Talking to god.

he could very pluasibly just say that he is an aethiest for the sake of the arguement and the conversation. It sounds much more convincing if someone is converted from a non-believer to a believer then if someone has their faith "reaffirmed"

 
Wow: to all you debating whether or not it actually took place are completely missing the point.

Some one said that it would be easy for someone to come up with that whole thing.... I beg to differ, it might seem easy enough because he did a really good job at making it understandable, however, to be able to create a sound argument for the meaning of life, the explanations to why we do what we do, even if it's a philosophical creation of his own is far from easy.

He gives explanations; he gives counter arguments and supplies satisfactory retorts. Everything works together to form the over arching theme, and he has worked in actual examples to explain things.

The explanations do not need to be true, it could be that none of what we know is actually how it is, but we'd rather have an idea of how something works and be wrong and not have any ideas at all. I think his piece provides a decent view of life, the universe, and god; even if it's not your thing, you can still say his idea is better than the old one, better than old religion.

I think it's safe to say that this piece is a think paper, not a guiding paper, the factuality of it is not as important as the readers ability to accept the what ifs he presents.

 
"If you've enjoyed this and, in particular if you're wondering why we didn't touch on the issue of "Life After Death", you might like to try my play"

clearly he made it up
 
yeah its just a philosopher making how he thinks a conversation with god would go and describing what he thinks god is
 
is everybody retarded? people suggesting this might be real...the kid writes plays for a living, it pretty much says at the end that its fake.
 
but thats the problem. its just a theory. and religion os something that you cant really have a theory on. you have to be sure.

"i think god is an elephant from new zealand." theres my theory. do you beleive it?
 
but he was never converted

he says at the beginning that he's still an atheist

if he wasn't an atheist, what would a christian or jew get out of disproving thier own religions?

he is a philosipher(sp?) and this is made to make you think, so stop focusing on if it's real or not and just look at what it's saying
 
The ironic thing though is that our species does indeed have a flaw, and that is religion and that very flaw, in the context of the article, will keep us from passing into phase 1. With new technologies, I am completely confident our species will end itself through chemical or nuclear means. If more people thought as freely as the author of the article, we still wouldn't have a chance, because the majority of people will still believe in invisible people and take trust in fables dictated in a "sacred" book that they call their own.
 
You guys are killing me, its almost certainly not "real" in the sense that this actual conversation took place on the subway, but the author does a very good job of explaining why that doesn't matter. And whoever said "why would an atheist say he met god?" you completely missed the point too. The type of god he is writing about is no dogmatic creation born of human weakness. The existence of the type of god the author imagines is one which a man of logic and science must necessarily believe is a distinct possibility.
 
Dude he said he wasnt sure if he had it all word for word and i may be wrong but didnt he take some notes, im not sure i read it yestarday.
 
Hey, i'ts nothing real, It's something made up for the fun of it.

Still, I love it and it shows up some incredibly interesting ideas. Read It whole and its definetly something to look up to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top