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

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

The parodies are mere strawman arguments and nothing more.

There are a number of eyewitness accounts of God and his dealings with man in the OT. I see nothing similar with the IPU or the FSM.

Of course, you yourself Pete repeatedly point out the absurdity of the judgmental and pompous nonsense justified in the name of "God," all of it likewise justified by people advocating by pointing to things in the OT.

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

The parodies are mere strawman arguments and nothing more.

I understand why you might think that, but I don't believe it is entirely accurate.

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by doppelgänger

Of course, you yourself Pete repeatedly point out the absurdity of the judgmental and pompous nonsense justified in the name of "God," all of it likewise justified by people advocating by pointing to things in the OT.

I actually should have included the NT as well. However, there is a tendency among us to discount something JUST BECAUSE it didn't happen to us. This is elitism at it's worst.

As it is, there are NO adherents to either the FSM or the IPU. There are no religious books purported to have been written that were inspired by these two entities. Consequently, there is absolutely no comparison between these and any Abrahamic religion.

No, the use of these comparisons is only showing the delusion of the person who thinks that they are a valid argument. They are mean spirited and do nothing but stop discussions. You do yourself a disservice by employing them.

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

I understand why you might think that, but I don't believe it is entirely accurate.

Well great. Why don't you give us your insight as to why people employ such a mean spirited argument. While you are at it, please tell us why you think such drivel is useful in a civilized discussion.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Well great. Why don't you give us your insight as to why people employ such a mean spirited argument. While you are at it, please tell us why you think such drivel is useful in a civilized discussion.

It's no more or less useful that drivel about arguments by authority asserting that some judgmental or hateful attitude is alright because "God" told the person espousing it that it was actually "love" despite all appearances to the contrary. FSM/IPU are a satire of religion that has already made a mockery of itself. As satire, it merely teases the mockery out by changing the context.

Now I know you don't approach your faith like that Pete. In fact, from what I've read, I think you and I fundamentally approach Christianity in the same way - that's it is first and foremost about the spirituality of love rather than dogma, authority or beliefs.

But take into account the context in which these satires arise. FSM, for example, was in the context of responding to attempts to get the Kansas school board to mandate the teaching of aspects of particular religious creeds to everyone's kids using public money. If that generates scorn and disdain for Christianity, rather than blaming those who find it scornful, perhaps those who advocate such things should take a look in the mirror to see why people find FSM and IPU appealing.

Discordia is a little different. It is another folk inflection of mysticism at its heart.

Keep in mind that Christianity itself can be reasonably understood as a sort of parody on legalistic Judaism.

[Don Penguinoini]

I cant tell whether it challenges Abrahamic religion or just religion in general.

[Rolling_Stone]

Originally Posted by rojse

I would like to know how you dismiss the parody without dismissing your God.

My initial reaction to this was, “You’ve got to be kidding.” I consider conventional or traditional theology to be weak in some areas, but even to it the “parody“ is so much monkey gibberish. My second reaction was to brush it off since it’s already been addressed several times and the definition of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expecting to get different results. But then I realized that I saw it coming and I am a little insane--but not totally so I’ll play the game by my rules. I’ll take it step by step so there will be no excuse for further foolishness.

Want to play?

Even in traditional theology, God is defined as infinite Being. So, what does that mean? What are the implications? Answer this and we’ll continue, but not until then.

[Somkid]

I use The Flying Spaghetti Monster in all of my philosophy of religion classes just to make a point. My students love it!