The Instigator
theta_pinch
Pro (for)
Tied
5 Points
The Contender
Grandbudda
Con (against)
Tied
5 Points

the flying spaghetti monster is at least as likely to exist as the Judeo-Christian God

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,142 times Debate No: 44241
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (3)

 

theta_pinch

Pro

The flying spaghetti monster is the diety in the religion of pastafarianism. I will argue that the flying spaghetti monster is at least as likely as the Judeo-Christian God.
Grandbudda

Con

I will argue for the existence of God because I believe in what my opponent calls the Judeo- Christian God. I will make the distinction however that God is The God for all people even the atheists. Even if you don't believe in him, the important thing is that he believes in you.
Debate Round No. 1
theta_pinch

Pro

Why the flying spaghetti monster is at least as likely to exist as the Judeo-Christian God:

1. Neither have any evidence to support them.


2. Both the flying spaghetti monster and God have given people revelations and visions.


3. Sightings of both have occured.


Now some spaghetti monster miracles:


Here is a painting of the monster:





<a href=http://s3-2.kiva.org...; width="418" height="346" />And here's the miracle:


<a href=http://farm1.static.flickr.com...; />


<a href=http://farm4.static.flickr.com...; />


<a href=http://www.cevainteresant.ro...; />


SPAGHETTI MONSTER BURNS ON TOAST!!!!!



The flying spaghetti monster spotted by Hubble:



<a href=http://3.bp.blogspot.com...; />



The monster on a wall:


<a href=http://i730.photobucket.com...; />



And finally:



:<a href=http://pizzabytheslice.com...; />



THE SPAGHETTI MONSTER IN A CUP OF COFFEE?!!


The spaghetti monster has certainly proved himself as much as the Judeo-Christian God has!


Grandbudda

Con

My argument proposes that God's existence is self-evident. The logic, depending on the formulation is that
God is the greatest conceivable being. Since it is greater to exist than not to exist therefore God exists. God really signifies two different terms: both the idea of God, and God.

Christianity, Judaism, Islam and most religions assert that God intervened in key specific moments in history. For example at the Exodus and the giving of the Ten Commandments in front of all the tribes of Israel, positing an argument from empirical evidence stemming from sheer number of witnesses, thus demonstrating his existence. Every culture down through the ages has a flood story and this includes cultures and societies that couldn't possibly have colluded in some great religious conspiracy. The theistic conclusion comes closest for me as sufficient reason to believe that god or gods exists. There are just too many witnesses to conclude otherwise.

I have always loved pasta and I'm sure that your deity will understand if I continue to pray to my one true god. With all due respect to your spaghetti monster god, I don't think we should blame your god or mine for the warped actions of mortal men who use religion as their weapon. If you want to make the argument that men are weak and prone to evil I'll agree. But I won't blame God!
Debate Round No. 2
theta_pinch

Pro

My argument proposes that God's existence is self-evident. The logic, depending on the formulation is that
God is the greatest conceivable being. Since it is greater to exist than not to exist therefore God exists.

The flying spaghetti monster is also the greatest concievable being. It's omnipotent, omniscient, invisible, flying, and is made of PASTA. How can a humanoid God compare to one made of spaghetti and two meatballs; how I ask you, How!

Christianity, Judaism, Islam and most religions assert that God intervened in key specific moments in history. For example at the Exodus and the giving of the Ten Commandments in front of all the tribes of Israel, positing an argument from empirical evidence stemming from sheer number of witnesses, thus demonstrating his existence.

The flying spaghetti monster not only has hundreds to thousands of witnesses, but it has also been caught on film by the Hubble Space Telescope; modern evidence of it's existence. Modern evidence is way more reliable than 6000-2000 year old witnesses.

Every culture down through the ages has a flood story and this includes cultures and societies that couldn't possibly have colluded in some great religious conspiracy.

This is non-sequitur; recent evidence suggests that there were large city destroying floods 8000 years ago due to glacial melt; the floods were simply attributed to their respective God(s.)

The theistic conclusion comes closest for me as sufficient reason to believe that god or gods exists. There are just too many witnesses to conclude otherwise.

The flying spaghetti monster is a deity so it's theistic! Anyways the flying spaghetti monster could have just made them think they saw non-spaghetti like Gods like he uses his powers to change the dates given by radiometric dating. If it can change the results of a quantum mechanical process then it can certainly change the memories of large groups of people. It's simply a test of faith.

I have always loved pasta and I'm sure that your deity will understand if I continue to pray to my one true god. With all due respect to your spaghetti monster god, I don't think we should blame your god or mine for the warped actions of mortal men who use religion as their weapon.

But the flying spaghetti monster told us that it was its fault for all the evil and other flaws because when it ceated the universe and earth it was intoxicated. The pastafarian creation myth:
"The central creation myth is that an invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe "after drinking heavily". According to these beliefs, the Monster's intoxication was the cause for a flawed Earth. Furthermore, according to Pastafarianism, all evidence for evolution was planted by the Flying Spaghetti Monster in an effort to test the faith of Pastafarians. When scientific measurements such as radiocarbon dating are taken, the Flying Spaghetti Monster "is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage"--wikipedia

SOURCES
http://en.wikipedia.org...





Grandbudda

Con

When I became a man I put away childish things and while this has been fun I suggest that we try to raise the discourse here.
St. Thomas Aquinas made perhaps the best argument for the existence if God in his Summa Theologica. He was the foremost proponent of natural theology. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and much of modern philosophy was conceived in development or refutation of his ideas. He is renowned in the areas of ethics, natural law, metaphysics, and political theory. Aquinas embraced several ideas put forward by Aristotle whom he referred to as "the Philosopher", and attempted to synthethise Aristotle with the principles of Christianity.[7] The works for which he is best He was the foremost classical proponent of natural theology, and the father of Thomism. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and much of modern philosophy was conceived in development or refutation of his ideas, particularly in the areas of ethics, natural law, metaphysics, and political theory. Unlike many currents in the Church of the time he embraced several ideas put forward by Aristotle whom he referred to as "the Philosopher" and attempted to synthethise Aristotelian philosophy with the principles of Christianity.

Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways argued from the unmoved mover, first cause, necessary being, argument from degree, and the teleological argument. All of these can be found detailed in Wikipedia but the important thing is that Aquinas like many other scholars have shown that God does exist. Your Flying Spaghetti Monster exists in your rather comical mind only. I was hoping that we might actually try to reason out this complicated subject. My opponent seems clearly driven to prove his comical satire even at the expense of reason and logic. I will admit that I can't prove that god exists physically but then I never said he physically existed. His actual existence is a matter of faith while the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a matter of lunacy.
Debate Round No. 3
theta_pinch

Pro

All five of Aquinas's five arguments can be used for the flying spaghetti monster. Also the flying spaghetti moster has all the qualities of any other god. Con says that god is a mtter of faith and the monster a matter of lunacy but with both being omniscient and omnipotent there's no reason for a humanoid god being more likely than a spaghetti monster god. Both are a matter of faith and although the monster hasn't been around as long as other religions the modern evidence; the photo from the Hubble Telescope and all the burnt toast; provide stronger evidence balancing the likelihood. If you still don't think so; just remember the burnt toast.

NOTE: I think this is a troll debate.
Grandbudda

Con

When I became a man I put away childish things and while this has been fun I suggest that we try to raise the discourse here.
St. Thomas Aquinas made perhaps the best argument for the existence if God in his Summa Theologica. He was the foremost proponent of natural theology. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and much of modern philosophy was conceived in development or refutation of his ideas. He is renowned in the areas of ethics, natural law, metaphysics, and political theory. Aquinas embraced several ideas put forward by Aristotle whom he referred to as "the Philosopher", and attempted to synthethise Aristotle with the principles of Christianity.
The works for which he is best He was the foremost classical proponent of natural theology, and the father of Thomism. His influence on Western thought is considerable, and much of modern philosophy was conceived in development or refutation of his ideas, particularly in the areas of ethics, natural law, metaphysics, and political theory. Unlike many currents in the Church of the time he embraced several ideas put forward by Aristotle whom he referred to as "the Philosopher" and attempted to synthethise Aristotelian philosophy with the principles of Christianity.

Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways argued from the unmoved mover, first cause, necessary being, argument from degree, and the teleological argument. All of these can be found detailed in Wikipedia but the important thing is that Aquinas like many other scholars have shown that God does exist. Your Flying Spaghetti Monster exists in your rather comical mind only. I was hoping that we might actually try to reason out this complicated subject. My opponent seems clearly driven to prove his comical satire even at the expense of reason and logic. I will admit that I can't prove that god exists physically but then I never said he physically existed. His actual existence is a matter of faith while the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a matter of lunacy.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Well the flying spaghetti monster is god so you're admitting the flying spaghetti monster exists.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
You say god is without form but remember the flying spaghetti monster is all powerful so it doesn't have to obey logic.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
@fluffycactus;

This was intentionally a troll debate; wasn't that obvious? I can have intelligible discourse on theistic philosophy but again this was not supposed to be serious.
Posted by Grandbudda 3 years ago
Grandbudda
I agree and never said that god was humanoid as you say. I simply say as I believe that god exists. That there has been witness to his existence and as far as Thomas Aquinas my info came directly from Wikipedia.
Posted by FluffyCactus 3 years ago
FluffyCactus
Right. You've already shown that this is a troll debate; demonstrating your incompetence for intelligible discourse on theistic philosophy. You vastly misunderstand Saint Thomas Aquinas' arguments, for if you did understand them, you'd realize that Thomas doesn't believe in a "humanoid" God, and neither does the Christian Tradition. In fact, by definition, the Thomist God (the god proposed by St. Aquinas) is without form, as the quality of omnipresence implies.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Also spaghetti wasn't invented until the past few centuries so no one would know it was made of spaghetti.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Well actually since the spaghetti monster has showed itself to us multiple times in this century it's actually more likely. Anyways the spaghetti monster just tricked them as a test of faith.
Posted by FluffyCactus 3 years ago
FluffyCactus
Objectively speaking, the existence of the Judeo-Christian God is far more likely, as it is a being based in historic tradition, whereas the flying spaghetti monster is something invented in the past century.
Posted by Abnewstein 3 years ago
Abnewstein
Haha, Nice debate, Hope Pro wins.
Posted by RebelRebelDixieDixie01 3 years ago
RebelRebelDixieDixie01
Im Messianic Jewish and we don't have a flying monster watching over us, this argument is stupid.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Romanii 3 years ago
Romanii
theta_pinchGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe in God, but the God of the Bible really is about as ridiculous as the Flying Spaghetti monster, as Pro successfully showed. He also was the only one to use sources.
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
theta_pinchGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: i was going to give points to the person who killed the least of my brain cells, but it ended up being a tie
Vote Placed by GodChoosesLife 3 years ago
GodChoosesLife
theta_pinchGrandbuddaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made better arguments and gave quotes to defend his point of view is he gets the points for convincing arguments and reliable resources.