Congratulations on reaching new heights on VideoSift. You have earned yourself 10 stars, earning you status of Bronze Star member. You have been awarded 1 Power Point for achieving this level. Thanks for all your contributions.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

It's much more than fun for me to argue these points. Philosophy effects every aspect of our lives and since there can be a right answer and a wrong answer to the existance of god it seems like an essential question.

if you're interested i'd even be willing to discuss points on skype www.skype.com (eliminates any phone bill)

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
Hmm. The only "loose" scientific method i know of is used by sloppy or fraudulent scientists; let's not confuse evidence (however valid) with proof. As close as evidence can sometimes get you to proof, there is still a very clear line between the two. Thus, in the absence of proof, when we accept something as true, we are inescapably doing so with some measure of "faith". This is, of course, rarely "blind" faith, but rather, faith backed by evidence. Sometimes that evidence is strong and plentiful, sometimes it is weak or sparse, and sometimes it is non-existent (intuitive) or flat-out wrong. Still, in *all* cases (big and small), in the absence of repeatable, verifiable (i.e. scientific) proof, it requires "faith" to believe that something is true. That said, intuition is the only form of "blind faith" i am familiar with. In my experience most of what people call "blind faith" would be better described as "myopic faith", a willful restriction of scope when considering evidence rather than an evidence-less faith. This is why it tends to piss people off when they're accused of blind faith; such an accusation amounts to a callous rejection of the evidence they've relied on.

This is more or less my framework for understanding and discussing these things (faith, evidence, proof, etc.). I'm of course, always happy to refine it if someone points out flaws, but it hasn't changed much for me in recent years.

As to briefing you on my faith, i must ask, to what end? Are you genuinely curious? Just eager to debate for the fun of it? Looking to demonstrate your superiority? Looking to convert me to agnosticism or atheism? Wanting an examination of your beliefs so you can refine/alter them? Have you even examined your reasons? I ask because it's no small thing you ask of me, a stranger on the internet. My faith in Christ is, if you will, more of a journey than a destination. Describing it in a videosift comment box will be quite inadequate, as i'm sure you can imagine. Such things are much better done in patient, real life conversations. It is not scientific study, after all. So really, if i'm going to attempt this for you, i'd like to know where you want to go with it first.

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
If I may address two points in reverse order,

Perhaps I have painted you in an improper way, some days i get caught up trying to sharpen my argument skills do make poor assumptions to open a conversation up (my freinds find me bickering in the street with the Jehova's Witnesses frequently). To a degree I will admit fault on this occasion. I'm sorry if I was insulting at some point. If you're willing to continue the conversation please brief me on your perspective.

Secondly,

You are misconstruing what valid evidence is (I believe we have a serious disagreement on this point). Your understanding of your wife's love for you isnt based on faith, it's based on evidence (whether subjective, or anecdotal). I would argue that you do follow a loose scientific method while trying to understand your wife's love (since you do seem to be an analytical person.) But blind faith leads people down horrible paths in relationships the same way it does in many other aspects of life (I'm not saying you have blind faith just that you are misunderstanding your methods). The wife who is physically abused by her husband but goes back over and over again because she is convinced of his love for her is a valid example of poor evidence evaluation (anecdotal, subjective or otherwise).

If I may address two points in reverse order,

Perhaps I have painted you in an improper way, some days i get caught up trying to sharpen my argument skills do make poor assumptions to open a conversation up (my freinds find me bickering in the street with the Jehova's Witnesses frequently). To a degree I will admit fault on this occasion. I'm sorry if I was insulting at some point. If you're willing to continue the conversation please brief me on your perspective.

Secondly,

You are misconstruing what valid evidence is (I believe we have a serious disagreement on this point). Your understanding of your wife's love for you isnt based on faith, it's based on evidence (whether subjective, or anecdotal). I would argue that you do follow a loose scientific method while trying to understand your wife's love (since you do seem to be an analytical person.) But blind faith leads people down horrible paths in relationships the same way it does in many other aspects of life (I'm not saying you have blind faith just that you are misunderstanding your methods). The wife who is physically abused by her husband but goes back over and over again because she is convinced of his love for her is a valid example of poor evidence evaluation (anecdotal, subjective or otherwise).




In reply to this comment by nadabu:
You disappoint me, Jigga. I never said lack of disproof equals proof. Nothing of the sort. I specifically said there was no proof. It would aid this conversation greatly if you would read what i said. Reread my last comment and notice that lack of disproof creates the *option* of faith. For you to equate the option with the choice of that option and babble on about other deities was...well...choose your own label.

I also am quite a fan of scientific evidence in all fields where it is practical (i'm quite the pragmatist, you'll find). I've an ardent fan and user of the scientific method for most of my life. For you to insinuate i have some sort of disregard for science is again, reading things into me, not out of me. You seem to have a very disappointing reliance on stereotypes for discussion with complete strangers.

Finally, i'm disappointed that you know nothing of the practical limits of scientific knowledge and the necessity of "practical knowledge" for which one has no scientific evidence amassed. Consider my wife. She loves me. I "know" this based upon personal experience, her testimony and the testimony of others. Purely anecdotal, subjective evidence. Not at all scientific, yet i rely upon it daily in my choices and would be exceedingly stupid to demand a proper scientific study of my wife's love before accepting it as true. So i live "by faith" in it. Spend a day trying to be very aware of *why* you do most of what you do during that day, and you will find that most of your choices are made on just the same sort of unscientific evidence. This is practical knowledge. Even our court system relies heavily upon this. So again, we all regularly *must* live primarily "by faith" in all sorts of things, big and small. Why then does my faith in an un(dis)provable deity merit your scorn? And please try to limit yourself to *my* chosen faith. Don't waste my time again trying to paint me as some anti-science Kansan school board member or blabbing about aborigine faiths that i have not chosen to hold. I assure, i am not. If you find that you don't know enough about *my* personal faith, then you should probably either apologize for your assumption-based scorn or else ask me enough about it to be able to properly justify your scorn. Either would be fine with me. Further painting me with stereotypes, however, will end our conversation, as i have better things to do with my time. Thanks in advance for your understanding.

Just because we lack proof of the non- existence doesn't mean the opposite is automatically true. As my little sister often says to me "Just because you can't see something, doesnt mean it's not real." to which i retort, "But that doesn't mean that it IS real either!"

I admit that I would have to concede some kind of faith to definitively say that god does not exist. I would say that the idea is EXTREMELY unlikely (since we're speaking in specifics)

What exactly is the difference between the practical and scientific knowledge? (according to you)

Allow me to borrow a few words from Richard Dawkins, (paraphrased) I assume that when you say god that you mean the judeo christian god and not say any of these :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deities
You could have picked any of these gods, and lets see here,
Further information: Australian Aboriginal mythology

* Adnoartina - the lizard guard of Uluru
* Altjira - God of Dreams
* Anjea - Fertility goddess
* Bagadjimbiri - Two brothers and creator gods
* Baiame - God of rain
* Bamapana - A trickster god who causes discord
* Banaitja - A creator god
* Bobbi-Bobbi - Supernatural being who lived in the heavens in the Dreamtime
* Bunjil - The supreme god, represented as an eagle
* Daramulum - Son of Baiame
* Dilga - Goddess of fertility and growth
* Djanggawul - Three siblings, two female and one male, who created the landscape of Australia
* Eingana - Creator goddess
* Galeru - A rainbow snake who swallowed the Djanggawul
* Gnowee - A solar goddess
* Julana - A lecherous spirit who surprises women
* Julunggul - A rainbow snake goddess
* Karora - A creator god
* Kidili - Ancient moon-man
* Kunapipi - Mother goddess (patron deity of heroes)
* Mangar-kunjer-kunja - Lizard god who created humans
* Numakulla - Two sky gods who created all life on Earth
* Pundjel - Creator god
* Ulanji - Snake-ancestor of the Binbinga
* Wala
* Wawalag - Sisters who were daughters of Djanggawul
* Wuriupranili - A solar goddess
* Yurlungur - Mythological copper snake

Do you believe in these gods as well? Do you concede faith to them because their existence can't be disproven?

Give it up, if you were born and raised in Africa you'd be worshiping Jengu (water/river spirit). All I'm asking for is a re-evaluation of your opinions with what fits with the facts.

If your doctor came into the surgery room with all sorts of unproven ideas about how to operate on you, you'd understandably feel uncomfortable. AND THATS A GOOD THING!! The demand for solid evidence has given us clean water, a healthy abundant food supply, modern medicine, and brought an end to witch hunts! Well...Almost.
http://www.clarksvilleonline.com/2007/10/03/book-burning-fueling-flames-of-censorship/

More people that are willing to re-evaluate their opinions (something encouraged by a scientific approach) means less crazy ideas running rampant and more sensible honest people.

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
Oh, good, it seems we're more on the same page than i thought. If we lack proof of God's non-existence, then it seems to me quite wrong to limit the options for theists like myself are not limited to liar, ignoramus or (self-)deceived. So, may we now consider the option of faith? Faith being neither pretense, ignorance nor deception, but rather a sincere belief (possibly of varying degree) in that which is clearly unproven in any scientific sense and yet also admittedly impossible to disprove.

It seems to me that limiting what we "know" (in the practical sense, not the scientific sense) to that which can be scientifically proven is absurdly, paralyzingly impractical. We constantly live "by faith" in all sorts of little and big things. All humans regularly act as though "[we] know more about something than [we] possibly could". Why then, when it comes to the issue of theism, should my faith merit your derision? My theism didn't come from proof, and i'm not ever going to prove it. I believe one day God will force the matter, but i sure as hell can't do it for you. If you want to know what and why i believe about God and how that works in my life, i can talk about that.

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
The burden of proof lays in your hands not mine. Trying to disprove the existence of god would be like trying to disprove the existance of unicorns or dragons. We have stories about dragons and unicorns but maybe even those are bad analogies. Perhaps Bigfoot or Loch Ness would be better examples(since people actually do seem to believe said things are real) despite a lack of credible evidence.

Maybe you could answer a question for me and then i'll be able to help you.

Find something we can both agree isn't real, and then tell me how to disprove it's existence.

The burden of proof lays in your hands not mine. Trying to disprove the existence of god would be like trying to disprove the existance of unicorns or dragons. We have stories about dragons and unicorns but maybe even those are bad analogies. Perhaps Bigfoot or Loch Ness would be better examples(since people actually do seem to believe said things are real) despite a lack of credible evidence.

Maybe you could answer a question for me and then i'll be able to help you.

Find something we can both agree isn't real, and then tell me how to disprove it's existence.

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
No, i didn't think you meant to insult, nor was i insulted. It was only hypocrisy i saw in the words you chose, which really took all the sting out of the accusation. The more interesting thing out of it is that you find insincerity to be less negative than ignorance or being (self-)deceived. If so, then we ought to take great care in what we assume about each other, as we clearly have different mores.

As to your question, since it's unlikely anyone realizes they are (self-)deceived and yes, i'm quite sincere, i'll have to take ignorance. Of course, why being a theist makes me either a liar, fool or nutjob is something you'll have to explain to me. Exactly what am i so ignorant of in my theism? Is there proof that there's no God that i've not heard about? Or did i answer wrong? Is there proof of God's non-existence that i've convinced myself is false? Please don't be afraid to tell me so.

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
For the record, I chose the word pretending because it has less negative connotations. And though this may sound suprising, I'm not trying to be insulting.

But to use your words, as a theist, if you're not pretending which are you: ignorant? or self decieved?

For the record, I chose the word pretending because it has less negative connotations. And though this may sound suprising, I'm not trying to be insulting.

But to use your words, as a theist, if you're not pretending which are you: ignorant? or self decieved?

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
I'm pretending? Kinda bold and harsh assumption, man. It's one think to think i'm just ignorant or self-deceived, but it's quite another to accuse me of insincerity. So back at you, are you pretending to know that much about me that you can say that? Or what?

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
Just going through some old posts and thought i'd comment on this.

Even in context, the bible doesnt make any sense. I wish you, like a lot of other people in the world, would stop pretending that you know more about something than you possibly could.

Just going through some old posts and thought i'd comment on this.

Even in context, the bible doesnt make any sense. I wish you, like a lot of other people in the world, would stop pretending that you know more about something than you possibly could.

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
I'm a Christian who celebrates Advent. I worship Jesus in the Advent season by giving extra to those needier than i (most going to http://water.cc, but some also to feed Rwandan kids and some to a local single mother of 5 through the Something Wonderful program), by reading and meditating about Christ's coming to earth as a man, and by doing these things communally with my friends and family. I think those are very much the kind of ways God wants to be worshipped.

I also happen to be an American who celebrates christmas. I buy and decorate a tree, put lights on my house, and enjoy stories of Rudolph, Frosty, Santa, and Mr. Hanky the christmas poo. I do not do these things as worship to my God; i do them as fun family traditions that brighten up some of the darkest and coldest weeks of the year. God doesn't want us to worship him as pagans worshipped their gods, but that doesn't mean we can't do those same things for other reasons.

Meditate on Matthew 5 and Romans 13 for some better explanations of this than mine. Just please don't go around picking out de-contextualized Old Testament verses and thinking you know more about it, it's hard enough to listen to the Christians that do this. I don't need athiests doing it too, thanks.

http://adventconspiracy.org
http://rethinkingchristmas.com

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Actually, scratch that. You should be able to embed vimeo videos. I'd try it again with a different vimeo video, and if you're still having the same issue, I'd contact Admin.

nadabu, once you become a Gold Star (http://www.videosift.com/starpower) or higher, you can post Flash video embeds from any source. VideoSift has a limited number of video sources they allow for members under gold star. Though, to be honest, I thought vimeo would be allowed whether you are a gold star or not.

Good luck!

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
how did you manage to post a Vimeo clip? i keep getting "invalid embed code"

Sure thing. Actually, I'd never heard of the guy until a few months ago while searching for Keller Williams vids. I saw that Keaggy clip and put it in my folder to "sift at a later date." Heh - that'll teach me to wait. Glad to see it made it this time.

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
thanks, jonny! it's a beauty, glad to know i'm not the only fan.

hahah yeah I'm kinda obsessed with them.

Heh. Already submitted it, thanks!

It's at this link. Why don't you try submitting it I'll vote for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOmL8SZxfyU

In reply to this comment by nadabu:
i dig mxpx. anyone got the vid for chick magnet?