Maybe you should spend a

Maybe you should spend a little less time mocking God and get a life. This isn’t science… Sorry if Christians were trying to bring peace and hope into this world. Go ahead and spead the rest of your life resisting/mocking your creater and when you die, you’ll find soul is stuck in eternity, without God. And if that doesn’t mean anything to you it sure means something to Satan. Why don’t you go watch the Passion of the Christ or the Exorcism of Emily Rose. Oh yeah, there’s a movie you would like coming out… The davinci code. Another mock of God… -john Quintiliani

26 Responses to “Maybe you should spend a”


Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

  1. 1 Werefox Alchemist Sep 30th, 2006 at 9:58 pm

    The Davinci Code does not mock God. It doesn’t mock anything. It is a work of FICTION, which talks about the holy grail, and makes some points about the bloody things that the early Christian church did. You may want to do some historical research on your religion; it’s a lot less peaceful than you may assume. Bigot bastard.

  2. 2 Mythos Sep 30th, 2006 at 11:20 pm

    “Sorry if Christians were trying to bring peace and hope into this world.”

    This has got the be the funniest and stupidest thing I have seen in a long time. Through out the history of the Judeo/Christian religions, EVERYWHERE they have spread they have brought with them chaos and death. In my opinion Judeism,Islam and Christianity are not religions they are nothing but a disease. The truly pathetic part about this disease is that some people actually want it because they are too blind or too stupid to look at its roots and to see it for what it is.The issue here is that many of us see it for what it is and do not want it nor do we want it and the lies associated with it shoved down our children’s throats. The public education system is NOT the place for religion to be taught. Whether you call it Creationism or ID it is the same thing a dressed up version of the Judeo/Christian creation myth.

  3. 3 Not Me Nov 28th, 2006 at 3:00 am

    The Exorcism of Emily Rose presents the viewer with a scientific and spiritual cause for Emily’s actions…
    Were you so blinded by your desire to believe that it was spiritual that you comepletely forgot that they spent half the movie convincing the viewer that it was a bout of schizophrenia?
    @ Mythos
    Thumbs up for the copy/pasted slap in the face of ignorance!

  4. 4 Jon E Nov 28th, 2006 at 3:27 am

    One of the best tools against this kind of nonsense has always been ridicule. The church has long tried to use it against anyone who was to tough for them to take in a fight. It’s only fair that they get it done back to them.

  5. 5 Fred Nov 28th, 2006 at 6:35 am

    @ Mythos
    Religion per se does as Mr. Quintiliani claims, if properly understood and interpreted. However, the people that would try and achieve this have historically been held back and even deposed of by those with sinister motives. Religious movements these days are usually a vehicle for the personal opinions of someone to try and adapt his chosen religious texts to his way of thinking, ususally rather extremist and intolerant.
    .
    It is people, not religion, that have caused the destruction and devastation of entire civilisations, but had it not been for religion similar people would have waged similarily devasting wars but for better, or at least less mendacious reasons, such as land, security or resources, which is the hidden agenda of most religious wars to date anyhow.
    .
    Religion was established sometimes to unify people, sometimes to reform other religious movements, sometimes to provide a way of recognising like minded people, and sometimes to further civilisation by giving the populace a common goal. In time, these causes have changed to manipulation of the trusting, a “valid” reason to destroy something that you might not agree with, a great way of getting lots of money very quickly, and, more often than not, a really really good way of boosting one’s ego/God complex.
    .
    Lastly, and I’m sorry for the annoyingly long post, religion should of course be taught in schools, or else we run the risk of raising a narrow minded and intolerant society. Religion is a theology, and should be taught as such, but when “shoved down…children’s throats” it ceases to be religion, thus children must be given the education and freedom to make a sensible and educated choice about what they want to believe.
    .
    In my humble opinion.

  6. 6 Homo narrans Nov 28th, 2006 at 6:51 am

    i’m happy for religion to be taught in schools…just not as implicit fact and certainly not as empirical science.
    .
    and while, yes, it is people who are ultimately responsable for their own atrocities, religion makes it awfully easy to justify said atrocities by dividing the human race into the ‘pure’ and the ’sinful’ or the ‘enlightened’ and the ‘ignorant’ or just plain ‘us’ and ‘them’. in many religious texts, it can be implied that those who do not share your worldview are not even human (hence why the bible was used to justify black slavery). i agree with what you say to an extent - but i add that if the devil really can quote scripture to further his ends, then he doesn’t have to try very hard at all.

  7. 7 Penne Nov 28th, 2006 at 7:01 am

    I think the devil has been quoting it for a very long time already. And as for the Passion, well, we all know about Mel now,don’t we?

  8. 8 Penne Nov 28th, 2006 at 7:03 am

    (pssssssst, usually from the oval office.-shhhhhhh)

  9. 9 Fred Nov 28th, 2006 at 7:22 am

    @Homo Narrans
    -i’m happy for religion to be taught in schools…just not as implicit fact and certainly not as empirical science.

    I’ll defend that to the death!

    -religion makes it awfully easy to justify said atrocities by dividing the human race into the ‘pure’ and the ’sinful’ or the ‘enlightened’ and the ‘ignorant’ or just plain ‘us’ and ‘them’

    It does and it doesn’t. Religious texts offer a moral guideline, but certainly Christianity has a get out clause there - that judgement is God’s alone, the whole first stone thing, meaning that those who do create those divisions, or who prey upon the misgivings of others, or even judge others for their mistakes or differences of opinion are not in fact following a religion, they are lying to your face, and to themselves.
    .
    You can quote anything you like from the Bible- like this “And the Lord said ‘I do not exist’ ” Those words are written in the Bible, but taken from different sections and rolled into a convenient sentence for my own benefit. As you point out, it’s just too easy. It’s a shame too. The number of guys who can be made an asshole by one man.
    .
    Pasta doesn’t judge you. It doesn’t even have opposable thumbs, making it hard to throw the first stone too. Pasta’s pretty shibby.

  10. 10 Penne Nov 28th, 2006 at 10:09 am

    -chapter 6 online

  11. 11 Penne Nov 28th, 2006 at 10:20 am

    What be this ’shibby’?

  12. 12 Fred Nov 28th, 2006 at 10:29 am

    Arrrr! Shibby be a curious word indeed. I believe it t’be an abbreveviation of “Shibshape”. Shibs are like ships, but for people who suffer from colds.
    .
    What be this chapter 6?
    .
    Avaunt! Tis time to sup from the beer volcano.

  13. 13 Penne Nov 28th, 2006 at 10:44 am

    Check out the “Science without religion is lame.” thread and read my story Fred. Hope you like it.

  14. 14 mopert Nov 28th, 2006 at 11:07 am

    Fred, thank you for your qualified comments! I enjoy your clear and informed opinions! That is exactly what I’m looking for on this site; Good-willed and patient answers from pastafarians to all these hate-mails (and concerned criticisms) from love-&-peace-spreading christians.
    What I’m not looking for is pretty well demonstrated by Mythos, in summary:
    christianity = stupid, chaos, death, disease, pathetic, blind, stupid.

    @ Mythos, is your comment beneficial for whatever you think is good in the world?

    And by the way, next time you use the word “we”, could you please either explicitly exclude me, or concretely specify who you mean?

    Thanks, Mopert

  15. 15 Gnocci Man Nov 28th, 2006 at 11:25 am

    most of us have never mocked our creator. being a devout pastafarian, I -know- that our creator is the great FSM.
    ficticious movies that are created by us humans hardly prove anything.
    we pastafarians are (in most cases) simply piratey, peace-loving people who believe in a thouroughly legit religion, and do not want to see science defaced, seeing as it is His big joke, not ours. as to the pastafarians who reply to hate mails with worse hate mails, please just ignore them.
    .
    .
    .
    ps: DaVinci was a cognitive genius. while the DaVinci code is known to be fiction (DaVinci didn’t even create the codex), it adresses major issues. fanaticism for, and against, religion. both extremes must be avoided.

  16. 16 Just Guess Nov 28th, 2006 at 11:37 am

    Dear Mr. Quintiliani,
    Why don’t you go watch Dogma. In my opinion, it is one of the better religious commentary film you will fine. It also has Jay & Silent Bob, instant classic.

  17. 17 Fred Nov 28th, 2006 at 6:13 pm

    @Penne
    Will do, just a little short on time!
    @Mopert
    Thank you, I am of course honoured by your kind comments, and wish you all the best!

  18. 18 Capn'EmilyRose'Skittle Jan 19th, 2007 at 5:13 pm

    My name is Emily Rose, and I went and saw that film.
    You have no idea how much ridicule the spiritual side got me at school. x__X;

    Anywayy. I’m getting off track.
    The primary objective of MODERN Christianity may well be to bring ‘peace and love’ to this world (which, might I add, is failing miserably, as is any other attempt at ‘peace and love’), but the objective of medieval Christianity was to use shock-tactics to force others to believe something that would keep them toeing the line. Christianity, in my opinion, still tries to hurl itself down our throats and force us into belief, but with more subtle actions. Of course, religion functions primarily on evangelism anyway, so this is to be expected.

    My personal beliefs state that a good act is not a good act unless it is performed without fear of a negative consequence i.e. Hell.

    And, just as a side note, the Da Vinci Code is a work of fiction - like most people here have already stated.

    RAmen, my pirate comrades. RAmen.

  19. 19 John Holmstrom Jan 19th, 2007 at 8:48 pm

    Well I may not be a pastafarian quite yet, but I think it’s time I converted. All this time I thought the FSM was making fun of intelligent design. I was absolutely convinced this was science too. But thankfully John Q up there has shown me the light. The FSM is not science and is obviously mocking God, so count me in. RAmen, let the mocking begin.

  20. 20 Heathen Jan 19th, 2007 at 9:52 pm

    Yo - John - just a minute there big guy - is not mocking God - is just as believable as any othe religion out there - even more so - we have charts and graphs. Plus if you have to believe in something on faith, then we have strippers and beer volcanoes and every Friday is a holiday. Come on now, lets show a little respect here.

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply

Connect with other Pastafarians

Propaganda Buttons

Add these buttons to your site:



Contribute

The Church of the FSM is looking for content. Details here

Support the Cause

The Church is funded entirely by your purchases of FSM merchandise. Thank you for your support.

Purchase the Gospel

An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is neither too elaborate nor too spoofy to succeed in nailing the fallacies of ID. It's even wackier than Jonathan Swift's suggestion that the Irish eat their children as a way to keep them from being a burden, and it may offend just as many people, but Henderson, described elsewhere as a 25-year-old "out-of-work physics major," puts satire to the same serious use that Swift did. Oh, yes, it is very funny. -- Scientific American

Misc.

Bobby's Personal Blog

Contact Bobby: Contact Me


Website monitor by Killerwebstats.com

 

Support the Arts:

Fine art taco photography



Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License. This means you're free to use the content but not sell it. More Details