Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Athe...

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

There are 1239 comments on the Mediaite.com story from Apr 6, 2013, titled Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Atheism To Islam After Seeing.... In it, Mediaite.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Mediaite.com.

Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1202 Jul 1, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
As I said before, an intelligent, non created creator is what I consider the best guess. You have no evidence for any other guesses. You say, well we have a universe. Well, that could be evidence for any of the ideas or guesses, including a non created creator. So what is that supposed to mean?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#1203 Jul 1, 2013
So beyond your suppositions and personal beliefs, you really have no proof for a creator whatsoever yes?

It's okay we know you will cower away from answering this.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>As I said before, an intelligent, non created creator is what I consider the best guess. You have no evidence for any other guesses. You say, well we have a universe. Well, that could be evidence for any of the ideas or guesses, including a non created creator. So what is that supposed to mean?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1204 Jul 1, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Many things are possible, but an all powerful compassionate creator is not because we have evidence of avoidable suffering.
<quoted text>
Look, I said that it could be considered "logically" avoidable, but maybe avoiding it isn't the best answer. How could we know unless we were in the position of the creator? It only looks wrong from your limited perspective. That's almost like the guy who says, well a real President would do xyz and that's what I would do if I were President. You hear that on the campaign trail all of the time. But often, when the guy himself gets into office and is given complete knowledge, often his opinion can change quite drastically. And when we talk about being a creator of creation itself, it's gets even worse and more presumptuous. Nobody even has the first clue about anything close to complete knowledge of being in that position.

And since you want to only focus on the negative of life, then let me say this. Anybody can painlessly get out of it any time they want to. But for some reason, an overwhelming majority choose not to, and almost all even cling to life to their very last breath and don't want to die. Some will go so far as to kill others so that their supposedly horrible lives can continue. So how cruel is a creator that gives you something that apparently you never want to seem to let go of?

“I'm out hunting”

Since: Jan 10

For your mind and soul

#1205 Jul 1, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
As I said before, an intelligent, non created creator is what I consider the best guess. You have no evidence for any other guesses. You say, well we have a universe. Well, that could be evidence for any of the ideas or guesses, including a non created creator. So what is that supposed to mean?
The universe cannot be proof of a creator unless there is something taht could point to such a creator. Nothing of a kind has been found.

“I'm out hunting”

Since: Jan 10

For your mind and soul

#1206 Jul 1, 2013
Typo-that
Thinking

York, UK

#1207 Jul 1, 2013
Straw man. The fact that I enjoy life today does not mean that I want to live forever.

You really want a compassionate god so bad it hurts, don't you?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Look, I said that it could be considered "logically" avoidable, but maybe avoiding it isn't the best answer. How could we know unless we were in the position of the creator? It only looks wrong from your limited perspective. That's almost like the guy who says, well a real President would do xyz and that's what I would do if I were President. You hear that on the campaign trail all of the time. But often, when the guy himself gets into office and is given complete knowledge, often his opinion can change quite drastically. And when we talk about being a creator of creation itself, it's gets even worse and more presumptuous. Nobody even has the first clue about anything close to complete knowledge of being in that position.
And since you want to only focus on the negative of life, then let me say this. Anybody can painlessly get out of it any time they want to. But for some reason, an overwhelming majority choose not to, and almost all even cling to life to their very last breath and don't want to die. Some will go so far as to kill others so that their supposedly horrible lives can continue. So how cruel is a creator that gives you something that apparently you never want to seem to let go of?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1208 Jul 1, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Straw man. The fact that I enjoy life today does not mean that I want to live forever.
You really want a compassionate god so bad it hurts, don't you?
<quoted text>
I'm not the one who appears to be hurt and angry about life that I outright dismiss any notion of an ultimately compassionate creator. My father lived a long life until he was 90, and I had to take care of him at the end, and he used to say "what takes so long"? The only reason why he didn't outwardly kill himself at the end was because he knew that would hurt us. But he had no reason to live anymore. But he used to try to pretend he would take his required pills and then hide them. I know another guy who wants to die just like his Dad did. He said his Dad died when he was 55. He refused to take his heart medication and said when it's my time to die, it's my time. And he was mowing the grass one day, took a major heart attack and keeled over. Is that much different than dying in a tsunami? And what happens when natural disaster strikes or anybody dies for that matter or suffers? People come together. I used the example of Logan's Run, and that got ignored as well.

And you didn't even touch what I asked about how you could know the best possible way things should be. How could you know that from your limited perspective?

Liebniz, a very famous Mathematician and a Physicist on par with Newton was also a Philosopher. He postulated that this is the best possible world no matter how much it would not appear to be that way to us from our limited perspective. Part of it was him surmising that an all knowing creator would not create anything but the best possible world. Even though the world may seem wrong from our limited perspective, how do we know that it actually is? How could we KNOW that? And yet you seem to KNOW, but at the same time, you couldn't even scratch the surface of having the knowledge that a non created creator would have to have. You judge from a perspective of limited knowledge within creation itself and within a tiny little box called yourself. You say, if I were God, I would do xyz and since God doesn't do xyz, then there is no God. How could anybody really say that?

Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1209 Jul 1, 2013
emperorjohn wrote:
<quoted text>
The universe cannot be proof of a creator unless there is something taht could point to such a creator. Nothing of a kind has been found.
How about everything? Why does everything point to any or every OTHER explanation but not a non created creator? We entertain all other possibilities and give them credence, and yet they have no more credence than an uncreated creator. Even the famous and staunch Atheist Anthony Flew finally said at the later years of his life that he sees intelligence behind it all. He still didn't believe in an afterlife, but in his mind, it just seemed unlikely that something as incredible as all of this didn't have intelligence behind it, after years of denying that there was. Einstein and Heisenberg obviously did not believe in the classic idea of God, but both did believe in intelligence behind all of this. They thought it was almost impossible for there not to be. Einstein used to say that he didn't care about knowing what God is, probably because he realized he never will, he said he was more interested in how God thinks.

“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.”
&#8213; Werner Heisenberg

I just don't understand why there is such immediate dismissal for this, and yet any other possibility is hoped for and even embraced. Many Atheists seem to be crossing their fingers that they can disprove God's existence one day. Why?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1210 Jul 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Uhmmm no.
You were caught red handed lying, and you know it, when you claimed Webster's backed up your assertion.
It DOES back it up. View and belief are interchangeable or synonymous in the context of the definition itself. This is now the SEVENTH time I have repeated that to you. Why do you think that Webster's uses "view", and Oxford's uses "belief"? They both mean the same thing. So once again, not one single lie. No matter how desperate you are to make me out to be some sort of liar, it just ain't gunna happen. How long are you going to continue with this? The more you do, the more wrong you keep being. For God's sake, you even tried to suggest that I posted dead links to Dictionary.com and Oxford's, and then tried to accuse me of scamming once again. What is the matter with your head? Why do you keep on insisting upon embarrassing yourself? When are you going to let it go for your own good?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#1211 Jul 1, 2013
Good grief you are resorting to the writings of Flew post senile?

Regardless, that would merely be an argument from authority logical fallacy, when you are able to present proof for a creator beyond your hopes and dreams let us know okay?

Einstein: I do not believe in a personal god.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>How about everything? Why does everything point to any or every OTHER explanation but not a non created creator? We entertain all other possibilities and give them credence, and yet they have no more credence than an uncreated creator. Even the famous and staunch Atheist Anthony Flew finally said at the later years of his life that he sees intelligence behind it all. He still didn't believe in an afterlife, but in his mind, it just seemed unlikely that something as incredible as all of this didn't have intelligence behind it, after years of denying that there was. Einstein and Heisenberg obviously did not believe in the classic idea of God, but both did believe in intelligence behind all of this. They thought it was almost impossible for there not to be. Einstein used to say that he didn't care about knowing what God is, probably because he realized he never will, he said he was more interested in how God thinks.

“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.”
&#8213; Werner Heisenberg

I just don't understand why there is such immediate dismissal for this, and yet any other possibility is hoped for and even embraced. Many Atheists seem to be crossing their fingers that they can disprove God's existence one day. Why?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1212 Jul 1, 2013
I just checked those links that I posted on post 1186 for the third time. They all work you psychopath. What is the matter with you?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#1213 Jul 1, 2013
You are just being purposely obtuse now and you know it.

What is the definition of mystic please?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>It DOES back it up. View and belief are interchangeable or synonymous in the context of the definition itself. This is now the SEVENTH time I have repeated that to you. Why do you think that Webster's uses "view", and Oxford's uses "belief"? They both mean the same thing. So once again, not one single lie. No matter how desperate you are to make me out to be some sort of liar, it just ain't gunna happen. How long are you going to continue with this? The more you do, the more wrong you keep being. For God's sake, you even tried to suggest that I posted dead links to Dictionary.com and Oxford's, and then tried to accuse me of scamming once again. What is the matter with your head? Why do you keep on insisting upon embarrassing yourself? When are you going to let it go for your own good?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1214 Jul 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
So beyond your suppositions and personal beliefs, you really have no proof for a creator whatsoever yes?
It's okay we know you will cower away from answering this.
<quoted text>
At this point, I not only find you to be distasteful, I think you are actually out of your mind. Why would I ever have a conversation about any serious issues with someone like that? I think you accusing me of scamming by posting dead or broken links on post 1186 was the last straw. You are practicing nothing but crazy desperation at this point to make me out to be a liar or scammer any way that you can. And it's awful to watch. I don't even care if you own up to any mistakes at this point, as we both know that is impossible anyway, but even if you did, I still have no interest in discussing any serious issues with you at all, so I rescind my offer. There will be no discussion about POE or any other more serious issues between you and I. You can stand on the sidelines and watch others engage in the conversation, and post all of your little comments on it, but I'm not going to answer anything that you have to say about issues such as POE. The other people participating run rings around you anyway.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#1215 Jul 1, 2013
Still cowering from my questions I notice and throwing out ad hom attacks. So typical of the slow witted sadly.

Let's see if you can answer this since my previous questions were beyond your ability to answer. Here we will even do it, your way....

What do agnostics believe?
Seeker wrote:
I just checked those links that I posted on post 1186 for the third time. They all work you psychopath. What is the matter with you?
Thinking

York, UK

#1216 Jul 1, 2013
I'm not hurt and angry about life because I believe it is probably random.

When Iain Banks found he had terminal cancer, he said he was happier he didn't believe because he'd be asking, "Why me, god?"

Are you now postulating a benevolent creator that is not all powerful?
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not the one who appears to be hurt and angry about life that I outright dismiss any notion of an ultimately compassionate creator. My father lived a long life until he was 90, and I had to take care of him at the end, and he used to say "what takes so long"? The only reason why he didn't outwardly kill himself at the end was because he knew that would hurt us. But he had no reason to live anymore. But he used to try to pretend he would take his required pills and then hide them. I know another guy who wants to die just like his Dad did. He said his Dad died when he was 55. He refused to take his heart medication and said when it's my time to die, it's my time. And he was mowing the grass one day, took a major heart attack and keeled over. Is that much different than dying in a tsunami? And what happens when natural disaster strikes or anybody dies for that matter or suffers? People come together. I used the example of Logan's Run, and that got ignored as well.
And you didn't even touch what I asked about how you could know the best possible way things should be. How could you know that from your limited perspective?
Liebniz, a very famous Mathematician and a Physicist on par with Newton was also a Philosopher. He postulated that this is the best possible world no matter how much it would not appear to be that way to us from our limited perspective. Part of it was him surmising that an all knowing creator would not create anything but the best possible world. Even though the world may seem wrong from our limited perspective, how do we know that it actually is? How could we KNOW that? And yet you seem to KNOW, but at the same time, you couldn't even scratch the surface of having the knowledge that a non created creator would have to have. You judge from a perspective of limited knowledge within creation itself and within a tiny little box called yourself. You say, if I were God, I would do xyz and since God doesn't do xyz, then there is no God. How could anybody really say that?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#1217 Jul 1, 2013
So then we should be able to switch words and it make sense?

Seeker has a deep, loving belief of Jesus Christ when he is on his knees.

Seeker has a deep, loving view of Jesus Christ when he is on his knees.

Well that certainly changes much!

Hahahahahahaha!

What's the definition of a mystic again!
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>It DOES back it up. View and belief are interchangeable or synonymous in the context of the definition itself. This is now the SEVENTH time I have repeated that to you. Why do you think that Webster's uses "view", and Oxford's uses "belief"? They both mean the same thing. So once again, not one single lie. No matter how desperate you are to make me out to be some sort of liar, it just ain't gunna happen. How long are you going to continue with this? The more you do, the more wrong you keep being. For God's sake, you even tried to suggest that I posted dead links to Dictionary.com and Oxford's, and then tried to accuse me of scamming once again. What is the matter with your head? Why do you keep on insisting upon embarrassing yourself? When are you going to let it go for your own good?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1218 Jul 1, 2013
Thinking wrote:
I'm not hurt and angry about life because I believe it is probably random.
Actually I said that if anything, it would seem that you are after you tried to say that I was.
Thinking wrote:
When Iain Banks found he had terminal cancer, he said he was happier he didn't believe because he'd be asking, "Why me, god?"
That's not even true either. There are plenty of people who believe in God that just accept it as God's will.
Thinking wrote:
Are you now postulating a benevolent creator that is not all powerful?
<quoted text>
Well, if one gives free will out, then one loses that portion of control. And by free will, I don't mean that we can do anything that we want, but rather complete free will to chose how to react to our circumstances. Obviously we do not have the ability to always control our circumstances, only some of them, but we have complete free will to choose how to react to them. And if we had no choice but to always react the correct or most optimal way, then that isn't free will.
Thinking

York, UK

#1219 Jul 1, 2013
Behave.

The Iain Banks quote is an attested fact.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I said that if anything, it would seem that you are after you tried to say that I was.
<quoted text>
That's not even true either. There are plenty of people who believe in God that just accept it as God's will.
<quoted text>
Well, if one gives free will out, then one loses that portion of control. And by free will, I don't mean that we can do anything that we want, but rather complete free will to chose how to react to our circumstances. Obviously we do not have the ability to always control our circumstances, only some of them, but we have complete free will to choose how to react to them. And if we had no choice but to always react the correct or most optimal way, then that isn't free will.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1220 Jul 1, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Behave.
The Iain Banks quote is an attested fact.
<quoted text>
I know and it is also an attested fact that plenty of people who believe in God don't say "why me?", they just accept it as God's will. So what is your point?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#1221 Jul 1, 2013
Let's see, it is now page number 61, post number 1220. I should have just avoided what I knew was going to happen. I even said it on post number 71

"All I asked is where Jesus told them to do any of the bad things they do. Do you want to start a whole thread discussing whether God exists or not? I can promise you that thread will last forever, for nobody can prove that God exists and nobody can prove that God doesn't exist. It's a rather pointless discussion."

I've really really spent or even wasted a ton of time on this. If any of you think you have as well, times it by five or six for me, because for every five or six of you, there is only one me. And at the end of the day, all that anybody can really say is that their guess is more likely.

Some where around 1100 hundred posts and a completely hijacked thread, and this is where we are at. Nobody can PROVE anything and this is what I said right up front. I've been through these discussions many many times.

I think I made a huge mistake even bothering to discuss this. I can't think of how many more productive things I should have been doing.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Proof of God for the Atheist 20 min Uncle Sam 125
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 25 min NoahLovesU 12,669
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 28 min New Age Spiritual... 247,442
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 2 hr thetruth 47,806
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 4 hr ChristineM 2,353
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 8 hr thetruth 14,715
News Atheism, the Bible and sexual orientation 13 hr thetruth 7
More from around the web