August 21, 2009

Orwellian Days Are Indeed Here

I just read Frederick Meekins Part 2 of his piece called "A Christian Analysis Of Atheism"

Please enjoy reading PART 1. (Stop the distracting Dr. Who music at the bottom of the article first.)

Then if you haven't had enough, dare to read PART 2.

I am interested in the responses of atheists. Any takers?


  1. I was tired when I began to read this droll, and it damned near rendered me comatose. I made it through the first part (though I sped-read the last few paragraphs), and looked at the second part, but it appeared to be more of the same.

    There is no real argument made, and the paper reads like a lower-division term paper -- it's terrible. It's as though he's got a requirement to include a certain number of references, and sought to include at least one reference in each paragraph -- note, also, that the citation page is missing; this paper was pretty clearly a submission for credit that he chose to publish on his blog.

    What's the thesis? That the last three centuries may be described as the Era of Unbelief? That's pathetic. Worse, it's not argued -- we just get a laundry list of notable figures who may or may not have been atheists, who are seen by Christians as contributing to the "cause" of Atheism. Some clearly were both atheists and influential to this "cause," but others were not, such as Darwin. His discovery had nothing to do with Atheism, and he himself was no atheist.

    It doesn't matter, though. This paper is a worthy read only in the most cynical of high school courses -- it's awful even as lower-division material. The dates listed, of course, are recent, but I'll bet this was written a few years ago; I certainly hope this is the case, as the author is allegedly a post-doc grad student (if his "Doctor of Practical Theology" title is substantive). If this is a sample of his current work following all of that "education," I'm not exactly concerned.

    So no, I'm not still standing. I was sitting when I began reading, and I rapidly slouched away to a more prone position as I passed out from boredom.

    I think I'll have a nap right now...


    P.S. -- What does this have to do with Orwell? Orwell is mentioned only once, in passing, in the second version, and yet you seem to take it as some sort of thesis...? I don't get it.

  2. I have to agree with stan the half-truth teller; This is the worst drivel I've read in some time. It was painfuly lacking in substance and made no real point! TOTAL FAIL

  3. Dan has missed his calling. He should be a Glen Beck contibutor.

    "The sky is falling!"

  4. Fundamentalists have this vague view that somehow they will be able to stop the progress of socienty, if not mankind itself.

    Society will continue to evolve and as challenges that we cannot even know we will face will present themselves in the future and changes will be made.

    Every day of my life I hear the Glen Becks and Dans of the world hollering that life as we know it is over and how much better it was in the past.

    Even if every person on earth decided to stop every change and keep everything the same., or roll back to the good old days, it would be impossible.

    Environmental, sociental and economic pressures necessitate major decisions to be made and I can assure you if the Dans of the world were making them it would be a cluster fuck of biblical proportions.

    Changes are coming and we will face them as best we can. It is impossible to make a perfect decision. Decisions can also be altered if they prove wrong.

    No one can stop the progression of time and the inevitable challenges it will present.

    This shrill, panicky fear mongering only shows me that Dan is a shrill, fear mongering fear mongerer, and in my opinion, a chicken shit scardy cat.

    I think I remember a story about some dufus running around crying that the sky is falling, the sky is falling.

    The Dan's of the world have been doing this since time immemorial, and they are usually the ones that make no positive contribution when the tough decisions need to be made.

  5. Froggie,

    I certainly am not scared one bit. I "don't know where to put my hands" but not frightened of anything or anyone.

    I see, what I am doing, as a warning to the lost...that is all. I welcome the changes, but that doesn't mean I approve of them. I still will show my disapproval on subjects and voice my opinions on matters but I am, for all intense purposes, at peace. I have witnessed God's hand in my life so I hold no fear. I am concerned for you though. If I am right, then there is not much time for many of you.

    If I am wrong (second time in 41 years) then we will go about life until that day will eventually come. All I am saying is that things are too coincidental to the Bible's claims for it not to be happening. I am fully willing to admit that I am wrong though...when that day happens that is.

  6. Dan,

    You and your ilk have been claiming this for two thousand years now.
    It is not going to happen.

    I don't doubt one bit that there may be a mass extinction in the future due to one of any number of causes, but it won't have anything to do with the bible.

  7.      Well, Froggie, it may have something to do with the bible -- as in "it is god's will that we push the button." Religious crazy can do a lot of bad things.

  8. 2 Peter 3:3-4 "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

    And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

  9. Dan:

         That's like a snake oil salesman predicting that some people will say he is selling snake oil. It keeps his marks there. If noone challenges him, they don't consider the prediction. If someone does challenge him, the marks say "woah, he was right."

  10. "Pvblivs said...
    Well, Froggie, it may have something to do with the bible -- as in "it is god's will that we push the button." Religious crazy can do a lot of bad things."

    And that is exactly why when some fundamentalist starts trying to gain traction in a presidential election year, the mainstream Christians reject them, like Mike Huckabee.

    99% of the people of this country want nothing to do with the likes of a fundamentalist Christian with his finger on "the button," just waiting for the moment to fulfill "prophesy" and make themselves center stage.

    In a country where 85% of the population is supposedly "Christian," it is rather curious that they have never come close to electing one of their own as president.


Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>