Is it easier to justify a belief in God or in a mythical monster

The significant difference between the belief in GOD and the belief in the flying spaghetti monster is that atheists attack the religious for believing in something without any evidence just because it cannot be proved that it does not exist. After all, it is also impossible to prove that a spaghetti monster does not exist, but is it clear that it is not rational to believe that it does exist just because of that? Alas, this only applies to a “straw man,” since religious people believe in GOD for many reasons, usually related to the evidence presented above or in part. One can argue with this evidence, but one cannot present the religious as believing only because “it has not been proven otherwise” (even those who define belief in GOD as a basic belief, do not believe in it only “because it has not been proven otherwise”, but because they find within themselves the same belief to justify its acceptance).

In any case, the spaghetti monster argument does not work at all. There is no evidence to believe in the existence of the monster: no evidence, no tradition, no logical proof, it is not necessary to explain anything. And no one believes in her. Consequently, what argument can this spaghetti monster lead against religious belief?

What can be justified is a claim that even proof of the existence of a planner to the world will not “clothe” that planner with religious qualities, without additional evidence. If leaping from the argument of the planner to the conclusion that the planner is identical to one of the GOD’s “clothe” arguments, there is no evidence that that quality is true to the designer, and this is perhaps GOD’s will. Incidentally, this point has been argued as associated with the characteristics of GOD, not of GOD’s existence.

"The Logical Proof Of GOD" book by HOLY LAND MAN

More Posts


In the spiritual world reside the forces that operate our lives in daily reality. Get to know them, because your happiness depends on them.

While we are selfish creatures with survival mechanisms and animal instincts to achieve more than we need, we’re also wired (DNA & neurotheology) for spirituality and to live for the greater good, for the higher self. For that reason, we are wired to protect our spouse, our family, our country, and be connected to a higher spirituality we call GOD (whatever it is).

We seek to connect to the highest authority which is above human sensual perception. We seek a GOD to be our ultimate guide. Not the GOD that the religions created for us with endless restrictions and imaginary hell and heaven, but the true real GOD.

This book sums up thousands of years and debates to one practical conclusion: is it good for humans to have and believe in (a) GOD or not.

While emerging in the debate, keep an open mind and ignore any religious misconception of who GOD really is. You are here because you care to know if there is a higher authority and if your life will be more fulfilled with GOD in it. You want to know if spirituality is good for you.


The spirit is invisible, but it is revealed in every phenomenon in life that means oneness. It is revealed the moment you look into a person’s eyes and discover that you both feel the same. Spirituality is revealed as soon as you do something that makes others a caravan of joy. It is revealed the moment someone refers to you and you refer to him, and you are both aware of each other’s existence. As a Roman poet so beautifully put it: “Outside all the notions of good and evil there is a field. Will you meet me there?”

Socrates was said to have not come from Athens, but from the world. You and I are two aspects of one reality, united and all-embracing. In unity no differences are eliminated. For things to unite, they do not have to lose their individual identities.  In unity only the separation between them is abolished, which is the difference in value and importance. Then it turns out that everything is one thing.

Share on Social Media