Why Dawkins and Peterson Miss Each Other

I am not a big fan of Peterson. I feel that he is being overplayed and is the flavor of the week in conservative circles.

I much prefer to hear Dawkins and Lenox.

Peterson's a mess, but what has made him such a phenomenon is simply that he genuinely cares about young men and wants to help them. The fact that he's become a celebrity should tell us something about the current winds and needs of our society.

I do appreciate that he cares for young people. And he was/is a good teacher and clinician. But what has made him a phenomenon is his alignment with the right. It started with his battle in Canada around the use of pronouns and current legislation. Prior to that he was a good teacher in a university. He is articulate in his message, and many things he says is good. I am getting tired of the right parading him around, and his continued attempts at trying to bring Christianity to the forefront through the use of intellectual diatribes and fancy performance. In reality he does little to contribute to the theological framework of the Bible.

In reality he does little to contribute to the theological framework of the Bible.

Why would we expect a man who has not yet come to Christ to contribute to the theological framework of the Bible? Dawkins however is a vocal atheist, yet he is "preferred." Is that because he is more closely aligned with the left than the right or is there something more I am missing? If you simply meant sticking to data etc., then why not state that instead of making everything about your quarrel with the "right"?

I don't prefer Dawkins at all? All I meant was that if there was a debate with one of the new atheist (use Dawkins as an example), I would prefer Lennox to represent a Biblical view than Peterson. Peterson, is coming out with more and more video series on Scripture and they are gaining traction. My concern is not where he places himself (right or left), just that he may or may not be a Christian, hawking Scripture series, that are being picked up on the right because of his past success with the right around his series on transgender and that. It really wasn't a commentary of the left or right, but more the caution around Peterson.

Thank you for your clarification. I agree that there should be cautions- even warnings- raised about Peterson. I just think we lose people when almost every issue we bring up also brings up the left or the right.

I mention the right only as to his rise in fame. He was an ordinary professor in Canada, until he stood up on the transgender issue. It was the right that catapulted him into the limelight. That isn't an indictment on the right. I am not against him being catapulted, nor do I knock many of his ideas and approaches, no do I think it is a knock on the right. He is articulate and has the credentials and he was catapulted because at the time the right didn't have a very good voice around this and he provided it.