We have and will continue to watch the video about the 2 prominant opposing world views. Here is commentary about one of the current leaders of the atheists. And his strategy to stop your pursuit of living a life of faith.

If You Can't Beat Them, Embarrass Them

I find it interesting that all the notable reviews I’ve read so far of Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion, don’t mince words about the author’s proclivity to dismiss an argument by ridicule or parody as opposed to dismantling it.

In Jim Holt's review of it in The New York Times, he states:

These, in a nutshell, are the Big Three arguments [for God's existence]. To Dawkins, they are simply ridiculous. He dismisses the ontological argument as “infantile” and “dialectical prestidigitation” without quite identifying the defect in its logic, and he is baffled that a philosopher like Russell — “no fool” — could take it seriously. He seems unaware that this argument, though medieval in origin, comes in sophisticated modern versions that are not at all easy to refute. Shirking the intellectual hard work, Dawkins prefers to move on to parodic “proofs” that he has found on the Internet….

The Publishers Weekly review corroborates the point:

While Dawkins can be witty, even confirmed atheists who agree with his advocacy of science and vigorous rationalism may have trouble stomaching some of the rhetoric: the biblical Yahweh is "psychotic," Aquinas's proofs of God's existence are "fatuous" and religion generally is "nonsense."

Or there’s the debate that Dawkins recently participated in that Wired News describes as follows:

A few months earlier, in front of an audience of graduate students from around the world, Dawkins took on a famous geneticist and a renowned neurosurgeon on the question of whether God was real. The geneticist and the neurosurgeon advanced their best theistic arguments: Human consciousness is too remarkable to have evolved; our moral sense defies the selfish imperatives of nature; the laws of science themselves display an order divine; the existence of God can never be disproved by purely empirical means. Dawkins rejected all these claims, but the last one -- that science could never disprove God -- provoked him to sarcasm. "There's an infinite number of things that we can't disprove," he said. "You might say that because science can explain just about everything but not quite, it's wrong to say therefore we don't need God. It is also, I suppose, wrong to say we don't need the Flying Spaghetti Monster, unicorns, Thor, Wotan, Jupiter, or fairies at the bottom of the garden.”

But perhaps, Dawkins reveals his modus operandi best in his own words when he told Wired News: “At some point, there is going to be enough pressure that it is just going to be too embarrassing to believe in God."

Bullies have always taunted. Look at Goliath. The faithful, however, see their taunts as directed not at them, but ultimately as a fist in the face of the living God. They respond in faith and strength. The challenge for Christians in the coming years, however, is in how we will respond to efforts to embarass and marginalize us. I hope we can respond like Paul, a former scoffer, by underscoring that the Gospel is for all who will turn and believe:

“I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.” And perhaps, I pray, also for Dawkins.