FSM-ism

[Deagonx]

Ofcourse, but God doesn't want us to follow his views out of fear of him. He wants us to follow him because we think its the right thing to do.

[Idozen Cair]

Why does Satan even exist then? Why can't God just destroy him forever?

I am very aware that this is veering very off-topic.

[Deagonx]

This is a very common misconception. Satans influences would very easily be stopped by God. It is a test of faith.


Secondly, Satan does not rule hell and torture people. He is IN hell just like everyone else.

[ArtDrake]

Well, I'm sure that you, just like your savior, could hope to be perfect and sinless.
What's that? You couldn't? Might your situation be just like that of a Buddhist, only hoping to achieve a fraction of the worshipped one's perfection through a life of good deeds and non-sinful-ness?


Oh, and about Islam; they might have had a more havoc-wreaking God / Allah and corresponding prohet than you Christians did back in the days where gods actually did things... maybe... but throughout history, it's really been the Christians that have butchered native peoples, burned and stoned people they thought were witches, and in general, not been very nice people to the rest of the world. You don't exactly see many militant Buddhists about, and the militant Islam in recent political history has really been just that -- political. Terrorist leaders have been manipulating the religion of desperate people to recruit cannon fodder in their struggle for... whatever they're struggling for. (???)

Historically, Christians have joined bloody wars, if they can be called that, in frustration with the fact that native populations don't immediately accept Christianity as fact when it's shoved down their throats at gunpoint. And the fact that the have the wrong color skin. And the way they won't buy nearly enough opium.

Christianity has some good points, but I think it has bad points comparable to those you've named. It's certainly no more believable.

[Rob]

You do realize that one of Christianity's teachings says that all men are sinful, and have fallen short of God, and that living a life of good deeds does not lead to perfection or a "fraction of perfection" (whatever that means) but instead is in vain. I believe this would make it different from Buddhism. As for Islam, I do hope you realize that one of the first things that Muhammad and his followers did was conquer Mecca and the rest of present day Saudi Arabia. I am somewhat surprised that you have written off the present day militant Muslims as political. If that is the case, couldn't you just write off the militant Christians as political. After all, the Roman Catholic Church was very political, which was one of the things that led to the Protestant Reformation.

[Deagonx]

Well, I'm sure that you, just like your savior, could hope to be perfect and sinless.
What's that? You couldn't? Might your situation be just like that of a Buddhist, only hoping to achieve a fraction of the worshipped one's perfection through a life of good deeds and non-sinful-ness?


Oh, and about Islam; they might have had a more havoc-wreaking God / Allah and corresponding prohet than you Christians did back in the days where gods actually did things... maybe... but throughout history, it's really been the Christians that have butchered native peoples, burned and stoned people they thought were witches, and in general, not been very nice people to the rest of the world. You don't exactly see many militant Buddhists about, and the militant Islam in recent political history has really been just that -- political. Terrorist leaders have been manipulating the religion of desperate people to recruit cannon fodder in their struggle for... whatever they're struggling for. (???)

Historically, Christians have joined bloody wars, if they can be called that, in frustration with the fact that native populations don't immediately accept Christianity as fact when it's shoved down their throats at gunpoint. And the fact that the have the wrong color skin. And the way they won't buy nearly enough opium.

Christianity has some good points, but I think it has bad points comparable to those you've named. It's certainly no more believable.

Why is it exactly, that you think any war that a Christian is in, is a Christian War? There is a difference.


There were the crusades, I'll give you that, but we are not looking at what men did under the banner of a religion, we are looking at the religion itself.



Islam fully supports the wars it fights now. I could show hundreds of commands that say so.
And no, its not like the bible where you can pull quotes out of context. They are straightforward commands, not stories.


Secondly, I do not hope to become like Jesus. It simply won't happen. That'd be like saying I want to be as powerful as god.

[Deagonx]

ALSO:


In response to the 'Political Militant Islam' bit. Islam does not believe in anti-disestablishmenttarianism . They think that church and state should be completely one and the same. The Qur'an even specifies its social laws. Around the globe there are courts specifically for muslims to be punished under THEIR law.


The SAME law that promotes large scale execution, a man's word being twice that of a womans (in court). The same law that says if a woman is raped, she needs 4 MALE witnesses, otherwise she only confessed to adultery.


This is Islamic law. Shari'a law.

[MikeW781]

ALSO:


In response to the 'Political Militant Islam' bit. Islam does not believe in anti-disestablishmenttarianism . They think that church and state should be completely one and the same. The Qur'an even specifies its social laws. Around the globe there are courts specifically for muslims to be punished under THEIR law.


The SAME law that promotes large scale execution, a man's word being twice that of a womans (in court). The same law that says if a woman is raped, she needs 4 MALE witnesses, otherwise she only confessed to adultery.


This is Islamic law. Shari'a law.

You ought to stop flaming Islam without understanding that much like Christianity, what is written in their holy book and what the majority of their followers practice today have important differences. To say those are part of Muslim law, then imply it as applied to Muslim courts of law is incorrect and ignorant.

[Deagonx]

You ought to stop flaming Islam without understanding that much like Christianity, what is written in their holy book and what the majority of their followers practice today have important differences. To say those are part of Muslim law, then imply it as applied to Muslim courts of law is incorrect and ignorant.

He said that the Islamic militants in the east were more political than anything. I gave him a rebuttal describing why Islam considers church and state one and the same.

[ArtDrake]

And I insist that what the holy book literally describes and what its followers do differ. A modern-day interpretation of religion and its old archaeic roots should differ as has the world.

Well, let me point out some flaws in *other* religions. (Well, you did ask us why we think our religion is more true than others)

You misunderstand. My question is of whether Christian creation is any more believable that creation according the the gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I hold the view that it is not, and would actually like to leave Islam out of it, unless you would like to consider Islamic creation and compare it to the other two. I did not, in fact, ask why your religion was more true than others, but rather if you have any grounds for believing that your version of creation is more believable than that of the Pastafarians.

[Deagonx]

Pastafarianism is not and never will be an actual religion.


If you actually want to argue why I think Christianity is more believable than a mere reductio ad absurdum, then I would deem you crazier than the 'Pastafarianists'. (Well, the ones that legitimately believe in it)

[ArtDrake]

I'm wondering why you think Old Testament creation oughtn't be reductio'd ad absurdum. The way I see it, it's equally absurdum as that which was reductio'd from it.

Old Testament Creation: A superhuman being, not from Earth, decided one day to create a universe. He kind of just splunked bits and pieces down, one day at a time. Strangely enough, he created electromagnetic radiation before there was anything to radiate it. Weird. And then he went on to create the Earth in a very flat way. It must have rounded out all on its own, because God didn't create it that way. And then, after creating millions of species of insects and fishes and birds and reptiles and worms and bacteria and parasites in just six days, he takes a whole day just to think of a better life form than that. You'd think he'd have figured out that the awesomer life forms were smarter and better at moving around long distances. And then he made dinosaur bones to totally fake us out.

Spaghetti Creation: A superhuman being, not from Earth, decided one day to create a universe. He kind of just splunked bits and pieces down, in no particular order. Strangely enough, he created a beer volcano before creating midgets. Weird. And then he went on to create the Earth, round as it is. I think that bit's more accurate than in the other one.... Anyway, he created a few species of each kind of animal and kind of let them breed and differentiate, in two days, took three days off, and then made some midgets. (Apologies to those of you amongst the forumers that go by midgets, little people, or any number of politically correct names, but FSM-ism makes a lot of jokes about that. I'll try to keep those to a minimum) Then, he spent the rest of the day, since creating midgets was easy, laughing and suchlike at them. Meanly. And he's been messing with the universe with his noodly appendages ever since, in order to fool scientists.

What science tells us: Well, we don't know much for sure, but there sure do seem to be a lot of fossils around that show intermediate forms between common ancestors and current species... let's call this theory evolution, and say that they're all decended from the same ancestor, a really long time ago, seeing as there're tons of evidence for it. Oh, and about that whole start of the universe. We don't know much about that for sure either, but we're pretty sure that there was a lot of pyrotechnics involved. We'll be sure to tell you as soon as we figure something out. But it's going to be less ridiculous than either of those other two theories -- I can tell you that much for sure.

[Deagonx]

I read the first sentence of both paragraphs and realized you were trying to make them sound similar.



In response, Im not going to finish.

[ArtDrake]

Not only did I attempt to make them sound similar -- they are similar; that's very much the point.

I see that you are terribly offended by the very idea of trying to point out a single way in which your religion's creation is more believable than that of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Sorry about that, but it's rather necessary for this thread to have a point. I'd also say that it's significantly less offensive than your posts containing your repertoire of slurs against Islam. Seeing as it is the burden of the one making a proposition to put forth evidence to support it (as stated by Bertrand Russell), I merely point out that the two are similar, as are many creation stories.

[Deagonx]

The only TRUE similarities between creation theories, is the fact that it involves some sort of God.


Beyond that, it is very complicated and using similar words, and sentences, does not change that.