I don't know if you guys have seen this, I just saw it on another forum. I thought it was cute.
5835
I have discovered a new religion called Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. We believe that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. He is invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease. In order to express my faith, I must wear full pirate regalia, because global warming is caused by the declining number of pirates.

To find more information about my new religion, please click here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
http://www.venganza.org/

May you be forever touched by His Noodly Appendage,

:lol:

Good one gaya, hope a debate gets going. The drawing of the deity is the best.

Good one gaya, hope a debate gets going. The drawing of the deity is the best.
I hope a debate comes of this as well. I tried to post the pic in the OP but I can't figure out how to do it...if any one knows.

eta...i don't think we can post pics in threads on this forum. I've never seen anyone else do it (i don't think i have)

I know there a lot christians on here but are there those that advocate int. design?

this is at the end of the site if you didn't get that far down. It has me cracking up
Contacted by lawyers asking how serious I am about pursuing legal action against the Kansas School Board if they refuse to give equal time for FSMism. The answer: very. If it happens, I will need an army of like-minded Flying Spaghetti Monsterists on my side. I recommend you start hunting around for Pirate regalia.

I know there a lot christians on here but are there those that advocate int. design?
i have no idea lol

I have no problem with teaching intelligent design, it's a fine idea. I learned about intelligent design in university, in a philosophy class, because it's NOT science.

bomby the bombadier beetle does make a lot of people stop and think, irreducibly complex?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0932766137/002-3233831-6996018?v=glance

One of the things I think is interesting but peculiar about ID is that ID proponents seem strangely uninterested in the designer intelligence/s. You'd think, it being "science" and all, that they'd want to know more about this intelligent being/beings who did the designing. Oh, yeah -they already know about the Designer!

Quotes from leading ID proponents:

From William Dembski

"[A]ny view of the sciences that leaves Christ out of the picture must be seen as fundamentally deficient." (Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology, 1999, p. 206)


"Intelligent design readily embraces the sacramental nature of physical reality. Indeed, intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory." (Touchstone Magazine, July/August 1999)


"But there are deeper motivations. I think at a fundamental level, in terms of what drives me in this is that I think God's glory is being robbed by these naturalistic approaches to biological evolution, creation, the origin of the world, the origin of biological complexity and diversity. When you are attributing the wonders of nature to these mindless material mechanisms, God's glory is getting robbed...And so there is a cultural war here. Ultimately I want to see God get the credit for what he's done - and he's not getting it." (Address given at Fellowship Baptist Church, Waco, Texas, March 7, 2004)


Explaining that angels may have been responsible for creating some aspects of life on earth: "And another thing I think we need to be aware of is that not every instance of design we see in nature needs to be directly attributed to God. Certainly as Christians we believe there is an angelic hierarchy - it's not just that there's this physical material world and there's God. There can be various hierarchies of intelligent beings operating, God can work through what can be called derived intelligences - processes which carry out the Divine will, but maybe not perfectly because of the fall." (Ibid.)


From Phillip Johnson


Admitting that not bringing up God and the bible is strictly a strategic choice: "So the question is: "How to win?" That’s when I began to develop what you now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important thing"—the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." (Touchstone Magazine interview, June 2002)


"This isn't really, and never has been a debate about science. Its about religion and philosophy." (World Magazine, November 30, 1996)


Admitting that the entire purpose of the Wedge strategy is religious: "If we understand our own times, we will know that we should affirm the reality of God by challenging the domination of materialism and naturalism in the world of the mind. With the assistance of many friends I have developed a strategy for doing this....We call our strategy the "wedge." (Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, 1997, pp. 91-92)


"We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator." (LA Times, March 25, 2001)


"Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." (American Family Radio, January 10, 2003)


"The subject is not just the theory of evolution, the subject is the reality of God." (Hank Hanegraaf's "Bible Answer Man" radio program, 12/19/2001)


"We're not trying to prove the character of God through science. That's a bad idea. What I'm trying to do is clear away the misunderstandings, the debris that prevent people from accepting that God who wants to accept them." (Ibid.)


"The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'" (Church and State Magazine, April 1999)


"The Intelligent Design movement starts with the recognition that "In the beginning was the Word," and "In the beginning God created." Establishing that point isn't enough, but it is absolutely essential to the rest of the gospel message." (Forward to Creation, Evolution, & Modern Science, 2000)


From Nancy Pearcy


"By uncovering evidence that natural phenomena are best accounted for by Intelligence, Mind, and Purpose, the theory of Intelligent Design reconnects religion to the realm of public knowledge. It takes Christianity out of the sphere of noncognitive value and restores it to the realm of objective fact, so that it can once more take a place at the table of public discourse. Only when we are willing to restore Christianity to the status of genuine knowledge will we be able to effectively engage the “cognitive war” that is at the root of today’s culture war." (Uncommon dissent : intellectuals who find Darwinism unconvincing, 2004, p. 73)


"If the broader impact of Darwinism was to remove Christianity from the sphere of objective truth, then the broader significance of the Intelligent Design movement will be to bring it back. By providing evidence of God's work in nature, it restores Christianity to the status of a genuine knowledge claim, giving us the means to reclaim a place at the table of public debate. Christians will then be in a position to challenge the fact/value dichotomy that has marginalized religion and morality by reducing them to irrational, subjective experience." ( Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, 2004

Design . . . dunno about intelligent.

the only problem I have with intelligent design, is that if "the flying spagetti" created us, then who created him?

Hehe.

Intelligent design is not science, its religion/philosophy and doesn't belong in a science class. That includes the semolina variety ;-)

My mother was raised Catholic, but she modified her beliefs of intelligent design when she was older. Now she believes that Darwin created everything.

Seems simple enough to me. Teach the scientifically backed theory (evolution, for the most part) in the Science classroom. Teach ID in a religion or philosophy course. Don't mix and match.

Ludi: That is the best post, ever.

I'm not going to be dressing as a pirate anytime soon, but seriously anyone who thinks ID can be seriously considered "science" does not understand science.

The Earth is flat and square. God the Father took Jesus up on a big mountain to show him the four corners of the Earth. If all of the Earth was visible from one point, it must be flat, and if their are corners...

the only problem I have with intelligent design, is that if "the flying spagetti" created us, then who created him?
His noodly appendage is derived from saucy sticky matter/goo

http://theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4133&n=2

OMG, thats great. :-) I love the onion :-)

I prefer ziti myself.

Seems simple enough to me. Teach the scientifically backed theory (evolution, for the most part) in the Science classroom. Teach ID in a religion or philosophy course. Don't mix and match.

It's illegal to teach evolution in Georgia as far as I'm concerned. I think it is a whole bunch of BS not to. After all, this is the 21st century...

(Lets answer several posts at once, without quoting, and see who gets confused.:))

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardier.html

Everything you want to know about the Bombardier Beetle.

And for another poster, Cobb County, Georgia, no longer requires those nasty stickers on their books.

(Lets answer several posts at once, without quoting, and see who gets confused.:))

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardier.html

Everything you want to know about the Bombardier Beetle.

And for another poster, Cobb County, Georgia, no longer requires those nasty stickers on their books.
This is blasphemy against FSM

You did confuse me. I would asume that when you talked about Cobb county you were refering to me, but I never talked about that county or stickers.

AFAIK, its not illegal to teach evolution in Georgia. The county of Cobb, usually associated with Atlanta, Georgia, had mandated those infamous textbook stickers for several years, but that was recently struck down.