toward, if not for.


(and I think it was PDN )

SeantheMan

In response to the OPs original post -

My answer would be that the person would believe in what his friends/family believe obviously. Depending on the culture or religion of that specific area. It is very few who find a religion seperate to that of their culture and family/friends.

If you lost your memory and woke up in India, you would lean torwards their god if any, same as in Ireland you would probably lean towards Christianity.

For me personally, I don't believe in any god, and would like to think that if I were to lose my memory, and woke up, would arrive at the same logical conclusion that I am at present, after looking at each of the religions of the world.

himnextdoor

I think that humans are like pack-animals in a sense; groups sort themselves out hierarchically. They establish a 'pyramid of authority'.

In the case of a pack of wolves for example, the 'Alpha pair' have absolute authority over the whole pack while the 'Beta members' act as a buffer against the lower ranked members of the society.

For the lower ranked members, authority is directly experienced on an hour to hour basis but the Alpha and, to a certain extent, the Beta members are the authority. However, all wolves are equipped with the ability to recognise a higher authority and the authority over the Alpha male comes from outside the pack.

A large bear and men might be such 'authorities' to an Alpha-male wolf and he might show respect to the boundaries of those 'authorities'. Also, he will direct the pack according to his perception of that authority. In this way, the lower ranked members 'learn' how to treat authority; they learn to fear bears because the Alpha male does and, for the the purposes of this discussion, it is the same with men.

So, we have a rudimentary polytheistic pack of wolves; a recognition of greater authority.

Now, it may so happen that the Alpha male wolf 'notices' that bears also seem to respect the boundaries of men; that man has authority over the bear. And a lyrically-minded Alpha-male wolf may consider, "Even the great cats with their sharp teeth, the great eagles with their sharp beaks, do not all take flight from the path of man?"

When this happened, dog became man's best friend.

And we have a rudimentary monotheistic pack of wolves. A recognition of ultimate authority. (Until they see men running away from something.)

I think that God evolved with mankind in a similar way; firstly, our betters recognised the power of the sun and moon, the wind and the sea and labelled them as authorities because they couldn't understand or control the source of their power; then they passed on their perceptions to the lower ranked members of society who, being used to being told what to think, accepted the 'teachings' of their betters.

Agendas arise, interests are divided, gods go to war; one wins and the others are gone.

There is only one God and the others are now mere angels, subordinate to the One True God. Believe it or die!

And so we believe. Not because of what we know but because of what we've been told by those who have the power of life and death.

If the notion of God was to be erased from the minds of men, we would recreate the process of 'discovering' God; that is to accept the interpretation of God as given to you by your highest authority.

Mark Hamill

himnextdoor wrote: »

However, all wolves are equipped with the ability to recognise a higher authority and the authority over the Alpha male comes from outside the pack.

A large bear and men might be such 'authorities' to an Alpha-male wolf and he might show respect to the boundaries of those 'authorities'. Also, he will direct the pack according to his perception of that authority. In this way, the lower ranked members 'learn' how to treat authority; they learn to fear bears because the Alpha male does and, for the the purposes of this discussion, it is the same with men.

I domt think that wild dogs see bears or humans as authorities in any way. Yes, they fear them, but they dont follow them around or give them first preference for kills, they simply avoid a danger to them. I imagine they fell much the same about anything that seems threatening, even things like cars.

himnextdoor wrote: »

So, we have a rudimentary polytheistic pack of wolves; a recognition of greater authority.

massive non sequitor.

himnextdoor wrote: »

And we have a rudimentary monotheistic pack of wolves. A recognition of ultimate authority. (Until they see men running away from something.)

I dont know where you are getting this from, but its pretty much nonsense. Authority, in a wolf pack,is fluid. Animals can compete for it and take it from each other. This happens between domesticated dogs and humans too, just look at Cesar Milan, the American dog trainer with the tv show, his first job in helping people with unruly dogs is getting them to reassert their dominance over the dogs, because the dogs consider themselves dominant. They have no idea of ultimate authority, they are animals.

I think you are looking for same religious analogy in nature, but it just doesn't exist. You only consider dogs, but you ignore other pack making animals, such as apes, bees and dolphins. Wild animals recognise humans a threat, not an authority.

himnextdoor

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I domt think that wild dogs see bears or humans as authorities in any way. Yes, they fear them, but they dont follow them around or give them first preference for kills, they simply avoid a danger to them. I imagine they fell much the same about anything that seems threatening, even things like cars.


massive non sequitor.


I dont know where you are getting this from, but its pretty much nonsense. Authority, in a wolf pack,is fluid. Animals can compete for it and take it from each other. This happens between domesticated dogs and humans too, just look at Cesar Milan, the American dog trainer with the tv show, his first job in helping people with unruly dogs is getting them to reassert their dominance over the dogs, because the dogs consider themselves dominant. They have no idea of ultimate authority, they are animals.

I think you are looking for same religious analogy in nature, but it just doesn't exist. You only consider dogs, but you ignore other pack making animals, such as apes, bees and dolphins. Wild animals recognise humans a threat, not an authority.

I think it is a good analogy and dogs do recognise authority but there you go.

The point is that our idea of Divinity is determined by those we consider to be have authority and therefore the answer to the OP is - no, we would believe in whatever God we were taught about, if any at all.