This guy is ridiculous. I don't advocate for the FSM, nor do i believe in the FSM, but this guy is straight up lying about God's existence being proven. At no point in time has God's existence been proven.
He said there is evidence for God's existence and belief in God and Christianity is a rationally defensible position, not that God's existence has been proven. Nice straw man though. Who's lying again? Who's ridiculous?
According to wiki, there are hundreds and hundreds of Sects of Christianity, many of them incompatible. To my knowledge there are only a few dozen Churches of the FSM. So it terms of consistency of belief, I think our theology is vpbetter than Christian theology.
"While there are some atheists who take theistic arguments seriously, many atheists do not take the time to seriously consider these arguments." Guess what? Same applies to theists. You can take the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a rambling of an atheist who does not take theistic arguments seriously, but there are also many, many, very many religious people who do not take the time to seriously consider atheist arguments. People are stuck on beliefs rather than reasoning. Confirmation bias. Man, I am born, and raised Catholic, but I lean towards agnosticism. Why should I take the time to study all this reasoning for why God exists? Who says he doesn't look like a Flying Spaghetti Monster? Do you think he's like, Loki, and can take any form? That'd be cool. Come on, man. There's just so many things we don't know about this world, and explaining away everything under a god, and then imposing your own morals that will please this supposed god is just so lazy. We are rational enough to form our own moral compasses, and it isn't a very productive use of time to be loving god more than your neighbours. I can respect it if people had dark times and relied on god. But hey, people could rely on the Flying Spaghetti Monster too in dark times. It's humorous enough to do that as well. I'm not gonna take the time to read all about the arguments, because I'm sure nobody'd read through this too. Why give the time of day to someone who won't be convinced? Same applies to both parties in here. Earlier you talked about an a priori rejection. Well, burden of proof here. You have the evidence. Seems the reasoning to tie it in to your claim is not enough. To clarify, I'm acting as an antithesis. I'm not proposing any other belief. Agnostic, after all, the lazy atheist. I mean, your evidence is just one book, or that one cloth Jesus wore I saw on a documentary, and then your reasoning is so long. Why you guys got so many lawyers? The book only makes sense if you believe. And everyone else is making arguments and reasons you should. "Belief in the divine is the place human rationality naturally takes us. Thus, the burden of proof is on the atheist to explain why we should deny the natural, logical leanings of our minds and hearts and why we should accept atheism as the truth." from your article on Russell's teapot. Ugh. I thought religion is about humility under a greater being. Why should we even trust the logical leanings of our minds? You just called it a leaning! Some people lean other ways, I guess, dude. Since atheism is like, a negative, that's like an unequal balance. Like in court. Prosecutor and defence. That's why. Since theists are so adamant on it and atheists can't get any ground, they make an alternative theism. Spaghetti Cosmological argument - We could just, not know the cause. It could just be random. What if this powerful thing that caused life is not some sentient god, but just, a soul? A cell that had the possibility for life? To propagate and expand the universe? But fine. Okay. If a god caused it, it's either Yahweh, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Both are possible, aren't they? How are we to discern their forms? Hell. Make it Sun Wukong. Since Buddha ain't a god and all. Teleological argument - Gosh, why does everything have to be designed by some greater being. Evolution wasn't enough for you? Wait a couple more years, maybe we'll find an explanation that shakes the whole world once more. It can be really random. Or have you heard the theory that we are living in a simulation? That everything is so mathematically or so designed that maybe we are living under some engineer's universe? Yeah. That's basically god, isn't it? Or, or, get this, the only way the universe could've come into existence, and life itself, is this very specific design. If this design were not followed or executed, we wouldn't be here talking. We're just the one in a million to happen to exist as humans, and happen to exist in a universe. Right? We don't need to be created with a purpose. Everything can just be a happy little accident, dude. But I suppose that makes most people feel aimless in life, thus religion. Moral argument - Oh, that's easy. Morality traced back to god. Yes, religion is ubiquitous. I wonder what the concept of family is, then. Why do we find the need to love them? I'm sure there's an instance of a remote island with a family. Survival instinct. We work better in numbers against predators. Why do we feel pity when we look at hardship? I never liked it when my teacher said that we all have a conscience, and that it's God's voice speaking to us. I never heard his voice. I prayed, and prayed, but I guess it's not meant to be for my parents to stop arguing, boohoo. I grew up and realised that our choices are the ones that get the world to move. You go follow your own beliefs, your way of thinking, no matter how selfless or selfish it is. What brings us to be "naturally good?" Because god is good, so we are good? Authentic freedom and stuff like that? Well, what brings psychopaths to naturally not care and kill people? What brings psychopaths, raised in a normal environment, to not commit heinous crimes? We mimic each other. That's what babies do. As humans, most of us want to survive and live. And we just realised it's easier to do that when you work together with each others' strengths. But people don't like it when you take away their hard work, you share only what you allow to. So then, we don't steal, we don't covet, we love our neighbour, etc. Morality is just how we choose to peacefully co-exist and not have to deal with pain and violence. Not because we are naturally drawn to god or wonderfully made and naturally good. Though yes, we are all wonderfully made. Thanks, universe, for giving me a bunch of coincidences making me look so darned cute. Appreciate it. ugh seriously man this video kept talking about fallacies. i just finished my second year class about that logical fallacy stuff (love is a fallacy is pretty funny) but like dude. i dunno what to call your fallacy, but it's all like: "god exists because we think so" "uhhh dude some other people think that he don't" "majority vote bro think harder". was it argumentum ad populum? "The argument is not that belief in God is true BECAUSE so many people believe that God exists. Rather, it is simply an irrefutable fact that many brilliant minds have pondered the God question and come to the conclusion that He does, in fact, exist. *This fact, while it doesn’t prove that God exists,* should prompt us to deal with the question of God’s existence with seriousness and intellectual honesty." So you're really out here just saying "yeah but everyone else thinks so so like think harder take it seriously bro" while you get to feel like "I'm so right lmao everyone else thinks so too but lemme just leave this guy to figure it out himself lol not my fault" ughhh so tiring. I thought that one of the ways to show you're smart is to explain it in simple terms. Why is god so complicated? 'Til someone comes along and explains it just as simply as theory of evolution does, y'all just have a theory goin' on for so many years that nobody can seem to ever agree on
Classic misconception of a non-beliver of the FSM, but it´s ok, you might not believe in the FSM but it dosen´t matter he boil for you sins and he still loves you. Ramen
i am a Christian and there actually arent any evidence for the existence of God, at least there aren't any EMPIRICAL evidence which is needed to make the evidence scientific. The examples of the "evidence" he listed are not empirically testable nor could they be accurately correlated to the existence of God and only to the existence of God. However, i believe that this is what makes religion so beautiful, you cannot prove that it is real, yet it inspired you so much that you decide to have faith in it anyway (as long as you decided to believe out of your own will and inspiration instead of having it forced on you by guilt tripping adults as a kid or pushy hateful "preachers" who just tell you that you are going to hell)
Facts I am Buddhist and whilst we believe in God's in the heavens we reject the idea there is a creator god, we teach the gods in heavens have long life's but like us will die and be reincarnated and they have no power over earth or the universe
Arent these arguements based on the assumption that a thing is true? For instance the 1st cause has to assume there is a 1st cause. To claim that arguement one must show how it could not of been an infinite regression or eternal... the evidence for them seem to be hypothetical not factual..
Here, I don't believe in his noodliy goodness, but if you want to debate on its existence, I'll defend it more than God, and why it is more plausable for an FSM to exist than a God to exist.
Nobody uses the 'flying spaghetti monster' as a cuss word, but people around the world cuss the name of Jesus Christ exclusivley everyday. That tells you what the truth is.
