Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Frank

If I Was A Malaevolent/mischievious God

Recommended Posts

If I was a malaevolent/mischievious god, as found in many polytheist and pre-theist cultures, I might play a nasty trick on a group of people by sending them a prophet who forbade them music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, blasphemy ... Because I was a god I'd do a good job of it - I would part seas, split moons, burn bushes etc. There would be no way my victims could possibly tell that they had been tricked unless one of my fellow gods intervened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Brothers and sisters in Islam, do not grace this obvious stupidity with a thought-out reply.

 

Frank, do us all a favor and either say something constructive, or leave.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a major problem for religions which claim to know the truth that they can't allow "truth" to exist outside the parameters of their belief system (otherwise there is something greater than their godhead), as they then have no objective way of knowing if their god is telling them the truth or not. I'm curious as to the response. This seems to be the correct forum for it. You needn't read the thread if you don't like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You come here, preaching about how we "think" we are right, yet yourself believe that truth being dependant on faith is flawed, in which case you "think" you are right. Unless you go around saying "I don't know" to every single question you've ever been asked concerning truth, faith, and belief (or lack thereof) of a higher being, then you really shouldn't be too concerned with wagging your finger at other people.

 

And no, there is no right forum in which you can mock and insult Muslims by claiming that if you were a "malevolent/mischievious god", you would send us a false prophet who would forbide "music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, blasphemy".

 

Thirdly, you were curious as to a response. You received mine, which is that no Muslim would ever get into such a discussion with a conceited and self-righteous person such as yourself. At least realize that what you accuse of others, exists in you.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully understand that you don't want to take part in the thread. See you elsewhere.

 

Others who are interested in the nature of truth and belief might care to respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to partake in this topic? How presumptous of you; I'm having a great time mocking you in return.

 

What is it, Frank? You don't want the truth?

 

No Muslim in his or her right mind will discuss your absurd claim that if you were a "malevolent/mischievious god", you would send a false prophet to forbide "music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, blasphemy".

 

And as I said, you shouldn't wag fingers at others when you yourself have beliefs and disbeliefs.

 

Salam.

Edited by Layna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps you did not understand the users words. Read it again.

 

You come here, preaching about how we "think" we are right, yet yourself believe that truth being dependant on faith is flawed, in which case you "think" you are right.

-------------------------------------------

 

About your post :

 

Basically you are trying to say that you are right and we who follow religion is wrong ?

 

So basically you are proselytising your beliefs. Why, what motivates you to do so?

Muslims do it cuz they have been told to do so. Why do you do it?

Edited by Student

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace,

 

So basically you are proselytising your beliefs. Why, what motivates you to do so?

Muslims do it cuz they have been told to do so. Why do you do it?

 

Perhaps he is the earthly manifestation of a malaevolent or mischievious god and he's seeking to confuse you further? (Let's not be closed minded.) :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl: / Peace

 

To Frank, you are bordering on being warned for rule 22.

 

List your points in a straigtforward and civilised manner. There's no point in twisting your words to bend or escape the rules.

 

:sl: / Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

 

Frank, there is God and there is Satan. I think what you meant is you were a malaevolent/mischievous Satan

Because mischievous and malaevolent are Satan's characters, not God's

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

To actually get to (partly) Frank's point.

 

Under a polythesitic system, worshippers frequently worship their gods by adopting some of their attributes. For example, Mars or Bacchus. Gods such as Pan 'glory' when there is mischief in the world and all stories seem to suggest a low attention span and a desire for instant gratification. A long term plan which stopped people getting drunk etc wouldn't really seem up Pan's street.

 

Of course, this just assumes we're covering someone like Pan or Loki.

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I was a malaevolent/mischievious god, as found in many polytheist and pre-theist cultures, I might play a nasty trick on a group of people by sending them a prophet who forbade them music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, blasphemy ... Because I was a god I'd do a good job of it - I would part seas, split moons, burn bushes etc. There would be no way my victims could possibly tell that they had been tricked unless one of my fellow gods intervened.

peace

 

frank what is your point in this?

 

by sending the people a prophet who forbade people doing bad things is not a nasty trick-free sex is unsafe-it leads to numerous diseases (STDs) in addition to other disadvantages.alcohol leads to loosing your senses-why are the people wanting to loose their senses?do you really have a lot of fun loosing your mind?same thing goes for the drugs-these are just some examples

 

people are just crazy.they do crazy things like drinking alcohol and driving cars drunken risking their own lives.humans need guidance from a God who will make them aware of such things.

 

i do agree with you that there are some religions which have a good and a bad god-

but in Islam God is one and He is Allah-there is no bad quality in Him.

and there is a satan-who is our worst enemy-no goodness is in him.

salaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darla - yep, Bacchus, Pan, Loki and all were what prompted me to think about it. Even Puck of 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' (Is there a Hindu equivalent? I don't think Hanuman - a monkey - is actually mischievious, is he?)

 

When and why the 'fun' trickster merged with the personification of evil (and, in fact the development of the idea of Evil, as opposed to bad luck and the rotten things that happen just by virtue of existing in an imperfect world) is really interesting, IMHO.

 

However, I was also making another point. That it would be impossible to tell whether or not a god was telling you the truth (except if, as for the Greeks, for example, another god ratted on them). By all means accept the sensible things that you think god/s are telling you, but remain very, very cautious about unquestioning belief.

Edited by Frank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand what you are talking bout, Frank

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

Yasnov, we believe in one God who has revealed Himself to us through texts and has laid down rules for our lives in those texts.

 

Frank is asking how we know that is true as opposed to there actually being many gods and one just being mischievous and sending down prophets, books and rules to mislead us. Quite a novel question, actually.

 

My answer is that I can no more believe in polytheism than I can in atheism. I have faith that there is one God (etc etc). Religion isn't about 'proving' that monotheism is true over polytheism. It is having faith that is the case and living that faith.

 

Hindus have GOT to have one, they have thousands, don't they? Anyway, I'm more familiar with European 'families' so better stick here.

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank is asking how we know that is true as opposed to there actually being many gods and one just being mischievous and sending down prophets, books and rules to mislead us. Quite a novel question, actually.

Darla, it's because you listen to your heart, and your heart never lies, so you just feel the love.

 

Btw, why would satan ask us to do so many good things like obey your parents, help the poor, do not lie, do not kill, do not slander, be good man, this is just to mention a few.

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

He's not even arguing that it's Satan doing so. He's saying imagine that the true state of affairs is polytheism (like the ancient greeks or romans) and then to work from there...

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

 

He's not even arguing that it's Satan doing so. He's saying imagine that the true state of affairs is polytheism (like the ancient greeks or romans) and then to work from there...

If it is what he believes in, why haven't he picked one as his god? How he would debate and convince us of his polytheism theory if he himself cannot feel even one of the many gods himself.

 

I am conviced and certain that there is only One True God in this universe because I can feel it, and suddenly Frank came with his claim that the true state of affairs is polytheism, and his profile is no religion. How would you convince someone of your polytheism theory if you have no any experience and relationship whatsoever with the so called god?

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Edited by Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaam,

 

He's not even arguing that it's Satan doing so. He's saying imagine that the true state of affairs is polytheism (like the ancient greeks or romans) and then to work from there...

 

It's not so much what he asked, but how he asked it. He's implying that only a false and bad god would prevent us from the things that he listed, and which he has defended repeatedly in other topics.

 

Would it make sense if he said "If I was a malevolent/mischievious god, I would play a nasty trick on a group of people by sending a prophet who forbade murder, crimes, and all other things that destroy societies"? No, that is illogical because a malevolent or mischievious person (not god, because there is only One God and He is neither malevolent nor mischievious) would actually WANT people to do all of those things.

 

So why are malevolence and mischief characteristics that one must adopt in order to forbid what Islam does actually forbid? Why couldn't he say good and righteous? Just and loving? That simply wouldn't do, because he believes that only a "nasty trick" would result in God forbiding music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, and blasphemy.

 

You get the idea.

 

Salam.

Edited by Layna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace Layna,

 

So why are malevolence and mischief characteristics that one must adopt in order to forbid what Islam does actually forbid? Why couldn't he say good and righteous? Just and loving? That simply wouldn't do, because he believes that only a "nasty trick" would result in God forbiding music, free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, and blasphemy.

 

If I were going to second guess a malevolent/mischievious God I would imagine he wouldn't need to worry about everybody murdering each other because human beings don't do that whether they follow a religion or not. He needn't to worry about rape, incest, theft or abuse either because these are considered wrong by all societies. Even in those places untouched by any monotheistic or even external religion such as in Papua New Guinea, or Australia before colonisation - these actuibs were considered 'wrong'. A malevolent God would be giving nothing away by telling people to behave civilly towards one another because they would do so anyway.

 

It would be only by rendering the lives of his flock mundane that he would be adding anything to what is already programmed into humans. At the end of it all he may send all Muslims to hell for being so gullible, what Frank is getting at is that not only do you believe in a God for whom there is no objective evidence, but that you also believe in a God who could be telling you anything for His own amusement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peace Layna,

If I were going to second guess a malevolent/mischievious God I would imagine he wouldn't need to worry about everybody murdering each other because human beings don't do that whether they follow a religion or not. He needn't to worry about rape, incest, theft or abuse either because these are considered wrong by all societies. Even in those places untouched by any monotheistic or even external religion such as in Papua New Guinea, or Australia before colonisation - these actuibs were considered 'wrong'. A malevolent God would be giving nothing away by telling people to behave civilly towards one another because they would do so anyway.

 

I think you've misunderstood what I said. I didn't say that a malevolent or mischievous person (not god, because there is only one God and He is neither malevolent nor mischievous) would forbid murder or crimes. I said that he would allow and encourage them.

 

Firstly, we need a definition of malevolent:

1. wishing evil or harm to another or others; showing ill will; ill-disposed; malicious: His failures made him malevolent toward those who were successful.

2. evil; harmful; injurious: a malevolent inclination to destroy the happiness of others.

3. evil or malign in influence.

 

Secondly, mischievous:

1. maliciously or playfully annoying.

2. causing annoyance, harm, or trouble.

3. roguishly or slyly teasing, as a glance.

4. harmful or injurious.

 

Both these words imply that person would want to cause harm, injure, create trouble. If a person (not god, because there is only one God and He is neither malevolent nor mischievous) wanted to harm, injure, or cause trouble, he would attack what people DO consider wrong. He would ban what is considered normal and make lawful what isn't. And because he would have the ability in this absurd scenario, he would do so convincingly.

 

How would a person cause harm, injure, or create trouble by forbiding promiscuity? Alcohol? Drugs? Chew on these three. You can't injure a person by preventing them from doing something that WOULD injure them. Let's use common sense here. On the other hand, encouraging them to murder one another would, without a doubt, injure and cause them harm, both physically and psychologically.

 

I, and several others such as brother Yasnov, have had discussions with Frank in which he tried to challenge and mock our laws concerning "free sex, alcohol, dancing, drugs, painting, and blasphemy". It is no coincedence that he brings these points up, he is using them as a means to further goad and poke at us. He is implying, as I've already said, that the only way he would ban what Islam considers unlawful is IF he was malevolent or mischievous.

 

Go ahead and ask him. If he were the opposite of malevolent or mischievous, would he still ban them? Hardly. Because someone who is the opposite of malevolent or mischievous wouldn't do a "nasty trick", as he thinks forbiding Islam's unlawful things would be.

 

what Frank is getting at is that not only do you believe in a God for whom there is no objective evidence, but that you also believe in a God who could be telling you anything for His own amusement.

 

Assuming that God is doing it for His "amusement", in which case He isn't. If not, prove it to me and everyone else, and not by creating insulting and stupid what-ifs.

 

Secondly, Frank here goes on and endlessly on about how we "follow" something. But does he not follow his own belief that those who follow beliefs are wrong? In which case, he thinks he is right, and he should be scolding himself. I hope this doesn't apply to you also.

 

Salam.

Edited by Layna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Layna - I do admit that I chose the ban on instrumental music as a part of Islam that I can't imagine anyone accepting if they didn't think a god had told them to. The other things are banned (in a greater or lesser degree, depending on strictness/fundamentalism) by various versions of other monotheist (and other) religions.

 

(As an aside, I do think that banning music is malicious - as far as I can see, music is hard-wired into humans and it's a perversion of the human spirit to ban it. However that would need another thread.)

 

Assuming that God is doing it for His "amusement", in which case He isn't. If not, prove it to me and everyone else, and not by creating insulting and stupid what-ifs.

 

That's my point. No 'proof' is available to distinguish between a world ruled by a benign monotheist god and a world under the sway of a mischievious god from poytheist system who wanted to fool humans into adopting a monotheist religion. You can even imagine an Olympian scene from a Greek comedy in which the gods debate just what sort of silly things they could get humans to believe in and to die for - such as not eating cows.

 

If it is what he believes in, why haven't he picked one as his god? How he would debate and convince us of his polytheism theory if he himself cannot feel even one of the many gods himself.

 

Yasnov, you old silly, I don't believe that polytheism and a world ruled by a mischievous god is the true state of affairs. I have no way of knowing whether it is or not. I also think that YOU have no way of knowing, and yet you claim to. I'm curious about that.

 

(Another aside - Yasnov I don't know where you got the idea that you have to believe in something to debate it. Evidence is evidence.)

Edited by Frank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×