Tom Gilson

What Do Peter Boghossian and Josh McDowell Have In Common?

What do atheist professor Peter Boghossian and some top apologists, including Josh McDowell, have in common? Hint: it’s a teaching technique.

The one difference (it’s a big one) is that when it comes time to press on to the truth, McDowell stays on course, while Boghossian steers his listeners right off the track. See what I mean in my Worldview and You column this month at BreakPoint.

Series Navigation (Peter Boghossian):<<< How Peter Boghossian Gets Faith WrongCreating Atheists: Made, Not Born >>>
Commenting Restored

The comment function here has been out of service, possibly causing frustration, for which I apologize. You can comment again now, and it will save and post as it should do. First-time commenters' comments will not appear, however, until approved in moderation.

6 thoughts on “What Do Peter Boghossian and Josh McDowell Have In Common?

  1. I find it interesting that (at least here in the blogosphere) one can post links to other people doing some actual writing, add a bit of weak rhetorical spin, and call it a ‘series.’ Certainly, the dictionary definition of the word is clear and simple to understand; the word is not used incorrectly, exactly, but what is implied by it’s use is rather misleading. Adopting the language of actual journalism is as empty as the arguments your contemporaries employ. Oh, and it’s Dr. Boghossian.

  2. John, who are the other people doing the “actual writing,” please? Are you referring to the actual writer responsible for the BreakPoint piece I linked to? Or the other articles in this series? I’m not sure who you had in mind.

    I’m also not quite sure where I got anything wrong by not specifying Dr. Boghossian in every instance. So I’m hoping you can help me by clarifying both these matters.

  3. So that you need not acknowledge it publicly yourself, John (since that might be awkward for you), I’ll go ahead and let you know the “other people doing actual writing” that I’ve linked to as parts of this series, as well as the BreakPoint article, are all, well, I mean, that is, all I can say is, thank you for the unintended compliment you’ve given me here for my actual writing.

  4. John Book has given us a demonstration of, “if you can’t tackle the substance of an argument, you can still nitpick the style.”

Comments are closed.

"Engaging… exhilarating.… This might be the most surprising and refreshing book you’ll read this year!" — Lee Strobel

"Too Good To Be False is almost too good to be true!" — Josh McDowell

Purchase Here!

More on the book...

Subscribe

Subscribe here to receive updates and a free Too Good To Be False preview chapter!

Recent Comments

Discussion Policy

By commenting here you agree to abide by this site's discussion policy. Comments support Markdown language for your convenience. Each new commenter's first comment goes into moderation temporarily before appearing on the site. Comments close automatically after 120 days.

Copyright, Permissions, Marketing

Some books reviewed on this blog are attached to my account with Amazon’s affiliate marketing program, and I receive a small percentage of revenue from those sales.

All content copyright © Thomas Gilson as of date of posting except as attributed to other sources. Permissions information here.

Privacy Policy

%d bloggers like this: