Is Satan an Atheist or believes in God?

[The Kilted Heathen]

You cant expect a monotheist to be polytheistic.

No kidding. Thanks for stating the obvious; Part 2 is that Monotheism is clearly the problem. I'm sure you'll vehemently disagree, but you can't be blamed if that's all you've ever known. Still, better to be a polytheist devoted to monoloatry (the exclusive worship of one deity above all others) rather than problematically - and often arrogantly - claim your god is the only one.

The statement Allah is a God is like saying My father is a pater. Nevertheless, your statement is logically true.

No, that would be like saying "Allah is a 'one true god of Abraham'," as that's technically what it means. Yet for a polytheistic view this god - Yahweh, so you know - is a god in the same scope and context as Odin or Krishna.

 

[firedragon]

No kidding. Thanks for stating the obvious;

Exactly.

No, that would be like saying "Allah is a 'one true god of Abraham'," as that's technically what it means. Y

No. Thats absolutely wrong.

Yet for a polytheistic view this god - Yahweh, so you know - is a god in the same scope and context as Odin or Krishna.

Thats completely different. A completely different meaning, and topic altogether.

 

[firedragon]

Salam

Everyone assumes he believes in God but is disobeying, and hence his disbelief is due not being submissive, but I find opposite proof to this in Quran. He does not believe in God and I've tried to show the way he talks to God is sarcasm to Ahlulbayt about the God as if talking to God that they believe, he is talking to the veils, in a sarcastic way as if the voice utter through them is not God but definitely a falsehood.

Today, I was rereading tuhuf al-Uqool, and in it I found:

Harun asked the Imam (7th Imam) about the first one who apostatized and became an atheist. The Imam (peace be upon him) answered:

The first one who apostatized and became an atheist in the heavens was Eblis the cursed. He showed arrogance and took pride in himself against Adam (peace be upon him) the choice and confidant of God. The cursed said - as it is mentioned in the Quran-:

I am better than Adam, for You have created me out of fire and Adam out of clay. [309]

Thus, he rejected the Lord’s orders and became atheist. His offspring inherited atheism from him.

Harun wondered whether Eblis has offspring. The Imam (peace be upon him) answered:

Eblis has offspring. Listen to God’s saying:

When We told the angels to prostrate before Adam they all obeyed except Eblis. He was a jinn and he sinned against the command of his Lord. Why do you (people) obey him and his offspring instead of Me, even though they are your enemies? How terrible will be the recompense that the wrong doers will receive! I did not call (the unjust) to witness the creation of the heavens and earth nor to witness their own creation nor did I want to be helped by those who lead people astray. [310]

They mislead the offspring of Adam through their false vanities and lies. Meanwhile, they declare that there is no god but Allah. God describes them in His following saying:

If you ask them, "Who has created the heavens and the earth," they will certainly say, "God has created them." Say, "It is only God who deserves all praise, but most of them do not know." [311]

This means that they declare so only with their tongues because they used to say so as one of their customs. He who does not believe, even if he declares with the tongue, will be suspicious, envious, and resistant.

I thought I will answer your title of the thread.

Satan was spoken to by God. So by default, he cannot be an atheist unless he lost all his memories, was turned into a human, and dwells on earth as a man or a woman and only remembers earth and is an atheist because he has no memory.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

No. Thats absolutely wrong.

Not really. "Allah" is derived from al-Ilahu, meaning "the god". The word "ilah" means "deity/god," - feminine of "ilāhah" or "goddess". "God" is derived from the Proto-Indo-European ghut, meaning "that which is invoked/worshiped". So really, "Allah" means "the one thing which we worship", and you - as with other Abrahamics - believe this "one thing you worship" to be the god that Abraham worshiped: Yahweh.

Thats completely different. A completely different meaning, and topic altogether.

No, it's really not. One can entirely believe that a given god exists, and yet care nothing for them, their words, or their deeds.

 

[firedragon]

Not really. "Allah" is derived from al-Ilahu, meaning "the god". The word "ilah" means "deity/god," - feminine of "ilāhah" or "goddess". "God" is derived from the Proto-Indo-European ghut, meaning "that which is invoked/worshiped". So really, "Allah" means "the one thing which we worship", and you - as with other Abrahamics - believe this "one thing you worship" to be the god that Abraham worshiped: Yahweh.

Lol. Mate. What you have done is give the linguistic meaning of the word which absolutely contradicts your own statement about it purely being this "Abrahamic God" which is a theological statement but not a linguistic statement.

Every tom dick and harry who knows a tad bit of arabic knows the meaning of Allah. It is not "ilahu". Ilaahu is when you address a certain situation. Like you say "he is the God of tom and also the God of Dick", that is when you use ilaahu which in grammatical terms is called a marfooa. It is Al+ilah. "The God". And it does mean as you rightly said "the one thing which we worship", and not only that, it is also the one thing that we deify, not money, not our ego, not our children, not property, not our desire or wishful thinking, not parents, not a prophet, not the world or the universe or anything. It is not only worship, but deify.

Anyway, that being said, lets say a monotheistic faith in a corner of an asian country has a God, and they spoke arabic, and their God was "one God" they would use the same phrase "Allah". Thus, the word as a statement is not necessarily "only for the abrahamic god".

YHWH is irrelevant. YHWH means He Exists. And in Arabic this would be similar to Al Haqq, or in elaboration even Al Qayyoom. But that's a whole other discussion altogether. If you wish to go there, then you have to analyse the documentary hypothesis, and the pentateuch which you are referring to and understand where the Ye or as we commonly call it the J source is coming from. Because you see, there is also an Elohist source. This is more complicated than that.

So the bottomline is, Allah does not "MEAN" the one true God of Abraham, technically.

No, it's really not. One can entirely believe that a given god exists, and yet care nothing for them, their words, or their deeds.

Thats true. So whats your argument. I was responding to the below statement of yours as irrelevant.

"Yet for a polytheistic view this god - Yahweh, so you know - is a god in the same scope and context as Odin or Krishna."

That statement is irrelevant to the discussion. But if you want to discuss further, anyway one has to get used to irrelevance.

Odin is a name like lets say "Butt". Its a name, not a description. So is Krishna. Also, conceptually, I can see that you are trying your levels best to bring in the polytheistic argument into this discussion which is irrelevant, but nevertheless, Krishna is a manifestation of God. So when you make that statement Odin and Krishna and YHWH are all the same, no its not. Unless of course you just want it to be.

Even in the matter of Krishna, if you are a pantheist, Krishna is God, and you are also God. Everything is God. Just manifestations. The whole universe is God. Odin is not another God, Krishna is not another God, if Odin is existing he is just a manifestation, and if Krishna exists (but is more relevant because it is Hinduism), he is just a manifestation.

Gotta go.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

What you have done is give the linguistic meaning of the word which absolutely contradicts your own statement about it purely being this "Abrahamic God"

Not really, no, because the "One God" is theologically taken to be Abraham's god.

It is not "ilahu"

Did you miss the whole "derived from" bit?

It is Al+ilah. "The God". And it does mean as you rightly said "the one thing which we worship"

So... are you just in the habit of repeating what I say after telling me it's wrong?

lets say a monotheistic faith in a corner of an asian country

Only they don't have a monotheistic faith. Not indigenously. No, that only comes from the Middle East after Christianity came from Rome. Technically Judaism is monolatry, in that they don't exactly deny other gods, they simply only worship the god of Abraham.

YHWH is irrelevant.

No, he's really not. Because regardless of whether you call Abraham's nameless god "Yahweh", "Allah", "Ha-Shem" or any other number of titles-made-name, it's the god of Abraham.

Thats true. So whats your argument.

That Iblis, knowing this god to exist, yet defying him, does not make Iblis an atheist. One can recognize the existence of a being and yet still find them irrelevant, as you do with the President of Bangladesh. An Atheist would not believe the President of Bangladesh exists, as they do not believe in the existence of any god.

I was responding to the below statement of yours as irrelevant.

And that statement is directly relevant to your claim that believing in a god and believing that god is wrong or fallible is impossible. Such a view is absolutely not impossible with a polytheistic mindset, and we do it all the time. Your god is no greater or lesser than any other god out there - regardless of your beliefs on him or them, or whatever insults you might concoct toward them (yes, that was not missed).

 

[Mock Turtle]

By the lose definitions, a god is what is valued highest or things valued very highly, and atheists value humans highest since they don't believe anything higher then humans that they know of, and so humans would be their gods per that definition.

That is just not true. Atheists just don't believe in a God or gods, and whatever else they believe as regards values is not necessarily related to such. Humans as gods is often what is practised by the religious - in imposing their beliefs on others, and so often via their dogmatic beliefs in or literal interpretation of old texts.

 

[firedragon]

Did you miss the whole "derived from" bit?

So "wrong". You are simply wrong.

Only they don't have a monotheistic faith.

They do.

No, that only comes from the Middle East after Christianity came from Rome. Technically Judaism is monolatry, in that they don't exactly deny other gods, they simply only worship the god of Abraham.

Wrong. Everything is wrong.

No, he's really not. Because regardless of whether you call Abraham's nameless god "Yahweh", "Allah", "Ha-Shem" or any other number of titles-made-name, it's the god of Abraham.

Address this. Dnt just ignore it to remove context.

YHWH is irrelevant. YHWH means He Exists. And in Arabic this would be similar to Al Haqq, or in elaboration even Al Qayyoom. But that's a whole other discussion altogether. If you wish to go there, then you have to analyse the documentary hypothesis, and the pentateuch which you are referring to and understand where the Ye or as we commonly call it the J source is coming from. Because you see, there is also an Elohist source. This is more complicated than that.

That Iblis, knowing this god to exist, yet defying him, does not make Iblis an atheist.

Correct.

And that statement is directly relevant to your claim that believing in a god and believing that god is wrong or fallible is impossible.

It is logically impossible.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That is a benefit of having a make belief. One can know what the characters are thinking at any time. You on the other hand are real. Can I know what you are thinking? Not a chance. But if I make up a character I can say with utmost certainty what that character is thinking.

I didn't know whether to rate this is funny or winner -- so I went with winner.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

So "wrong". You are simply wrong.

And yet it's odd how this thing happens where you claim "everything is wrong" and then go on to show how it's not.

They do.

Not indigenously. No, neither Pantheism nor Panatheism is Monotheism.

Wrong. Everything is wrong.

Saying that doesn't make it so. There have been very few instances of Monotheism in the history of mankind; a theism that states there is only One God and all other gods are false. Atenism, Christianity, Islam, and Baha'i. The later three being derived from one another, factually.

Address this. Dnt just ignore it to remove context.

It was addressed. "YHWH" (יהוה) is not irrelevant, in that it is a title for the god of Abraham in the same manner that "Allah" is. Neither are a name, and this does not mean that "Allah" means the same thing as the Tetragrammaton. That you can have similar Arabic phrases for "I Am" is inconsequential to the point that they are nothing but titles, not true names. YHWH could even be considered an evasion of Moses' question as to who the god was, a cryptic "Never you mind who I am".

It is logically impossible.

And yet you have demonstrated repeatedly how it is not logically impossible, even acknowledging no less than twice how a direct example of this is logically correct. If we're just going to be going around in circles like this, dragon, I'd appreciate being let known now; I've very little interest or patience in a contradictory merry-go-round where "wrong, so wrong" means "You're wrong only because I like how it sounds when I say it better".

 

[firedragon]

And yet it's odd how this thing happens where you claim "everything is wrong" and then go on to show how it's not.

Everything you said in that statement is just wrong. So I never showed that Judaism is monolatry, which is your claim, and that Allah is only for abrahamic faiths, etc etc. These are your claims. I know that these are just popular memes online, but has no real scriptural basis. Most of it is just plain reading of English passages with no proper understanding.

Not indigenously. No, neither Pantheism nor Panatheism is Monotheism.

Well. Not true. Its just that, you dont know of monotheistic theologies in Asia. You may only know of one or two famous ones but that does not mean "there are none".

Saying that doesn't make it so. There have been very few instances of Monotheism in the history of mankind;

Which you know of.

It was addressed. "YHWH" (יהוה) is not irrelevant, in that it is a title for the god of Abraham in the same manner that "Allah"

Nope. You never addressed it. If you dont know how to address it, just say so rather than just repeating some information you gathered on the internet.

At least can you tell me that you have some knowledge on the Documentary Hypothesis or did you just think I made that phrase up?

And yet you have demonstrated repeatedly how it is not logically impossible,

Nope. You didnt address what was said. So of course, it seems like you never will. Your knowledge is too poor so I think you are someone who will never stumble upon the humility to address what someone has said even if you dont know the topic or do not understand the logic behind it.

Thus, there is no point in this conversation. I bid you well.

Cheers.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Everything you said in that statement is just wrong.

This is going to get very old, very fast. Who am I kidding; it already has...

So I never showed that Judaism is monolatry, which is your claim, and that Allah is only for abrahamic faiths, etc etc.

Cool, only what you're quoting specifically was in reply to your baseless and self-contradicting objections to the etymology of "Allah". So... Maybe some focus.

Well. Not true. Its just that, you dont know of monotheistic theologies in Asia.

Then provide one.

Nope. You didnt address what was said.

I did, and I'm not going to keep repeating myself ad infinitum.

Your knowledge is too poor

Personal insults are unbecoming, and evidence that you have no argument and thus opt to rely on ad hominem. Do better.

Thus, there is no point in this conversation. I bid you well.

May you have the day you deserve.

 

[firedragon]

This is going to get very old, very fast. Who am I kidding; it already has...


Cool, only what you're quoting specifically was in reply to your baseless and self-contradicting objections to the etymology of "Allah". So... Maybe some focus.


Then provide one.


I did, and I'm not going to keep repeating myself ad infinitum.


Personal insults are unbecoming, and evidence that you have no argument and thus opt to rely on ad hominem. Do better.


May you have the day you deserve.

1. Alright. So you were teaching me some arabic.

Can you tell me what it means when in arabic, islamic theology one says "Allahika bike shay an, alaa kulli shayin kadheer"?

Please go ahead.

2. What do you know about the theology of the God Ayya Nayaka? Is it monotheism, or polytheism?

Just two simple questions for someone like you.

Thanks in advance.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Alright. So you were teaching me some arabic.

No. I was displaying the etymology of the word, easily found, and you verified this is so.

What do you know about the theology of the God Ayya Nayaka? Is it monotheism, or polytheism?

Simplistically, polytheism. Specifically it's henotheism; the worship of a single, supreme god while not denying the existence or possible existence of other lower deities. Specifically, the regard all deities - viewed as individual entities in their own right - as equal parts of a Divine Essence.

 

[firedragon]

No. I was displaying the etymology of the word, easily found, and you verified this is so.

Alright. Thats fair. The thing is, your research was corrected and you refused to.

Simplistically, polytheism.

No its not. Its monotheism.

Anyway, do you know what Ayya Nayaka means and could you explain how that is polytheism? I ask since you claim it is polytheism.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

The thing is, your research was corrected

No, it really wasn't. Because you didn't change or correct anything, and in fact said the same thing that I had said with less depth.

No its not. Its monotheism.

No, you first. I've given you my answer, now you show how it's "actually monotheism". And if this is where you leave because one reason or excuse or another, well, so be it and no big surprise; we've been down that road before, you and I.

 

[firedragon]

No, you first. I've given you my answer, now you show how it's "actually monotheism".

You said "its polytheism" so without knowing anything about it you just made something up right?

Anyway, since you know every single theology in the whole of Asia, can you tell me what Ayya Nayaka means? At least start there. If you dont know, just say you dont know and it can proceed.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You said "its polytheism"

I said simplistically (with your two given examples) it is polytheism, but more specifically it is henotheism. Pay closer attention.

so without knowing anything about it you just made something up right?

No. But now we're to your turn. Provide your counter-argument that it is monotheistic.

 

[firedragon]

I said simplistically (with your two given examples) it is polytheism, but more specifically it is henotheism. Pay closer attention.

You are just making things up.

Ayya means elder brother which is an honorific term given, like in the Bible which says prototokos only one is elder brother, the other is first born son, in Pali. Nayaka means leader like in Sanskrit which is similar to Nayak. This God is worshiped by a set of people, and they believe he is the monotheistic deity who rules all.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

And what is the name of that religion? Do you have any sources for it?

ADD: (+32 minutes) Nothing, @firedragon ? Shouldn't be that hard to provide a religion's name...

ADD 2: (+14) Well, that's disapointing. Seeing how you've come and then gone without so much as a word, I can only assume there's nothing but an attempted "gotcha". However, considering I never claimed to be an expert in these things, Welcome to the Internet (or maybe Barovia) where all of the world's resources (well, most) are at our fingertips, and can be searched and learned on a whim.

You are just making things up.

Talk about making things up... Running a search of "Ayya Nayaka" we got this guy's Facebook page. Somehow, I doubt that's what you meant, though it certainly looks like he might think he's a god. Maybe his Instagram? No? Moving on.

Modifying that search to "Religion of Ayya Nayaka" the best and closest result - i.e. an actual religion - is Ayyavazhi, a Hindu sect. This is the henotheistic religion of which I mentioned. Ah, but modifying the search (thanks, Google suggestions!) we go deeper and it doesn't get better for you.

Searching "Ayya god" yields Ayya Vaikundar, who is evidently an avatar who is born to Narayana and Lekhsmi which, y'know, polytheism.

Then searching at yet another suggestion for "Ayyanayaka god" yields that "Ayyanayaka" is a nickname for the god Ganesha. As well the article mentioning several other gods and goddesses which is also known as polytheism.

So. Any thoughts? Additions and "corrections"? Or is this just wrong, so wrong all the time and ever time until you say something to the same effect?