Why don't christians confess their non-belief in the FSM is just an assumption?

Question

I couldn't help myself.

FSM = The Flying Spaghetti Monster

www.venganza.org

Answer 1

Christians disbelief in the Noodly One (may his gently boiling water ever be of perfect salinity) is based largely in their ignorance of Him. I feel sure that all who have learned the truth about him (and the mountain....and the midget....) and are of sound mind, cannot help but embrace Him and all He stands for.

Ramen! Ramen!

Answer 2

The same reason why Atheists do not confess their non-belief in the FSM is just an assumption.

Me either.

Answer 3

Here are a few brief evidences for the accounts written in scripture. And I have never argued circularly that because the text says it, therefore it's true.

1) The documentary evidence for early written accounts is overwhelming. That is to say that there is overwhelming evidence that the gospels were finalized within the lifetime of eyewitnesses, not generations later allowing for embellishment. Now that doesn't mean that what the documents claim is true by any means. But it does mean that they were written when the events (alleged) happened.

There is more manuscript evidence for the bible than all of ancient history combined. In fact anything you know about Caeser or Aristotle comes form documents that date back to 800-1200 years after the events they describe happen. Yet historians place confidence in those documents. Portions of biblical manuscripts date back to within 30-60 years of when they were written. That's a news flash when it comes to ancient history. See the John Rylands, Bodmer Papyrus II et al.

And these documents that have been reliably preserved make claims. And all claims no matter how extreme or trivial require evidence. The evidence for an acient historical matter is different than evidence for a present scientific matter. Here are some evidences for the case for Christ.

1) The boom of early Christianity.

Any religion can spread rapidly. For Christianity it's the circumstances by which it took off that are significant. The Jews, at the time of Jesus were waiting for this promised Messiah who they thought were going to deliver them from their oppressors. Then Jesus of Nazereth comes along and many believe He is the Messiah. They crucify Him because of His claims to divinity which they considered blasphemy. Had he lead a revolt against Rome with sucess, they would have probably accepted Him as thier deliverer, but instead He brought revolutionary teachings which elevated the poor, slaves and women, but harshly critized the pious religious pharasees. So they crucified Him. And His apostles who thought He was the Messiah were confused and probably thought they were mislead. But then something happened. They started claiming to have seen Jesus ressurected from the dead. In fact, all of the apostles (except for John) were killed for spreading this belief.

And that is where one evidence lies. If it was all a hoax, and Jesus hadn't risen, then why were all these men willing to die for what they knew was a lie? People die for lies all the time. But it's because they think it's true. If the apostles truly knew it wasn't true since they were the orchestrators of the conspiracy, then why didn't they back down at the point of death, especially being burned alive or crucified upside down.

Some alternate explanation is needed for the rise of early Christianity if Christ truly didn't ressurect from the dead.

2) The Jews who hated the new movement could have crushed it. They could have stopped it in it's tracks had they produced a body. All of Christianty claims to be staked on one claim. That Jesus Christ rose from the dead. The bible clearly states that if Christ didn't rise then Christians are the most pitable of all men. So if the Jewish leaders could have produced a body, it would have stopped the movement, but no such thing was ever recorded in the anti-Christian literature of the day.

3) Argument from opponent. Like I mentioned, the non-Christian Jews of that day would have loved to discredit the Christian movement. And they produced lots of anti-Christian literature. Even thought their literature said lots of terrible things about Jesus, they never deny His ressurection or miracles, but instead claim He did miracles by some demonic power. So that's actually an evidence in favor of His divinity.

And there are many more evidences. I know most people think Christians are brainwashed or simple minded and certainly some are. But I never make the case the Christianity is provable. I do however say, that based on the evidence, Christianity is probable.

And of course I know that the whole FSM thing you wrote was just and ad-hominem attack. But I do encourage you to look into the evidence for Christianity. I know you think there is no good evidence for it. But you don't know what's coming after death. It would be worth just taking a half hour of your life to look into it. Even if you come to the conclusion it's wrong, with a possible eternity in the balance, and I fairly say "possible" it would make sense to just investigate the claims.

Answer 4

CJ- You are new here obviously. Go here: http://www.venganza.org/
FSM = Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Answer 5

Perhaps they're afraid their faith won't stand up the Truth of the FSM (pbuh)!

RAmen!

Answer 6

What is the FSM???? Please clarify.

* Gazoo-check my date and my points, YOU are new here, I just have never heard of the flying spaghetti monster!

Answer 7

sorry...i'm a godzillian cause she's really comunicated with me through y/a

Answer 8

YAY!!!
R'Amen to that, sister!!

Answer 9

LMAO!

Answer 10

good one.....