American Jewish University presents best-selling authors Sam Harris and Rabbi David Wolpe in a debate about the existence of God and the role of religion and faith in society. Sam Harris is a renowned atheist and author of The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation. Rabbi David Wolpe, of Sinai Temple, is the author of Teaching Your Children About God and Why Be Jewish. This debate is moderated by Los Angeles Times religion editor Steve Padilla.
On June 1, 2010, In Uncategorized, by admin
American Jewish University presents best-selling authors Sam Harris and Rabbi David Wolpe in a debate about the existence of God and the role of religion and faith in society. Sam Harris is a renowned atheist and author of The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation. Rabbi David Wolpe, of Sinai Temple, is [...]
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
@lanakila08 ** Wolpe actually is claiming removing religion [...] negative impacts…**
Not only that, but the questioner said the same thing, and that Wolpe had backed Sam into a corner a couple of times!? Just like some commenters here, that guy must have been watching a different debate
I wonder why Sam didn’t bring up the better health & fewer teen pregnancies, STDs, murders & drug addicts in atheist societies
I like Harris but Hitchens would rape this dirty jew as he needs to be raped. Hitch is of course half jew so he has enough flesh eating instincts to do the job.
Wolpe actually is claiming removing religion from a society has had negative impacts historically??? Right, I wonder if he knows that today, there is actually a direct correlation between levels of organic atheism and quality of living in countries. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Britain, Canada, etc. The US doesn’t come close to any of these countries.
@130adi you’ve got to be joking, Wolpe is nowhere near Sam Harris’ level. Whenever he realizes he’s getting in trouble, he simply gets loud and talks over Sam and really sounds arrogant. The fact that he actually suggests the problem with Nazism, Stalinism, North Korea, etc. is lack of organized religion, just shows how intellectually dishonest and bankrupt Wolpe is.
@LIVEETERNALLOVE : “Wolpe? is getting slaughtered.”
I didn’t think so from watching the entire debate up to this point. Wolpe is way more intelligent and gives brilliant answers. Harris has some interesting points, but they are not intellectually sophisticated or satisfying.
@Venue0309 Race, nationality, social status, economic status, etc. However all of those things will be a much harder sell in a diverse community. This is why the romans converted it’s country to christianity to keep their empire from falling apart from being ruled.
@ElasticGiraffe Religion is just the vehicle to do evil because it’s “God’s will”, in their belief; it’s justification. However, without religion, there will still be the same lunatics that want to destory the world, but their vehicle to do it wouldn’t be God says so, it will have to be something else–something that the masses can get behind.
@ElasticGiraffe Hate is amplified by religion and therefore making it very easy to wage wars with others… Don’t be ignorant to why Christains and Jews are hated by Muslims even today.
Good and bad are always personal preferences. The proliferation of religion is a testament to moral relativism. Morality will never collapse as long as human are able to define it to their liking.
A choice between a war for an invisible force that has never been supported by fact, or for the benefit of a countries economy or political position. In all cases, men, women and children will die, houses destroyed, injuries suffered. But in which case is the reason for this the best?
@ElasticGiraffe
I absolutely advocate that we abolish private property and government, more specifically opinion and money. but I don’t suggest we go to anarcho-communism. I invite you to have a look at the zeitgeist movement or the venus project to see what I mean
Also, why does Wolpe keep bringing up the the French Revolu. as evidence That athesim or a world w/o religion is bad?
The reason why ppl revolted agianst chruch is be/c it was fking corrupt and hoarding money while giving nothing to the ppl. that doesnt even count the crimes of the royalilty agianst it own ppl. what a fking load!
why doesnt harris bring up current athesistic societies that are actually
comparably doing much better w/o mindfuck of religion? Sweden, France, Japan
Denmark, Norway. their crime rate is waay down the intelligience of their kids in schools more than rivals ours. interviews have been done about ppl being fine w/o the burden of religion.
How do i know you aren’t a pedophile?
Why do people treat you as if you aren’t sexually attracted to children?
You believe things for a reason.
If there is no reason to believe in it, it can be dismissed.
There’s more evidence for you being a child rapist than god’s existence.
You exist,children exist… god not so much.
LOL Poseidon. It’s a dead religion.
Harris’ measure is of the ideal rather than any that exists or has existed in the real world.
@hymnofashes
I’m glad to say that you are right, that God does not exist because you did not describe the God of Abraham AT ALL. And besides, just because you or anyone cannot logically understand God does not mean he does not exist.
@munari1976 A god might exist, but the Abrahamic god CANNOT exist becuase he’s logically incoherent.
He exists outside of time but performs actions in time, responding and reacting, sometimes with surprise or anger to events he ultimately caused, despite being omnipotent. He is just but metes out infinite and disproportional punishment.
If such a God exists, all of our words mean nothing like what they think we mean. The concept has no content.
Wolpe’s a dickhead, he could’ve responded to the guy asking about the third defense of religion like he asked
Sam’s demure is amazing
And that I can accept too. I think I even agree that in general, it is strong to conclude something does not exist based on lack of proof rather than it does exist because of lack of proof. But, as I said many times before, faith in God comes down to faith. I have a lot of personal “proofs”, but they are not scientific.
As far as strict Atheism goes, asserting it is tricky. I mean, personally, I find that it is a stronger argument to say that something does not exist based on it’s lack of evidence to be stronger than to say that it must exist due to the lack of proof against it. Scientifically, the onus is on the “prover” not the “dis-prover” to assert something’s existence, yet one cannot logically conclude that something does not exist because we have yet to find it. I go with disbelief pending proof.
I think quite a few people are atheists because they don’t like religion, not necessarily because of the actual logic behind believing or not believing. I mean, consider “atheism” like when I say water -it’s really H20, which is really a collection of electrons, neutrons, and protons in a certain pattern, which are really quarks and etc etc – I just say water, you get the idea. There are technicalities, but I’m sure you see what I’m saying.
@SevenRiderAirForce
Finally! Someone that gives an honest response to the question! Thank you. You’re the first person I have ever asked that to that has admitted that. Even though I don’t agree with you, I can completely respect that stance. Everyone else that I have asked that to has responded with a definitive “God does not exist.”
In connection with this, I stated that STRICT atheism is as much a faith as theism. This too was denied. I would assume that you agree, with maybe a caveat or2
Yes, Youtube fails at sorting comments – it bugs me.
Anywho, you can’t say for sure that God doesn’t exist. The best you can be is agnostic, scientifically. Consider the word “atheism” to be functional shorthand for disbelief pending proof. Ex: We can’t disprove that leprechauns exist, let alone prove there is any reason to believe they do, so we function as if they weren’t there. If we find some, we change our minds.