Christian Apologists Dishonestly Discuss Peter Boghossian's Method

In Boghossian's book A Manual for Creating Atheists,he talks about being a Street Epistemologist, which is a person who uses the Socratic method of dialectically asking a series of questions to get people to realize they are pretending to know what they don't know. Pretending. That's Boghossian's definition of faith. Believers are pretending when they claim to know with 100% certainty that what they believe is true. The antidote for this faith virus, as he calls it, is the Socratic method. Below is a video of what Tom Gilson and Timothy McGrew claim he's doing compared with what he's actually doing. What they claim is false, and the evidence that it's false is just not found in his book, but also in several video clips. More liars for Jesus. When evangelicals feel threatened why do they need to lie for Jesus? But they do. I'm hoping that by highlighting these liars for Jesus that honest Christians will look elsewhere for honest discussions of their faith, rather than paid apologists serving in creedal affirming evangelical colleges.


David Marshall said...

That's total crap, John. Tim thrashed Peter in their debate, because Peter wrote his book without bothering to find out the facts regarding his central assumption -- that ridiculous definition of faith that Gnus want to impose on Christians, regardless of reality. We've explained what nonsense your definition is, given evidence from Scripture and Christian history galore, refuted the two or three "proof texts" and four or five "proof quotes" you guys offer in response over and over again -- but you cling to it desperately, "not only in the absence of evidence, but in the teeth of evidence."

You know better, but you embrace the party line for the good of the tribe.

Lying against Jesus, anyone? Everyone, it seems.