gdp's Comments

michaelnugent.com : Cartoon: Confused Ratzi with Nazi belt buckle

Tue, 21 Sep 2010 19:47:53 +0000

On reflection, I have changed the wording of this cartoon, to make clear that it is a response to the Pope's recent attack on atheists.

michaelnugent.com : Cartoon: Confused Ratzi with Nazi belt buckle

Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:42:53 +0000

Interesting feedback. I'm happy to hear more. It's certainly provocative and could certainly offend people, but I'm not sure why some people perceive it to be childish. In an unprovoked statement, the Pope publicly associated atheism with Nazism, despite knowing that Nazism was conceived and conducted mostly by people who believed in a god. This is a cartoon response to that slanderous assertion. As I said, I'm open to more feedback.

michaelnugent.com : Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life

Sun, 5 Sep 2010 15:43:27 +0000

Thanks for the feedback, Bob. There's no need to be so rude. This version of the declaration was adopted by delegates at a world atheist conference in Copenhagen. Atheist Ireland has adopted the following revised version, which takes into account the point you made. Atheist Ireland declaration on religion in public life

michaelnugent.com : Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life

Sun, 5 Sep 2010 15:41:02 +0000

I agree that can be an ambiguous assertion. This version of the declaration was adopted by delegates at a world atheist conference in Copenhagen. Atheist Ireland has adopted the following revised version, which takes into account the point you made. Atheist Ireland declaration on religion in public life

michaelnugent.com : Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life

Sun, 5 Sep 2010 15:36:57 +0000

Thanks for the feedback, Una. This version of the declaration was adopted by delegates at a world atheist conference in Copenhagen. Atheist Ireland has adopted the following revised version, which takes into account the point you made. Atheist Ireland declaration on religion in public life

michaelnugent.com : Feedback on Copenhagen Declaration on Religion in Public Life

Fri, 2 Jul 2010 14:58:29 +0000

Thanks, Kristjan. I've incorporated those comments into the post above.

Atheist Revolution : Atheist Identity

Sun, 11 Oct 2009 16:36:55 +0000

The variations of "atheism is like not collecting stamps" are misleading. To make that analogy meaningful, atheism is like not collecting stamps in a culture where the vast majority of people not only collect stamps, but insist that the universe was created by a stamp, and that truth and morality derive only from stamps, and that the laws society should be based on the sacred texts of stamp-collectors. In that context, not collecting stamps is a significant and wide-ranging position, that forms the basis of a shared part of our identities.

Atheist Revolution : How Prayer Works

Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:08:24 +0000

I remember reading about that study when it was published. It measured and made findings on two different things. One, whether or not people were prayed for, it made no difference to their recovery. Two, if people knew they were being prayed for, it increased the likelihood of health complications. The first finding indicates that prayer has no effect. The second finding might show that knowing you are being prayed for might cause people extra stress. Also, this was not merely any old study. It was a rigorous and comprehensive decade-long scientific study, designed specifically to address the flaws in previous less comprehensive studies on this issue.

Atheist Revolution : Understanding Atheism and Agnosticism

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:02:11 +0000

Aedus, all words are terms that people made up. That is why it is important to agree that we are using the same words to point to the same meanings when having discussions like this. And the absence of evidence for a proposition, in circumstances where one would expect to see evidence if the proposition was true, does provide evidence for the counter-proposition being true. It does not provide conclusive evidence, but it does provide some evidence. It provides enough evidence to enable people to justifiably form a belief and, in certain cases, to make a claim to have knowledge. That claim may, of course, be mistaken. Did five hundred African elephants trample through your house last night while you were asleep? You have no evidence that they did not (they may have been very quiet and careful) yet I suspect that you not only believe that this did not happen, but you might even claim to know that it did not happen.

Atheist Revolution : Understanding Atheism and Agnosticism

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:31:38 +0000

I agree broadly with these definitions, with perhaps some nuances of emphasis. There is also another factor to consider. Sometimes we are speaking in ordinary, common-or-garden language. Using this language, when we say "I know..." it is assumed that it is prefaced with something like "Based on the evidence that seems to be available at the moment, and subject to being corrected by other evidence, and without currently having any reasonable doubts about my conclusions, I know..." Sometimes we are speaking in more precise, philosophical or logical language. Using this language, we have to make explicit the qualifications that are assumed in ordinary language. Strictly speaking, using this type of language, we cannot know anything - even that "we" exist - because the only mechanism that we have for testing the accuracy of our thinking is our thinking itself. Saying "I know..." in ordinary language is not as extreme as saying "I know..." in strict philosophical language. And one difficulty with discussing atheism and agnosticism is that the discussion often shifts between these two types of language.

Atheist Revolution : Celebrating the Win Does Not Always Mean Deriding the Loser

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 09:07:42 +0000

Firstly, here is the point I made to the original post: The premise here is that somebody feels bad because circumstances force them further away from attaining a goal that is important to them. You use the examples of Christian activists being thwarted in their goal of spreading their religion to others, but the same principle holds for everybody about every goal that is important to them. The corollary is that somebody feels good when circumstances move them closer to attaining a goal that is important to them. In the above example, some secular activists will feel good because they have been moved closer to the goal of a secular society, and other secular activists will feel good because they also have a goal (perhaps more subliminal) of seeing Christian activists personally humiliated. With regard to your question, I suggest that the first reason for secular activists feeling good should be welcomed, while the second should be questioned to see if it is consistent with the overall system of ethics that the person wants to live by. To that, I would also like to add this related opinion: Satire is an appropriate weapon in political debate. Ridiculing absurd beliefs is an appropriate weapon in the battle against allowing absurd beliefs to dominate public affairs. It is important to distinguish between ridiculing ideas, on the one hand, and ridiculing the people who hold those ideas to be true, on the other hand. Ridiculing ideas can make people feel bad if they hold those ideas to be true, but so can doing anything that moves you closer to attaining a goal that is important to you in circumstances where attaining the opposite is important to somebody else.

michaelnugent.com : Richard Dawkins on Late Late Show

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:04:00 +0000

Militant atheist approach? As somebody has said elsewhere: militant Muslims drive planes into buildings, militant Christians murder doctors who perform abortions, and militant atheists write books.

michaelnugent.com : Richard Dawkins on Late Late Show

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:02:01 +0000

I agree, Justin. And it does seem to have been planned. Richard Dawkins has said that he was told beforehand there would be an audience contribution by a priest.

michaelnugent.com : Richard Dawkins on Late Late Show

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:00:16 +0000

The only two questions on evolution were when did humans arrive one earth, and what will happen to humans in the future. Quite a narrow perspective on evolution, to put it mildly.

michaelnugent.com : Catholic magic tricks #1 - Holy Orders

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:55:57 +0000

I'm not sure it is a woman. I think it might be Woody Allen.

michaelnugent.com : The false flow of the Biblical Jesus stories

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:05:54 +0000

I agree that it is hindsight, and pretty clumsy hindsight. The problem is that these supposed "different sides of Jesus" are not complementary, they are often contradictory.

michaelnugent.com : Top ten kinky quotes by Pastor Anderson

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:44:31 +0000

Mikespeir and Twazzi, I agree. The quote where he compares being in hell to being locked in a closet could have been penned by a sitcom writer. :D Last Hussar, I think the policy position here is that God always answers prayers, but sometimes the answer is no.

michaelnugent.com : The false flow of the Biblical Jesus stories

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:31:13 +0000

The first part of Mark 16 (from 16:1-8) describes Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome going to the tomb of Jesus in order to anoint his body, finding the tomb empty, and being told by a young man that Jesus has risen and has gone to Galilee. The three women leave, flee from the tomb, and tell nobody about this because they are afraid. In the earliest versions of the Gospel later called Mark, the story ends there. The allegedly risen Jesus does not appear to anybody. The rest of Mark 16 (from 16:9-20) was added later by another writer or writers. This extra piece starts by contradicting the preceding part, saying that Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdelene, who told his disciples but they did not believe her. He then appeared again to two of the disciples, and yet again to the eleven. Jesus then told them to preach the good news to all of creation, and that those who believed them would be able to handle snakes and drink poison without being harmed, and would be able to heal people with their hands. He then ascended into heaven, they went out and preached, and these signs came true. Not only is this (Mark 16:9-20) demonstrably untrue, but it is not in the earliest versions of the Gospel that was later called Mark.

michaelnugent.com : The false flow of the Biblical Jesus stories

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:11:40 +0000

Ehrman is the one I am most familiar with. I also have a general overview of the various attempts to identify the historical Jesus, many of which are outlined in David Boulton's book 'Who on Earth was Jesus?' Obviously I am approaching this from a perspective of not believing in the existence of gods, so I want to also familiarise myself with Christian perspectives on the Bible. To help me with this, I have purchased or ordered: Jesus of Nazareth by Pope Benedict XVI Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson The Bible by Karen Armstrong IVP Bible Background Commentary Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible John MacArthur Study Notes Thru the Bible - Complete Bible Commentary by J. Vernon McGee Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge by Canne, Browne, Blayney, Scott, and others. Zodhiates' Complete Word Study Bible King James Version with Strongs Numbers King James Version with Apocrypha International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Easton's Bible Dictionary Hitchcock's Bible Names Smith's Bible Atlas Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions Thayer's Greek Definitions If you have any suggestions to add to this list, I would be grateful to hear them.

michaelnugent.com : The false flow of the Biblical Jesus stories

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:01:23 +0000

Thanks, Adam. I think it is fair to say that Paul, more than Jesus, founded what evolved into modern Christianity. But it was not inevitable. Given different circumstances, one of the other factions could have emerged as mainstream Christianity.