Most people the world over do believe in the existence of God. For the atheists, we have already proved that God exists (see the previous three sections). Through the ages, however, all sorts of concepts of God have been prevalent such as:

* Man-Oriented Concept of God

* Monistic Concept of God

* Polytheistic Concept of God

* Trinity Concept of God

* Monotheistic Concept of God.

The concepts of God may be divided into two categories: ‘One God versus many gods’ and ‘A Personal God versus an impersonal God’. Some believe in two gods, one of good and the other of evil. Some believe in three, as in the form of the trinity, a construct of the Christians. Some believe in many gods or polytheism and some believe in the concept of One God or Monotheism. Let us take a look at the various concepts of God that people follow and see if there is any logical proof for their belief in the concept.

Man-Oriented Concept of God

Certain people believe in man-oriented spirituality or that the reality or God is within us. They believe that as God is within us our objective is to establish contact with one’s own inner personality. This concept has been explained by Acharya Rajneesh in his book, “Kundalini Andar Base.” In this system man’s inner existence is akin to a mysterious ocean, which remains, under normal circumstances, undiscovered for man. Like the iceberg in the oceans, a tiny part of his existence comes under the grip of his consciousness, while the greater part remains hidden under the subconscious. Now the goal of spiritualism is for man to be able to relate his conscious part to the unconscious. By accomplishing this man achieves the stage of mental or spiritual development. He perfects his mental existence at the conscious level.

According to me, there is partial truth in this concept. It is true that the potential of man’s own existence are far more than that which comes under the perception of conscious in normal circumstances. However this is not the answer to man’s actual quest. Taking both the conscious and the unconscious, man is no doubt in a state of limited existence, and discovering something limited in nature can never be the answer man seeks to find.

Man’s quest, from the respect of actual reality is a quest of his own completion, rather than simply one concerning his own discovery. Man by his very nature cannot remain content with limitations. Man from every respect is a limited being. Now he wants to find the limitless in order to compensate for his limitations.

According to the above concept what is possible is only that the limited succeeds in finding the limited. This can never be the answer to man’s actual quest that is why such an answer leaves him unsatisfied as before.

This issue is in principle a matter concerning the perception of reality, rather than simply a matter of discovering one’s own self. If man were a perfect being he would never have the psychology of quest embedded within him. The psychology of quest is part of man’s subconscious, so, if the subconscious is a perfect existence why should it always suffer from the psychology of quest. Such a psychology is indicative of imperfectness on the part of seeker.

It is a fact that had man been a perfect existence he would never have been born with the natural urge of quest. All human beings being born with this nature provide an internal proof that man in his nature is no perfect existence. This fact is enough to prove that the target of the spiritual quest of man can never be his own being.

This concept of man-oriented spirituality which is called “indwelling God” by Pandu Rang Shashtri, founder of the Swadhyaye Movement, is not corroborated by Islam. But since no such spiritual treasure house has been proved to be in existence independently, we have yet to find proving evidence for this theory of the concept of God.

Monistic Concept of God

Another concept of God that certain people follow is that of the concept which is produced under the influence of the philosophy of monism. Monism posits the totality of a single reality, with all the diverse phenomena of the natural world seen as different manifestations of the same reality. According to this concept, therefore, there is no real difference between the creator and the creature. Thus as per the monism concept of an individual, a personalized God does not exist – God is like a vague spirit such as gravity or cosmic rays. All forms of existence are in actual fact manifestations of the same source. Man and everything besides man is one and the same thing in essence. The existing world is a manifestation of one and the same reality rather than of manniness of reality. A philosopher has explained this concept of oneness of reality in these words:

‘The knower and the known are one. God and I, we are one in knowledge, and there is no distinction between us (12/787).

According to this concept of God, to put it in simple words, it is for the part to realize its whole in order that it may join it by discovering it.

Although in both the philosophic and religious circles this concept has remained popular, but no person or school of thought has provided real argument in favour of this concept.

Calling this quest of spiritualism the quest of the part for the whole is not worth considering in present circumstances. What has to be proved first of all in this connection is the fact that man is really in his nature a part of the whole. As long as this first premise is not proved, how can a philosophic interpretation based on this concept be true?

All the points made in favour of oneness of reality are only a set of an exercise in words. All the arguments forwarded in this connection are symbolic in nature. For instance, it is said that, “all the things of this world are varied (in different forms) manifestations of one absolute reality.” This is only a statement and no such set of words can be a substitute for an argument.

Another symbolic argument forwarded is that if one drop is taken away from the ocean, that drop in its essence will be a tiny ocean. Man is likewise a tiny drop of the vast sea of reality. This too is a simile and a simile never proves a reality. A simile may be employed to explain a reality already established. But offering similes towards proving a reality is entirely unacademic and illogical.

To prove the theory that the “essence of everything is the same,” one of two arguments are essential. Either such a theory is proved by a scientific research or else an argument in the real sense exists in its favour in revealed religions. But this theory is neither established by science, nor any real argument is to be found in its favour in revealed religions.

In such circumstances a school of thought which explains the spiritual quest in terms of all is the same (hama ust) undoubtedly stands on a baseless ground as no testimony, either of science or revelation exists to support this theory.

Polytheistic Concept of God

There are others who believe in multitudes of gods or ‘polytheism’, as in Hinduism. Polytheism does not, however, mean a multiplicity in the absolute sense, as is commonly understood. No nation has ever been ‘polytheist’ in the sense that it believed in many gods of the same order. In fact, polytheism implies a hierarchy with one ‘Supreme God’ at the top and his entourage of demi-gods spreading downwards from Him on the rungs of the divine ladder. Polytheism has always carried with it the concept of a ‘God of gods’. This means that the demi-gods serve as intermediaries to the supreme God.

The ideology of polytheism may have been founded on the fact that when people saw many different things in the universe, they thought that there must be different gods looking after each of them. This led to the worship of some part of nature or person other than God and this finally developed into shirk, or polytheism. This shirk gradually came to dominate all aspects of belief and practice, finding its way into every household as a bearer of good omens and a nullifier of bad omens, thus becoming a part of all customs.

Even the governments of those times were founded upon superstitious beliefs. The interests of the rulers lay, therefore, 'in the perpetuation of the age of superstition, so that their subjects might continue to be swayed by the belief in the divine right of kings. (This was so that they should not question their right to rule.) That was why they used all their military and political might to suppress any attempts to put an end to polytheism and superstition by means of a missionary struggle. And once belief in a divine king was added to all the other polytheistic beliefs, it became a necessary part of the political system. Therefore, worship in those days was based wholly on shirk, to put it in religious terminology, or, in common parlance, superstition.

No proof for the concept of polytheism has however been put forward. It is only backed with mythology and superstition. Contrary to this, the world discovered by science is a wholly unified world. All the parts of the present world are so interlinked with each other that it is impossible to separate them from one another. In such a world the concept of more than one God is quite alien.

In ancient times people believed that there were numerous forces controlling the universe. Newton reduced these forces to the following four: gravitational force, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force. However, the extraordinary unity that scientists found in the world was incompatible with the notion that it was being controlled by four forces.

That is why the scientists have been trying to reduce the four forces to one. Their efforts were crowned with success in the second half of the twentieth century. It is now generally believed that there cannot be four forces controlling nature, but only one. This has led to the formulation of the Single String Theory by scientists. The Single String Theory has totally rejected the concept of polytheism and points only to the concept of One God or Monotheism.

Trinity Concept of God

Christians believe in the concept of Trinity or belief in three God. So far as the concept of three gods, or the trinity, is concerned, it is not proved by any revealed source. Even today it is merely a creed of the Christian Church. In neither the Old Testament, or the New Testament, held sacred by Christians, is there any clear mention of the concept of the trinity. In their own sacred scriptures the trinity is an alien creed. So far as reason then is concerned, the concept of the trinity is not rationally understandable. In terms of the trinity, God is at the same time three in one and one in three. This is an inconceivable mathematical riddle, which none of the greatest of mathematicians can solve. That is why when a Christian professor of an Indian university was once asked by a student to explain the trinity, he had this to say

If you ask me I do not know, if you do not ask me I know. The truth is that the concept of the trinity is wholly unproved so far religious scriptures are concerned. It is likewise entirely baseless judging by the criteria of knowledge and reason. Keeping this reality in view, it will not be wrong to say that this concept is so unfounded that, prima facie, it stands rejected.

Monotheistic Concept of God

As per the Monotheistic concept God is One. He is the Creator and everything else is creature. There is no intermediary link between the Creator and the creature. When one remembers the Creator, he immediately establishes a direct contact with Him. All the discoveries of science, especially the single string theory (explained above) proves the monotheistic concept of God. The Big Bang Theory proves the monotheistic concept of God. (See Monotheism Explains the Existence Universe)

While monotheism means the oneness of God, it must be stressed that this concept differs radically from pantheistic or animist notions that all the forms of existence are diverse manifestations of one and the same reality. On the contrary, the oneness of God as defined in Monotheism means that there is only one Being of the nature of God. All other things of the universe, they physical or non-physical, are the creations of this One God: they are in no respect constituents of, or partners in the divine godhead.

In the following sections let us take a look at the proof of the monotheistic concept of God in detail.