What makes God real but the flying spaghetti monster fictional?

What makes God real but the flying spaghetti monster fictional?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ak-riGdz-UM
purifymind.com/ProdigalSon.htm
thoughtco.com/prodigal-son-luke-1511-32-700213
youtu.be/LKDZ4Q-Ad4k
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>not real

The flying spaghetti monster has touched me with his noodly appendage and life has never been better. Such a pity you cannot come to see the truth.

because the flying spaghetti monster has behind it the sole idea "lol look at me im so random", while God is a complex concept which has evolved throughout the millenia into a complex system of morals, ethics, social constructs and traditions which all are meant to unify a people.

God = the universe because it created itself and all things in it save for the creations of man.

flying spaghetti monster is a creation of man and only an idea with no machination.
therefore it's just a fictional character such as harry potter while the universe is very real since you exist within it as it exists within you.

that's the difference.

Because god created spaghetti

*tips

How do you know it's not the other way around?

>look at me lol I'm so random
Versus
>look at me lol I'm so special
Abrahamic faith is the antithesis of intellectual honesty. You're nothing more than a useful idiot if you follow and believe in that trite. Do the world a favor and learn the difference between subjective and objective. God is an absolutely subjective meme

>2017
>not believing in Cthulhu
It's like you guys don't even want the whole human race to be exterminated.

...

>What makes God real but the flying spaghetti monster fictional?
The fact that God exist and the flying spaghetti monster doesn't.
>t. Christian

The flying spaghetti monster doesn't really exist.
>t. Edgy teens

Either way, the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist.

>while God is a complex concept which has
A complex designer, obviously. No wait...

>evolved throughout the millenia into a complex system of morals, ethics, social constructs
No people did that. People deliberated on the best of the morals that had come before and built their moral systems accordingly. And then they would pretend a god invented their morals so no one could argue with them.

>and traditions which all are meant to unify a people
Religion only separates people and makes them crazy enough to kill to please their bloodthirsty gods.

>when a Christian loses an argument

I'll tip my fedora to that. Just knowing you have to resort to memes to make yourself feel better about worshipping a zombie Jew makes me feel great. Have a nice day. Try not to molest any kids today Muhammad

You got it backwards:
>Flying Spaghetti Monster = the universe because it created itself and all things in it save for the creations of man.
>god is a creation of man and only an idea with no machination.

Do you believe evil exists?

you do not understand that people to function need a metaphysical bond, speaking of objectivity and subjectivity, yes, in a physical sense God does not exist, but the fact that there is a force prevalent in our minds to unite us under the same cross of beliefs, of purpose of life and view s on things, helps us not lose faith in us and in our future. this all sounds like total bollocks but you can clearly see atheists after a short while losing touch with common sense and subject everything to a purely objective form, somehow demonstrated empirically, which when applied to human feelings, minds, senses, does not apply since we do not understand how we function and what are the mechanisms that made us as we are. Yes, now they know God does not exist, but do they know what is their purpose in life? "lol just do whatever the fuck makes u happy, thats the purpose" slowly but surely erodes from inside every human being subject to narcissistic views of life, ultimately destroying any inch of compassion, love and humanity in him. i dont want to promote "le happy ignorant and blissful" style of life that some might think about religious people, but if you dont want this style of life, you need a compass of moralities and meanings that will guide you through life anyway, so might as well borrow the one that your family, majority of friends and acquaintances have.

...

these threads always assume that God is an inactive agent, that he needs human activity or assistance--God will speak to you or he won't, at the time of his choosing

that has no bearing on me whatsoever--my obligations are to him, not to you

the only obligation I feel right now is to inform you that making a decision about God without doing any reading is pretty lazy, I wouldn't want to stand in front of the throne of God, while knowing that I wasted all my time being lazy

Anti-Christian!

I don't remember reading about the flying spaghetti monster in Plato's works. Or in Aristotle. Or in the Avesta. He wasn't mentioned in the Gita either

>I don't remember reading about the flying spaghetti monster in Plato's works. Or in Aristotle.
They would have been referring to the Greek gods Jupiter, Apollo, Athenia, Hera, Zeus, Posideon, etc.

>I don't remember reading about the Christian god in Plato's works. Or in Aristotle.
Again, they would have been referring to the Greek gods Jupiter, Apollo, Athenia, Hera, Zeus, Posideon, etc.

>And then they would pretend a god invented their morals so no one could argue with them.
You can argue, but you don't try to understand what we believe in so it's usually futule. For instance look at Dawkins who absolutely refuses to understand metaphysics, and yet he tries to 'debunk' it using science

>futule
futile

flying spagehtti monster is a cringe meme created by ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((Atheists))))))))))))))))))))))

these people prove the existence of god by how far they've strayed from his light

>the only obligation I feel right now is to inform you that making a decision about God without doing any reading is pretty lazy, I wouldn't want to stand in front of the throne of God, while knowing that I wasted all my time being lazy

Im a athiest but that spaghetti monster is so fucking edgy and cringey.

You fucking dweebs make us look bad. Stop caring so much about what other believe in, its like arguing with an little kid about if santa is real or not. You end up looking retarded even if you are right.

>>I don't remember reading about the Christian god in Plato's works. Or in Aristotle.
Their thought has great influence in Christianity to the extent that Plato was called an honorary Christian. Plato's Demiurge and Aristotle's Prime Mover, that's who the Christian God is

how often are you on /pop/? Do you see the shit people post? Half the daily threads are about commuting genocide and murdering people of differing opinions. For the sake of the "christians" on this board, I hope there is no God, because if there is you guys are going straight to hell.

>inb4 it's just satire bro
No it's not, people are genuine, and they're genuinely going to burn

>You can argue, but you don't try to understand what we believe in so it's usually futule.
There have been thousand of gods, but only yours are real? That's literally what they all say. This is your deepest fear. We DO understand what you believe, far better than you do. And we reject it because - just like all the other deity beliefs of all the other you(s) - they are made up and false.


>For instance look at Dawkins who absolutely refuses to understand metaphysics, and yet he tries to 'debunk' it using science
You have it backwards. You never see scientists relentlessly trying to figure out new ways to slip supernatural beings into their data, into their analysis or conclusions. You only see theists relentlessly trying to rationalize their irrational beliefs and irrational beings.
Dawkins only uses science to show how desperate theist rationalizers are abusing science to that end.

flying spaghetti monster is an arbitrary absurd postulation. God is an abstract and universal quality evidenced by creation itself.

>what is evolution

youtube.com/watch?v=ak-riGdz-UM

It's a useful sanity check if you're a heretic or not.

>that's who the Christian God is
>the Greeks crafted arguments to explain their gods
>Hey, let's steal their ideas and pretend they were talking about future gods all along
>If I'm dumb enough to fall for that, maybe others will too.
You don't seem to realize that your religion is an weak amalgam of religions that came before:

The Buddha version:
purifymind.com/ProdigalSon.htm

The Bible re-write after stealing it:
thoughtco.com/prodigal-son-luke-1511-32-700213

don't forget greek philosophy crept its way into the christian canon with the heretical belief of souls

Consider this--there is no metaphysical reason why 1+1 does equal 2. There are clearly laws to the universe, which need not exist. That these laws create a stable and harmonious universe shows that they are unlikely to be arbitrary. That we, as an otherwise seemingly random collection of self-motivating cells, find abstraction emotional benefit out of the interaction of these laws indicates that our morality has at least some external component. If you consider that this universe must have been created, that there is an order to this universe, and that we can relate to this order in a positive way, then it is obviously foolish and wrong to relate to the universe in any other way. Despite all of our efforts, there does not seem to be any real, meaningful way to change our perspective on what is good or bad, in a broad sense. The closest we come is by distracting ourselves with either increasingly fleeting pleasure, or incredibly mind-warping drugs. Both of these options have shown themselves to be incredibly destructive to society, completely inefficient, and wholly unrewarding. It is almost as though, when you try and deny reality, reality will kill you. If it helps you to imagine the creator as a ball of spaghetti, then go right ahead, but the key difference between atheistic straw-man arguments, and the actual theistic arguments is that the atheists focus on the least relevant qualities of God, such as his appearance or physical position in space, whereas theologians focus on the essential elements of God, such as his universal and absolute metaphysical qualities.

haha, faithfags BTFO. well done fellow redditor.

>There have been thousand of gods, but only yours are real?
It's irrelevant if they are real because most of those are immanent gods. The One God isn't only known by us Christians, we never claimed that anyway (see St. Paul and the Unknown God). There are Hindu monotheists, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians, all who follow the same God, even if it's in some unrefined sense.

>You never see scientists relentlessly trying to figure out new ways to slip supernatural beings into their data
You only continue to show that you know very little about this. The scientific method wasn't meant for proving everything that we should believe in

Depending on how hard you wish to get BTFO, watch this and get the definitive answer.

Spaghetti monster is actually mentioned, and you retards are exposed for the imbeciles that you are.
youtu.be/LKDZ4Q-Ad4k

...

Ravioli created spaghetti, and spaghetti created god. Its not that hard guys

Good and evil are social constructs. What is ethical for one civilisation is unethical for another.

Ironically God is the most real "being" in existence. Everything was made real by him, you don't think he's real because the world doesn't acknowledge him as it has it's own rhythm, one inclusive yes but equal in that inclusiveness.

God, has his own space, his own epicenter. One which permeates throughout all dimensions. He is a guiding white light, and certainly he does exist here on this Earth as well but not in the same form as he does in Heaven.

Exactly. There are certain inviolable laws that have governed the interaction of all species which has yielded this specific collection of organisms. It may seem completely arbitrary which set of organisms exists, and yet our species has the incredible, and seemingly unnecessary quality of being able to examine these very questions, to be able to marvel at the full scope of the universe. But we also know that, while certain traits may become redundant or superfluous, no traits develop without purpose. Our ability to conceptualize about God and the universe must be recognized as distinctly human, and completely necessary for survival, especially given that our abandonment of it has drive us closer to extinction (through war and climate destruction) than ever before. Culture can only be seen as an evolutionary trait, and religion is the central foundation of culture. We also can recognize our own happiness, pleasure, and satisfaction as distinct states of being. Certainly you wouldn't deny the importance of homeostasis to life, but you seem to want to completely ignore the important self-regulating element religion has on the very necessary human process of culture.

Fix'd

Not equal in inclusiveness.

Have you even read their works? Those arguments point to One God beyond everything, not billions of natural deities

>don't steal
These things are are deeply woven together, saying that it's stealing is absurd. In the Book of John the Greek for Word is Logos, so really the only way to understand it is to study what the Greek philosophers meant, which is where Plato comes in. We don't say that Buddhists stole the idea of reincarnation from the Sramama, religion doesn't work that way

Careful with this line of thinking. Just because there are many kinds of monotheists does not mean they are the same. Some even say they are monotheists, even when they are not. If two people say they are monotheists, but ascribe different qualities to God, then they are talking about two separate Gods. If there is only one God, there can only be one true and complete conception of him.

Good and Evil are merely the result of our moral standards. Literally any practice could be deemed good or evil, since we already decided with Christianity that natural morality is a thing of the past.

Flying Spaghetti Monster is real
We call em Satan

The logic behind the likely hood of each one existing, obviously. Just look at each choice and use reasoning.
>Powerful entity or force of nature that caused the world and the other forces (physics, chemistry, etc...) to exist as they do.
>A blob of floating spaghetti and meatballs that is sentient and based solely on a concept made up by humans.
Gee, dumb fucks, I wonder what's more likely. There being something responsible for the universe starting, or a monster you made up in your mind????

>Have you even read their works?
Of course
>Those arguments point to One God beyond everything
And very specifically not your gods. You're attempting to rationalize via extremist revisionism to to distort the works of Plato. In "The Republic" Plato refers to a creator as the original inventor of ideas, but we all recognize this as the generic "intelligent design" fallacy. And don't even try your uneducated piffle on Greek metanyms. You're worse than clueless.

>Powerful entity or force of nature that caused the world and the other forces (physics, chemistry, etc...) to exist as they do.
you forgot
>and look like Santa Clause

The fact that you can't tell the difference between these parables is everything. Just because many of the pieces are the same, does not mean the philosophy is the same. For one thing, that there are two sons in the Christian version completely shifts the meaning. It is not just a story about how you should treat others, but revelation of the nature of God that rebukes those who would, out of their piousness, deny mercy to those who are less zealous, and who were less faithful. It clearly shows that obedience is not the measure of man, but love. The buddhist version encourages deceit and tests of worthiness. Had the son not performed well, he would not have inherited the money. And for his whole life after running away he was without his father, even when his father was right next to him and knew it. The morals one draws from these accounts are the differences between these religions. That the stories are so similar in their empty structure only serves to highlight these differences.

Explain to me why atheist want everyone to embrace atheism if inherently nothing matters (even converting people to your ideology)

Gets my noggin joggin

You're the only one insisting he have a beard. Leafs can't into art.

What do you mean? The bible/Quran/Torah or whatever holy book say god is real. Why would they lie about that?
Also, luckily every religion claims it's the correct one. So I guess you can't get it wrong at all!

Yeah.
>opium is the religion of the masses
>we can't get people to do what we want unless we give them drugs
>free drugs, band God
>but nothing matters, I swear

If religion is a drug, it's clearly the best one.

>saying that it's stealing is absurd.
The ancient Jews {{{ borrowed }}} it without giving any credit to it's original source. Happy? The fact remains that very little about the morality espoused in the bible is original.

>We don't say that Buddhists stole the idea of reincarnation
The bible stole that too. The Buddhists reincarnate many times, the Christians claim they reincarnate once. It's all based on frightened, ignorant primitives who felt they needed to explain death, but without any facts.

>Gee, dumb fucks, I wonder what's more likely. There being something responsible for the universe starting,
Yes! The Flying Spaghetti Monster!

>or a monster you made up in your mind????
God?

Who is to say that the "real God" is not the spaghetti monster? No one has seen God so he could very well look like a blob of spaghetti.

>The fact that you can't tell the difference between these parables is everything. Just because many of the pieces are the same, does not mean the philosophy is the same.
You failed to grasp my point. I don't claim the philosophy is the same. I don;t claim these stories don;t have minor differences. I claim that the ancient Israelites heard this parable spoken somewhere, remembered it poorly and incorporated it directly into their book or many tales.

>minor differences
It's literally the whole thing

>flying spaghetti monster not real

Social constructs operate upon constructs of flesh. Good and evil tend over time to constructive, meaningful definitions based upon the needs of the flesh constructs communicating with those social constructs.

Theists fall for the stupidest lies
>if inherently nothing matters
Oh, look. They fell for another one

Theists are the existential nihilists, not the atheists. Here's why: Atheists have only this one life, with no expectation of an afterlife. That make this life very precious to an atheist.

Theists are only interested in going to heaven and don't care if the world explodes in an Armageddon fireball as long as they get to go to heaven. For them, nothing in this world really matters.

Why do you think that atheists lack purpose, a moral compass or meaning in their life? You can have all these things without religion.

The world is reliant on something greater because you cannot explain something from nothing.

God is not real, faggots.

Retards,

Your idiot.

>you cannot explain
We don't need to. We can simply admit we honestly don't know. We don't have make up stories, to engage in lies and deceptions the way theists are prone to do.

>something from nothing.
The "from nothing" nonsense is a hilarious swipe by theists to explain something rational. In the scientific version of cosmological inflation, all the atoms of the universe already exist, and there's a good body of evidence to support that.

In the made-up, kooky theist version, there is "nothing" in the beginning and their gods appear out of nowhere.

But that's what makes atheists the worst thing for this civilization. They become cowards and frauds, rats that scurry and pillage, piling up for themselves rewards here, refusing to plant trees that they will never sit in the shade of. They stagnate and they rot, because we have to either move forward or die, and atheists, given that they only care what happens to them here and now, cease to exist, and society gets dragged down with them.

they are both "real"

the flying spaghetti monster is just useless and only exists to entertain children

Can any theist explain the Parable of the Talents?

>making a decision about God without doing any reading is pretty lazy
OK you, the guy who does so much bible reading because he isn't lazy, you explain this parable for the class.