Pretty sure your using this theory to make fun of real religion

Published August 11th, 2008 by Bobby Henderson

Pretty sure your using this theory to make fun of real religion. but its really quite stupid and lame because firstly, Noone was created in the image of the FSM (wtf!) secondly you have seriously zero proof of any writings from ancient times. Thirdly you are probably some year six kid looking for attention over the internet cos in life, you’re too much of a idiot for anyone to pay attention to.
-BR



160 Responses to “Pretty sure your using this theory to make fun of real religion”

  1. Teh Spag-worshipper (she of the crappy name) says:

    What do you mean, no-one was created in the image of the FSM? Have you never come across a bowl of spaghetti and meatballs?

    Your logic is flawed, sir.

    And Bobby Henderson is not six years old, or he wouldn’t have been through college, now would he?

    Still, I shall think of you as I eat my spaghetti, and may His Noodly Appendage touch you.

    RAmen, Brother/Sister/Undecided BR.

    TS-W

  2. Nick says:

    MY FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER! Someone who actually understands the concept of sarcasm!

  3. Daryl says:

    “Pretty sure your using this theory to make fun of real religion.”

    My personal opinion is that this theory doesn’t need to make fun of real religion, since most religions make fun of themselves without even being aware of it. And this would be funny if it weren’t so sad that their proponents have been slaughtering innocent people in the name of their deity(s) for thousands of years.

  4. Bruno The Pig says:

    if god is invisible and never shows himself to anyone, how do we know we were created in his image hmmmmmmmmmm.
    Calling Bobby Henderson a six year old child, then saying he is looking for attention because he is an idiot. Yeah, thats what all six year old kids do.
    Also Teh Spag-Worshipper makes an extremely valid point

  5. Plumber Bob says:

    If the antiquity if the writing is the test of its authenticity, then the story of Noah, and therefore, all later (Biblical) writing is trumped by the Sumerian story of Ziusudra, copied in cuneiform in about the eighth century B.C.E.

    Therefore, your Bible is no longer authoritative.

  6. Wdabrock says:

    BR,

    At first, I thought that you were clever, but the rest of your missive shows your ignorance.

    There probably have been people made in His Noodly Image, but they looked so tasty they were probably sacrificed to some pagan version of the FSM early in human history. You do believe in cannibalism, don’t you?

    During my travels in college(Angkor Wat, Cambodia, China, Thailand) I saw many images that looked like Him, and I don’t mean JC. Not all ancient texts were written on paper, the Lintyl text bamboo slats of Sun Wu, The Dead Sea scrolls-written on hides. You know, just because you haven’t personally seen a object doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, or have you lost faith in your God already?

    Finally, if Bobby(and my fellow Pastafarians) are:”too much of a idiot(sic)for anyone to pay attention to.”, dare I ask, why in the fuck do YOU and idiots like you come here? For the saucy verbal abuse? The pesto charged confrontation? Next to the reply box is a image of our Holy Text, bravely declaring “An elaborate spoof on Intelligent Design”. You came here to insult us and while you were pecking away frantically, you didn’t see it?

    You sir, are definitely a troll!
    RAmen!

  7. JPM says:

    Yes, Praise the FSM. For HE’s a true-loving-and-comprenhsive god (in suchs times of blind belief in religion) and Bobby Henderson, Ph.D. is HIS only and one prophet.
    BTW: Do you know why GOD never got a Ph.D. Here are some reasons:
    1.He had only one major publication.
    2. It was in Hebrew.
    3. It had no references.
    4. It wasn’t published in a refereed journal.
    5. Some even doubt he wrote it by himself.
    6. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since then?
    7. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited.
    8. The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results.
    9. He never applied to the ethics board for permission to use human subjects.
    10. When one experiment went awry he tried to cover it by drowning his subjects.
    11. When subjects didn’t behave as predicted, he deleted them from the sample.
    12. He rarely came to class, just told students to read the book.
    13. Some say he had his son teach the class.
    14. He expelled his first two students for learning.
    15. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students failed his tests.
    16. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountain top.
    17. No record of working well with colleagues.

    RAmen,

  8. keepfoldingit says:

    “pretty sure” huh…

Leave a Reply