Could "Allah" be Satan?

This is simply a question, and not an attack or slur on Muslims or Islam.
To my understanding, “Satan”, the former Arc Angel mentioned in the Christian Bible, does not want to be seen by humans as a devil, but actually wants to be worshipped as God.

Is it possible then, that the billion or so people who worship a spiritual being they call “Allah” are actually worshipping and serving the spiritual being others refer to as Satan. Could Satan have completed part of his goal by having a significant number of humans worship him as God? And if so, could this be a factor in the final conflicts spoken of in the Bibles book of Revelations?

I know this is an extremely edgy question. But it is only a debate question, not a troll or an accusation. I’m not even sure what the hell I believe in when it comes to religion.

A better question would be, “Is ‘God’ Satan?” Could Satan have completed part of his goal by having a significant number of humans worship him as God? And if so, could this be a factor in the final conflicts spoken of in the Bibles book of Revelations?


Despite the best efforts of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to demonize Islam, there is no reason to believe that Allah is other than God with a group of worshippers who have simply taken a somewhat different approach in viewing God than that taken by Jews or Christians.

They have a basic set of moral standards that closely parallel the standards accepted by Jews and Christians. (They honor one God, they honor their parents, they are encouraged to avoid murder, theft, adultery, dishonesty, and covetousness.) There are variations on the understanding of how to obey those rules–most of which are couched in terms of culture–but they are not “opposing” God in any way that one could demonstrate.

Well…Supposing God and Satan exist, Satan is about as likely to be the Christian ‘God’ as ‘Allah’. God and Allah are one and the same according to Muslim tradition, even if the specifics about the message delivered and the form taken is a bit different. Islam recognizes the existence of Satan/Shaitan as the enemy of God/Allah.

Now some Christian fundamentalist preachers have claimed that Muhammed was demon-possesed and Islam are the teachings of Satan ( ironically one of the bits of evidence for this is taken from Muhammed’s own accounts of his initial doubts :rolleyes: ). But I fail to see why you simply couldn’t turn that around, say the Bible was dictated by Satan, and Muhammed corrected those errors. Either claim would be tenditious and based on a complete absense of evidence. Indeed, what evidence could there be, if it is all a matter of faith?

  • Tamerlane

And what tomndeb said :).

  • Tamerlane

George, ol’ buddy, I have it on good authority that Satan retired in the early 13th Century. No, I don’t have any rational cites but, then, neither do you for your proposition.

If you’re going to try to reason in a vacuum, then pick something fun, like: Is it possible that Woody Allen was really George Washington in a previous incarnation? And that the cherry tree incident thus explains the breakup with Mia Farrow?

While I don’t think that its really all that likely that Allah would be Satan (I believe that Muslims worship the same God that Christians and Jews do), it is conceivable. It is also conceivable that Jesus was a man possessed by Satan, and that Christians worship the Devil.

OPs like this one make the prophet Mohammed cry.

Yes, rjung, but are they tears of sadness… or guilt???



Some might say that an inherent danger of monotheism is that God/Allah/YHWH/Supreme Being of Whatever Name is said to possess both infinite goodness and infinite power, and that goodness somehow becomes equated with power.

Critics of monotheism, such as Ludwig Feuerbach, have warned that what really goes on in the case of monotheism is that we create God in our own image. Thus, in the case of Osama Bin Laden, “Allah” is simply a projection of a small man’s insatiable lust for power (and the similar power lust of kindred minds), and this lust for political power is equated with moral goodness–might makes right…theological masturbation.

Of course, one might want to argue that this is simply an example of a perverse form of monotheism, and not inherent to monotheism itself. The defender of monotheism then must explain how we get around this problem–how we can think of God as consisting of both ultimate power and ultimate goodness, without making “God” into a mere instrument of a person’s (or group’s) narrow desires to acquire power and use it arbitrarily. If “God” is inevitably nothing more than a club in the hands of surly fundamentalists, it would be tough to defend any form of monotheism.

I second what Tomndebb said. Islam is varies a bit from nation to nation, reflecting cultural differences in place before the introduction of Islam.

Turkey is traditionally a rather cosmopolitan place, (crossroads between Asia and Europe and all that), and their flavor of Islam (Suffi?) is very ‘low-key’ (more tolerant, etc) then Saudi Arabia’s flavor of Islam (Wahabi?).

I would guess that the culture generally defines the religeon, not the other way around.

This is simply a question, and not an attack or slur on Hayduke Lives!.

But how many Satan’s can you fit on the head of Allah? And if so, how do you know which colour? Would the whole concept be a feminine or masculine term if you were to make up a word for it in French? What side of the road would Satan have us drive on? What colour smarties would Allah consider best? Which side of bed would Satan get out of? If it was on the left, and then God started getting out of his own bed on that side, would Satan start getting out of the right side, just to be different?

And while we are on the subject, is Allah Satan?

Read Phillip Pullman’s award-winning His Dark Materials trilogy.

Now that is a fascinating perspective on the whole God thing…

Well, as in the Narnia series, (C.S. Lewis) whatever good one does in done in God’s name. Likewise, whatever evil one does in done in Satan’s name, regardless of whom you think you are serving. It is the service that counts, not the namesake.

Is the OP aware that not all Arabs are Moslems? There are many Christian Moslems as well- and do you know what Christian Arabs call God?


You don’t have to embrace Islam, nor do you have to say it’s “just as good” as the religion you prefer. But there is no doubt that the God Mohammaed called “Allah” is the same God that Jesus called “the Father,” who is, in turn, the same God to whom Moses prayed.

Judaism, Christianity and Islam have real, serious differences- but the God they’re dedicated to is the same.

The thing about Revelations and the other “End Time” prophesies is that they are so vague that with just a little bit of creativity, you could make a case for anybody being the Anti-Christ (Mohammed, George Bush, Gary Coleman, Winkie the telletubby, etc.) and anything being Satan (Islam, the United States, Microsoft, The Brotherhood of Shriners, etc).

So is it possible that Allah is Satan? Sure, but as others have pointed out, if we use the same logic it is also possible that Satan is the Christian Church, or AOL Time Warner, or the US Postal Service, or the Dallas Cowboys, etc.

There is a related topic here and possibly another here.

What Philosophocles, astorian and Brutus said. However, I do think the OP’s question is fair because regardless of the culture and ethnicity of a Muslim faith, Arabic is the language of his/her faith and so s/he addresses God as “Allah”. But yes, byt the same token Arabized Christians (modern and historical) referred to their God as “Allah”.

Allah is simply the Arabic word for God – the same proper noun which we, in English, use to denote the single, all-powerful deity of Christianity and Judaism. Arabic uses this word in the same way French, Russian and Roman Christians use(d) the equivalent of “God” in their own languages.

Unfortunately, this flawed perception of the God of Islam by non-Arabic speakers as “Allah”, rather than “God”, creates the impression that the deity whom Muslims revere is a different entity than that of the Christians and Jews. In some ways it is a convenient ignorance: it allows one to side-step the thorny theological and doctrinal questions regarding Islam which the Christian gospels, naturally, aren’t equipped to answer, because they pre-date the Qu’ran.

“Christian Moslems?” Don’t you mean “Christian Arabs?”

“Christian Moslems”

Is that like Jews for Jesus?