Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Atheism To Islam After Seeing...

Apr 6, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Mediaite.com

CNN has an amazing story out of Guantanamo Bay about an American atheist prison camp guard that converted to Islam after spending extensive time talking to with some of the English speaking prisoners there.

Comments
1,161 - 1,180 of 1,239 Comments Last updated Jul 4, 2013

Since: Mar 11

Simpsonville, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1181
Jun 30, 2013
 
Yes the Job story clearly illustrates how the god of the bible is a horrid monster to be disposed not worshipped. And if he is saying do this and go to heaven after what he did to Job? I wouldn't be putting much stock in it.

Just have some iron chariots handy just in case :)
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>The story of Job makes God sound like some cruel king or some macabre serial killer. Despotic monarchs like Henry VIII or Ivan the Terrible are known for being friends with people one day and killing those people the next day. Serial killers are known for wanting the power to take lives at will.

Since: Mar 11

Simpsonville, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1182
Jun 30, 2013
 
Start with proving the creator is anything more than the work of someone's imagination... And go.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>So it's all just blap, but the idea of a non created creator cannot even be entertained or "believed" without evidence. There's always "prove it", but any alternative does not need to be proven. Seems kind of skewed to me.

Since: Mar 11

Simpsonville, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1183
Jun 30, 2013
 
Yet you still can't answer my yes or no question. Once again..

Did your google and Webster's definition match up perfectly? Yes or no... And go.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>Look, you are simply rude, obnoxious and ignorant. And you add nothing to the conversation at all. Who would ever want to have a conversation with someone like that? Others participating here run rings around you.

Since: Mar 11

Simpsonville, SC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1184
Jun 30, 2013
 
View and belief mean the same thing? Lol!

No once again.. Sigh... Yet again... Your first link did not match up to your original definition and you know it. You before we're caught making up your own definition for mystic remember?

Hence no matter how much you wriggle and try to build strawmen, my point stands and is backed up by you still admitting your definition of mystic is wrong. You still can't answer my questions or point so you fail and that is that.

Notice how I can in so few words factually slash your argument apart while you often need to use up the entire word allotment?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>They mean the same thing. View and belief both mean the same thing in the context of the definition, and there are many more sources that use the word belief. Seems to be the author's choice. No two definitions perfectly match up as that would border on plagiarism, but they are all intended to mean the same thing.

And, once again, that has nothing to do with you clearly accusing me of altering or just making up the first definition I posted to suit my needs. That was your clear accusation. No amount of spin in the world is going to make your clearly false accusation disappear. Don't blame me. I didn't ask you to make that mistake and I am not responsible for it in the least.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1185
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
How about I suggest that the creator is a magical pony or Clifford the Big Dog, how is that any less rational than your version of a god?
Do you mean my version that merely postulates a non created creator with an intelligent and even, "ultimately", a benevolent purpose, even if the benevolence is not immediately apparent? If you want to get into the Bible later, then fine, I'll explain that later. In short, I think it is a nursery rhyme for ancient people, but I think it does point to the truth, but in a more symbolic, nursery rhyme sort of way that people back then could grasp. For example, I could never take Noah's Ark literally, but it could point to the truth in a symbolic way.

But what's the point of discussing any of that if you think it isn't possible for there to be a non created creator with intelligence and purpose? I said earlier, that people do not necessarily disbelieve in God, they disbelieve in the version of it they have been told. And this is why you are gravitating towards the specifically defined version of God taught by religions as your real objection. It seems to me that rejection of the idea all seems to come down to avoidable suffering as Thinker mentioned, and therefore if it is avoidable, there cannot be an ultimately benevolent, intelligent, non created creator. I knew a girl who's mom died from cancer when she was 15. That was what made her decide there is no God. It wouldn't for me, but it did for her. But when we say avoidable suffering, sure it is technically avoidable, but maybe things would actually be worse without it. I know that sounds absurd to you, but Leibniz, a famous mathematician and philosopher postulated that this world is actually the best possible world that could have been created. But how can we say that is absurd unless we were actually in the position of and had the perspective of the creator itself? So in that respect, maybe suffering is not avoidable, as it would be worse without it. The interesting thing is that natural disaster has the interesting effect of bringing people together and showing their ability to love and care for each other. Maybe if there was no suffering, we would all sit in our lofty towers with relative disinterest of each other because we already have all we want. Who knows? How could we unless we were at the level of a creator of all things, assuming one exists? We only say what "should be" from out own limited perspective.
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
My point is that we know that there is a universe. What caused it or if it was caused remains a mystery. You want us to consider your wild guess as a credible theory.
Why is it any worse than any other guess? In my opinion, I think it's a better guess, but if someone gives me a better guess, then I will drop my guess. But one guess seems to be completely non allowable, while all other guesses are not. So there has to be a deeper reason for the bias against one guess, while all others are allowable and entertained rather than completely dismissed. And I think that reason has to do with what I said above.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1186
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Givemeliberty wrote:
View and belief mean the same thing? Lol!
No once again.. Sigh
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnost...

Read definition number four and then number six. Here you find the word belief in one, and view in the other. They are meant to be synonymous in the context of the definition. And also read about the synonym study as well on the page and you will find the word belief.

Here's another
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engl...

Here is another version from even the same source. It's the American English version
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/amer...

Now would you please just shut up? Look, don't blame me. I'm not doing it, you insisted upon doing it to yourself. If you could have just let it go long ago, I would have let it drop, but you asked me for proof of your accusation and demanded that I go back and piece it together, so I did. Now you attempt spin and the angle now is that the issue is now that view and belief are two entirely different words with different meanings. But they are not in the context of the definition and this is the 5th time that I have had to repeat this to you
Givemeliberty wrote:
... Yet again... Your first link did not match up to your original definition and you know it.
Because they weren't even from the same source, but I was able to verify the source of my first posted defintion after you CLEARLY accused me of just altering or making up the first definition that I posted to suit my argument. And it is all in writing and I completed documented it all. And you KNOW you did this. The spin is not going to work. You should quit while you are ahead, but I can't even see any room left for you to be ahead at this point. And YOU did it all to yourself, not me. So blame yourself.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1187
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
They mean the same thing. View and belief both mean the same thing in the context of the definition, and there are many more sources that use the word belief. Seems to be the author's choice. No two definitions perfectly match up as that would border on plagiarism, but they are all intended to mean the same thing.
And, once again, that has nothing to do with you clearly accusing me of altering or just making up the first definition I posted to suit my needs. That was your clear accusation. No amount of spin in the world is going to make your clearly false accusation disappear. Don't blame me. I didn't ask you to make that mistake and I am not responsible for it in the least.
Liar who cant prove god is possible and has no evidence for any of his rubbish opinions

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1188
Jun 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnost...
Read definition number four and then number six. Here you find the word belief in one, and view in the other. They are meant to be synonymous in the context of the definition. And also read about the synonym study as well on the page and you will find the word belief.
Here's another
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engl...
Here is another version from even the same source. It's the American English version
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/amer...
Now would you please just shut up? Look, don't blame me. I'm not doing it, you insisted upon doing it to yourself. If you could have just let it go long ago, I would have let it drop, but you asked me for proof of your accusation and demanded that I go back and piece it together, so I did. Now you attempt spin and the angle now is that the issue is now that view and belief are two entirely different words with different meanings. But they are not in the context of the definition and this is the 5th time that I have had to repeat this to you
<quoted text>
Because they weren't even from the same source, but I was able to verify the source of my first posted defintion after you CLEARLY accused me of just altering or making up the first definition that I posted to suit my argument. And it is all in writing and I completed documented it all. And you KNOW you did this. The spin is not going to work. You should quit while you are ahead, but I can't even see any room left for you to be ahead at this point. And YOU did it all to yourself, not me. So blame yourself.
When are you going to start posting bible quotes? the game is up troll, just do a Lincoln and stop pretending that you're absorbing anything here.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1189
Jun 30, 2013
 
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Liar who cant prove god is possible and has no evidence for any of his rubbish opinions
Thanks for your repeated opinion that I never heard before, 50 times.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1190
Jun 30, 2013
 
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
When are you going to start posting bible quotes?
Later, assuming that I can even have the patience to continue, and it's looking like I won't because I have been repeatedly asking myself why I have even bothered in the first place. But since I put my hat in the ring, I at least try to offer things. Doubt it will ever go anywhere. I can tell, but at least I can gain some specific ideas and exact reasons for objections. That's all that I could ever hope for and all that I am doing. As far as your contribution? It has been absolutely meaningless. But that's okay, you are still a teenage boy, so you get a free pass.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1191
Jun 30, 2013
 
Well you already have shattering your last shred of so called credibility. You run and hide from questions and facts like your god runs from iron chariots.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>Later, assuming that I can even have the patience to continue, and it's looking like I won't because I have been repeatedly asking myself why I have even bothered in the first place. But since I put my hat in the ring, I at least try to offer things. Doubt it will ever go anywhere. I can tell, but at least I can gain some specific ideas and exact reasons for objections. That's all that I could ever hope for and all that I am doing. As far as your contribution? It has been absolutely meaningless. But that's okay, you are still a teenage boy, so you get a free pass.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1192
Jun 30, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
Well you already have shattering your last shred of so called credibility.
What did you think of the alternate definitions that I offered from Oxford's? Where is your credibility? Is there that concept of "Projection" going on? You have never really ever been able to offer any true value to the actual topics of conversation themselves, just like Skeptic. But you aren't a teenager, like he is, so you get no free pass. Could you kindly and politely just step out of the way while other people who have more to offer the conversation do so? They run rings around you. Thank you.

Since: Mar 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1194
Jun 30, 2013
 
You have yet to prove me wrong on jack nor has anyone else for that matter so until you are able to demonstrate that your insult falls flat. What's the definition of a mystic again?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>What did you think of the alternate definitions that I offered from Oxford's? Where is your credibility? Is there that concept of "Projection" going on? You have never really ever been able to offer any true value to the actual topics of conversation themselves, just like Skeptic. But you aren't a teenager, like he is, so you get no free pass. Could you kindly and politely just step out of the way while other people who have more to offer the conversation do so? They run rings around you. Thank you.

Since: Mar 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1195
Jun 30, 2013
 
And what a shock your links don't work. Sheesh you are humiliating yourself. Posting dead links? We all knew you were childish and flailing badly but even I didn't think you would sink that low!

Might as well start belching scriptures.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agnost...

Read definition number four and then number six. Here you find the word belief in one, and view in the other. They are meant to be synonymous in the context of the definition. And also read about the synonym study as well on the page and you will find the word belief.

Here's another
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engl...

Here is another version from even the same source. It's the American English version
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/amer...

Now would you please just shut up? Look, don't blame me. I'm not doing it, you insisted upon doing it to yourself. If you could have just let it go long ago, I would have let it drop, but you asked me for proof of your accusation and demanded that I go back and piece it together, so I did. Now you attempt spin and the angle now is that the issue is now that view and belief are two entirely different words with different meanings. But they are not in the context of the definition and this is the 5th time that I have had to repeat this to you

Givemeliberty wrote, "
... Yet again... Your first link did not match up to your original definition and you know it."

Because they weren't even from the same source, but I was able to verify the source of my first posted defintion after you CLEARLY accused me of just altering or making up the first definition that I posted to suit my argument. And it is all in writing and I completed documented it all. And you KNOW you did this. The spin is not going to work. You should quit while you are ahead, but I can't even see any room left for you to be ahead at this point. And YOU did it all to yourself, not me. So blame yourself.

“Handsome white and black men”

Since: Jan 10

Interracial love

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1196
Jul 1, 2013
 
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>

But what's the point of discussing any of that if you think it isn't possible for there to be a non created creator with intelligence and purpose?
I never said that it is impossible. What I said is that there is no evidence of a creator and that you just posting suppositions not theories. It is like you and me are standing in front of a house and you say without evidence, that the house is filled with gold.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1197
Jul 1, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
You have yet to prove me wrong on jack nor has anyone else for that matter so until you are able to demonstrate that your insult falls flat. What's the definition of a mystic again?
<quoted text>
You have been proven to have made a false accusation of me merely making up my own definition or altering an existing one. Proven beyond a reasonable doubt and all documented into one post with post numbers included and chronological order.

You have proven to be wrong that the words view and belief mean two entirely different things in the context of the definition of agnostic. They do not at all. I have not only given you a google definition with the word belief in it, but I also gave you one from Oxford's as well. Both clearly using the word belief.

You have been proven to be stubborn as well and someone who will merely change the subject or spin it any way that you can. The more you keep doing things like this, the worse it seems to get for you.

I even let your initial accusation of me outright lying and inventing or altering a definition go. But you kept bringing it up and then you even said it's all in writing that I did and even dared me to post it. So I did, piece by piece, all very well documented.

Then you changed the subject and still maintained that the word belief in the definition is faulty and attacked the source of the definition itself that used the word belief and laughed at google. I told you that google does not make those definitions up itself but rather gets them from an official source and then puts their label on it.

You should have let it rest there. But it still was not good enough, you had to keep it up. So then I gave you a definition from Oxford's which clearly had the word belief in it. I would never have even bothered to look that up if you didn't persist, but you kept persisting. So now you have an Oxford's definition shoved in your face. The more you persist, the worse it gets for you.

But I know the personality. Some people can just never simply admit a mistake, and your inability to do so has caused you to make even more mistakes. But I know the personality type and it will simply never end. Now the subject gets changed back to mystic to spin everything because you are desperate to make me out to be wrong about something since you have been proven wrong about two things (and it's actually far more than that, but I'm not going to even bother to get into that)

When will it end? You would have been so much better if you let it end long ago, but you ended up making things worse for yourself. You are your own worst enemy. And it's all because of your stubborn pride. Excessive pride is a very foolish thing to have and it can lead to mindless stubbornness.
Seeker

Billerica, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1198
Jul 1, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
And what a shock your links don't work. Sheesh you are humiliating yourself. Posting dead links? We all knew you were childish and flailing badly but even I didn't think you would sink that low!
Might as well start belching scriptures.
<quoted text>
I just clicked on the link to Oxford's from within your quote of my post where I gave the link, and it worked. Yet another mistake. What is the matter with your head? Are you that desperate that now you are going to pretend that the links don't work so you can pretend that you never saw the Oxford's definition? This is getting downright surreal.

Here, here it is again.
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/engl...

Same exact link I posted before. Are you that stubborn and desperate that you are going to embarrass yourself like this?
Thinking

Todmorden, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1199
Jul 1, 2013
 
Many things are possible, but an all powerful compassionate creator is not because we have evidence of avoidable suffering.
Seeker wrote:
To me, the thinking seems to come down to anything is possible EXCEPT a non created creator. One cannot even postulate that, but everything else is allowed to be postulated. Anything BUT a non created creator. There seems to be a strange exception made in the thinking.
Thinking

Todmorden, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1200
Jul 1, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I'm not worried by fuckwits like you.
atheism is evil wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't. But as long as you're worried, I'm happy.

Since: Mar 11

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1201
Jul 1, 2013
 
Uhmmm no.

I said
Atheist = without belief
Agnostic = without knowledge

You went on a temper tantrum saying agnostic also was a stance about belief. I correctly pointed out your mistake, you in desperation posted a link less definition that still doesn't actually say agnostic deals with belief in god but has the word belief thrown in. You for many days couldn't mystic up a link. When you did finally post a link it said as I did, not as you claimed previously. You wailed that I was unfair and closed minded. And many days later finally belched out a google (lol) definition that matched, sort of, your previous statement.

You were caught red handed lying, and you know it, when you claimed Webster's backed up your assertion. One might ask why you didn't simply post your hehehe google definition at first and tried to hide behind Webster's? You got caught, I pointed it out and you went crazy in desperation ad hom mode trying to change the subject.

Now you were caught posting broken links! Lmfao!

I fixed your post by the way as you are clearly projecting. And I can prove it with one question.

What is the definition of a mystic?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
But I know people can just never simply admit a mistake, and my inability to do so has caused me to make even more mistakes.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

8 Users are viewing the Atheism Forum right now

Search the Atheism Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 11 min Buck Crick 224,647
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 32 min Magyar 101 21,407
Talking some sense into you people... 33 min CunningLinguist 28
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 45 min ChristineM 845
Our world came from nothing? 2 hr CunningLinguist 260
How much faith it takes to believe in Evolution. 2 hr CunningLinguist 30
Atheists, give up your lost religion and seek t... (Nov '13) 10 hr CunningLinguist 229
•••
•••