Home Home / Exchange about Faith and Feeling Emptin…

Correspondence

February-March 1976

Exchange about Faith and Feeling Emptiness (1976)

Faith

1. Correspondent C to R. Lamm

1. Correspondent C to R. Lamm (Feb. 2, 1976)

1. Correspondent C to R. Lamm (Feb. 2, 1976)

View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

Next Letter

RELATED CONTENT

Note

Does God Exist? - A Passing Thought (1992)

The question is illegitimate. It is illegitimate because it assumes that the burden of proof is upon the believer when, indeed, it upon the atheist. When the question is asked, the believer has every moral and intellectual right to shrug his shoulders and say, "Why not?," and then turn to the atheist to prove why not.This is so because the world is a given. It is the primal element which impinges upon our senses, and the sensory system is the primary way that we, as biological creatures, relate outside of ourselves. Now this would presume a Creator. I do not refer to the classical "proofs," because I grant the Kantian critique of the "proofs." I accept them, however, especially the teleological and the cosmological, as rational "support" for overwhelming intuitions. In the presence of such elemental existential givens, the burden of proof shifts to the skeptic.This was not so during the Middle Ages, from Aristotle on down, for so long as the theory of the Eternity of Matter prevailed. Then one could say that the un-createdness of the world is sufficiently established for us to overcome the teleological and cosmological "intuitions," and therefore only "proofs" will do to establish the theistic thesis.However, this is the age of the Big Bang. Any theory that asserts that, given the aeons of eternity, the Big Bang will statistically occur, would be today laughed off the stage of cosmo- logical discourse. The Bang so convincingly points to a Banger, that the burden of proof is clearly upon the atheists.Hence —"why not?"
Faith

Article

Issues of Faith (1967)

The fundamental concept that captures the whole essence of Judaism – the idea of God, the obligations of man to Him, the interdependence of human beings – in one word, is that of mitzvah, commandment. The noun, in its different forms, appears about 180 times in Scripture; in its various verbal forms, perhaps twice that number. This is, of course, only a minor indication of the vast significance of what is apparently so simple an idea. The term mitzvah implies the existence of a Metzaveh – One who commands. The divine Metzaveh must obviously be theistic, i.e., a personal God, not an impersonal deistic or pantheistic deity – only a personal God is sufficiently concerned with men to command them. Mitzvah additionally implies that man lives under obligation to the Metzaveh, and that his life must be regulated in accordance with His express will. Furthermore, the very existence of mitzvah tells us that the will of Metzaveh formulated in the mitzvah was made known to man – hence, some form of revelation had to take place. The derivation of mitzvah from Metzaveh rules out the identification of mitzvah with generalized virtue, which may be self-motivated, a utilitarian ethic, or merely a reflection of contemporary mores. Similarly, it is a distortion of the concept of mitzvah to define it as religious folkways or customs. Folkways may be charming, even very valuable, but they do not presuppose an origin external and transcendental to man – on the contrary, their source is the folk, not God. The Jewish tradition cherishes customs and folkways – at least it values most of them – but takes pains to distinguish between mitzvah and minhag, custom. Despite the prominence given to the latter, it does not supersede the former – at most, it helps guide us to a proper interpretation of the mitzvah.
Faith

Speech

Student Discussion on Belief in God (1969)

After the initial presentation, in response to several prepared questions, the session was thrown open to general discussion. I am flattered at the assumption behind your invitation that in twenty minutes I can cover Belief in the Unproven, Religion as a Crutch, the Existence of God, Why God Created the World, and God Concerned with Man and History. It speaks volumes, and also requires volumes. Obviously, I make no pretense at being able to answer all your questions, because I have no illusions about my ability to answer all of my ques- tions. If I may begin with a counselling point, I think that this is the first approach to take to students. Avoid the pretense that you have all the answers. In the attempt to struggle with questions, one of the main things to convey to them is a feeling that it is possible to have unresolved problems and to continue nevertheless with unscathed emunah and mitzvot maasiot -- even while you struggle with those prob- lems. What you in essence are doing is not giving him information as much as transmitting an attitude of confidence that you have a certain confidence and he can take the same confidence from you. If you have a good, warm relationship with the boy then this confidence that you have in your ultimate commitment, despite your problems, can be trans- mitted. It is not much different from a healthy attitude towards sex education. The physiological information can be given by anyone. (My personal feeling is that it should not be the parents who give anatorn!- cal information to their children.) But when it comes to everything -2- else, to the inculcation of attitude and personal orientation, the most that a parent can do to a child is say - look, this is an area b eyond your present experience. You simply have to have faith that it is a wonderful thing, it can be great; but it can also be dangerous. This sense of confidence can be transmitted. Notice that I am not using the word ”faith.” Faith is a more personal element. But wi…
Faith