The experience of converting

Are you talking about "strong" athiesm, as in you're sure there is no god?Then there is one bit of dogma right there, that god definitley doesn't exist.You don't know this one way or another and if you believe that god certainly doesn't exist, then this requires faith.

Right,You don't have proof that the Easter Bunny, as it is presented, does not exist.So to say with absolute certainty that it does not exist requires belief without knowing and a level of confidence in your belief without knowing that would put it into faith territory.The Easter bunny, though is pretty specific.So is the Abrahamic God.So, it would require about the same amount of faith to believe in either.BUT, to totally deny the possibility of any kind of omnipotent or even supernatural being with such a degree of confidence and certainty as to be absolute, then that's faith.

IPU?
The Inter-Parlaimentary Union?Well, whatever the IPU is, if it is something like Interplanetary Union or something involving aliens, then no I don't have faith that it doesn't exist, because I don't know one way or another.

You think the existence of something beyond our understanding is beyond dispute?Do you think that the non-existence of god(s) is so impossible that to dispute their non-existence is simply absurd?Here's what else Wiki had to say about axioms:

quote:

---

In epistemology, an axiom is a self-evident truth upon which other knowledge must rest, from which other knowledge is built up. Not all epistemologists agree that any axioms, understood in that sense, exist.

---

Are you saying that the non-existence if god(s) is self-evident?In what way?A person who does believe in god(s) will tell you exactly how self-evident the existence of god really is.I guess that's just an axiom of their religious philosophy and not dogma at all. To me faith means certainty without evidence.Your statement about the elephant and your certainty as to his non-existence is based on previous experience. It's based on what you know about corridors around you and what you know about elephants and your confidence level or certainty level is based on that.Now, to say that you are 100% all the way certain, without peeking, is a matter of faith, I believe.You put faith in your ability to predict outcomes based on previous experience.Now, where is your experience of the supernatural?
I would wager that you have none, so perhaps you don't have any previous experience upon which to base a conclusion. But you have drawn a very sweeping conclusion about the supernatural by sayingthat you are certain it doesn't exist. This, to me, is faith (certainty without evidence.)

I see!How can it be invisible and pink at the same time?{shrug}If that's the rub, then I can say by definition, something can't really be pink and invisible at the same time, but I could be wrong.If I said that I was certain beyond dispute, then yes, that would be faith.Then do or anyone here have FAITH that intellegent extra-terrestrial being don't exist, never existed, and will never exist?

I don't see how it's a dilemma.We can't say for certain that it doesn't exist.If I said that I know it does...faith.
If I say that I know it doesn't...faith.If I tell the truth and say that I don't know one way or the other and probably never will, that's agnosticism.This message has been edited by gnojek, 07-05-2005 05:27 PM

So saying "God exists" is merely an axiom, and not dogma is what you're saying?And then, saying that God created the world in 6 days, that would be the dogma?Maybe I could say that this is pretty self-evident and make it an axiom.Can a statement be axiomatic and dogmatic simultaneously? Actually no, because I don't think you finished your thought here...
If the one point (not on the first line) had a line passing through it, then it could be parallel or not. Since you are analogizing this way, then you would say that another's belief in god(s) is just as valid as your outright dismissal of the possibilty simply because you are operating in different geometrical spaces?Ok, forget the geometry, what you seem to be saying is that your dismissal of god(s) is based on just as tenuous a foundation as another's belief in it/them?That belief in Christianity or the IPU is just as valid in a superstitious mind as non-belief is in a less-superstitious mind seems to be what you are saying here.You just decided to say with utter confidence that there is definitely zero god(s), without testing that hypothesis.
You made a leap of faith.All you can honestly say is that, so far, you haven't come across any convincing evidence.edit:
I don't care if you get confrontational, no big deal to me.. No, I think perhaps people are calling things faith when they are not faith at all.Like you said, a xian will profess his strong faith and say how his faith is unshakeable, but if he is basing his beliefs on emotional "evidence" then this really isn't faith in the pure sense.But really, can emotions be considered "evidence" as we define this term? Maybe.If not, then this person is exercising faith (certainty without evidence).This message has been edited by gnojek, 07-05-2005 05:55 PM

I don't know if it's possible or not. I got your drift, but disbelief can be "strong" or "weak."
You can be incredulous. The Bears won! I don't believe it!Or you can be totally convinced that something is totally impossible.
In this case, it requires faith to hold that position.It's all a matter of the confidence level of the believer or non-believer. ..and you too.

Right, as in evidence that has convinced you. Exactly. Well, I seem to never find the absense of anything.
But I have no evidence for God and I also have nothing to prove that something like that is impossible. Ok. If it didn't convince you, then it's not convincing.
If it convinced the xian, then it is.If the xian is basing his beliefs on evidence and not faith, then under their system, from what I understand, this is bad.