Peter Boghossian backs out of a radio debate because he claims his opponent, a theologian with a PhD, is not a scholar.
aRemonstrant’sRamblings continues to dissect Boghossian’s book, showing how Boghossian quote-minded, while beginning to deconstruct Boghossian’s oddball definition of faith.
And over at Faith. Physics. Rants., Jerry Coyne’s illogical thinking is highlighted.
Shadow To Light 
“Not a scholar”? This coming from the guy who, in his book, can’t even use enough scholarship to get the definition of “faith” correct? Parody and delusion truly go hand in hand.
Dr. Rauser is a fine scholar, much published author and thinker. Me thinks that Dr. Boghossian is concerned that a debate with him might not go so well. You see, he wants some rube who won’t be able to call him on his ad hoc definition of faith.
> And over at Faith. Physics. Rants., Jerry Coyne’s illogical thinking is highlighted.
Original is at http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/newly-translated-and-pre-biblical-tablet-details-a-great-flood-and-a-rescue-boat-with-animals-put-aboard-in-pairs/.
Coyne says, “We’ve known since at least 1872 that the Great Flood detailed in Genesis is a descendant of earlier flood myths from Mesopotamia. And there may be some credibility to the presence of at least some serious floods then, based on the fact that Mesopotamia is a giant flood plain and the presence of some archeological evidence for a big flood around 5000 BC. But what we didn’t know until now is that those earlier flood myths also incorporated a boat onto which species of wild animals were sequestered to save them—two by two! This clearly shows, as if we didn’t know it already, that the Genesis story of Noah and the Ark isn’t true, but was simply an embroidery of earlier flood stories.”
The Genesis story of Noah and the Ark might or might not have been ‘simply an embroidery of earlier flood stories,’ but Coyne ought to get his scripture quotations right instead of mindlessly quoting errors from other sites: yes, Genesis 6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+6%3A19-20&version=ESVUK) starts off with two by two; but Genesis 7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+7%3A+1-3&version=ESVUK) makes plain that in the event only ‘unclean’ animals went in two by two — everything else went in in seven pairs.
But why spoil a good rant (and the opportunity to use italics and an exclamation mark in “–/two by two/!”) — why spoil a good rant with accuracy.
Probably his blog audience wouldn’t even notice Coyne’s blunder.