Help! Gospel of Flying Spaghetti Monster

[xroadrunnerx]

Hey,

Just so you know, I whole heartedly believe everything in the apostles creed, and I walk by faith not by sight.

however recently I've been getting into apologetics, and one thing has troubled me - The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It ridicules Theism, and demonstrates the idea that there are an infinite amount of religions that can be created around "intelligent design, thus it must be false.

Now, all I'm looking for is a logical way to refute this idea, and i appreciate anyones input.

NB: before you read, go here http: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monsterism
to read the details (I cant post a direct link cos I don't have enough posts yet )

 

[FadingWhispers3]

It ridicules Theism and demonstrates the idea that there are an infinite amount of religions that can be created around "intelligent design, thus it must be false.

That is not true. The chief idea of the FSM is not to say that intelligent design must be false or to ridicule theism. The chief idea of the FSM is about equality. "Do unto others..."

If intelligent design is to have equal time with the theory of evolution, then equality demands that the FSM should also be taught about as an alternative. If someone wants to deny the teaching of FSM and yet wants the teaching of intelligent design, then hypocrisy is exposed. Why? Because then you are no longer seeking the teaching of an objective theory, but instead you have a specific deity in mind (else how could you complain?). The problem of this is obvious... if you do not want other cults and religions (ex. FSM) inserting their beliefs in a science classroom, then have the decency to do others the same favor.

The problem with trying to logically refute the FSM is that most, if not all, such arguments ALSO apply to theism since FSM is a form of theism (albeit, satire of theism).

Why is it that reaction to satire is all too often rejection? Satire is good for people if only they would humble themselves and listen to the message behind it rather than trying to dismiss it.

 

[xroadrunnerx]

Ah, thanks, it makes more sense now.

It's just that i've also heard it used to try and dismiss the idea of theism.

thats cool tho, - your post has given me a new look on it.

 

[Blackguard_]

It's just that i've also heard it used to try and dismiss the idea of theism.

I've never heard the FSM in the inteligent design debate, but have only seen it as a response to Theists sayinfg "You can't disporve God exists" by saying "Well, can you prove teh Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist?" Basically a snide way of reminding where the burden of proof belongs.

Now, all I'm looking for is a logical way to refute this idea, and i appreciate anyones input.

It can't be refuted, that's the point.

and demonstrates the idea that there are an infinite amount of religions that can be created around "intelligent design, thus it must be false

This isn't technically true. The point is that intelligent design is an unfalsifiable claim, wheras Sciece is a system of falsification of claims. In short, unfalsifiable claims belong to Philosophy, not Science, hence Intelligent Design has no place in Science class.

however recently I've been getting into apologetics, and one thing has troubled me - The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

I'd suggest you realize that faith and reason don't always support eachother(and to walk by faith and not sight requires this to be), the FSM and other "you can't prove religious claim X" objections is light skirmishing in the battle of Apologetics. You have to learn that or the heavy artillery will flatten you.

FSM is a form of theism (albeit, satire of theism).

Does this mean I can't syncretize it some and await a beer volcano in the Christian Heaven?

 

[Hydra009]

I've never heard the FSM in the inteligent design debate

You haven't? It's out and about in ID conversations quite a bit, and the official FSM site starts with an open letter asking FSM to be taught as an alternate version of ID should ID be taught as alternative to evolution in public schools.

the FSM and other "you can't prove religious claim X" objections is light skirmishing in the battle of Apologetics. You have to learn that or the heavy artillery will flatten you.

I've always regarded FSM as a rather lighthearted parody religion - rather than a heavy satirization of Christianity, it seems more or less a whacky, pirate and noodle-themed craziness all its own.

 

[FadingWhispers3]

I've always regarded FSM as a rather lighthearted parody religion - rather than a heavy satirization of Christianity, it seems more or less a whacky, pirate and noodle-themed craziness all its own.

It began as lighthearted parody... and then all the serious responses it got propelled it into satirization. Somtimes, opposing a point evidences it's truth.

 

[RealityCheck]

I actually ran across the FSM book in Barnes&Noble a few weeks ago.

It is absolutely hilarious, and as the other posters have said - it's a parody of theistic religion and a pretty damned good one at that.

 

[ReluctantProphet]

Now, all I'm looking for is a logical way to refute this idea, and i appreciate anyones input.

The only way that you could resolve the problem would be to provide logical evidence that Christianity is substantially different than FSM.

I don't see how you can do that without exposing exactly who God is and Christianity seems to be avoiding doing that for unknown reasons to me.

Expose who God actually is, and the entire issue is resolved and 100,000 atheists "come to Jesus" so I don't know what the hold up is.

It all seems a bit ridiculus to me.

 

[xroadrunnerx]

The only way that you could resolve the problem would be to provide logical evidence that Christianity is substantially different than FSM.

I don't see how you can do that without exposing exactly who God is and Christianity seems to be avoiding doing that for unknown reasons to me.

Expose who God actually is, and the entire issue is resolved and 100,000 atheists "come to Jesus" so I don't know what the hold up is.

It all seems a bit ridiculus to me.

That's a good point - but a good place to go would be the persecuted churches in china, where thousands of athiests are coming to Christ everyday.

now I could try with all my might to quote scripture, argue and expose God, but in the end it will be pointless. But when you hear the testimonies that I just heard this past week (at a camp), the sheer reality and intensity of it shines through and the identity of God is revealed.

I guess thats all I can say..

 

[steen]

That's a good point - but a good place to go would be the persecuted churches in china, where thousands of athiests are coming to Christ everyday.

now I could try with all my might to quote scripture, argue and expose God, but in the end it will be pointless. But when you hear the testimonies that I just heard this past week (at a camp), the sheer reality and intensity of it shines through and the identity of God is revealed.

I guess thats all I can say..

Yes, you can talk about Faith. You cannot talk about evidence or try to explain science by using the Bible.

 

[Ludwig van Beethoven]

One thing I see wrong with FSM is "Does the church of the FSM REALLY believe that it exists?"
I could sit here and make up religions all day and not believe a single one of them. Why give equal classroom time to a religion that no one really believes?

 

[Elioenai26]

One thing I see wrong with FSM is "Does the church of the FSM REALLY believe that it exists?"
I could sit here and make up religions all day and not believe a single one of them. Why give equal classroom time to a religion that no one really believes?

I agree with your point here. People can sit around all day and come up with satirical conjecture to muddy the waters a bit but they deliberately overlook the fact that their inventions are not even categorically similar to the Judeo-Christian worldview.

The history of the persecutions and sufferings that Christians over the millenia have willingly endured becasue of their faith is oftentimes willfully and deliberately overlooked.

I challenge one person to die for something they know to be false. It has oftentimes been claimed that Christians just made up some stuff about a Jewish guy they liked and decided to start spreading it around (for what reason I cant really understand), and then when things got tough, they decided to die for this lie. Seems brilliant to me! Right? No. It is nonsense.

Nonsense in the same way that someone who thinks evolution should be taught in school and not creationism or the Bible. FSM all boils down to a pathetic attempt to promote "equality" among views, when really it is saying: "If we cant have it our way, and teach only evolution, (how teaching that we evolved from primates and are nothing more than civilized animals is going to benefit anyone in this world is still unknown to me) then we should allow our children and young adults to be taught every form of nonsense the fallen human mind can fathom."

 

[Danyc]

It should be obvious to both of you that the actions and beliefs of the supposed adherents of a certain belief system are of absolutely zero consequence in regards to whether or not that belief system is objectively true.

This is such an obvious point that I feel patronizing even discussing it. However, so many people still use it as some sort of argument for their faith. If it is a coherent and strong argument for their faith, it must also be an equally cogent argument for thousands of other faiths. People die for their beliefs all the time. They have for thousands of years. And they have all been different. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs...

It proves absolutely nothing for other religions, as I'm sure you would agree. Until, that is, we get to Christianity. As Hitchens said, just go one god further, and you're nearly there.

It's progress of a kind.

 

[Elioenai26]

It should be obvious to both of you that the actions and beliefs of the supposed adherents of a certain belief system are of absolutely zero consequence in regards to whether or not that belief system is objectively true.

This is such an obvious point that I feel patronizing even discussing it. However, so many people still use it as some sort of argument for their faith. If it is a coherent and strong argument for their faith, it must also be an equally cogent argument for thousands of other faiths. People die for their beliefs all the time. They have for thousands of years. And they have all been different. Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs...

It proves absolutely nothing for other religions, as I'm sure you would agree. Until, that is, we get to Christianity. As Hitchens said, just go one god further, and you're nearly there.

It's progress of a kind.

You conveniently missed my point. I said that no one would willingly die for something the knew to be false. Every religion you listed contains adherents who believe their faith to be true. I doubt very seriously anyone would die for their faith if they knew it to be based on falsehood.

 

[Danyc]

You conveniently missed my point. I said that no one would willingly die for something the knew to be false. Every religion you listed contains adherents who believe their faith to be true. I doubt very seriously anyone would die for their faith if they knew it to be based on falsehood.

Seriously? I guess I do have to be patronizing. You have conveniently missed the entire point.

It doesn't matter. None of it. It does not matter at all what humans think or do. There is an objective reality outside of what we think and feel. It does not matter at all what we do or do not do. Why are you bestowing this strange power upon us?

It doesn't matter at all what the believers of Jesus 2,000 years ago thought. It doesn't matter whether or not they actually believed it or were just playing around. It doesn't matter if they died for it, or if they didn't die for it. It doesn't matter in regards to the truth of the claims made. At all.

 

[Elioenai26]

Seriously? I guess I do have to be patronizing. You have conveniently missed the entire point.

It doesn't matter. None of it. It does not matter at all what humans think or do. There is an objective reality outside of what we think and feel. It does not matter at all what we do or do not do. Why are you bestowing this strange power upon us?

I don't think you really believe what you are saying. If you did, then your very own words and thoughts about this subject do not even matter. Therefore your position is self-contradictory!

 

[Habakk]

One thing I see wrong with FSM is "Does the church of the FSM REALLY believe that it exists?"
I could sit here and make up religions all day and not believe a single one of them. Why give equal classroom time to a religion that no one really believes?

FSM was invented as a spoof religion with a fictitious following, very much like the Landover Baptist site. It’s all made up, including its fictitious followers.

 

[Danyc]

I don't think you really believe what you are saying. If you did, then your very own words and thoughts about this subject do not even matter. Therefore your position is self-contradictory!

Oh, good. Because IT DOESN'T MATTER. You're right. I don't matter. It doesn't matter what I think. At all. At all.

Kill me, convert me, make me a spaniel at thy gate, Jesus!

It does not matter what I think. It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what anyone thinks. There is still an objective reality outside of our opinions and beliefs. And you're right, my very own words about this subject have nothing to do with how true the proposition actually is!

Though it's a good thing I'm not accountable to anyone other than you and the others around me.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Elioenai26 You conveniently missed my point. I said that no one would willingly die for something the knew to be false. Every religion you listed contains adherents who believe their faith to be true. I doubt very seriously anyone would die for their faith if they knew it to be based on falsehood.

Seriously? I guess I do have to be patronizing. You have conveniently missed the entire point.

It doesn't matter. None of it. It does not matter at all what humans think or do. There is an objective reality outside of what we think and feel. It does not matter at all what we do or do not do. Why are you bestowing this strange power upon us?

It doesn't matter at all what the believers of Jesus 2,000 years ago thought. It doesn't matter whether or not they actually believed it or were just playing around. It doesn't matter if they died for it, or if they didn't die for it. It doesn't matter in regards to the truth of the claims made. At all.

Except with Christianity of course

Judaism however is still waiting on their prophecied Messaiah/Savior to come to this day

Young) John 19:30 when therefore Jesus received the vinegar, He said, "It hath been finished!"
and having bowed the head, gave up the spirit.

Young) Revelation 1:18 and he who is living and I did become dead, and behold!, I am living to the ages of the ages. Amen!
and I have the keys of the hades and of the death.

.....

 

[Davian]

I agree with your point here. People can sit around all day and come up with satirical conjecture to muddy the waters a bit but they deliberately overlook the fact that their inventions are not even categorically similar to the Judeo-Christian worldview.

For the purposes for which the FSM protest was conceived, it was in the same category.

The history of the persecutions and sufferings that Christians over the millenia have willingly endured becasue of their faith is oftentimes willfully and deliberately overlooked.

I challenge one person to die for something they know to be false. It has oftentimes been claimed that Christians just made up some stuff about a Jewish guy they liked and decided to start spreading it around (for what reason I cant really understand), and then when things got tough, they decided to die for this lie. Seems brilliant to me! Right? No. It is nonsense.

That individuals died for their beliefs does not establish the validity of them. How could it be, as it is not unique to any particular religion.

Nonsense in the same way that someone who thinks evolution should be taught in school and not creationism or the Bible.

The scientific theory of evolution is science, and should be taught in the science classrooms. The point of the FSM protest is that creationism, the bible, and the FSM are not. That is not to say they cannot be taught in history, literature, or similar classes.

FSM all boils down to a pathetic attempt...

Actually, it was successful.

Polk Needled, Noodled In Evolution Flap | TBO.com

to promote "equality" among views, when really it is saying: "If we cant have it our way, and teach only evolution, (how teaching that we evolved from primates and are nothing more than civilized animals is going to benefit anyone in this world is still unknown to me)...

Let's use the Nobel Foundation as a reference:

"To see the integral role of evolution in biomedical research, consider Nobel Prizes, a good indicator of the most important breakthroughs in biology. Reviewing the last 50 years of Nobel Prizes in medicine or physiology, I asked, "Is training in evolutionary biology necessary for a thorough understanding of the award-winning discoveries and work resulting from each breakthrough?" By my criteria, understanding of evolution is necessary in 47 of 50 cases. From vaccines, viral cancer genes, and nerve cell communication to drug trials, and genes controlling cholesterol and heart disease, evolutionary insights are crucial."

Evolution is a Winner for Breakthroughs and Prizes | NCSE

then we should allow our children and young adults to be taught every form of nonsense the fallen human mind can fathom."

I do not know what you mean by "fallen", but you are right in that the FSM protest said that if the a school board wants to put a non-scientific topic into the science class, it would only be fair to open it to other non-scientific topics.