I'm one of the few pastafarians here
Offline I'm a pastafarian. Convince me to become an atheist.
First remember that the FSM is outside of space-time and in an unknowable realm. He acts in mysterious ways that we can never know.
He created the world in four days, and one day is whatever He wants it to be. There is overwhelming proof of His evidence. For example, if you crumple a piece of string or paper you always get the shape of a meatball. But so far the best evidence is the fact that the number of pirates has been changing inversely proportional to the overall temperature of the world. This is real statistical proof of the FSM.
The FSM loves you and it is for His Glory that He created you. He is all-loving but He is also just. If you do not believe in Him, you will be damned and if you do believe in Him, you spend eternity in a stripper factory and beer volcano. Which is better, to believe in Him or to not believe?
RAmen.
LOL you're religion makes more since than forming out of the dust..
On that note, are you considering converting to Pastafarianism?
[url=http://www.venganza.org]Here's where you can read more about His Noodleness.[/url]
Here's a swift and simple refutation of Pastafarianism:
Your religion is a spoof, entirely made up for the amusement of atheists and evolutionists. The creator of the "religion", Bobby Henderson, never intended any of it to be literal; it's complete falsehood in all reality, and he knows it.
Therefore, since it was invented [i]as falsehood[/i], then your religion is therefore untrue.
I stay away from every religion/cult.
Any Jeniuists in here?
[quote=Dave_G]I stay away from every religion/cult.[/quote]
Good for you.
'm a pastafarian too. LOL. I guy sent hatemail to that sight, claiming that comparing FSM to creationism is unfair because apparently no scientists believe in FSM but many credible believe in creationism..... Yeah, whatever.
[quote=liberal agnostic]'m a pastafarian too. LOL. I guy sent hatemail to that sight, claiming that comparing FSM to creationism is unfair because apparently no scientists believe in FSM but many credible believe in creationism..... Yeah, whatever.[/quote]
No credible scientist believes in ID creationism. That's like an astronomer who believes in a geocentric solar system.
[quote]No credible scientist believes in ID creationism. That's like an astronomer who believes in a geocentric solar system.[/quote]
Define "credible scientist."
Not sure but I'd say a credible scientist is one who is accepted in the scientific community and publishes often in secular scientific journals.
From [url=http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/779]here[/url]:
[i]‘What about creationist scientists publishing articles, in secular journals, which specifically come to creationist conclusions? The bitter experience of a number of us has made it clear that there is almost no chance that such articles will pass the review process, no matter what their quality. I have also had repeated correspondence with the letters editors of major journals, having submitted brief, well-written items which critiqued published conclusions favourable to long-agers or ‘big-bangers’. These contained no explicit creationist connotations, but I have concluded that, now that I am known as a creationist, such items have virtually no chance of publication.’[/i]
No scientific journal would actually accept an ID article because it's not real science. That's why creationists have had to create their own journals because secular science journals occasionally debunk creationism.
[url=http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/index.html]Kenneth Miller[/url] is a Christian, but he's a staunch opponent of ID!
Do you mean he is a scientist? Becaue the 'but' dosent go w/ christian
Oh, and Pastafarianism is soooo wrong, Im a Dudeist www.dudeism.com (I thnk) go read about the church of the latter-day dude!
BTW, I can do weddings, pet spayings, brises (whatever the plural of bris is)
[quote=noor]I'm a pastafarian. Convince me to become an atheist.
blah blah blah blah blah....[/quote]
So how are those red herrings holding up?
[quote]Not sure but I'd say a credible scientist is one who is accepted in the scientific community and publishes often in secular scientific journals.
From here:
‘What about creationist scientists publishing articles, in secular journals, which specifically come to creationist conclusions? The bitter experience of a number of us has made it clear that there is almost no chance that such articles will pass the review process, no matter what their quality. I have also had repeated correspondence with the letters editors of major journals, having submitted brief, well-written items which critiqued published conclusions favourable to long-agers or ‘big-bangers’. These contained no explicit creationist connotations, but I have concluded that, now that I am known as a creationist, such items have virtually no chance of publication.’
No scientific journal would actually accept an ID article because it's not real science. That's why creationists have had to create their own journals because secular science journals occasionally debunk creationism.[/quote]
I see. Gotcha.
Kind of like Robert Price had to start his own journal because secular and religious scholarly journals alike debunk the Jesus-myth theory.
;-)
Darn, did we settle on this board on whether he was a myth? (Guess ill have to dig through some threads...)
[quote]Darn, did we settle on this board on whether he was a myth? (Guess ill have to dig through some threads...)[/quote]
Dave recently brought back the discussion...Rook never responded to my post...Anyway.
It's honeslty sad that we still have to discuss the possibility of Jesus's non-existence as if it's reasonable.