Right, you are some geek sitting up in your one bedroomed appartment thinking of ways to get kicks out of life. Now u have captured my best mate and i wont stop until FSM is expossed as the shabby, bare walled, well conducted piece of rubbish that it is.
I mean a flying spaghetti monster? i think you need to see a pyshologist mate. you have serious problems.
by the way, have you stopped to consider the effects your little game will cause?
i think you have just split up me and my friend. oh yeh i wanna say thanks, thanks for ruining my life.
-rebecca
A catholic wedding is the same as a catholic funeral, except at the wedding there are usulaly two people kneeling and the funeral there is usually one person lying down.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
what the FUCK is a psyshologist?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
He’s got a book, yo. That’s good enough for me.
If your friend and you split up because of the FSM, then you really are a bigot-pseudo-christian… with no sense of humor or irony.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
a moment of drama presented by jesus christ (a conversation between Rebecca and friend)
.
“I can’t talk to you anymore, just get out of my life.”
.
“what’s the matter rebecca, i just want to hang out. what’s your problem.”
.
“i can no longer deal with you and your pagan god.”
.
“what pagan god, what the fuck are you talking about.”
.
“don’t give me this mister i worship the flying spaghetti monster.”
.
“wft, you’re mad at me because of that?”
.
“mad, are kidding me, I’M PISSED OFF. there’s only one true god, and that is jesus.”
.
“Dude, just don’t talk to me ok. you’re getting pissed off at me because of a satire site. i can’t even call you my friend.”
.
“don’t come crying to me when you defy god on judgement day”
.
“dude, fuck you, i can’t take anymore of your melodramatic bible bullshit. i can’t put up with this shit anymore, go get a fucking life.”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is not hate mail: (fyi people who are angry about this and feel the need to write about how stupid this site is, I honestly think that makes you the stupid one, seeing as you’re getting all pissed off about a flying ball of pasta)
Before people bash me I am Catholic and go to church every Sunday.-People are so threatened by others with differing view points that they even feel threatened by the ridiculous Spaghetti Monster. Science is theories that can either be proved or disproved by hard evidence and supporting facts, these theories are added to and changing at all times. Evolution is a part of science, it has and continues to be backed up with facts and artifacts giving it validity it has also been tested and is a supported respected hypothesis. Intelligent Design is not a science, it can neither be proved nor disproved that God is real. I’d be glad to learn about Intelligent Design, but not in my science class. So if the unfortunate day comes that as a student in my biology classes I am supposed to learn about Intelligent Design as a scienctific theory then I’d better be learning about the Spaghetti Monster too, since neither has yet to be proved or disproved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@ Moochie
First of all, I would like for you to pin point the moment in history when I infiltrated the government, started a war, or ended a life.
Second of all, I AM aware that there are many worldly views, since I’ve done my research on a great number of them, to make sure that what I believe stands the best against cold-hard facts.
Third of all, do not acuse me of blindly following it, because I can asure you I do not blindly follow anything.
Fourth of all, I do not hate. Hate is a futile waste of energy. People who hate waste energy that could be put to so much more productive use. (back to Rebbecca for a sec: Instead of using your energy to hate your friend, and attack these people with backless acusations, take a class and get certified in CPR, maybe you’ll save a life, instead of writing letters that subtract from the sum of human knowledge.)
And to everyone in general, on a much lighter note (no more deffensive arguements). Since there isn’t really a book on Atheism, I’m much less educated as to the beliefs of those who are. Of course Atheism is actually defined as the lack of belief, I think it is more of a technicallity. Because you have to have some oppinion as to what happens when you die, even if it’s that you just blink out of existance.
What happens when you die? do you suddenly lose all awareness, and just are no more? if so, why are we aware of ourselves now? How can we percieve the world in such a way, if we are just another species struggling to survive, until we can no longer? What’s at the end of the universe, and why is it expanding? Scientific theories, and facts prove that the gravitational pull of stars should be contracting the universe by pulling closer to one another. However, the universe is expanding. Scientist openly admit that there is some unknown force that they cannot explain pulling the stars apart. And since it has been proven that the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into? a larger universe? if you breached the edge of the universe, what would happen? would you suddenly appear on the polar opposite end like on the classic game Asteroids? would you be in another universe? in heaven? or would the wall act as a massive black hole and cause complete and instant destruction?
Science is amazing. I probably should’ve gone into a philosophy major, rather than Music Composition :) but I love what I do. Science is awesome just as a hobby.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
p.s. Kate I like your comment, and agree that no religion is a scientific fact or theory. It belongs in a philosophy class, not a biology class. Evolution, is a scientific theory (it has not been declared a fact to my knowledge). And though I do not believe the theory as a whole, I do agree with the idea that as time goes on animals adapt through evolution among many generations. I don’t think we came from single cells, but we certainly have come a long way since the people whose remains have been found as the earliest people to our knowledge.
If they’re going to start teaching religion in science classes, then they better have some sort of research that’s been done to attempt to back it up as a theory. Because that’s what makes something a scientific theory…research. scientific research, not reading a really old book. (unless of couse said book as photographs in it, but I’m thinking Kodak wasn’t around back then…)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hey guys, I wouldn’t get to mad at Rebecca, it’s quite possible that she was just really upset at the time she wrote this. Mabye she doesn’t want to blame her friend, so she blames us for stealing her. On the other hand, Rebecca- please do not allow this to stand in the way of friendship. My friends and I get along great, and most of them are believers of some sort.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello Cindy. Thanks for your response to my comments. I should have taken more care to differentiate between comments to you personally, and barbs aimed at your religion in general. My apologies for that.
-
“I would like for you to pin point the moment in history when I infiltrated the government, started a war, or ended a life.”
-
If I might be so bold as to substitute the second ‘I’ with the term ‘religious zealots’, then perhaps my point becomes clearer. You certainly seem to be a charming, reasonable person, but you’re part of an organisation that is doing real damage, now, in the world you share with billions of others. The people doing the damage use the same texts for ‘guidance’ as you do. I would argue that they adhere more closely to the scriptures than you do, because they don’t just select the nice cuddly parts to inform their morality, but take every word literally. And they act on it, to the detriment of the majority.
-
“I AM aware that there are many worldly views”
-
Yes .. I certainly didn’t mean to imply otherwise .. apologies if I was unclear.
-
“I’ve done my research on a great number of them, to make sure that what I believe stands the best against cold-hard facts.”
-
Thank you. I was feeling a bit wretched about giving you a hard time, but this sentence rather graphically illustrates the yawning gulf between those with a religious belief, and those without. I know my brothers in pasta hate long, rambling discourses, so I’ll keep it brief.
Basically, comparing and contrasting various religious texts, in order to confirm yours is the ‘best’ one, is intellectually dubious. Not the ‘research’ part .. that’s honest and shows intellectual curiosity. But it’s the rationale that’s twisted. You’re looking for “cold-hard facts”, but you only have three .. what’s physically written down in the texts you study, that a man called Jesus probably lived about two thousand years ago, and that many people place varying interpretations on the assorted texts. That’s ALL you have in the facts department.
Now, you may argue that what you’re actually trying to do is find the religious text that offers the best correlation between itself and the world as you perceive it .. which makes the most sense? .. which seems the most ‘true’? If so, then you’ve found the Bible is that text. But here’s the problem .. a lot of the Bible is de-humanising, self-contradictory, and patently absurd. Chosing such a text, warts and all, as the best of the bunch only begins to make sense if the god it describes actually exists. This is a being that believers variously describe as being eternal, everywhere, all powerful, invisible, three beings in one being, outside of space and time, unknowable to ‘Man’, yet quite happy to help little Johnny pass his exams next Tuesday. A being that created a perfect world, and then spent 6000 years smashing it up. A being that was happy to turn a blind eye to incest, murder, infanticide, slavery and rape, but would destroy entire populations because some of their number prefered ’shirt’ to ’skirt’.
I could go on, but you get the picture. The point is that your god doesn’t make any sort of logical sense .. he’s a mass of contradictions, according to the Bible. The rational explanation is that he doesn’t exist .. at least, not as advertised. But if the Bible is wrong, at least in part, and you’ve rejected all other holy texts, then what’s left? Atheism! The intellectual dishonesty is in cherry-picking the bits of the Bible you like, comparing the high-lights with other religions and non-religion and then claiming you’re only looking at ‘facts’.
-
“Third of all, do not acuse me of blindly following it, because I can asure you I do not blindly follow anything.”
-
Umm “Christianity is about READING the Word, and believing it to be true.” Sorry, but that sounds rather dogmatic to me, unless I’m mis-interpreting. If so, my apologies.
-
Fourth of all, I do not hate. Hate is a futile waste of energy. People who hate waste energy that could be put to so much more productive use.
-
Here we agree totally. I’m glad to have made your acquaintance and sincerely hope we part as potential friends. Good day to you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@ Jesus Christ, your post reminds me of why I like this site so much. Thank you for being you. RAmen
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You’re welcome, “rebecca,” if that is your real name.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’ve never lost a friend because of a difference in religious beliefs. I have, however, made lots of friends (christians too) through my open worship of the FSM.
.
My advice to you Rebecca: go to your local bookstore and pick up a copy of the Gospel of FSM (it’s available in hardcover now), and read His Noodly Word.
.
Realise the error of your judgements, and learn to judge not, lest ye be judged, then maybe your friend will take you a little more seriously.
.
St John the Blasphemist
Saint of Hardcovers
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Was your relationship with your friend so shallow that a discussion on religion separated you two? I know that religion is a social taboo, but for good friends to avoid the topic is absurd.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@moochie RAmen brother.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Moochie,
You present a very good debate. I totally respect the fact that your arguement is logical, while it is also not offensive. I would like to say along the lines of your presumtion that others follow the teaching of the Bible than I, some probably do. I try to live the way God has set, but like all human beings with the nature to do what we know to be wrong (lie, think “un-Godly” thoughts, etc.) I falter. The Bible teaches that no sin may enter the Kingdom of Heaven. So no one is worthy of such, being that will all comit some kind of sin at some point (even the pope…who by the way to any Catholics, he was a Nazi at one point in his life…). But… “God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son, Jesus Christ, to die, so that we might have eternal life” Jesus was both Divine and Human. He never sinned and therefore, when crucified, he was paying for the sins of the world, both past present and future. So people who condemn sinners, regardles of what they’ve done, they are not following the Bible, but rather contradict it.
And as for the Bible conterdicting itself, you didn’t give examples. So, to save you a bit of time, I will.
In the Old Testament God marks a lot of sins as punishable by death. Then in the New Testament, when Jesus comes acrossed a woman being stoned for adultry, as the Old says is to be done, he stops them and says “May he without sin, cast the first stone.” Why would Jesus, the Son of God, go against his own father’s teachings? teen rebelry? lol. No. Since Jesus knew he had come to pay the price for all sin, he knew this woman would no longer have to.
The are many rules and guidlines in Leviticus. Some say things like homosexuality are sins, others say eating shellfish is a sin… So since when do we get to pick and choose which ones we think should be followed? Well, it says that eating shellfish (and pigs and other things as well) is unclean and should not be done. these were dietary rules that were being set in place because back when the book was written, the didn’t have the same means of sanitation as we do today. The morality rules are still followed today, don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t be homosexual. Both were probably put there with the intent for them to be followed always, but they probably didn’t realize that in the future it’d be harder to get sick from eating such things. Of course, to be “on the safe side” one could follow these rules anyways, but none of it is going to send anyone to Hell since Jesus died for ALL sin, small and great. I think that’s the hardest contradiction for people to understand, because it’s harder to explain clearly.
I had a third contradiction, but I cant remember what it was. If you have any others I’d love to hear them, and hopefully I will be able to explain them.
:) as to the friends thing: definately. You seem to be an intelligent person, and have given one of the best opposition arguements of anyone I’ve crossed thus far. Total respect for that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I wrote that way too fast, and did not proof-read. I apologize greatly for the numerous gramatical errors. I know you all despise that. :)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
what kind of friend can’t deal with their friend’s religion? Sounds to me like your friend is better off without a snot like you
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[not the rebecca who is the source of such great contention in this thread]
@ Kate: Kudos to you!
@ Cindy: “However, I would like to say that Jesus, wether you see him as Jesus Christ, Jesus the Prophet, or just plain Jesus, is a Historical Figure, and ANY historian who knows anything would agree, Christian or otherwise. However, there is no true documentation of said Spaghetti Monster.”
Actually, there are several former Church officials, historians, atheists, and other assorted members of intelligent society who are of the opinion that Jesus Christ originally was a mythical figure, and that the more human qualities were attributed to him later on. For more information on this, you can visit http://www.thegodmovie.com for their film on the subject, “The God Who Wasn’t There.”
And as far as the Flying Spaghetti Monster is concerned, haven’t you read the accounts of the sightings of him? I myself once had a near encounter with the Noodly One while dressed in full wench regalia in my college’s parking lot one night.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Cindy .. don’t worry about spelling and grammar; we only tend to jump up and down on the “Ur a mooron” type hate-posters who claim intellectual superiority over us. The target is just too tempting.
-
You want contradictions in the Bible? Crikey .. how long have you got? One of my favourite sites for pointing out the many and various umm ‘anomolies’ in your holy text is the Skeptics Annotated Bible. There’s a handy list of some of the more absurd high-lights here: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/highlights.html with a link to the appropriate biblical passage in each case. They also link to religious sites which attempt an explanation or refutation of each point. Many of the ‘answer’ pages are hard to read (black text on dark green background), but if you hit Ctrl+A on such pages, the text is easier to read. Only go there if you are really, genuinely prepared to test your faith to the limit. I can appreciate how devestating such an experience would be for someone with an open mind and a religious conviction. My only advice would be .. don’t be afraid of the logical part of your brain. Listen to it. Good luck.
-
You wrote about “.. dietary rules that were being set in place because back when the book was written, the didn’t have the same means of sanitation as we do today” and “.. they probably didn’t realize that in the future it’d be harder to get sick from eating such things.”
-
The Bible as a Health & Safety cookbook for 2000 years ago? Actually, that’s an acute observation by yourself. Now, think it through. Dating the books of the OT defeats even the most scholarly theologian, but they must pre-date Jesus. The NT books, if memory serves, were written between 60 and 200 years after his death (with numerous amendments, additions, re-interpretations, re-translations and even removals, up to the present day). They were written by men, incorporating their own prejudices and interpretations, and were ‘fixed’ in a particular moment in history. These individuals were products of their societies, with all the associated social, political, religious and technological baggage of the day. How could it be otherwise?
>
Ok, so how can you sort the underlying ‘truths’ from the now irrelevant (though historically interesting) social commentary and dietary advice? Well, scholars have made a good living from this through the ages, declaring large parts of the text to be allegory, parable, mis-translation etc etc. What remains is ‘the actual word of god’ .. the ‘nice’ bits .. what you guys often refer to as the Good Book. The nasty bits (sacrificing, smiting, rape, incest etc etc), the internal contradictions (see the Skeptics site above), and the silly bits (god’s problem with iron chariots, the Flood, three person god etc etc) are left in the text, but are ignored or relegated to the status of foot-notes.
>
What I don’t understand is how an otherwise intelligent person could then refer to such a bowdlerized, sanitized collection of ancient writings as being the ultimate authority on life, death, morality, existence, truth, law and the proof that god exists. It doesn’t make sense.
>
For those who find this (sorry if this sounds unkind) wishy-washy ‘evidence’ unsatisfactory, there are two ways forward .. fundamentalism (every single word of the Bible is god-given and true), or atheism. As an atheist I, of course, consider fundamentalism to be an enormous step backwards, though I can appreciate the logical processes that would lead one to such a belief.
>
I guess what I’m asking, in my long-winded way, is how do you reconcile the totality of your holy text with the passages you have carefully picked to form your own moral compass? Why is it not ‘All or Nothing’?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Does Bobby have your former friend locked in a cage or something because that is what ‘Now u have captured my best mate’ implies.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here’s a short list of 30 contradictions in the Bible : http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/short.html . There are links on the top left of that page to more contradictions (about 380 in total). And that’s after 20 centuries of ‘tidying up’ the original texts!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Cindy
Dear Dear Cindy,
quote:”Both were probably put there with the intent for them to be followed always, but they probably didn’t realize that in the future it’d be harder to get sick from eating such things.”
Couldn’t God see the future and know that sanitation would be improved eventually? Surely he could have put a addendum or something along the lines of “Dietary requirements subject to change on the basis of future technological breakthroughs”.
Furthermore, according to the Christian theology of which you appear to be an adherent, these ‘dietary requirements’ were removed (along with the whole Mosaic Law) with the advent of the New Covenant – ie. around 30AD. However, we had to wait a futher 1900 years at least until sanitation/hygiene/technology made it possible to store meats such as pork in warmer climes. You will have to think again on that one.
In response to the rest of your post(s) firstly let me say I appreciate your efforts to remain reasonable: a good foundation for any discussion, as you know.
However, remember that reasoning must always follow in a linear fashion (very noodle like if you ask me). ie. There is a starting point and an ending point (which of course may lead to more starting points for NEW lines of reasoning). What we must avoid always is circular reasoning: where the conclusion of our reasoning process is also its basis.
e.g.
1. There is a God (Proposition).
2. He must have a purpose. (Assumption).
3. He must have spoken to us, to tell us his purpose. (Supposition based on 2).
…
N. God’s purpose is clearly presented in the bible (conclusion assumes the existence of God without demonstrating it).
Since we cannot ‘prove’ the existence of God (something you accept) it follows logically that we cannot say that the bible (or any other text) IS his word (we can’t prove that an unprovable thing has provably spoken). So no offence, but quoting scripture here is pointless.
You try to bridge the gap between the irrational fundamentalist position (the bible is completely and inerrantly true), and one that recognises the blatant problems by finding rational explanations which allow you to excuse those ‘difficulties’ in the text.
This is a predictable response to ‘cognitive dissonance’, experienced where the worldview (e.g. the bible) is not consonant with observable/experienceable reality. For some the reaction is to shut off and become aggressive when challenged (the typical fundamentalist reaction – who, incidently, would call your sort ‘liberals’ and ‘apostates’).
One thing the FSM helps to achieve is a break between the first two milestones of ID/YEC ‘logic’:
1. There is a God, the totality of creation testifies to that.
2. The genesis creation account is correct (all other ideas on the existence of life are incorrect) ‘God’ is the God of the Bible.
The Pastafarian argument is simply this: “Given the proposition that life arose by intelligent design, why is your intelligent designer any better than ours? Yours is a 3 in one godhead with a penchant for favouritism and smiting, ours is made of pasta and meatballs. Even ASSUMING the existence of God through the arguments of ID, it does not follow that said God is the Jehovah/Lord/Jesus/Holy Spirit of the Judeo-Christian system any more than it is a a Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I hope you can follow this (apols for the length).
RAmen
FSM: Welcome Him as your Lord and Savour.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I never said “my” God was better than yours. I apologize for making the assumption that your god was a mere illustration of the faults of mine. If anyone truly believes the world was created by pasta, by all means go ahead, but I was under the impression that this site wasn’t about an actual religion, but rather a satire of one. That would leave one to the assumption that since “my” god is actually believed by millions, it is probably more realistic. Of course, this is only an assumption since millions of people could believe that peanut butter is made from elephant toenails, and it doesn’t make it anymore true. And you have a good point with the dietary thing. It completely voids my arguement. I’m a little ashamed to have over-looked that. lol. Perhaps we are still held accountable to those rules, and ignorant fools who decided that shellfish was a pretty tasty dinner decided that they didn’t like that part of the Bible so they just excluded it. Don’t you hate when people do that? “This is the Holy Word, and I follow it to the T….well, I follow all the parts that I haven’t scratched out anyway.” lol. And then you’ve got Churches that add more in, like Josheph Smith when he created Mormonism, and then later in life converted to Muslim I believe. :). The world is full of hypocrites. Just look at Darwin, your founder of the Evolution Theory. On his death bed he claimed that it was all a hoax, simply an act of rebelion toward his father. Of course, that doesn’t make evolution less true, because Darwin may have just had a change of heart because of a fear of death. oh gosh… I’m rambling… hopefully you get my point. No belief is flawless, because I don’t think anyone has it completely right (yeah, not even me:p). Some may come close, but geeze, we’re just people, no one understands the meaning of life. Not until they die anyway. I guess that’s the only way to really know. :)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
oh, sorry moochie, I scrolled over your post, and will now respond as breifly as possible. I suppose in your terms I would be considered more of a Christian Fundamentalist. I do believe evry word in the Bible to be God-given and true. I don’t consider three God’s in one to be a “footnote”. However, being that I believe it all, when Jesus came and said he was the Ultimate Sacrifice, and tat we no longer had to sacrifice for our sins, or die for them, it fufilled a lot of the OT rules. It didn’t erase them. It’d be like someone asking me to pick up their pen on the floor, and someone else coming and doing it for me. It stilled had to be done, I just didn’t have to do it. Anyways, that is why we don’t sacrifice, and stone people anymore. I am planning on going to that site. I’m not afraid to test my beliefs, because if I am blatantly proven to be wrong, then why believe it? If there is proof that it is false, why wouldn’t I want to save myself the trouble of spending a life according to something that doesn’t exist? lol. thanx for the link.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m sorry, Cindy. I thought you were further along the path of honest re-evaluation of your religion than you actually are. If you genuinely embrace open-minded and critical rationalism, then you have a rocky ride ahead. Many have been in your position. Sadly, the vast majority find questioning their faith is too uncomfortable, and they slip back into whatever snug little theological nest they’ve constructed. Any subsequent attempts to prompt them into ‘doubting’ results in the all-too-common reaction of hands over the ears and a steady La-la-la-la-go-away-la-la. I really, really hope, having opened your heart to us, that this debasing, intellectual sclerosis is not your fate.
>
Your response to SpaghettiSawUs is, I’m afraid to say, rather poorly made. You’ve missed the point of his/her post, and then compounded the error by repeating one of the classic religious hoaxes (Darwin’s death-bed conversion). Sorry, but even Young Earth Creationists are embarrassed that this lie still surfaces from time to time. A detailed consideration, by fundamentalist scholars, is here:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i1/darwin_recant.asp . Whoever told you about Darwin probably also suggested that Einstein was strongly religious and that Hitler was an atheist. Probably best to avoid these, as they’re not true.
>
I’m afraid I will never be able to get my head around the idea of a triple god, who kills part of himself, but only temporarily, and that this somehow makes future human sins ok. No point beating around the bush .. if you can believe that kind of twisted nonsense, and not blush with embarrassment, then there’s little hope.
>
Anyway, I hope you keep writing. I urge you to read more around these subjects and look forward to our next encounter.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Actually, having mentioned Darwin, Einstein and Hitler, here’s a list of arguments that Young Earth Creationists suggest believers should avoid using when attempting to prove god’s existence: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp
>
Sorry if this bursts any bubbles. However, if you spend any time on the Answers in Genesis site, you’ll learn some new arguments. If you have any scientific learning in your background, some of their ideas will appeal to you. Feel free to bring any such ideas to the table. Hopefully we’ll be able to offer alternative explanations, based on real science. This won’t be the same as a gentle discussion with your friends .. only start down this course if you know you’re robust enough to deal with the implications.
>
ps. ALL mentions of FSM, even if apparently earnest, are made with tongue in cheek. The idea behind FSM is serious enough, though. Go back over SpaghettiSawUs’ post with that in mind .. look at his/her use of language .. you’ll get it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
-Right, you are some geek sitting up in your one bedroomed appartment thinking of ways to get kicks out of life. Now u have captured my best mate and i wont stop until FSM is expossed as the shabby, bare walled, well conducted piece of rubbish that it is.
Ouch? Luckily FSM’ism isn’t based around indoctrinating people, they join it of their own free will, if anything your friend escaped you :P Besides it’s a free country… someone can believe whatever they want.
-I mean a flying spaghetti monster? i think you need to see a pyshologist mate. you have serious problems.
Why are you addressing only one person when you’re trying to insult thousands..? :P maybe you should actually read about FSM’ism.
by the way, have you stopped to consider the effects your little game will cause?
Jihad between those of the linguini and the ramen..? Wait no FSM’ism doesn’t breed fanaticism =)
i think you have just split up me and my friend. oh yeh i wanna say thanks, thanks for ruining my life.
Shouldn’t you be talking to your friend, giving up your ideological fascist stance and letting him/her believe whatever they want? If anything you split you and your friend up. Unfortunately I can’t go find the author of the bible and blame the crusades on him =P Maybe you already know this which is why you’re just trying to lay blame on something rather than trying to get back with your friend. Facing reality is scary eh.
-jeff
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“you’re a complete idiot”
.
.
Why is it you can’t find any partial idiots?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ahoy SCJ,
.
Maybe “partial idiot” is a misnomer.
Perhaps “Incomplete Idiot” or better yet,
“Idiot in Training” should be the accepted term.
.
Danke…. and RAmen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s nice to see people talking intelectually about the Bible, instead of just reading it t each other. One of my friends’ (don’t get mad at me, I didn’t say this) favorite fantasy adventure books is the Bible. I believe that, like all religion, science, etc., it has truth and theory in it. I do not deny that a man named Jesus lived. I do not deny he was trusted and loved by many people. I do, however, question (not deny) that he was a Miracle person, that he was desended of God, and so forth etcetera.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Could perhaps Raz or someone else say why they believe God decided to go in for this creation thing in the first place?
As a perfect being or whatever, he/she could not possibly have any needs, and must surely not require or want anything else. Why go to all the trouble of designing a great big universe?
And to serve what purpose?
Interested to have your ideas.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
my friend told me the other day that he has proof against god and my other friend told him that is impossible… the two of them are 15 years of age…and handled this better than you and your friend… the first one told him his proof and the other one denied it and said but did not fuss or scream about it and when he rejected the idea my “god believing” friend was not upset… you should grow up!
-Blake M. Freedman “Faithful Pastafarian”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
oh yea…i would also like to point out Raz’s quote “Unfortunately I can’t go find the author of the bible and blame the crusades on him” This would be very hard because an idealist would look for the man who wrote the bible arround the time frame from Christ’s death to about 50 C.E. but a person who knows better would know they would find them 300 years later in the years 300-350 C.E. Why would he wait so long to write this? May some of the stories been mixed up allong the way? And is it possible that the Egyptians (who worshiped Anubis, the dog guy) influenced this? Maybe when translating Egyptian they spelt Dog wrong…maybe somthing more like God… so you guys might acctually be worshoping a Dog… now does that make you insane…NO and neither does worshiping a flying spaghetti monster.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Aar! I be sayin’ this in yer landlubbin’ language, so read on.
wow, take a chill pill. I for one am not Pastafarian, although I’m standing up for you guys, and I’ve been thinking about it, so it’s a possibility that I will become Pastafarian.
Anyways, this parody religion may appear to be rubbish to you, but when you really think about it, it’s just as plausible and probable as Catholic, Christian, Jewish (and any other religion’s) beliefs. It’s not actually hurting anyone anyhow.
Besides, MOST of us need to see a psychologist, no matter who we are. We just don’t realize it. I know I should probably see one, and so should… hang on lemme count…. pretty much all of my friends, so maybe you should check your head too before you point the finger, saying that people need to see a psychologist.
You also really should just let your friend believe whatever the @#!%# he/she wants to believe.(I’ve edited myself for content here.) Just cause you think that Pastafarianism is a load of rubbish doesn’t mean you have to have a fit and lose a friend over it. If you’re gonna let a friend go that easily, see my last paragraph.
As for a game… *blinks* Do you know what a game is? Seriously, look it up. A game is like… Monopoly. or Endless Online. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is obviously not a game to your friend, so maybe you should just smoke some weed or something to calm down. Seriously, whatever you need to do to calm down and not freak out about meaningless crap, do it. Now…. Then maybe your friend will be nice to you again. And you ruined your own life by flipping out by the way.
Oh yeah. that God? Pasta? What has more letters? guy makes a very good point. Worshiping spaghetti does not make you insane, flipping about the TINY little things in life(beliefs for example) does.
A word of advice to others who send in hate mail… your name goes up on the site. You will be hated afterwards.
So anyways, rebecca, have fun with the calmingdownness. And remember, put on some soothing music. *smiles*
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Rodger the cabin boy may be on to something. Perhaps Rebecca’s friend is a midget and WAS locked up in a cage! And Rebecca, misunderstanding Bobby’s assertion that he does NOT approve of such treatment, blamed Bobby! Just one more of life’s little misunderstandings.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Midgets in cages… oh crap!
.
Got to go! Forgot to do something!
.
OEJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A-HA! So it wasn’t Bobby. OEJ, how could you? was it a kinky thing or what? I won’t tell,…I promise.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
mate?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
After reading Rebecca’s message I thought I would try and bedroom my apartment. It turned out to be a lot more difficult than I expected. I came home after acquiring various supplies from the shops and try as I did, I just couldn’t bedroom my apartment.
Does anyone have any advice on how my apartment can be “bedroomed”?
“I mean a flying spaghetti monster?”
Rebecca, I think it’s a little unfair to ask us if you mean a flying spaghetti monster.
DO you mean a flying spaghetti monster? I don’t know, unfortunately I can’t help you with that question, but maybe someone else can, a psyhologist perhaps?
Well, I’m sure your belief system is a well educated guess like your spelling and you don’t discriminate against others like you discriminate against capital letters and punctuation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Penne
“A-HA! So it wasn’t Bobby. OEJ, how could you? was it a kinky thing or what?……”
Penne, I too was intrigued by OEJ’s post. Please explain OEJ????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cari’s a midget. That’s why she never weighs-in on these discussions; Bobby keeps the keyboard too high for her to reach.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello again Cindy,
Please re-read my post a few times… you got the first point but seemed to get a bit lost on the way down.
I’m not comparing our Gods, I’m saying that given the argument that we are created, it does not follow that the creator is the god of the Bible any more than it could be the FSM.
Importantly, accepting that it is not possible to prove the existence of god as you do, I cannot see how you then believe that the bible is his word. How could it be? How can an unprovable have provenly spoken? Belief in god and the bible isn’t just a one-stop reasoning process, it is a series of assumptions and presumptions which are essentially circular. You live your life according to the precepts of a book which you accept as the word of a creator that cannot be proven to exist.
For the benefit of clarity, I am a He, a one-time fundamentalist young earth creationist believer, I have met Ken Ham and I’ve studied theology. The road out of belief was a very difficult one but thankfully my reasoning abilities dragged me kicking and screaming into rationalism. My greatest observation however is this:
When one believes, the concept of a godless world and a purposeless life is scary. When one lets go of irrational belief life finds a real purpose and humanity takes on a totally different hue. The world makes so much more sense when we take the guy on a cloud out of it.
If you really would like to get into discussion join the forums and private message me, I’m only too glad to discuss things with anyone.
Good luck and best wishes.
SpaghettiSawUs
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cindy,
Just a few things to help your reasoning process…
quote:
“Perhaps we are still held accountable to those rules”
No, christian doctrine is that the the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant (Read Acts ch15 and Romans, or ask your Pastor/Priest/Vicar). A Christian is not required to follow the Law of Moses (i.e. no circumcision).
quote:
“and ignorant fools who decided that shellfish was a pretty tasty dinner decided that they didn’t like that part of the Bible so they just excluded it.”
Valid alternative: it was some ‘wisdom’, that fitted the worldview of the time and offered some protection from disease, but has now been superceded by new information and wasn’t actually direct from the all-knowing creator after all. Besides, liking shellfish doesn’t make you ignorant… a good moules marniere takes alot of knowledge/practice ;o)
quote:
“No belief is flawless…”
Such a small statement, such a big discussion to come:
If something is believed without any empirical evidence to back up it then that (act of) belief is completly flawed.
We need to qualify the word ‘belief’.
Consider: I *believe* in gravity (I can see that it occurs). I don’t *believe* in theories of gravity because belief is the wrong word: I accept the validity of the arguments in that the predictions of the theories are testable in observable experiments… but since I can’t *see* gravity I can’t *prove* that it exists.
So, if you were to ask me: “Do you believe in gravity” I would have to answer “Yes of course”, but if you asked me “Do you believe in string theory” I would answer “What a preposterous question! Nobody ‘believes’ in string theory”.
Belief, in the religious sense, is about accepting something without knowing whether it is demonstrably ‘true’ or not.
When Isaac Newton first said “Hey look, things are attracted to one another by some invisible force which I’ll call gravity. Here’s some experiments and some data, see for yourself”, we looked into it and said “This appears to be correct”. The result isn’t a new belief-system (we didn’t expect to survive falling from great heights before we knew about gravity did we?) Instead what we have is a ‘model’ that *works* to explain a phenomenon we can’t see. We may ‘believe’ in the phenomenon but we can only ‘trust’ the model at best. We have plenty of ideas what gravity is, and so far they are holding up, but belief (in any religious sense) is alien to the search for truth about gravity: all anyone can say is “I believe that the theory X model of gravity is correct, until proven otherwise”.
Can you see where this is going?
Ask yourself: “Do I believe in God because a) I arrived at it throught logical conjecture, experiment and analysis of empirical data, or b) because I was taught about it as a child, by people I trusted.” If you answer A, your God Theory may have merit, submit it for peer review. If B, your belief is completely flawed.
So let’s turn your statement on its head: All belief is flawed. It says the same thing but more accurately. Now the question I have to ask you is: are you comfortable using your mental capacity on something that is inherently flawed?
quote:
“…no one understands the meaning of life.”
Honestly, when you let go of the God concept, the meaning of life is instantly apparent, I swear it.
My invite to further discussion is always open, this thread is not really the appropriate place to go deeper.
Best Wishes
RAmen
@mod: sorry for length and references to dogma, hope my closing comments spare me a plank walk…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
yo yo yo
foshizel bizel
can i join your cult
i wana be saved
even tho i once had a girl in my bed and a horce
thats what she said
oh…u got skooled foshizzile
money cheese
do have any tost whith chez
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
that was wierd
I wonder if we should perhaps ban the usage of the word “foshizel”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
awww…poor Rebecca. =)…what, no1 else feels sorry for her? She just lost her best friend. I think we should show her the love of FSM and not criticize her horrible spelling, or poor adjectives, and her lack of understanding of sentence structure and just show her some love. WWFSMD
RAmen.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@One Eyed Jack Dec 2nd, 2006 at 11:22 pm
Midgets in cages… oh crap!
Got to go! Forgot to do something!
OEJ
–
??? OEJ ???
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wow, i miss a couple of months and i spend days catching up…
I suppose i shouldn’t be surprised but i just read a post in this thread “…i actually beleive every word in the bible…” what? literally? not only is that bizarre – it’s messed up. Does that include the bit when the Angel appears to Lot to warm him sodom is going to be destroted? the locals gather and demand he sends the angel out as they want to sodomize it – so to defend it he sends out his virgin daughters to be gang raped by the mob (not sure why god doesn’t stop it – perhaps he likes to watch?) and when he and his family run from the destruction God kills his wife for what – looking at the show? that seems fair!
it even goes further when he and his daughters hide out – they get him drunk and sleep with him in turns!! very pious. and you want to say you believe this. man i laughed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m nowhere near up to speed either, Spider. Does anyone have the faintest fucking idea as to what the flying fucking fuck of a fucking thing a fucking “pyshologist” is meant to be? For fuck’s fucking sake!
.
Not only are these hate posters complete retards/assholes/delusional fuckwads, they’re destroying the fucking language too!
.
Bastards!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think a pyshologist is a cross between a psychologist and an alcoholic. The shrink that drinks too many martinis^_^
Like or Dislike:
0 
0