Theological Parodies (Creator, tradition, Revelation, prophet, atheist)

[mr.guy]

Originally Posted by yossarian22

I doubt anybody has had a 'divine' experience involving a flying pasta dish.

I did. It involved discount noodles at the local strip club.

[Rolling_Stone]

Originally Posted by yossarian22

I thought there was more. 'You said first answer this before we can play'
There is no real way to fit the FSM to your god, but you are nowhere near orthodoxy.
Anyhow, the FSM is not meant for a disproof to god, it was meant to show the idiocy behind the 'prove me wrong' line of thinking. If you believe in something with utter certainty merely because it has not been proved wrong, then you must logically believe in the FSM.
Emphasis on the merely. I doubt anybody has had a 'divine' experience involving a flying pasta dish.

"God is infinite Being" is a standard Christian belief. The fact that the FSM doesn't work with even the standard model show that the "parody" is monkey gibberish.

[yossarian22]

Originally Posted by Rolling_Stone

"God is infinite Being" is a standard Christian belief. The fact that the FSM doesn't work with even the standard model show that the "parody" is monkey gibberish.

But its not meant to specifically attack belief in god. Its meant to attack anything which bases itself on 'prove me wrong'
At least, thats how I invoke the FSM.
This thread serves as a decent example of when to use it, although I used a telepathic flying jellyfish instead of a flying pasta

[Rolling_Stone]

Originally Posted by yossarian22

But its not meant to specifically attack belief in god. Its meant to attack anything which bases itself on 'prove me wrong'
At least, thats how I invoke the FSM.
This thread serves as a decent example of when to use it, although I used a telepathic flying jellyfish instead of a flying pasta

I don't like the 'prove me wrong' argument any more than you, but the FSM "parody" assumes that an unfalsifiable idea is not valid. Your previous answer illustrated very well that this is not the case.

How does it taste?

[rojse]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Sure I have. You are just trying hard to overlook it. We call this myopia.

You have not presented any evidence in this thread that shows any differentiation between the FSM and God.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

I highlighted the word "conclusions" for you. That is your faith. That comprises your belief system. Just because it happens to be YOURS does not make it any more defensible than MY conclusions which are based on my observations, knowledge and insight.

I don't have any faith, though. I have come to my conclusions through looking at scientific and empirical data to come to my conclusions, but I am also able to discard that should I come to new evidence. The difference between me and you is that what you attempt to call my faith does not involve any faith - in fact, it involves the complete opposite of faith - I demand proof before I believe in something.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Then you should have no issues seeing that you indeed have a belief system. Everyone has a threshold for belief or disbelief. Is there a point here?

The point is that no theist that responded to the thread made any attempt to claim what would be able to make them disregard their faith, and I can. That is a crucial difference between you and I - I am willing to define boundaries which will change my belief system, and you are not.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Based on your EGO, I can see how you have arrived at this conclusion. In reality, you have merely chosen a different path. I have taken the one less traveled. You are on the well worn path that states: "I believe it, so everyone else's belief is crap". This is the path that will soon lead you to intolerance and it is being tread by theists and atheists alike. Have fun with that.

This is wrong. What I believe is that if you can not provide proof of why you believe something, apart from personal, unverifiable observational evidence, then it is crap. I am quite willing to listen to people that try to provide evidence that I can personally examine, and have personally changed my stance on many different ideas after having received reviewable evidence from all sorts of areas.

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

How's that working for you? Is it making you a happier person? If so, then great.

[rojse]

Originally Posted by Rolling_Stone

I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but everyone has a belief system even if it is unrecognized as such. You used a belief system to come to the conclusion that you "have a system of observations, knowledge, and conclusions that I am ready to discard should I find new information that contradicts what I had previously learned."

I don't have a belief system, I have a cynism system.

[rojse]

If God is omnipotent, how come he cannot give himsellf the powers of omnificence?

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by rojse

You have not presented any evidence in this thread that shows any differentiation between the FSM and God.

Learn to read. It's there and plenty of it.

Originally Posted by rojse

I don't have any faith, though. I have come to my conclusions through looking at scientific and empirical data to come to my conclusions, but I am also able to discard that should I come to new evidence. The difference between me and you is that what you attempt to call my faith does not involve any faith - in fact, it involves the complete opposite of faith - I demand proof before I believe in something.

You might be able to take something for your delusions of grandeur here. You don't believe in God, and yet you can not prove he does not exist. Your conclusions are your faith, just as mine are. You are as much a prisoner of your faith as I am of mine. Yet BOTH of us are able to change when the evidence warrants it. We will see if you can change you stance on faith given this new information, or if it is indeed a BLIND faith.

Originally Posted by rojse

The point is that no theist that responded to the thread made any attempt to claim what would be able to make them disregard their faith, and I can. That is a crucial difference between you and I - I am willing to define boundaries which will change my belief system, and you are not.

So, has any theist given us any indication of what it would take to make them believe? I will be GLAD to abandon God as soon as you can prove he does NOT exist. Go for it. Maybe you can join logician in that futile exercise?

Originally Posted by rojse

This is wrong. What I believe is that if you can not provide proof of why you believe something, apart from personal, unverifiable observational evidence, then it is crap. I am quite willing to listen to people that try to provide evidence that I can personally examine, and have personally changed my stance on many different ideas after having received reviewable evidence from all sorts of areas.

It's all about you, isn't it. Do you believe that we landed on the moon? Have you PERSONALLY examined the evidence? Yeah, sure you have... how about John Wilkes Booth assassinating Lincoln? Have you INDEED examined the evidence PERSONALLY? Yah, I didn't think so. So there are many, many things that you believe where you have NOT personally examined the evidence.

So there you have some homework:

Read my posts again and identify that evidence. Read closely now.
Recognize faith in every one, including yourself.
Prove that God does not exist.
Learn the difference between evidence and proof.