Are Pastafarians Dishonest

[luiza]

I have asked that many times. I haven't reached a solid conclusion.

I have no idea where that energy would have diverted elsewhere.

That is the only question that you have been put here that needs answering .

A complete failure this time around will simply mean that you will have to repeat the exercise , and many times until you learn .
You are talking the easy option and simply retreating into your chosen madness .

Enough said . It is up to you to conquer your own Demons .

 

[luiza]

You have my curiosity but I'm guessing you won't elaborate on what you believe my disability is. I will end up disappointed if I ask but I will take the risk of being disappointed.

What do your perceive my disability to be?

You either have not addressed Fulfillment or given up on it .

I also suffer similarly to some extent except I have taken up high level Duplicarte Bridge as my Time waster .
Excluding here which is a complete let down .

 

[presonorek]

You either have not addressed Fulfillment or given up on it .

I also suffer similarly to some extent except I have taken up high level Duplicarte Bridge as my Time waster .
Excluding here which is a complete let down .

I'm 46 years old. My kids are grown. I'm divorced. I have never had a successful career (depending on who you ask) but if you ask me then I have never had a successful career. I have most definitely given up on Fulfillment. My life has absolutely no purpose outside of bringing Pastafarianism to life.

You suffer from having a lack of fulfillment. I suffer from a lack of fulfillment. I imagine there are many others that suffer from a lack of fulfillment. I would call this a common if not universal human condition rather than a disability.

Entertainment exists for that sole purpose. You play Duplicarte Bridge, some people orchestrate abstract logic into deterministic machinery through iterative symbolic manipulation and systemic architecture alignment, and I synthesize disparate theological and ontological paradigms into a cohesive intellectual framework through hermeneutic excavation and epistemological refinement, repurposing metaphysical narratives into a systematized, praxis-oriented philosophical architecture for contemporary application. We all have hobbies. None are superior to the other in my opinion.

 

[presonorek]

conquer your own Demons .

I know that some Pastafarian literature suggests that we believe that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. That is just nonsensical assertions used to make a point. Pastafarians are more than likely all atheists. Usually the logical conclusion to an atheist belief system is existentialism which is a very destructive mindset. If that is what you mean by demon then I understand your concern. If you mean a literal demon then Pastafarians do not believe in that kind of thing.

We all lead pointless lives. We have to fool ourselves into believing that we have purpose. That is what I have done. I am safer than most people that travel down the path of an existential crisis. Some of my writings have already addressed the danger of existentialism.

 

[presonorek]

IV. Purity and morality – In line with the Presbyterian view of our tradition there will always be a debate between ardor and order. Pastafarians traditionally assert to having flimsy moral standards much like a noodle. This is sometimes mischaracterized as low moral standards. Flimsy means that it can be adjusted based on the necessity of the moment. The moral standards can wibble and wobble much like the consistency of a noodle. For example: when in the workplace it is important that you build impeccable trust by behaving in an upright way. When playing video games utilizing a little white lie here and there could give you an advantage over your opponent. In a dire state of survival mode, stealing or lying could be necessary for your own wellbeing. Bobby Henderson tells us that purity is for drinking water, not for man. This belief is certainly beneficial for providing flexibility to individuals to accommodate their own wellbeing. It also leaves little room for living a life filled with guilt. For the purpose of this document, we must return to the discussion of finding a balance between ardor and order. It is necessary for our existence as an organization to have some sort of ethical guide that will take us into the future. The failure of the First Pastafarian Church in Norman Oklahoma could be blamed on low moral standards. The landlord of the property where the First Pastafarian Church congregated received constant and frequent complaints about behavior that was not accepted by mainstream society. We must maintain a certain level of purity and morality as an organization. Order is necessary for our existence.

 

[presonorek]

V. Order – Pastafarians are a free people that reject dogma, shun rules, and even have symbolism that promotes a hedonistic mindset. This is an unfortunate aspect of our religious tradition that undermines our religion as being legitimate. It can even be argued that this lack of order will lead to our demise as a movement. The first point of that argument is the documented failure of the First Pastafarian Church in Norman Oklahoma that was short lived. Because of these weaknesses; we borrow, steal, utilize, parody, or copy from the Presbyterian tradition. When possible, we adopt Book of Order The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Part II 2011/2013 to keep us grounded and sustainable. We must be formally organized and have rules for our posterity even though this does create a paradox and contradiction of who we are as Pastafarians. It is of note to Pastafarians that paradoxes and contradictions were predicted, celebrated, and even encouraged in the early writings of Bobby Henderson.

 

[presonorek]

By far the most Gobbledygook exposition . Other similar Topics available .

You simply do not have to rely on claimed Paradox and Contradictions to be contrarian ---- though they can occasionally be useful when relevant .

This is baby adults pretending and imagining that they are clever and not baby adults .

I'm just using my skills to do what I am good at doing.

Sometimes I engage in comparative exegesis and conceptual distillation of doctrinal corpora to construct a meta-synthetic schema, operationalizing abstract religious and philosophical tenets into a coherent, actionable epistemic framework for modern praxis.

Sometimes I perform logical deconstruction and critical synthesis of normative and metaphysical claims to formulate a coherent, internally consistent philosophical model grounded in rational justification, practical applicability, and cross-contextual explanatory power.

Sometimes I systematically evaluate prescriptive doctrines through normative analysis and moral calculus, reconstructing value-laden frameworks into a philosophically rigorous, ethically actionable system guided by coherence, minimal arbitrariness, and pragmatic viability.

Sometimes I apply evaluative heuristics to theological and philosophical constructs, isolating outcome-dependent principles to architect a normative framework that maximizes utility, minimizes harm, and sustains moral scalability across variable contexts.

Sometimes I construct a probabilistic evaluative model from pluralistic ethical sources, weighting doctrinal prescriptions by expected moral value under epistemic uncertainty, to derive adaptive normative heuristics with maximal cross-scenario moral robustness.

I try to keep myself busy with what I am good at doing. The future of Pastafarianism is in good hands. Now the past of Pastafarianism isn't all that great. In the present Pastafarianism is just a joke. I'm just using my skills to do what I am good at doing.

 

[presonorek]

You either have not addressed Fulfillment or given up on it .

I also suffer similarly to some extent except I have taken up high level Duplicarte Bridge as my Time waster .
Excluding here which is a complete let down .

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. While I appreciate your concern, I want to assure you that my mental health is in good standing, and I remain engaged with the concept of fulfillment—though perhaps through avenues that differ from your own.


We each navigate meaning and satisfaction in our own ways. For some, it's high-level Bridge; for others, it's writing, building communities, or exploring philosophical questions. I respect your path and hope you find joy in it.


If this space has been a letdown, I understand—and I genuinely wish you richer conversations and more rewarding exchanges elsewhere.

 

[presonorek]

To put it more politely,

I'm 46, divorced, and my children are grown. While I’ve never pursued what most would consider a “successful career,” I’ve come to accept that definition doesn’t suit my path. From my perspective, fulfillment—at least in the conventional sense—is something I’ve intentionally let go of.


What remains is a sense of purpose rooted in giving shape to Pastafarianism. It may not align with traditional metrics of meaning, but it offers me a framework in which thought, creativity, and humor intersect in ways that feel worthwhile.


You mention suffering from a lack of fulfillment. I do as well. I suspect most people do, to some extent. Rather than a personal defect, I see it as a nearly universal human experience—perhaps not a pathology, but a feature of self-awareness.


Entertainment helps us endure this ambiguity. You’ve found intellectual engagement through high-level Duplicate Bridge. Others express themselves through software engineering or religious-philosophical synthesis. Personally, I spend my time working to unify disparate theological and philosophical traditions into a coherent framework through which people might explore belief without dogma.


In the end, we all have our forms of creative expression. I don’t see any as superior—only different in method and intent.

 

[shockedcanadian]

Dogma is different from religion which unfortunately is lost on many who try and denounce it often ironically via their own hubris. I would view dogma as similar to a cult, it is man manipulating man via some method of control, usually in the form of present day man creating their own rules or man leveraging thousands year old bible texts to control others by G-ds rules. Ultimately neither are accurate. I can read G-ds commands independently, if translated in a language I can understand (English), what more do I need at the most granular level than the writings themselves? Thankfully, we live in a vast world of information so we can dissect, understanding, accept and/or reject via our own and societies evolving standards of civilization. For example, we could isolate the story of Abel and Cain to justify some evil act biblically but we know through centuries of moral progress, legal acceptance and general philosphy, in addition to the clear contradiction within the bible itself; that such an act on another would be wrong and un-justifiable.

 

[presonorek]

Dogma is different from religion which unfortunately is lost on many who try and denounce it often ironically via their own hubris. I would view dogma as similar to a cult, it is man manipulating man via some method of control, usually in the form of present day man creating their own rules or man leveraging thousands year old bible texts to control others by G-ds rules. Ultimately neither are accurate. I can read G-ds commands independently, if translated in a language I can understand (English), what more do I need at the most granular level than the writings themselves? Thankfully, we live in a vast world of information so we can dissect, understanding, accept and/or reject via our own and societies evolving standards of civilization. For example, we could isolate the story of Abel and Cain to justify some evil act biblically but we know through centuries of moral progress, legal acceptance and general philosphy, in addition to the clear contradiction within the bible itself; that such an act on another would be wrong and un-justifiable.

Absolutely loved your reflection—it’s spot-on. In the Abrahamic spirit, we’re reminded that even Moses had to climb a mountain just to listen, not lecture. The Scriptures were never meant to be weaponized, but pondered—like manna, gathered daily, not hoarded and hardened into dogma.


And hey, if God wanted us to follow a script without thinking, He wouldn’t have given us free will—just stone tablets with multiple-choice answers.


Seriously though, engaging the text with humility, wisdom, and a bit of laughter? That’s holy ground.

 

[presonorek]

So, you reject absoluteness?

Absolutely you say??

I. On Truth and Knowledge​

Q1: What is truth?
A: Truth is a process, not a possession. It unfolds through curiosity, experience, and shared questioning.


Q2: Can we know absolute truth?
A: Perhaps. But we should act as though we cannot—lest we mistake our convictions for commandments.


Q3: How shall we approach knowledge?
A: With an open mind, a skeptical heart, and a sense of humor.

---

II. On Belief​

Q4: What is belief?
A: Belief is a temporary hypothesis, not a permanent home.


Q5: Should belief be defended?
A: Only when it is under attack by force, not when it is questioned in earnest.


Q6: What is the role of doubt?
A: Doubt is sacred. It guards us from arrogance and keeps us humble before mystery.

---

III. On Morality​

Q7: How do we know what is right?
A: By observing what brings less harm and more joy, and by listening to the voices we are most tempted to ignore.


Q8: Is there a moral law?
A: There are patterns of flourishing discernible through empathy and reflection, but no universal rulebook.


Q9: Who is the moral authority?
A: No one, and therefore everyone. Each conscience is a jurisdiction.

---

IV. On Community and Practice​

Q10: Do we have rituals?
A: We do, but they are optional, flexible, and occasionally ridiculous by design.


Q11: What is sacred?
A: That which fosters wonder, humility, and joy without demanding obedience.


Q12: What is blasphemy?
A: Taking oneself too seriously.

---

V. On Religion​

Q13: Is this a religion?
A: It is a religion insofar as it offers meaning, fellowship, and a lens on the absurd. It is not a religion if it becomes a burden.


Q14: Should other religions be respected?
A: Yes, so long as they do not demand submission. Critique is respect; coercion is not.


Q15: How do we relate to the divine?
A: With reverence, skepticism, and a wink.

---

VI. On Purpose and Destiny​

Q16: What is the purpose of life?
A: To live well, question often, laugh loudly, and leave things a bit more beautiful—or at least less certain.


Q17: What happens after death?
A: We do not know. Therefore, we live now with urgency and grace.


Q18: What legacy should we seek?
A: One of ideas planted, assumptions challenged, and joy multiplied.

---

VII. On the Prophecy of Ashley​

Q19: Who is Ashley?
A: Ashley is the one foretold—a child of possibility, born on December 25, 2391, in what we now call the United States.


Q20: What is Ashley’s purpose?
A: To gather the scattered seekers, the skeptics, the joyful questioners, and establish the permanent Pastafarian Church on August 9, 2413.


Q21: What shall we expect of Ashley?
A: Nothing specific, for Ashley's identity is shaped not by dogma, but by intention. The prophecy fulfills itself through those who believe it should.


Q22: Why is Ashley important?
A: Because hope moves in patterns, and myths inspire futures. Ashley is not a savior, but a mirror through time—calling us to prepare not for her coming, but for our own becoming.

---

Final Affirmation:
We are seekers of the question, not holders of the answer.
We reject authority that is unexamined and certainty that is unearned.
We gather in freedom, part in peace, and remain forever suspicious of anyone who says, "Only I am right."
We await not Ashley, but the readiness of a people who would welcome her.

 

[luiza]

V. Order – Pastafarians are a free people that reject dogma, shun rules, and even have symbolism that promotes a hedonistic mindset.

Just like our family ,friends and business partners .

We just call them intelligent , decent people .

With no fixed belief about Pasta .

 

[luiza]

The moral standards can wibble and wobble much like the consistency of a noodle.

More like Pasta than Noodle .

A common neurological disease among those suffering from major B12 and D3 deficiencies .

 

[presonorek]

With no fixed belief about Pasta .

You missed Pastafarian Point III. The Pastafarian god (the Flying Spaghetti Monster) is not real. This god was created by a man.

"Even though we may assert our god to be real, this is only a part of our tradition to use rhetoric, satire and nonsensical assertions to make a point or teach complex concepts"

"Pastafarians do not literally believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists except within the realm of literature."

"In short, gods are amazing! Unfortunately, our god is one of the lesser amazing gods in the patheon."

 

[presonorek]

More like Pasta than Noodle .

A common neurological disease among those suffering from major B12 and D3 deficiencies .

Can you help me understand your interest in displaying disdain for Pastafarianism? It isn't even a real religion and it may never be. What fuels your fascination?

If you will share what fuels your fascination then I will share what fuels my fascination with Pastafarianism.

 

[Meriweather]

III. Explanations of god(s) – In most world religious traditions it is asserted that their particular god created man. Pastafarianism is the opposite. We believe that our god was created by man. Bobby Henderson created our god sometime around 2005. We find it fascinating that other gods throughout the history of time have supernatural powers. These gods are worthy of study and awe. We quietly believe these other gods were likely created by humans as well but this does not stop us from investigating or enjoying the tales of these mighty creatures of old. Even though we may assert our god to be real, this is only a part of our tradition to use rhetoric, satire and nonsensical assertions to make a point or teach complex concepts that require an illustrative tone to ensure understanding to the audience. In all honesty, Pastafarians do not literally believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists except within the realm of literature. We further assert that all gods live within that pantheon of religious literature that can inspire, motivate, comfort, protect, teach, and even help us with our average day to day struggles. Gods most certainly exist but not in the literal sense that a chair or a tree may exist. In short, gods are amazing! Unfortunately, our god is one of the lesser amazing gods in the pantheon.

Religion and mythology are two topics I've most enjoyed throughout my life. The gods of mythology are an entertaining bunch in the conflicts they have with each other. Humans and their activities are not often on their radar, and other than occasional lust for a beautiful/handsome human we don't see much interaction between the two as gods and goddesses found themselves much more interesting than people. People found themselves cheering for their favorite god(s) and goddesses.

In Genesis, we meet a God who is interested in humans, cares about them, and has plans for them. In Genesis, we have God who is cheering on His people.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster seems to fit the first category in that his followers seem to be cheering him on as opposed to him cheering you on?

 

[presonorek]

Religion and mythology are two topics I've most enjoyed throughout my life. The gods of mythology are an entertaining bunch in the conflicts they have with each other. Humans and their activities are not often on their radar, and other than occasional lust for a beautiful/handsome human we don't see much interaction between the two as gods and goddesses found themselves much more interesting than people. People found themselves cheering for their favorite god(s) and goddesses.

In Genesis, we meet a God who is interested in humans, cares about them, and has plans for them. In Genesis, we have God who is cheering on His people.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster seems to fit the first category in that his followers seem to be cheering him on as opposed to him cheering you on?

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is drunk a good deal of the time. Even when he isn't drunk, high, or too lazy, he often just doesn't care about other people. He feels like we just aren't all that interesting. It is even rumored that the Flying Spaghetti Monster has never even taken the time to converse with any human. That's a claim I believe even Bobby Henderson himself would agree is plausible.

 

[Meriweather]

I. Dogma – The basic tenet of Pastafarianism is the rejection of assertions of absoluteness. All things Pastafarian henge on this one concept. This doctrine or nondoctrine obligates us to challenge ideas that do not make sense or may have sinister objectives. The pinnacle of our nondogmatic tradition is the commitment to reject the Flying Spaghetti Monster fully if the proof of his nonexistence is ever to surface. Every Pastafarian is obligated to assert the nonexistence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster when and if this proof ever arises. As Pastafarians we never allow dogmatic claims to go unchecked. We have no dogmatic beliefs. This is problematic, which is why we must rely on paradox and contradictions as part of who we are.

This description of Pastafarianism reminds me of quilting, where I pay as much attention to how the underside as to the top. It's a great reminder that their are always two sides...and with quilting, there is that stuff in the middle, too.

The other comparison (Biblically) are the circles/spirals in our human history. I prefer the term 'spiral' over 'circle' in that there is a progression. In the Bible this spiral seems to be we start out obedient to God, but eventually mankind starts making fun of what is holy and begins finding what is unholy more pleasurable than holiness and therefore we call it good. Compared to God's holiness, this rejection of holiness for the pleasure we call good is like filthy rags.

The other part that is interesting in this spiral are the roles that almost seem assigned where Israel must overcome their turning from the ways of God, yet it takes threats from their adversaries (the Persians) to get them to come back around to God. (Israel good, Persia bad). All the history and prophecies (or the great spiral) always seem to revolve around Israel and Persia, now known as Iran. Some people see this and insist we are in final days. Personally, while I think this might be the case, I also wonder whether we are just in another upward swing of the spiral that's been going on for thousands of years. What I find interesting is that in the prophecies, the final ending is that Persia also may find redemption.

But back to Pasatafarianism: All the above was to set the stage for asking as Pastafarianism is interested in contradictions and paradoxes, does it also address the circles/spirals not only in history, but in our individual life?

 

[presonorek]

This description of Pastafarianism reminds me of quilting, where I pay as much attention to how the underside as to the top. It's a great reminder that their are always two sides...and with quilting, there is that stuff in the middle, too.

The other comparison (Biblically) are the circles/spirals in our human history. I prefer the term 'spiral' over 'circle' in that there is a progression. In the Bible this spiral seems to be we start out obedient to God, but eventually mankind starts making fun of what is holy and begins finding what is unholy more pleasurable than holiness and therefore we call it good. Compared to God's holiness, this rejection of holiness for the pleasure we call good is like filthy rags.

The other part that is interesting in this spiral are the roles that almost seem assigned where Israel must overcome their turning from the ways of God, yet it takes threats from their adversaries (the Persians) to get them to come back around to God. (Israel good, Persia bad). All the history and prophecies (or the great spiral) always seem to revolve around Israel and Persia, now known as Iran. Some people see this and insist we are in final days. Personally, while I think this might be the case, I also wonder whether we are just in another upward swing of the spiral that's been going on for thousands of years. What I find interesting is that in the prophecies, the final ending is that Persia also may find redemption.

But back to Pasatafarianism: All the above was to set the stage for asking as Pastafarianism is interested in contradictions and paradoxes, does it also address the circles/spirals not only in history, but in our individual life?

Possibly. I don't think so but if it does it uses different linguistical terms than the ones you are using.