The Flying Spaghetti Monster Doesn’t Disprove God


Monesvol“Well, that was a pretty lame argument. 😛 Still, one point I’ll make about the FSM is that it’s not enough to simply have an alternative *label* to God, but if you’re going to say that the FSM is just as likely an explanation as God is (in a theological argument), then you have to stipulate that the FSM has specific attributes. In other words, if you’re looking at genuine theological arguments, not just pop phrases that could fit on a bumper sticker, then you’ll quickly see that the attributes required for the FSM to explain the same things that God is used to explain, in those arguments, requires the FSM to take on just about every essential attribute of God. In short, “God” is not an empty label used to invoke the mysterious (despite the fact that atheists often treat theists as doing just that). Thus, there is good reason for a theist to argue for God doing something instead of the FSM doing something. Plainly put, if the FSM was used as an explanation, the FSM would just have to be another name for the same divine being currently called “God.””

Read more:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.