Yanks better convert to Islam, or bad things will happen (AlQaeda)

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Sikander
Do you know someone who isn't insane who converted to Islam?

Yes.

A genuine Frenchwoman, raised by soft-catholic parents.

She is only "insane" insofar as she believes in God and wanted to explore religious Truth (If this is the mark of insanity, then we have billions of insane people on this planet - not a terribly useful depiction then).

She started out having real interest in catholicism, and became a staunch believer. Then, in her quest for religious knowledge, she explored Islam. She believed the claim that Islam is the final word of God, while both previous religions (Judaism and Christianty) are only incomplete parts.
She then chose to go for the full package, instead of believing in the incomplete truth she had started her life, and her quest for religious knowledge, in.

Now, I'm an atheist, and such a belief is completely alien to me (just like the belief in God-Jesus, Yahweh, or Shiva are alien to me). However, I found no more insanity in her approach in comparison with that of any other believer I know.

[Dinner]

If I convert to Islam can I have sex with underaged girls and behead people I don't like? Their prophet got to do it.

[Elok]

I don't see why you'd think that. You're a democrat now, but you don't get to screw movie stars like Kennedy did, do you?

[Dinner]

No, but I want to.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by loinburger

I hold you entirely to blame for turning this thread into a "is atheism a religion" wank-fest. Though I must say that was a remarkably successful troll.

The trollish threadjack began with Snoopy though, to whom Cybershy was replying.

[Bosh]

Well, yes, Bosh, that's strictly speaking true. If you positively believed in the nonexistence of [whatever lame parody is currently popular among atheists], that too would be dependent on "faith" of a sort.

What what confuses theists. The "postive belief" in the non-existance of something is silly and irration and most atheists who think things true don't do that they just think that the existance of god is as likely as the existance of Leprechauns and for much the same reasons.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Elok
Loin: This is sort of beside the point, but I don't believe the ancient Greco-Roman gods were supernatural, strictly speaking. They came out of the natural world, which preceded them. They were largely incarnations of its power, and powers like hurling thunderbolts weren't exactly excluded from other creatures in the ancient imagination. Just look at the basilisk (er, figuratively, that is).

I'd also label the basilisk as a supernatural creature. Ditto the cyclops, the cockatrice, the minotaur, etc.

Granted that it may not take a lot of creativity to come up with "guy who hurls lightning bolts" or "big guy with only one eye," but "guy with fifty heads and a hundred hands" at least deserves an honorable mention.

Originally posted by lord of the mark
The trollish threadjack began with Snoopy though, to whom Cybershy was replying.

I'd say that the troll began with Snoopy, but that Cybershy is the one who turned it into a full-blown threadjack.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by CyberShy


1. gods are beings with authority in someones life
2. gods define the rules
3. gods are being worshipped or feared

1. gods aren't the only beings with authority in someones life
2. gods aren't the only beings that define the rules
3. gods aren't the only beings which are worshipped or feared

Your implication that having authority/defining rules/being worshipped or feared is an (exclusively) religious thing is therefore nonsense.

edit: oh, and I just see Loin replied already to that ...

[BeBMan]

dp + 0

[Robert]

Originally posted by Bosh

Anti-Invisible Pink Unicornism isn't a religion per se, but since Reason along is incapable of proving the non-existance of Invisible Pink Unicorns, it relies on Faith to reach its conclusion. So Anti-Invisible Pink Unicornism has more in common with theism than agnosticism.

The existance or non-existance of pink-unicorns doesn't really have much impact on somebodies life. If life make sence or not does make much impact. If there's an afterlife or not does make much impact.

The Pink Unicorn example is as famous as pathatic.

[Robert]

Originally posted by BeBro


1. gods aren't the only beings with authority in someones life
2. gods aren't the only beings that define the rules
3. gods aren't the only beings which are worshipped or feared

Your implication that having authority/defining rules/being worshipped or feared is an (exclusively) religious thing is therefore nonsense.

edit: oh, and I just see Loin replied already to that ...

Name any being that has authority (I mean full-authority in someone's life, not "he's my boss" authority), defines rules (not just some rules but all the rules in someones life) and is being worshipped that can clearly not be named a god.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Name any being that has authority (I mean full-authority in someone's life, not "he's my boss" authority), defines rules (not just some rules but all the rules in someones life) and is being worshipped that can clearly not be named a god.

Now you're restricting the definition of a god to the Judeo-Christian god. The Greek gods didn't have full authority over the lives of the Greeks, they were constantly squabbling with each other. The Norse gods aren't all-powerful, many of them are fated to be slain in Ragnarok. The Hindu and Buddhist deities also have limited powers. So basically you're restricting the world's religions to the Judeo-Christian religions or to atheism.

[BeBMan]

Name any being that has authority (I mean full-authority in someone's life, not "he's my boss" authority), defines rules (not just some rules but all the rules in someones life) and is being worshipped that can clearly not be named a god.

Oh, funny, now you come out with "I don't mean this kind of authority, but rather that one"

Since I don't believe in god, I also don't believe that a god has ultimate authority or defines all rules like you mean it, so your request is rather pointless.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by CyberShy


The existance or non-existance of pink-unicorns doesn't really have much impact on somebodies life. If life make sence or not does make much impact. If there's an afterlife or not does make much impact.

The Pink Unicorn example is as famous as pathatic.

So?
Same standards of proof apply.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by CyberShy
Name any being that has authority (I mean full-authority in someone's life, not "he's my boss" authority), defines rules (not just some rules but all the rules in someones life) and is being worshipped that can clearly not be named a god.

A totalitarian ruler.
The father of a young child.
A slaveowner (agreed the slaver is not worshipped - actually, only the "worship" part differentiates your definition of a God with that of any powerful human).