Theology of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you aren't inferior or sad.. But you have no soul.... So you just .. Are... Like a bug or a rock. I assume

I assume you're also the person who wrote

The good thing is that since atheists have no soul ... Killing them is more moral than killing a chicken since they negatively impact the environment more than a chicken.

... Twisted ... Illogical .. Defense of atheist importance in an existence without God in.... 3...2...1.

Given your perspective, any answer to this probably won't matter to you, but I'll give it a shot and maybe give you a little something to think about.

At the very least, each person is a unique entity - unlikely to be replicated ever again (unless we're all existing in a Matrix-like simulation). That uniqueness provides an inherent value over and above that of an animal because we are the sum of our experiences, and that summation in humans goes far beyond the capabilities of most animals.

As Roy Batty said at the end of Blade Runner, "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe - Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die."

But the value in human life goes beyond the sum of the person's own experiences. The value in a life is in its relationship to others and in its ability to make the world a better place.

Just like currency, which only has the value others assign to it, a human life has the ability to be important to friends and family in a way that a rock - as an example of an inanimate collection of matter - or a chicken - as an example of a non-human - don't.

A human can conceive of long term planning and sacrifice to make the world a better place in a way that animals do not. The value of a human - whether believer or atheist - is in the value that person's family, friends and acquaintances place on the person, and the potential for that person to do make the world a better place for others.

A person fights against the entropy of the universe by building something that lasts longer than themselves or by cooperating with others to build something that each as an individual could not achieve.

I don't believe I have a soul. Cogito ergo sum. I have value in being a unique creation in the universe, I am the sum of my experiences and the potential for all I will create in my life. But my value goes beyond that. I have value for the good I do in the world and how I help my friends. I have value because I am loved by my family and I challenge you to deny the "value" that shows in my daughter's eyes when she looks at me.

To me, relying on a soul to give you "value" in the eyes of a deity and which makes you equal to everyone else in the eyes of that deity is a political creation of religion.

When a centralized authority wants to avoid revolution by the dominated majority, the most effective way to do it is to convince the dominated majority to be happy with their position.

"Blessed are the meek" and "blessed are the poor" and the concept that the poor and downtrodden will be rewarded in the afterlife are all concepts that cause the dominated majority to accept their position in life. The idea that the "souls" of the poor and downtrodden are somehow valued more by the deity than those of the dominant minority enables the dominated class to feel superior and reduces the likelihood of revolution.

So, no, I'm more than a rock or a bug or a chicken, and so are you, and if you think you need a soul to have "value" in the universe, then that's unfortunate for you.

^^^^. Lol,. That is quite a hilarious religion you have there! Seems based on your feelings and opinions ,. Good luck with that !
... Btw ... A rock is unique as well and wil be here long after you and your rediculous religion are gone. It is cleaner than you , does not kill and eat innumerable living things for no purpose in eternity. A rock isn't stupid enough to waste others time with dumb opinions or whiney feelings . A rock also has no soul. The rock wins.

I'd just like to point out that the obvious end point to your line of reasoning is not that there *is* a God, but that we should all pretend that there is...even though there's no evidence whatsoever to support it. After all, the only thing you've demonstrated is that you believe that without gods, human life is meaningless. You don't want to accept that, therefore...GODS! But that's a pretty obvious fallacy. It would be nice if unicorns existed too, but that's not evidence of their existence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

you aren't inferior or sad.. But you have no soul.... So you just .. Are... Like a bug or a rock. I assume

I assume you're also the person who wrote

The good thing is that since atheists have no soul ... Killing them is more moral than killing a chicken since they negatively impact the environment more than a chicken.

... Twisted ... Illogical .. Defense of atheist importance in an existence without God in.... 3...2...1.

Given your perspective, any answer to this probably won't matter to you, but I'll give it a shot and maybe give you a little something to think about.

At the very least, each person is a unique entity - unlikely to be replicated ever again (unless we're all existing in a Matrix-like simulation). That uniqueness provides an inherent value over and above that of an animal because we are the sum of our experiences, and that summation in humans goes far beyond the capabilities of most animals.

As Roy Batty said at the end of Blade Runner, "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe - Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die."

But the value in human life goes beyond the sum of the person's own experiences. The value in a life is in its relationship to others and in its ability to make the world a better place.

Just like currency, which only has the value others assign to it, a human life has the ability to be important to friends and family in a way that a rock - as an example of an inanimate collection of matter - or a chicken - as an example of a non-human - don't.

A human can conceive of long term planning and sacrifice to make the world a better place in a way that animals do not. The value of a human - whether believer or atheist - is in the value that person's family, friends and acquaintances place on the person, and the potential for that person to do make the world a better place for others.

A person fights against the entropy of the universe by building something that lasts longer than themselves or by cooperating with others to build something that each as an individual could not achieve.

I don't believe I have a soul. Cogito ergo sum. I have value in being a unique creation in the universe, I am the sum of my experiences and the potential for all I will create in my life. But my value goes beyond that. I have value for the good I do in the world and how I help my friends. I have value because I am loved by my family and I challenge you to deny the "value" that shows in my daughter's eyes when she looks at me.

To me, relying on a soul to give you "value" in the eyes of a deity and which makes you equal to everyone else in the eyes of that deity is a political creation of religion.

When a centralized authority wants to avoid revolution by the dominated majority, the most effective way to do it is to convince the dominated majority to be happy with their position.

"Blessed are the meek" and "blessed are the poor" and the concept that the poor and downtrodden will be rewarded in the afterlife are all concepts that cause the dominated majority to accept their position in life. The idea that the "souls" of the poor and downtrodden are somehow valued more by the deity than those of the dominant minority enables the dominated class to feel superior and reduces the likelihood of revolution.

So, no, I'm more than a rock or a bug or a chicken, and so are you, and if you think you need a soul to have "value" in the universe, then that's unfortunate for you.

^^^^. Lol,. That is quite a hilarious religion you have there! Seems based on your feelings and opinions ,. Good luck with that !
... Btw ... A rock is unique as well and wil be here long after you and your rediculous religion are gone. It is cleaner than you , does not kill and eat innumerable living things for no purpose in eternity. A rock isn't stupid enough to waste others time with dumb opinions or whiney feelings . A rock also has no soul. The rock wins.

Ah, but rocks do have souls. I can prove it.

I like rocks, and I can conceive of a universe in which rocks communicate to one another over long periods of time. And sentient beings (as I imagine rocks to be) without souls would be a very sad thing indeed. Therefore, rocks must have souls.

QED.

[Anonymous]

This isn't "my interpretation", it's in the Bible in black and white type. I actually believe that a lot of the right-wing social conservatives aren't actually following Christ's teachings, and I'm not alone in this.

I agree with you that it's there in black and white, and I particularly agree that many who claim to be Christians - especially right-wing social conservatives but I don't think it's limited to them - aren't following Christ's teachings.

As Ghandi said, "I like your Christ. I don't like your Christians. So many of your Christians are unlike your Christ."

So you get to the question of why this system keeps getting perpetuated.

I would argue that the wealthy have an incentive to pay lip service to Christianity because the political message of Christianity advises the poor to accept their lot and suffer through this life in anticipation of their reward in Heaven.

Some promote the concept of "prosperity gospel," which is simply an extension of the divine right of kings. Under that logic, someone is rich because God has selected them to be rich and, thus, who are they (or anyone else) to say otherwise and go against the obvious workings of God? Arguing for "prosperity gospel" is precisely contrary to what you've identified as being written in black and white.

So, either the people who make that argument interpret it differently or they don't actually believe.

Outside of those who argue for the "prosperity gospel," I would argue that there are many people who do not follow the black and white teaching you've identified that have a vested interest in the continued belief by the non-wealthy in this mentality.

So the question becomes, if those people were true believers in the gospel as preached by Christ, how could they violate such a basic and clearly stated tenet? On the other hand, paying lip service to the religion and perpetuating a belief structure that makes the 99% happier with their lot has a lot of advantages for them. I'd put the question to Occam's Razor.

[Anonymous]

I'm a christian and I've found these arguments entertaining. I believe in God, and I have a right to it. You have a right to worship his Noodliness or nothing at all. Believe in nothing, its none of my concern. Christian by root definition is Christ-Like. What did Jesus, whether man or more, do? He loved everyone and judged no one. THAT is what being a true Christian is. All of these bible thumping idiots aren't christian at all. Now days I'm seeing just as many like minded atheists. Both parties are giving the rest of us civilized individuals bad names

[Anonymous]

Atheists don't "believe in nothing" - they simply don't believe in supernatural beings for which there is no evidence.

They have many beliefs just like everyone else, based on their experience, education and personality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a christian and I've found these arguments entertaining. I believe in God, and I have a right to it. You have a right to worship his Noodliness or nothing at all. Believe in nothing, its none of my concern. Christian by root definition is Christ-Like. What did Jesus, whether man or more, do? He loved everyone and judged no one. THAT is what being a true Christian is. All of these bible thumping idiots aren't christian at all. Now days I'm seeing just as many like minded atheists. Both parties are giving the rest of us civilized individuals bad names

Good post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Atheists don't "believe in nothing" - they simply don't believe in supernatural beings for which there is no evidence.

They have many beliefs just like everyone else, based on their experience, education and personality.

I'm sincerely curious. What do you "believe" in, then? Belief as it's usually defined involves a leap of faith. By contrast, you can "think" that murder is evil based on the objective evidence that it destroys lives and families. Or you can "think" that people are innately bad, or that people are innately good based on your life experiences. But both of these things can be measured and quantified to a great extent, so belief is besides the point when you have objective evidence.

I'd be interested in hearing that I'm wrong, though.

[Anonymous]

Your definition of "belief"sounds to me like a definition of religious belief, which requires believing that stories handed down from other believers are true.

I believe, for instance, that my spouse loves me. That requires faith in a feeling I have and faith in spouse's feeling toward me, but it does not require a leap. Those beliefs could change (and are known to, between spouses) if feelings change(love wanes, as it sometimes does) and facts change (spouse does something duplicitous)

In religion, however, faith seems to require a leap - to dismiss or rationalize information that does not fit with the beliefs. Doubt is allowed, even encouraged, as long as it results in renewed faith. Keeping the faith, despite additional information or changed feelings is encouraged -- even demanded, in some religions. This is not the case in other aspects of life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheists don't "believe in nothing" - they simply don't believe in supernatural beings for which there is no evidence.

They have many beliefs just like everyone else, based on their experience, education and personality.

I'm sincerely curious. What do you "believe" in, then? Belief as it's usually defined involves a leap of faith. By contrast, you can "think" that murder is evil based on the objective evidence that it destroys lives and families. Or you can "think" that people are innately bad, or that people are innately good based on your life experiences. But both of these things can be measured and quantified to a great extent, so belief is besides the point when you have objective evidence.

I'd be interested in hearing that I'm wrong, though.

I believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every person
I believe in justice, equity, and compassion in human relations
I believe in a free and responsible search for truth and meaning
I believe in the right of conscience and the democratic process
I believe in the interdependent web of life of which we are a part
I believe in deeds not creeds
Ultimately, I believe love, compassion and kindness are the most important



I do not believe in a diety. I describe myself as a non-theist, rather than athiest- as many people seem to have preconcieved notions of what that is. I do not need a higher power telling me what to do when and how to act so that I act with love and compassion. I believe that love, kindness and compassion are part of who I am.

I believe that whatever happens after we die happens the same for all of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every person
I believe in justice, equity, and compassion in human relations
I believe in a free and responsible search for truth and meaning
I believe in the right of conscience and the democratic process
I believe in the interdependent web of life of which we are a part
I believe in deeds not creeds
Ultimately, I believe love, compassion and kindness are the most important



I do not believe in a diety. I describe myself as a non-theist, rather than athiest- as many people seem to have preconcieved notions of what that is. I do not need a higher power telling me what to do when and how to act so that I act with love and compassion. I believe that love, kindness and compassion are part of who I am.

I believe that whatever happens after we die happens the same for all of us.

IMO you're describing a value system. It's not beliefs, it's your values. When you get into the details of something like "justice," I don't think you'd find anybody arguing against equity for different groups, but they wouldn't describe this as a belief, either.

Also, some of this sounds like slogans, like "deeds not creeds". Some of it is universal to all religions and atheism, like "justice, equity, compassion" and "democratic process". I guess I just don't see a role for "belief" in any of these.

[Anonymous]

so what are beliefs - supernatural only? from stories, doctrine, dogma you were taught? Could you describe some things you consider beliefs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every person
I believe in justice, equity, and compassion in human relations
I believe in a free and responsible search for truth and meaning
I believe in the right of conscience and the democratic process
I believe in the interdependent web of life of which we are a part
I believe in deeds not creeds
Ultimately, I believe love, compassion and kindness are the most important



I do not believe in a diety. I describe myself as a non-theist, rather than athiest- as many people seem to have preconcieved notions of what that is. I do not need a higher power telling me what to do when and how to act so that I act with love and compassion. I believe that love, kindness and compassion are part of who I am.

I believe that whatever happens after we die happens the same for all of us.

IMO you're describing a value system. It's not beliefs, it's your values. When you get into the details of something like "justice," I don't think you'd find anybody arguing against equity for different groups, but they wouldn't describe this as a belief, either.

Also, some of this sounds like slogans, like "deeds not creeds". Some of it is universal to all religions and atheism, like "justice, equity, compassion" and "democratic process". I guess I just don't see a role for "belief" in any of these.

I do see a role for belief in these- maybe that is the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so what are beliefs - supernatural only? from stories, doctrine, dogma you were taught? Could you describe some things you consider beliefs?

To me "belief" in this context requires a leap of faith. Belief and faith are intertwined. But for me, belief/faith need to be distinguished from opinions and values.

So, for an example that isn't religious. I believe that "justice" includes gay marriage, but somebody else might disagree. The point is, we're all starting from the basic premise that something called "justice" actually exists; there's no questioning of the basic existence of a concept called "justice," and there's no leap of faith that any of us is making to get to the point where we think somebody, or anybody, is deserving of justice. Instead, we're taking the existence of "justice" for granted and we're expressing our opinions about who is deserving of justice.

It's true that people often use the word "belief" to express opinions, as in "I believe in justice and equity for all people." Or even, more mundanely, "I believe that blue dress looks better on you than the green dress." But this statement isn't generally understood to mean that the person believes in some intangible thing called "justice" that can't be proven to exist. We're pretty sure this person means that "justice" is a real thing, but that she has clear opinions and values about how and to whom "justice" should be applied.

Belief requires a leap of faith. I'm religious, so I'd characterize it more respectfully than you do. But yes, belief and faith go hand in hand.

[Anonymous]

What was not respectful of religion that's been said in the last few posts?

Also, I don't see the leap of faith required to believe that justice includes gay marriage. It seems like an opinion to me.

And I don't think you've pinpointed the leap of faith in religion -- is it the supernatural aspect, believing stories, dogma?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What was not respectful of religion that's been said in the last few posts?

Also, I don't see the leap of faith required to believe that justice includes gay marriage. It seems like an opinion to me.

And I don't think you've pinpointed the leap of faith in religion -- is it the supernatural aspect, believing stories, dogma?

16:24 here. That was my point exactly - justice including gay marriage is an opinion, not a belief.

The leap of faith in religion is in believing in a higher power and, depending on your religion, in prophets and miracles. Faith is essential, because most people have not had direct experience with miracles or signs. What you call "dogma", or more respectfully the "tenets" of most religions, is different.