ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Rabbi David Wolpe out in LA has written a book that it does. Does Faith Matter?
He's interviewed in a rollickingly good interview by Dennis Prager: Radio Show
Key insight: "Atheism, wrote the Preacher Harry Emerson Fosdick, is the theoretical formulation of a discouraged life. That is too often true. God must not exist because things have not gone as I expected them to go."
Who hasn't had a tough life?
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Key insight: "Atheism, wrote the Preacher Harry Emerson Fosdick, is the theoretical formulation of a discouraged life. That is too often true. God must not exist because things have not gone as I expected them to go."
Isn't this all backwards? I thought this is why people clinged to religion (aka "born again") rather than moved away from it.
It's worth noting that atheism toward the natural world -- interpreting "atheism" to mean functional disbelief in supernatural forces -- is the only means of honest inquiry.
That is to say, if I mean to ask where something came from, I must rule out that the answer is "God did it!" (or the same answer, substituting some other supernatural being.) Otherwise the journey of discovery would be a brief one indeed.
So one could easily phrase any theistic hypothesis -- in the scientific world -- as a crisis of confidence in our own curiosity and combined powers of reason.
This is why I am a firm believer in the border of the objective and the subjective as enormously important in one's own religious development. One cannot construct a house of cards, if one is intellectually honest, ceding whatever is currently known to science, and whatever is not known to God, the so often mentioned "God of the gaps."
As to the inner life -- the very existence of which I do not find sufficient explanation for anywhere -- that is another story. No explanation of the existence of the subjective has yet been drawn from the examination of the objective that remotely satisfies my curiosity yet.
But its not so much the inability of the objective to explain the origin of the subjective that is my point; rather, it is the greatly limited ability we each have of even positing the subjective to another subjective actor, never mind claiming for it a place in the objective.
^^^ If you shine a light through a bunch of differently shaped crystals, the light is going to be refracted and absorbed by each crystal depending on their individual composition. That doesn't change the nature or "truth" of the light itself though.
^^^ If you shine a light through a bunch of differently shaped crystals, the light is going to be refracted and absorbed by each crystal depending on their individual composition. That doesn't change the nature or "truth" of the light itself though.
Edit to add: Maaaaaaaaaaan.
And you are prepared to say that the photons, or the crystals, are aware of this, maaaaan?
And you are prepared to say that the photons, or the crystals, are aware of this, maaaaan?
I'm saying that if the crystals were self aware, then there own distorted (subjective) interpretation of the photons has no inherent merit. The photons do not change, just like whatever the universe/world/whatever information we take in subjectively doesn't change the reality of it.
So you're redefining reality as purely consisting on the objective reality outside yourself, and urge that others do likewise?
This has the disadvantage of disregarding 100% of your own experiential evidence to the effect that your subjective reality does, in fact, matter. Not only does it matter, it is the only empirically unassailable fact, the one requiring no leap of faith. Cogito ergo sum and all that.
The fact is that of course the subjective world of the billions of people on earth (and probably quite a few of the animals), matters. For any of these individuals it is the basic fact of their lives. The objective world can make those lives very short, of course. Hence the traditional lack of navel-gazing among prey animals in the presence of a predator.
That subjective existence is, however, one's subjective reality, so there is a gaping chasm between the objective and the entirety of reality, whether or not one is of a religious bent.