Christianity Challenge - How Silly Is Your Faith?

[Timelord223]

You frickin moron, Pastafarianism is not a satirical religion. Some people like me actually believe in it!

[Strusra]

Because only a God of love would create a universe that runs like clockwork, create a man that can enjoy it, give that man freewill to choose to enjoy it or not, give that man an inborn ability to know what love is and the choice love it and then to die for that man to remind Him of what love really is, He died to reteach Us how to fly when everyone else was saying "if You fly You die". Jesus is God. Pasta doesn't love You or Your body, You can love it but I wouldn't put My trust in it.

[Strusra]

@Strusra "choice to love it" God bless You.

[joshTheGoods]

@Strusra

Interesting position. Your first premise, that "only a God of love would create a universe that ..." is debatable. Furthermore, you've failed to show that Yahweh is a "God of love." In fact, I would say that there are powerful arguments against God being loving by human standards. I quote Epicurus via Hume: "Is He willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is impotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Whence then is evil?"

[joshTheGoods]

@joshTheGoods

You've also failed to make a distinction between your claims regarding Yahweh and anyone else's claims about their God. A Pastafarian will claim that their God is a loving God, and list off a bunch of reasons why - as will a Hindu, or a Muslim believer. This is rather moot though, the challenge is to make an argument against the God of my choice (the FSM) that doesn't also apply to your God. It is not to prove your God, but to rather disprove mine. Please - try again :).

[paorarep]

Hey, Josh. I find you quite strange, that being alot of what your saying are useless wranglings, Your going to find it hard for a christian to Proove christian as true, As the entirety of Christian doctrine, say a few things, that what you ask for won't be proved in this age. 1) God calls an indivual 2) At this call we are to believe the message of Christ, and on that a whole life revovles around the message we believe.

[joshTheGoods]

I didn't actually ask for a Christian to prove their deity of choice. What I'm asking for is that a Christian make a reasoned attempt at separating their God from the FSM. Show me why it's more reasonable to belive in Yahweh than it is to believe in the FSM.

[donlaura47130]

So i love you man. I will pray for you . I hope that god will help you to see what you don't. God bless you and if you have any questions about the bible Jesus or Yahweh i will be happy to help you find answers. However i will not argue with you. I will state things the way i see them and if you disagree that sir is your god given right

[joshTheGoods]

I have plenty of questions, but I'm not interested in the word of DonLaura47130 as it were. No disrespect intended, but when you provide me with your interpretations of the Bible, I can't see past the fact that it's an interpretation, and it's no longer the purported word of God; rather, it is your word. I've always held to the belief that in order to cling to the Bible as "the truth," on must take the position of literalism and inerrancy which leaves no room for the interpretations of man.

[donlaura47130]

Does the book that backs up the claim of fsm have the historical and scientific accuracy of the bible? are there sections in the writings of fsm about how the planets were hung in the sky like lil balls while the rest of the world believed it was flat. do archaeologists use this book and are amazed by its accuracy of locations and cultures of ancient civilizations? these are only questions? Not meant to start an argument. Just questions.

[joshTheGoods]

Ah, the correlation = causation argument. It's been a while ;). See the FSM claims re: piracy, then ask yourself this: does the fact that some of the Bible is historically accurate mean that it is the word of God? Would one not expect people writing a book making claims regarding the truth to write about the things that they see around them? What does it mean when the Bible fails to match up with known history (Exodus?). Just questions ;).

[Cootabux]

don

U mean like in genesis when god says the sun & moon R both light sources? And then how he hung them, along with all the "stars," on the sky (dome?) Its interesting how the author didn't understand the basic composition of our solar system...& the universe. The stars don't rest on the sky dome, but in the far depths of space!

Also, god shows his knowledge of genetics. U wanna change the coat design of animals, just put some striped sticks where they can see them when they beed!

LOLs!

[joecarter2727]

well you clearly havent read the bible except when you open it and flip from here to there, and even if someone had evidence that made you think you would never admit that you werent sure if GOD was real or not, you'd rather mock and ridicule it makes you feel better about the fact your not happy. thats why you wasted your time with this video about a MONSTER grow up man

[joshTheGoods]

Actualy, joe, I have read the Bible. Although I'd love to discuss the reasons why the Bible is a joke of a basis for ANY belief system, this is not the forum for such a discussion. I asked for you, the theist, to attempt to separate your God from the FSM. Furthermore, I've never asserted the absolute truth of ANYTHING; project much?

Now, you don't know me, and you certainly don't know how happy I am. If you cannot even make an honest attempt then PM me to discuss something else or buzz off.

[joecarter2727]

oh you have huh? and as far as the boggyman or whatever, theres nothing to seperate cause theres nothing equivalent. theres no testimonies, no gospel, no wisdom coming from this boggyman why would you follow him? the bible is wisdom and although i cant call GOD on the telephone for proof im still 100% in my faith no spegetti follower could speak with such confidence in the bible theres an answer for EVERYTHING

[joshTheGoods]

"oh you have huh"

Yes.

"theres nothing to seperate cause theres nothing equivalent"

Both the FSM and Yahweh have been touted as the creator of the universe, both have Gospels, both have testimonies, and wisdom is clearly in the eye of the beholder in this case.

"Im still 100% in my faith"

Absolutely certain? Really?

"in the bible theres an answer for EVERYTHING"

Interesting ... AN answer for everything? Who was present when Jesus first appeared after being crucified?

[joecarter2727]

you know what this topic is really dumb bless the boogeyman have fun with that, i ment answers as for why things happen in life im not gonna take a pop quiz

[mos277]

i find it odd that you are so angry when you practice a religion of "peace"

stop hating and start loving, i am an atheist and i have kept and open mind... you do not reflect well on your faith sir.

[joecarter2727]

its frustration not anger stay in school

[mos277]

admit the fact that you are acting like an asshole

haha what a cunt

[SleepingZombies]

no reply?

[joshTheGoods]

hehe, sorry if you check out my channel you'll see I've been pretty crazy busy lately. I'll respond in a moment ;p.

[SleepingZombies]

God is God. That's the point, he is not human, he is not a machine, he doesn't work in checks and balances, he cannot be understood, because he is God.

Everything in our world can be explained and understood, our world is a system.

God created this world. He is above what our world is limited to. He is not of this world. that's why he's God.

God can't be manipulated, God can't be put in box (or even a book, if you will) That's the whole point. If God could be proven it wouldn't be called faith.

[joshTheGoods]

I didn't ask you to prove god; rather, I asked you to disprove the FSM.

"God is God." - It really is hard to discuss something without an ontology is it?

"he is not human" - it's funny that you personify 'him' while claiming 'he' is not a person.

"he cannot be understood" - it seems that you have some sort of understanding do you not? Are you claiming that the Bible, the word of God, is not to be understood? The evidence agrees with you on THAT point.

[SleepingZombies]

ok i just looked up FSM real quick, granted i don't know all about it yet, but it seems that it's just the same as christianity, just instead of God, you say flying spaghetti monster, please correct me if there's more to it.

In that case God might be a flying spaghetti monster idk, it wouldn't change much. i haven't seen him and i don't think i'll see him anytime soon. If all this is about is God's physical being then it's stupid. That's not what christianity is about

[joshTheGoods]

It's not about God's physical appearance. It's about your ability to distinguish your God from one you KNOW to be made up. It must make you think, gee ... it's really easy to make stuff like this up. Hopefully you'll eventually ask yourself what distinguishes your God from others which will lead (if you're honest) to the admission that you cannot, and that it is wholly illogical to think you have the slightest change of being right when choosing one over another. Your position is precarious.

[SleepingZombies]

What separates God from others is that other religions teach different principles. For example Buddhism is not Christianity but instead of God it's a big fat guy. FSM is Christianity but instead of God it's a flying spaghetti monster. Right?

[joshTheGoods]

I don't know if that's a fair characterization of the Church of the FSM. It's rather like saying Islam is Christianity with Allah. In some sense, sure (from my point of view), but in the specifics - no.

I'm afraid you may be missing the point. Visit the FSM website, and tell me how you can prove the creator (of the FSM) wrong in his assertions. That's the challenge.

[SleepingZombies]

I get what you're trying to do with this challenge, but I'm afraid you're the one missing the point.

stop trying to exploit people's "pride" and baiting people into converting you with this challenge.

We've all had our experiences with prideful, annoying, judgmental "Christians"(trust me ive had my share) but believe it or not, not everyone is out to get your soul lol

I don't want to convert you!! God is a gentleman, he doesn't force himself on those who dont want him.

[joshTheGoods]

"I'm afraid you're the one missing the point."

That must be because your point has, apparently, just been made for the first time. Your initial willingness to take the challenge belies your inability to effectively overcome its implications. Don't tell me what to do ... I'm doing just fine with my decisions. If you don't want to take the challenge (or are incapable) then we'll just leave it off here ok?

[SleepingZombies]

haha good enough

[Cootabux]

Sleep

But "god" sure uses the threat of damnation, dont he?

He gives us free will, but dares us 2 use it freely, holding a "hell-gun" 2 our heads!

Isn't the son, JC, the same as his daddy yahweh?? This "one-in-the-same" god doesn't hesitate 2 kill innocent women, children, even infants!

Yes, this is your gentleman god! Never has there been such a sadistically cruel being!

He says, " If U don't submit to my will, I'll send U to hell... But don't forget, I love you!"

Yes, such a gentleman!

[lostship47]

@SleepingZombies Buddha wasn't a god, or any divine being. He is just the most famous of those who reached "enlightenment". And BTW, those are just depictions of a Chinese Buddhist ideal. The real Buddha was skinny as hell. And the Question he is asking is: Why aren't they simply the same God, with one of the groups interpreting its message differently? An example is the situation of Allah, Yahweh, and the Christian God being the same God worshipped differently.

[lostship47]

@SleepingZombies The same could be said for FSM. He is not something as simple as actual floating spaghetti, but rather, he simply looks like he is. Spaghetti was invented to honour his divine image. We do not completely understand(as of yet) how he has come to exist, but we hope to understand eventually, instead of simply claiming eternal ignorance, like you do.

[Lattefnatte]

gaah scarwyyy

[a68rebel]

1985 called....it wants it's microphone back!

[joshTheGoods]

lol, that mic was actually brand new, and an attempt to get away from the interference that made my audio quality so poor. I ended up getting a USB camera w/mic to get around the issue (damn unshielded HD!). Anyway, thanks for the laugh ;).

[kmsoldier08]

Well I am Atheist. but i like how you challenge almost everyone.

[kcolumbusgirl]

RAmen

[matt3i6]

But Isaiah says he's a Nazarene, Micah says Bethlehem and Hosea says out of Egypt. Further interesting is God's providence displayed in that political forces cause Joseph to flee to Egypt with the young Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem and when they returned it was again political forces that made Joseph decide to live in Nazareth!

[joshTheGoods]

You can point to passages in the Bible and assert that they are truth all you like. One must assume that as an atheist, I've considered the possible truth of the Bible and rejected it. Your task is not to continue citing from the one source you know I do not trust; it is to show me why I'm wrong to equate Yahweh to something we BOTH think is silly: the FSM. Why is Yahweh a more valid God than the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Shouldn't this be an easy case for you to make?

[OurTVproductions]

As I examine my life and the world around me, plus my own experiences, I can say that you're both fool of shit :)

The world isn't black & white - there's other options. Philosophy isn't the end all of all! Neither is fundamental thinking - and that is important no matter who you are what you believe!

But to say that there is NOTHING more to this life, not a real drop of potential spiritual energy or whatever... well, that just seems rather un-scientific if you ask me!

-OurTV

[matt3i6]

Also - the Bible isn't one book by one man. Rather it is 66 books by 40 authors over a span of some 1,600 years all corroborating the story of God. Impossible for mere men to pull that off without help. That help is from God, obviously.

Men not only could not have written the Bible without God's help but would not have written it. They wouldn't have written seemingly contradictory stuff like Messiah would come out of Egypt and be a Nazarene from Bethlehem. Cont.

[thesoundof3am]

impossible for mere men to pull off? dude READ the bible. it contridicts itself constantly. so 40 dudes over 1,600 years corroborated the story of god and the fact that he created adam & eve. but 100s of thousands of SCIENTISTS have all written papers and done experiements proving DARWINS theory of evolution but even though we can prove it. your only proof is that 40 dudes had a similar idea and since it coincides with the foundation of your beliefs in god it MUST be true. YOUR ARGUMENT FAILS

[OurTVproductions]

Nice.

The bible was also manipulated for reasons of power and control. Hence, Constantine :)

[matt3i6]

One of the ancient prophecies was that Jesus would be assigned a grave with the criminals [Isaiah 53:9] (which he was) but would be burried with the rich man - which he was!

"With Pilate's permission, he came and took the body away. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds." John 19:38,39

75 pounds! He was given a king's burrial in the rich man's tomb! How did Isaiah ever know?

[matt3i6]

"For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe." 1 Corinthians 1:21

We know you think Christianity is silly or "foolish" nevertheless Jesus is the "truth the life and the way" and it was a member of the Sanhedrin, Joseph of Aramathea, who went to Pilate and begged for Jesus' body. Cont.

[lolomg69aids]

I guess we'll see when we all day eh?

[jazzyhap]

Well a logical mind would first conclude that God cannot be examined or tested by science, so God is irrelevant to science. It is impossible to possess reliable knowledge about God by the use of scientific and critical thinking.

So an exercise, using critical thinking, in dealing with the proving/disproving of God is as useful as using a toothbrush for a telescope.

[ambir]

Ramen!

[CodeRedAdvisory]

(Part 2/3) Seeking for what? To be like the religious? To be like others who seem to have it all together? No, not at all. Its a misdirection to seek to be like others, but then call it 'seeking God'. Religions are full of this, and why so many who thought they were seeking God, were really seeking to be like others, or to be accepted by them. Sometimes His revealings of Himself are so simple and 'in-your-face'-so close, that only after distractions are stripped from our vision, do we see.

[CodeRedAdvisory]

(Part 1/3) See? "If you truly seek Him,"means one already has a bit of faith or it wouldn't even cross a one's mind that God might exist. "might" is filled with a bit of faith. Where does this come in us? Why does it even cross our minds-curiosity about God? He is the one that has put this yearning in all of us-this curiosity about Him. He's given everyone this bit of faith. Then the 'seeking' takes place.

[Bidwell9876]

Saying your god put the curiosity about deities in us seems like circular logic to me.

[CodeRedAdvisory]

Well, that's understandable. trying to convince yourself of something you're not convinced of is merely brainwashing. a worthless endeavor. God reveals Himself to you, then you reject or accept Him. (not the other way around). Once He's done this its not a matter of "trying to make yourself believe" .. its a matter of rejecting or accepting what you then know to be true. Honestly, i wouldn't worry about trying to 'make yourself' believe anything. If you truly seek Him, you will find Him.

[joshTheGoods]

Again "If you truly seek Him, you will find Him" translates to "You have to try and believe before you can believe." Look, your God is all powerful right? Why can't he reveal himself to me in a way in which I can understand or believe? If it's a matter of rejecting what I "know" to be true after he is revealed, then rest assured, I'd be a believer. I do not, and cannot deny what I know to be true. It takes effort to have faith - belief without knowledge. If you "knew" it you wouldn't need faith.

[CodeRedAdvisory]

your endeavors would be more successful if you were to place your challenge where rightly belongs. People can't convert you. God is the one that does the converting - your challenge belongs to Him. I challenge YOU to challenge God. Do it right, if you're going to bother doing it. God makes Himself known to you, and His way of salvation. Accept it, or not. Your choice. I guess you are the one with a challenge in front of you, Josh. It appears that Jesus Christ is weighing heavy on your mind.

[joshTheGoods]

Funny it seems to me your saying except God and THEN he will reveal himself to you. Seems silly if I say the same thing to you regarding the FSM which is the point of my challenge. Think critically about the FSM, and then apply the same train of thought to your current beliefs. You MIGHT discover that your criticisms of the FSM applies equally to the FSM and Yahweh. For the record though, I have tried to believe. I found that I could no more convince myself that gravity doesn't exist.

[isuperman90210]

Can we hear your belief why he/she/it is a real God I know its a satirical God but should you not logically have evidence pointing to that he/she/it is real?

[joshTheGoods]

My position is a hypothetical one. Even so, you assert the truth of your beliefs without presenting evidence; why should a Pastafarian have to live up to a different standard? The whole idea of this challenge is to get you to think critically about someone else's beliefs and hopefully apply the same thought process to your own beliefs. Should your beliefs not be subject to the same standards you impose upon others? I'm equivocating the FSM to Yehweh, prove me wrong!

[ReubenAStern]

As for you reccomending Brahman that sounds alot like my god under a different name under a different religion. You sudied it you know he has many names. Ive already convinced myself?! what you on about?!!!? note I said myself! besides Cathololosism is a bit iffy (no offence intened) with all their cover ups and so on. If you want to know read the bible and try to understand god. try to understand why god did the bad he did and also give credit for the good.

[joshTheGoods]

Brahman is Hindu, look it up before you give me a crap answer. I've read the Bible more than once, and I think it's rather arrogant of anyone to try and understand the God the Bible paints a picture of. Yahweh is a specific God, and as I stated in the challenge the Bible says he's the "one true God." If your argument is that the other personal Gods are just Yahweh under a different name then the discussion is over because that's exactly what I'm saying. FSM = Your personal God = silly.

[ReubenAStern]

To all the ATHESTS out there you start wars too. Humanity finds reasons to fight over anything. If we must loose Religion we must loose oil, salt, land and just about everything

now to the point...

Rastafarianism? Isnt that based on the old testeiment? Its good to see someone on youtube who dont hate religion but c'mon thats a trick question. Even to Muslims as most of their beliefs are the same as us(notice I said muslin not taliban)

[joshTheGoods]

Please name one war fought in the name of atheism? Although I've never stated so in a video, I AM an anti-theist, but not JUST because religions are used as the basis for war after war. I'm an anti-theist because religion has more ill effects than positive. Religion is the justification for bigotry, anti-science, AND war. Tell me, what does your religion provide that we couldn't have otherwise?

re motivations for war: Are you saying we shouldn't try to limit the causes of war at all?

[ReubenAStern]

The war on afganistan and iraq! Even tho that had a altirior motive (oil). Wars usually have more than one reason. But evil fakes like hitler and binladen use religion to validate it. Genesis is missunderstood and I think mistranslated but there are things in it proven to be correct. like that makind came from africa and that mankind was made last. Religion brings god into your life and until you think spiritually and not just physically you will never know.

[ReubenAStern]

also... am I saying we shouldnt limit the causes of war? What kind of dumb question is that? Ok if we get rid of oil the oil barrens will start a war and so on... I'm saying we should tolerate and accept each other as jesus said. THAT can end wars. Does Atheism say love your enemie? Thats how you end and provent wars. few end in total annihilation its always a truce. Why should I disprove your FSM if you did it yourself? U can b atheist if u want but dont knock god till u try it. God bless you

[joshTheGoods]

I think my question was rather fair. If we can do something to make it harder to justify war in a flat and humane world then we should do so. It is very hard to get someone to fly a plane into a building without the promise of heaven no?

I'm saying we should love our neighbors because it's in all of our interests; not because some fictitious character will punish us otherwise.

I haven't disproven the FSM, I just think it's as unlikely as your God.

[joshTheGoods]

"don't knock it until you try it" applies to atheism as well my friend. I went to catholic school, and I did try it. I found it distasteful and dishonest. So, the ball is in your court on that one.

Again re: the challenge - It is up to believers to convince me and themselves that their personal God cannot be equivocated with the FSM - a God we can all agree is rather silly. Think about it, what is the difference logically between the FSM and Yahweh? Not much indeed.

[joshTheGoods]

Are you saying the war in afganistan wasn't a response to a religious attack? (9/11). Are you saying Bush and Cheney aren't religious folks? Are you saying the strife in Iraq isn't between Shiites and Sunnis?

Genesis also has light coming before stars; how does that make sense? Are you also claiming that the Garden of Eden was placed conclusively in Africa by the Old Testament?

I know what religion brings. I believe it is you that is deluded as to the consequences of religion.

[joshTheGoods]

And please give the "not a true scotsman" fallacy a break. Bin Ladin's entire hatred for America is based on religion alone. In his case it was more than just justification; it was the sole motivation. I agree that groups will find reasons to fight other groups. I'm questioning the value of religion at all. What does religion provide you that you cannot provide for yourself? If you need a threat to be moral, then you're moral for all of the wrong reasons.

[joshTheGoods]

That's cool, tell your asshole friends not to wake me up at 8am with their bullshit. Tell your assholes friends not to propagate hatred and war. Stop fighting against human rights. Stop telling me I'm going hell. Stop demanding a double standard of treatment from the government. Stop acting like you have a monopoly on morality. Stop hindering scientific progress. When you stop all of your bullshit, I'll stop mine. One more ... stop running from the truth!

[timbojb]

Why would you care if people are telling you your going to hell?.... why not just ignore it and relish in your own understanding of the spaghetti monster prophecy. Tell all your friends that spaghetti is a traditional Italian dish that is not to be taken lightly.

[joshTheGoods]

I laugh more at the specific comment that I'm going to hell, it's more of the ideals behind their claim that I'm going to hell that bothers me. I listed a bunch of qualms I have, this one in particular amounts to a monopoly on morality. I live my life by a fairly strict moral code, so I hate having my values denigrated like that. It's like saying, "you can be a good person that volunteers at a soup kitchen, but unless you believe what I believe your moral basis is bullshit." I say fuck that!

[isuperman90210]

If you do not believe in any God or higher power and then im assuming you believe in evolution (if that is a false assumption please correct me) than where does your moral code come from because you should be free to do what you want under that belief.

I know im behind the times in this debate but I find this quite interesting.

[AxonZin]

Morals are subjective. There are no "true" morals, they are created by the one who follows them.

[ReubenAStern]

exactly believe what you want! Im Christian myself. Although I take Atheist up on their challenges I accept people are different.

[mannypatel1]

im not christian

[joshTheGoods]

Mr Patel, I framed the discussion around Christianity solely because it is the religion I am most familiar with. The challenge applies, though, to all religions that provide a "Personal God."

[spymaster2]

Now this would lead one to think that since we must be agnostic towards the existence of the FSM that we must also agree that Christianity is equally ridiculous and implausible as the FSM. That's where I think we differ in our opinions. I believe the FSM challenge is invalid, and here's why. We KNOW, for a fact that the FSM is satire. You and I both know it, because we know of it's origin. It was created as satire in 2005. We know who created it, and why.

[spymaster2]

It's an imaginary creature, created for the sake of argument. Even if the creature itself does exist, we still know for a fact that the story told by people like yourself is false. You don't really believe in it. No one does. Yes, it MIGHT exist somewhere in the universe, but we have no reason to believe it does. With Christianity on the other hand, we do have reasons (not proof) to believe that the Christian God might exist.

[spymaster2]

We have a 2000 year old book, which cannot be confirmed false. It was written to be believed in, not for the sake of argument. It's an historical account. You may not believe it is true, but you cant prove whether it is or not. We also have many witness reports of encounters with God and his emissaries, as well evidence which points to a possible human soul. Souls have nothing to do with the FSM, but stand as possible evidence for many religions, including Christianity.

[spymaster2]

So, while I can't PROVE that Christianity is true and don't actually believe in it myself, I do stand by Christianity as at least better supported by possible evidence then the FSM, which I can confirm to be false and therefore flawed as a rebuttal to ANY possible religion. Thanks for your time.

[joshTheGoods]

I didn't ask anyone to prove Christianity is true. I asked for you to prove that Pastafarianism is false. So, c'mon ... tickle my noodle. Entertain me with your proof. If you can do it without your proof being applicable against Christianity I'll blow myself.

[joshTheGoods]

All of the support for Christianity is anecdotal. Likewise, all of the information supporting Pastafarianism is anecdotal. Where in the original letter to the Dover School Board does it say that Pastafarianism was created for argument's sake? You are inferring this, just as Christians infer the meaning of Jesus' prophecies of a second coming. The point is to find an argument that works against the FSM that does not work against Christianity.

[joshTheGoods]

There are older books referring to Gods the existence of which would refute Christian scripture.

We have eye-witness accounts of abduction ... do you believe in aliens abducting humans?

What is the evidence pointing to possible human soul?

[spymaster2]

Good answers, I agree that both "religions" are supported only by anecdotal evidence. What I'm saying is that the anecdotal evidence for one is negative while the anecdotal evidence for the other is positive. Of course, this doesn't disprove Pastafarianism (great word!) neither does it mean anyone should necessarily believe one over the other (Or either of them for that matter), it just means that one is more credible then the other.

[spymaster2]

Actually, I believe aliens are much more plausible then religion. I take witness accounts with a grain of salt of course, but they should still be considered possibly true, unless we can prove them untrue.

"There are older books referring to Gods the existence of which would refute Christian scripture"

Agreed, and I think those older Gods make a far better refutation of current religious faith than the FSM.

[spymaster2]

"What is the evidence pointing to possible human soul?"

Ghosts, out of body and near death experience, past life regression etc. None of witch is PROOF of a soul, but remain as evidence pointing towards the possibility of one.

[joshTheGoods]

I disagree with your idea of what is acceptable as evidence. If my 4 year old sister tells me that the play-doh pizza she made is tasty that it should be accepted as evidence. I typically reserve measurable, confirmed, reproducible things as evidence. Would you present ghosts etc in the court of law when asked about proof or evidence of a soul? This is the problem that creationists faced in the Dover trial. Their standards for evidence fail to meet up with standards in any other discipline.

[spymaster2]

Your 4 year old sister is a very poor comparison to hundreds (if not thousands) of credible witnesses. This is my problem with skeptics, your quickness to lump credible evidence together with the silliest in order to justify your disbelief in all but what has been proven. What you're looking for isn't actually evidence at all, it's proof. These are two different things, especially when discussing possibilities such as religion and unproven scientific phenomena.

[spymaster2]

Would I present Ghosts in a court of law? Yes. Witness accounts, along with photo and video evidence are submitted in court all the time. The same way I would submit my neighbor's testimony if he claimed to see a person break into my house. It's evidence, plain and simple. I wouldn't expect to be able to PROVE a soul exists without more than that, but unexplained Ghost encounters still remain as evidence for the possibility of a human soul.

[joshTheGoods]

I agree that a sighting can be seen as evidence, but not of the supernatural. The supernatural is the LEAST likely explanation as has been proven time and again. Arguing for ghosts is like arguing for the God of the gaps. In short, ghost sightings are evidence of the amazing work that the brain does in interpreting the flood of information that it is overwhelmed with. I'm talking about Occam's Razor I guess here, and I posit that history is on my side on this one. It's not an offhand dismissal.

[joshTheGoods]

In this regard, my sister is a perfect example. She is 4 and lacks experience. She has a strong imagination. It is her eventual experience in the world that will lead her, and other future skeptics (I'll be sure of that) to doubt ANYTHING that leaps to a supernatural conclusion. This sort of thing hinders progress. It's a waste of time. When one assumes that the supernatural is as likely or more so than the natural they have given in to ignorance. extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof

[spymaster2]

What you consider super natural now, may be perfectly natural one day. You aren't being skeptical of the super natural, you're being skeptical of the unknown. You're just as ignorant as anyone else here, in fact maybe more. Have YOU seen a ghost after all? You are quick to dismiss someone else's experience, but based on something you have no first hand experience, or proof of. You say that ghost sightings are evidence of the brain being overwhelmed, as if it's fact. It is not. It's an opinion.

[spymaster2]

What exactly is the brain being overwhelmed by? What are they in fact seeing? Unless you have a MORE likely answer, Occam's Razor doesn't apply. Instead what you're doing is the exact same thing you pretend not to do. You're believing an explanation for which there is no real proof.

[spymaster2]

History is not on on your side. When a thing is discovered it becomes a part of our understanding of the natural world, making it appear that only natural things are ever discovered. Electricity is a perfect example. So is fire. However, before these things were discovered they were beyond our understanding, making them "super natural" at the time. Later they were discovered and controlled, placing them within what we consider nature. Just as many other unknown things will be discovered in time.

[spymaster2]

Taking into account something that many scientists might consider "super natural" doesn't hinder progress in the least. It enhances it. It's the way new discoveries are made. When one discounts possibilities based on the current accepted view, they OVERLOOK their ignorance, misjudge limited human knowledge and lead us down the road to stagnation. THAT'S a waste of time. Now, I'm not saying it's bad to DOUBT the super natural, I'm saying it's bad to dismiss it, as it could be true.

[spymaster2]

"extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"

Only if you're trying to PROVE it, not present it as one possibility of many.

[Bundesnetzagent]

Witnesses? You mean you were in a David Copperfield show!

[spymaster2]

Good video, and good questions. You sent this video to me, I'm guessing based on some comments I left somewhere else, but I should let you know first that I'm not a Christian. I'm agnostic, but I'd still like to try and answer your questions If I may. As an agnostic I admit that we can't disprove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Sure, it MIGHT exist. The same is true of any other mythical creatures or gods (Allah, Shiva, Oden, ect.)

[joshTheGoods]

Yes, I sent this video to many many people whose comments were accepted by a rather loved YEC here on YouTube. It is, in a way, an active protest of that tuber's desire to protect his audience from views dangerous to their faith. Like it or not, one cannot protect their audience as I can see all of their subscribers and write mean little programs to rape all of the names off of their long long lists. I can do the same with comments filtered so that only people in agreement are displayed. Sad no?

[spymaster2]

Don't worry about it. I have no problem with you sending me your video. I'm actually glad you did, as it makes for an interesting discussion. I'm actually very much against censorship here on youtube, but I can also understand why that particular YEC choses to block many negative comments. Youtube has become a thunderstorm of anti-religious hate, most of which just blocks any true discussion at all.

[joshTheGoods]

The problem with said blYECy censorship is that he doesn't just block rude comments, he blocks legitimate discussion of counterpoints as well. I can't say his attempt isn't noble in that he believes he is in the right morally, but I can open his eyes to the naivety of his position by soliciting his subscribers and the people whose comments he accepts. He must come to terms with the fact that one cannot simply hide from the opposition. The act of hiding is admitting the weakness of your position.

[spymaster2]

I don't disagree here.

[AgApE010]

the newest and BESTEST challenge to Christians, huh? :/ (see description)

Boy i guess you sure learned me, an ignorant Christian...

[joshTheGoods]

C'mon bud, that was obviously a tongue in cheek remark. Are you really so humorless? Watch any of my videos, and then come back and attack my (lack of?) eloquence and over-verbosity and mastery of english grammer[sic?]. Man that remark was st0op3d. :D I'll try and annotate my jokes from now on!

[Gentle135]

Your admitedly fake religion is not found in historical data inside and outside the bible. I wouldn't argue on the grounds of theology or philosophy and therefore would be waisting my time.

[joshTheGoods]

Why would an attempt at bringing one to Christ ever be a waste of time? I am not the only one watching this thread, so even though you might fail to convince me there are others with whom you might strike a chord. I am not asking you to prove anything, I am merely asking you to disprove my position without disproving your own in the process.

[Tychicus1769]

Easy. You can provide no historical evidence via SpagMo "scripture," supported by historical and scientific evidence, that I should even consider your position. I can.  Simple.

[joshTheGoods]

Actually, the FSM shows quite clearly with statistical data that the decline of His Holy Pirates is the reason for, and has accurately predicted such catastrophic things as hurricanes and global warming. That's both historical and scientific. rebuttal?

[sockpuppetsfromhell]

I loves me a beer volcano! YArrrr!

[MylerM182]

Unfortunately, this experiment is hopeless on both sides. To be converted to Christianity, one must become a theist first. The fear of the Lord is the BEGINNING of knowledge. After that one must have a desire to seek the answers and ask God to lead them down the correct path. We Christians do not lead others to the faith by ourselves. God is the one that draws them in, whether it be through His people or by other methods.

[WeTestify]

Amen. My sharing of prophecy seems to be like punching a brick wall, as you've just ratified.

[joshTheGoods]

I'm entertaining the idea of theism right now. The door is open! I desire to seek the answer as I've demonstrated by putting out this challenge with the consequence of accepting Jesus as my savior. I hope that discussing the FSM will give me reason for theism. I haven't any fear of God at the moment because the religion I'm trying out does not have a fear inspiring God.

What do you lose by making an attempt?

What "methods" other than "through His people" do you propose God might use?

[joshTheGoods]

I refer you to #1(b) of the 8 "I'd rather you didn'ts" found in the more info section for a reason why I currently do not fear God. It is up to you to give me the gift of that fear by helping me along the path of Christianity.

[MylerM182]

When I said "The fear of the Lord..." I was meaning fearful recognition. In other words you have to believe in God to gain the knowledge. The only thing I can tell you to do is to take that first step of faith and if you truly want to believe in God and gain an understanding, pray and ask for that understanding. Seek it out yourself and listen to what God tells you. Don't rely on others to tell you. There are many false teachers. This is the best advice I can give you.

[joshTheGoods]

So, you're saying that I have to believe in God in order to have personal evidence (via an answered prayer) that God exists? We're losing sight of the challenge, which is to DISPROVE the FSM, but I can't resist. I submit that YOU DECIDE to believe in the FSM and then pray to him for confirmation. Does that make any sense? Sounds like ID science to me. I CHOOSE to believe the earth was intelligently designed, now let's go find some evidence to support that claim. Circular at best!

[MylerM182]

No. I'm saying you have to believe in God first of all. It's a step of faith. Again, before you can become Christian you have to become a theist.

It seems like you're wanting evidence of God. So let me ask you what would you take as evidence of God's existence?

[joshTheGoods]

Sir, I cannot make this any clearer. There is no such thing as plausible evidence for something that is inherently undefined and undefinable. In the absence of the possibility of proof, I am proposing the opposite. I'm asking for evidence that can DISPROVE not just any God, but the most ludicrous example of a God... the FSM. I posit that if one can disprove this God, or any for that matter, then I must accept that one God can be more valid than another. This is the essence of the challenge.

[MylerM182]

Ok. Well what are the fundamentals of the FSM? What does FSM teach? Does it have any real people that follow it? Does it have it's own "bible"? Does it have any fulfilled prophesy? Has anyone claimed to have had an experience from it?

[joshTheGoods]

I've provided a link to the website for pastafarianism. I've also provided the pastafarian version of the 10 commandments in the more info section. There are millions of followers (unknown number). It does have a published gospel (bible if you will). I claim that my current philosophical position is inspired by pastafarianism. The question arose as I pondered its validity. There is a defacto end prophecy which I stated in a previous comment. There is also quantifiable belief in pirates as holy.

[joshTheGoods]

I trust that you can now see that although the details of the challenge are silly, the subject matter and goals are not. I also hope that you can embrace the silliness of the religion I've chosen without sullying the intent of the challenge itself. Just as a child might ask a serious question in a silly way and still deserve a serious answer, I feel that I deserve just as serious an examination. I stated earlier why I chose the most silly religion possible; nevertheless the subject is serious.

[MylerM182]

In the wikipedia link, the very first sentence should deem FSM as nothing more than a parody.

"The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which includes the Eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts", is a satirical text written by Bobby Henderson that is considered to embody the main beliefs of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), a parody religion created as a counter to Intelligent Design (ID)."

[joshTheGoods]

In the wikipedia article entitled "Criticism of Christianity" there is a passage that states:

"Jesus did not fulfill these prophecies."

In essence claiming that Jesus was a prophet, but not the messiah. If Jesus is not the messiah, then Christianity is false. I contend that arguing from quotes on wikipedia can be used on both sides. We still do not have a method for falsification of Pastafarianism that does not also apply to and falsify Christianity. IE, quote mining fails the challenge.

[joshTheGoods]

Put more succinctly, the opinion of others regarding a religion are easily disregarded. In the same respect, you disregard the writings of Dennet, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens and many others as outside opinions. In effect, you've limited your justifications to the scripture itself. I argue that I can maintain the same position. Regardless, the reason for the proclamation of FSM based beliefs is moot to the argument. I could say Jesus was only looking to create a good code of ethics for everyone.

[MylerM182]

It says JUDAISM claims Jesus did not fulfill these prophecies. But I believe some prophecies are yet to be fulfilled but will be in the future as is supported by Revelation. Also the quote I mentioned from the wiki article from FSM was from a link that you posted for your support. It's clearly obvious that Bobby Henderson created FSM as a protest to the Kansas State School Board decision with Intelligent design. Plus spaghetti is a man-made food.

[joshTheGoods]

It does say Judaism refutes Christianity. I was illustrating 2 points: 1) quote mining 2) anecdotal evidence. I posted the wiki article so you'd have access to the parts of the gospel it displays in order to save you money wasted on the gospel itself. Can you admit that what is obvious to you regarding Henderson's motives is an inference? I'm attempting to show you that any argument you use against the FSM is equally applicable against Yahweh. Spaghetti was divinely inspired just like the Bible.

[MylerM182]

Is there another theory on Henderson's motives? What do you suppose the motives for making up Yahweh is?

"Spaghetti was divinely inspired just like the Bible."

What was the purpose of FSM to inspire a food after itself?

[joshTheGoods]

One theory might be that he wanted to spread peace through a set of ideals enumerated in the 8 "I'd rather you didnt's." Another theory is because he felt like it. I think a reasonable theory for Yahweh's creation is that the ruler at the time wanted to espouse a power that transcends human power. Another theory might be to provide an explanation for that which they didn't have the information to explain naturalistically. Inspired for pasta is spread the goodness of pasta. You don't like pasta?

[MylerM182]

Your theories for Henderson's motives don't transcend to lead someone to actually believe in the FSM. If the ruler wanted to espouse power, I think it would have been more reasonable to claim that he was god himself. If it was just a made up explanation for things they didn't know, what led them to make up all laws?

[joshTheGoods]

I believe that a ruler representing the one who can communicate with God is in a sense taking the place of said God. For instance, Moses... he went to great lengths to forbid his followers from setting foot on Mt. Sinai. Why? Catholics must communicate with God through priests ... Why? This is just like a monarchy claiming to be God on Earth. The fact is, religion HAS been used to wield power throughout history. I argue that creation of laws based on God support my theory that religion == power.

[MylerM182]

Moses warned his people to not go up the mountain because the glory of God was upon the mountain. They would have been killed.

I'm not Catholic and I don't know of any reference in the Bible that says we must communicate with the priests. Religion Has been used for power in the past. But you know what Jesus taught about regarding this religious power(Pharisees).

[joshTheGoods]

Assume that a man wrote the Bible for the purpose (amongst other things) of wielding the power of a higher being (just for a moment then you can go back to subservience). From this point of view, ask ... could it be that Moses wanted to be alone on the mountain so that no one could see his game? What threat would he use to keep people from the mountain?

I sent a small reply regarding separation of man from god via PM.

"Religion Has been used for power in the past"

so why not now? difference?

[MrBlahOfTheFire]

Hey Josh. I think its really good of you to do these challenges. However, I dont really understand the challenge, and which is your religion? I'm a bit confused. But I will gladly accept the debate :)

Thank you

[MylerM182]

Read Exodus 19:16-20. It's not like the people didn't see or hear anything and only stayed off the mountain because Moses said so.

Religion is used for power in some situations. But does this necessarily make the true teachings of a religion wrong? There are law enforcement and political officials that use power wrongly. Does this mean that all law enforcement and political officials are evil?

[WeTestify]

My answer to this is simple, prophecy.

This had a taste of "dawkins" repitition.

[joshTheGoods]

Please be specific. What prophecy are you talking about?

[WeTestify]

Well lets just use some basic examples (I don't have a Bible with me so I cannot quote atm, sorry).

The Bible says...

In the last days we would be ruled by the marketplace.

In the last days there would be a final "beast empire" a.k.a fourth reich / world gov., I think it's pretty clear were headed further that way, since a new monetary system is being formed right now because this one is "failing"... Not to mention Gordon Brown and many others have recentky many times called for New World Order

[WeTestify]

This NWO will likely be a financial order, so, possibly something like an International Central Bank... Matthew 24:6 "And you will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end." Matthew 24:7 "For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes."

[WeTestify]

II Timothy 3:1-5,7"But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, ....

[WeTestify]

...reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of god; holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

[WeTestify]

EXISTENCE OF A 200,000,000 MAN ARMY IN THE EAST  Revelation 9:16 "And the number of the armies of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them." An army of that size had never existed until China's army reached that number in the 1960's.

[WeTestify]

Zephaniah 3:9 "For then I will return to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent."

Prior to the restoration of Israel in 1948, Hebrew was a dead language. Now Hebrew is spoken throughout Israel.

Also, the temple in jerusalem must be rebuilt. There is at least one group pushing for this, and they already have all the "garb" required... templemountfaithful [dot] org

[joshTheGoods]

You still haven't answered my question regarding WHEN. One can pull out a bunch of predictions and eventually most will come true in one sense or another.

Since you refer to your prophet, allow me to quote mine:

"The pirate faithful will be led unto eternal dessert (Tiramisu and Cannolis if I'm not mistaken). The unforgiven will suffer the final battle of Vermiceddon."

I contend that the American occupation of Iraq might represent the pirate faithful going into the desert. The end is near!

[joshTheGoods]

It might be later though. *shrug*

[joshTheGoods]

Just an aside: The Chinese army only has around 2.3 million members. It has never been even near 200,000,000 strong. The largest army ever was around 12 million strong, and that occurred during the Cold War. Cite your source? Mine is:

William E. Odom, The Collapse of the Soviet Military, Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1998, p.39

via wikipedia.

[joshTheGoods]

There are a lot of times that people are frightened and are hearing about war. Lots of times we've seen famines and earthquakes. Was Matthew specific about WHEN these things might happen? Have they already happened?

Please, if there is applicable scripture pointing to when, be honest and present it.

PS please see rule #2 and its consequences. My scripture states that the FSM is God. My God and your God can't coexist under Biblical rules, so why is your book better than mine?

[WeTestify]

Because of prophecy.

Yes there is specific about when these things will happen, there are other independent things that have to happen too.

Prophecy that has already been fulfilled makes me God real and yours a fantasy made as a joke to begin with. The force behind the fsm isn't a fantasy though, it's real and dangerous.

[joshTheGoods]

What are the specifics regarding the "when." You've conveniently left them out... What are the other things? Do they ALL have to happen for the prophecy to be deemed true?

What is the force behind FSM to which you refer?

[WeTestify]

The other things? I cannot perfectly answer you at this time, and that's why I've left a lot out because as I said I dont have a bible with me.

Satan, is the force behind your FSM.

Unfortunately, this of folly to the natural man. But to those of the body of Christ (or, well, you don't even have to be saved to believe it) it is truth.

[joshTheGoods]

I will add a link to an online bible to the more info section. Please, feel free to educate yourself and then come back and let me know what you come up with.

You claim Satan is behind the FSM, how can you be certain he is not behind Jesus? Please tell me how you draw that distinction so that I and others can avoid Satan in the future. If I cannot tell the difference between Satan and God, then I'm not sure I want to commit to either.

[MylerM182]

Are you a true theist or is this just an atheist experiment?

[joshTheGoods]

I'm an atheist; so, yes you can call this an experiment. I've put forth the consequences through my PMs. You have a chance to convert me right now. Pass the challenge, earn another soul for the big guy in the sky.

[MylerM182]

Unfortunately this experiment is hopeless on both sides. To be converted to Christianity, one must become a theist first. "The fear of the Lord is the BEGINNING of knowledge." After that one must have a desire to seek the answers and ask God to lead them down the correct path. We Christians do not lead others to the faith by ourselves. God is the one that draws them in, whether it be through His people or by other methods.

[avlfreak]

This seems interesting.

It should be interesting to see how it turns out.

But at the same time, it's almost silly, because we should all just practice our religions as we please instead of trying to convert everyone. So encouraging people to tell us why their religion is best may just be asking for trouble. I hope this won't turn out bad; I'm curious to the results of this.

[joshTheGoods]

I certainly am asking for trouble :). The reason I ask why this particular denomination is best is because they are the most vocal in proclaiming it to be the best. I believe this proclamation might just be the undoing of those fundies that take the bible as a book of laws... those that are one and the same as people railing against human rights in the case of homosexuals using the Bible as their justification just as they did for my slave ancestors here in America. I doubt it though :(.

[joshTheGoods]

They will most likely do as they always do... backpedal and rationalize to no end. If anyone wants an example of the type of rationalization I expect, take a look at ProfMTH's series entitled "Jesus was WRONG." The Prof links an excellent paper that enumerates all of the excuses I'm looking forward to. The hope is to demonstrate their favorite tactics in an unavoidable way. My fingers are crossed, hopefully someone dares to take the challenge.

[Jacena]

I for one welcome our new FSM.

Pastafarians will be seen in a whole new light!

All hail the flying spaghetti monster!

[joshTheGoods]

I wonder if anyone will even attempt this challenge. Anyone that wants to see their futile attempts at this very fair challenge, favorite this video and attach it to a message to your favorite christian apologist. Happy debunking!

[TETSUno1]

Preach on brother, RAmen!