Stream Your Event | Partners | Speakers CART ITEMS: - | CHECKOUT

Rabbi David Wolpe on Why Faith Matters

Watch Full Video | previews

Sixth and I Historic Synagogue

Info
Bio
Chapters
Preview
Download
Zoom In

David Wolpe Separates Religion from Violence

05 min 23 sec

Add to Profile

Rabbi David Wolpe counters the argument that religion makes people violent against others by claiming the world was a much more savage and violent place before organized religion came on the scene.

He asserts that human nature is to be tribal and exclusionary and that God is the only universal concept that exists to unify people.
Wolpe: New Atheists Hold Religious Believers in Contempt

04 min 59 sec

Add to Profile

Rabbi David Wolpe percieves the arguments against religion from atheists like Christopher Hitchens as mockery, saying they hold believers in contempt. He cites harsh criticism against Sarah Palin's religious beliefs as an example.
David Wolpe Addresses Violence in Islam

03 min 11 sec

Add to Profile

In discussing a supposed connection between violence and religion, Rabbi David Wolpe says that while Islam has some violent elements in its scripture, it shares that trait with all religions. He points out that large Muslim nations like Indonesia are neither radical or violent.
Watch Full Program

01 hr 11 min 00 sec

Add to Profile

There are 15 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.

Previous FORAtv comments:

Page 2 of 2

coldspringhead

Posted: 11.24.08, 05:07 PM

More of the same from Wolpe...

By his own story, can I assume that Wolpe never answered the original question - "why do they hate us?". A simple and fair answer would be because many religious people claim to know things that they simply do not know, at all. They make claims of special knowledge and then try to thrust it upon the rest of us. As for Roberts in particular, I can see many reasons why a rational person would have nothing but bitter and acrid loathing for such a huckster. A huckster who claims, among other equally ridiculous/religious things, to have raised a child from the dead, to have had a conversation with a 900 foot Jesus, and to have foreseen the "end of days". All the while bilking the ignorant, the elderly, and the generally hopeless out of what little material possessions they have, as well as their common sense. I saw the Wolpe Harris debate. Wolpe whines incessantly about the "intangible". Obviously, because it's intangible, he can't define it for us, so we have no idea of what he's talking about. The only conclusive statement that I can glean from his side of the debate is that there is something else out there, other than what we can measure. But then he turns right around and makes claims about what this unmeasurable thing actually is, what it wants from us, and how we should live our lives to gain favor with it. He claims to know it's thoughts, and that he is qualified to "relay" them to you and I. Wolpe and Roberts may not be equally as evil, but they are cut from the same cloth. Both claim irrational believe as a virtue and, at best, puzzle over the scorn from those that simply cannot convince themselves of the seemingly impossible without a single shred of proof. Polar opposite to these men is Haldane who summed it up when he said that the universe is "queerer than we can suppose". Why can't religious people just leave it at that?

mrose

Posted: 11.20.08, 02:20 PM

I can't speak for others, but I do not hold believers in contempt because they believe in the supernatural. What I do find contemptible are actions such as denying life saving medical treatment to children in favor of prayer. People have every right to believe what they want so long as it doesn't interfere with our rights, doesn't cause harm to individuals, or enters into public law.

Bloodberrypie

Posted: 11.20.08, 12:09 AM

I think a lot of us (agnostics and atheists) do not hold believers in contempt simply because they "believe". It's more "believe what you want, but don't legislate with your faith which i don't share"

farber2

Posted: 10.18.08, 09:44 PM

what is it that they want us to believe, and why don't the various religions and denominations agree on what that is? and if they do agree on what we are supposed to believe, then why are there so many different religions?

drapper25

Posted: 10.12.08, 09:30 PM

Despite his best efforts to argue the case for religion I feel he does not offer enough to win that argument against atheism and the logic of scientific reasoning. Regardless of what he or anyone else might think about the personalities or argumentative style of the people he debates (Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens) they seem more than capable and up-to-the-task to debunk, repudiate, rationalize, and intelligently discuss and topic within the debate – and make more sense than Wolpe. Wolpe’s beliefs about religion and morality are handled quite well by Harris and Hitchens by the way. I urge you to find their debates and make up your own mind. Also check out Marc D. Hauser, PH.D. and his insight into the morality issue.

Page 2 of 2