Atheo in three parts.

I'm struck by the similiarity between the Holy Ghost (espirito sancto) and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It is, I suppose, one thing to declare disbelief in an entity that other's believe in.

It is quite another to invent an entity to not believe in. In an abstract way the invention of the entity of disbelief is a creation. The non-entity becomes as important for the non-believer as an entity is to the believer.

Atheo: the god who say's "I am not"

Early christians believed they were drawn together by belief in this holy spirt. Modern followers of atheism are equally drawn together by dis-belief in their non-entity.

Originally posted by Red Night
I'm struck by the similiarity between the Holy Ghost (espirito sancto) and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It is, I suppose, one thing to declare disbelief in an entity that other's believe in.

It is quite another to invent an entity to not believe in. In an abstract way the invention of the entity of disbelief is a creation. The non-entity becomes a ...[text shortened]... Modern followers of atheism are equally drawn together by dis-belief in their non-entity.

You're a twit.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You're a twit.

The fact that you attack people who don't agree with your religious beliefs hardly makes you unique.

Originally posted by Red Night
The non-entity becomes as important for the non-believer as an entity is to the believer.

What? No it doesn't. The Flying Spagetti Monster is a fictitious character designed to satirize religion as part of a much larger secular message. It is not nearly as important as the Holy Spirit or other deity is to believers.

Originally posted by Red Night
The fact that you attack people who don't agree with your religious beliefs hardly makes you unique.

...Doesn't make him wrong either.

Originally posted by Red Night
The fact that you attack people who don't agree with your religious beliefs hardly makes you unique.

I don't have religious beliefs. Haven't you got that yet?

Come on say it with me, "a-the-ist, a-the-ist, a person who doesn't belief in God or gods."

No, see, by not believing in God, you're just believing in a different god whose name is "not God." You worship him by not worshipping him. Your non-belief in the nonexistent moral authority of your non-god is exactly the same as any other religious belief in God. Why can't you understand that? It's so simple.

EDIT: yes, this is sarcasm

Originally posted by darthmix
No, see, by not believing in God, you're just believing in a different god whose name is "not God." You worship him by not worshipping him. Your non-belief in the nonexistent moral authority of your non-god is exactly the same as any other religious belief in God. Why can't you understand that? It's so simple.

Dogs and cats, living together...mass hysteria!

Originally posted by bbarr
Dogs and cats, living together...mass hysteria!

I believe (I hope?) he was being sarcastic.

Originally posted by Red Night
In an abstract way the invention of the entity of disbelief is a creation. The non-entity becomes as important for the non-believer as an entity is to the believer.

Uhm... hmm... I hate to say it so bluntly, but there's nothing abstract about it, the invention of the entity of disbelief is a creation, that's kind of what "invent" means. The creation is, as pointed out a satirical look at religion, an application of the same flawed justification being brought to its natural conclusion. As Dan Dennett put it I believe, why can someone invent an entity using the exact same philosophical reasoning and have it cast out as an obvious "fake" while any other religion, remember, applying the exact same reasoning, is granted literally a sacred place in society?
Where is the demarcation that the religious use to differentiate between the two? Apart from age, which has no effect on the rationality or philsophical basis for a belief, what is different between the FSM and a god? Nothing other than the fact that those in the curch of the FSM don't take themselves as seriously as the religious. This too has no effect on the rationale or the philosophical basis.
And that last sentence is the most crucial... the only difference between the two is that the church of the FSM fully accepts and indeed enjoys its members knowledge that its all a big joke.
The only difference is the knowledge that its a joke. Other religions should be aware of the hilarity of their situation, but are not, to everyones disadvantage.

=================================

What? No it doesn't. The Flying Spagetti Monster is a fictitious character designed to satirize religion as part of a much larger secular message. It is not nearly as important as the Holy Spirit or other deity is to believers.
====================================

That's right. So many athiests I know think they are so clever.

Kind of like an empty box wrapped in colorful fancy ribbons.

I'm an atheist too.

But Red Night seems to be claiming that atheism is somehow the same as theism because some atheists create characters to not believe in. He's made many similar statements in the past. And I think that's a pretty spurious line of reasoning.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=================================

What? No it doesn't. The Flying Spagetti Monster is a fictitious character designed to satirize religion as part of a much larger secular message. It is not nearly as important as the Holy Spirit or other deity is to believers.
====================================

That's right. So many athiests I know think they are so clever.

Kind of like an empty box wrapped in colorful fancy ribbons.[/b]

Whereas theists....

Well, "Emperor's new clothes" is all I can say.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I don't [b]have religious beliefs. Haven't you got that yet?

Come on say it with me, "a-the-ist, a-the-ist, a person who doesn't belief in God or gods."[/b]

The fact that you consider your religious beliefs to be superior, doesn't make you unique either,

Atheism is a belief, but it's not a religious belief.

Neither is deism, for that matter.