Richard Dawkins Hoist on His Own … Ummm … Interview

Richard Dawkins Hoist on His Own … Ummm … Interview February 20, 2014

Ravi Zacharias describes an interview where Richard Dawkins overstepped a bit in his never-ending battle against Christianity. He ended up looking almost as foolish as he says Christians are.

Stay with the video to the end. Ravi runs the audio of the interview he’s describing.


Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment

9 responses to “Richard Dawkins Hoist on His Own … Ummm … Interview”

  1. Trying to trip up people by asking them to name the Gospels or give the full name of a book is so bush league. That’s what they were trying to get across to Richard. I assume he was able to bounce back and hold his own the rest of the way.

    The most formidable opponent of Dawkins in my estimation is Stephen Meyer who explains intelligent design in a way that is difficult to refute.

  2. I have not seen Stephen Meyer, but I would love to learn more about him. I have watched John Lennox against Richard Dawkins as well and I have an immense respect for Prof. Lennox.

  3. Evolution is easy to disprove, all you have to do is find a fossil mammal in the Precambrian. Strangely, nobody has ever managed to find one. How could intelligent design be disproved?

  4. The Cambrian explosion does bring Neodarwinism into question. I think when the conditions became just right, evolution worked more quickly than we ever thought it could. It still is the mechanism by which the various life forms came about.

  5. The Cambrian explosion isn’t evolution “working more quickly than we ever thought it could”. It’s a rapid diversification but the “explosion” is still a period of tens of millions of years. It’s also remarkably sudden because it coincides with the evolution of exoskeletons and harder body parts. Prior to the Cambrian, you see things like charnia or jellyfish and such, but these are soft-bodied organisms and so don’t leave very many fossils.

    The Cambrian is a very important period for life and the diversification that occurs is a result of a fair number of important developments all happening at roughly the same time (we’re still speaking geologically here, so this is still, again, a period of tens of millions of years); the diversification of eyes, the formation of armour, and, with it, the capacity for large herbivores and even larger carnivores.

  6. This is only something you find amusing if you believe that Dawkins holds On the Origin of Species (By Means of Natural Selection; that’s the full title as I recall it, at least) in the same regard as Christians hold the Bible. Darwin’s works aren’t dogma for Dawkins, On the Origin of Species isn’t a guide on how to live one’s life, and he doesn’t claim it to be the literal word of God.

    If you claim that you are Christian, but then you can’t actually say what’s really in the Bible, isn’t that worrying? If you claim that this is the revealed truth of the Almighty that you live your life by, how can you claim to be a follower of said beliefs if you don’t even know what those beliefs are?

    Dawkins not being able to remember the title of a book and using a common curse word isn’t really comparable to someone who claims to be Christian being unable to tell you what the Sermon on the Mount is about.