Dawkins’ worldview lacks foundation for his outlandish claim that instructing children in the Christian faith is worse than sexually molesting them. His telling extreme stories of religious abuse is a cheap tactic to try and give credibility to this obviously ridiculous claim, and to hide its sinister implications.

Dawkins’ critique of typical God-proofs simply avoids the main one: the transcendental argument for the existence of God. Last time, we introduced this argument as an answer to the “ultimate Boeing 747 gambit”; this week, we present the transcendental argument to bolster the other more traditional proofs which Dawkins attempts to refute.

Note: This show’s content was re-edited and replaces the original.

Dawkins’ central argument against God’s existence–the “ultimate Boeing 747 gambit”–fails for at least two reasons. First, the gambit needs Darwinian evolution by natural selection to be true in spite of its glaring logical and factual flaws. Second, the gambit’s conclusions cannot account for the principles it used to draw its conclusions.

As if his simplistic attack against the Scripture’s moral fabric wasn’t enough, Dawkins marches forward to assault the Bible’s factual credibility. But evidence, common sense, and the modern scholarly consensus (even of the Bible’s detractors) are major obstacles to the credibility of his argument.

Unable to plug the gaping hole left by his inability to account for absolute standards of morality, Dawkins resorts in chapter seven to try and discredit the Bible as that plug. Of course, he again proceeds to critique something without any foundation for objectivity; also, he analyzes the Scripture in such a simplistic manner that you are forced to wonder if such a learned man ever actually read this Bible he attacks.

The title of Dawkins’ sixth chapter, “The Roots of Morality: Why Are We Good?,” betrays his inability as an atheist to account for the absolute standards of morality which he so readily embraces and applies throughout the book and his own life. His speculations about humanity’s moral consensus are merely descriptive, and when he finally (though half-heartedly) acknowledges this problem, the chapter ends with but a whimper.

In part one, we urged people to see the necessity of actually believing that the Christian religious claims are true. This time, we affirm Dawkins’ assertion that most religion, even much of what is said and done in the name of Christ, is untrue, and superstitious, and devised and promoted for selfish, bad reasons. Professing Christians open up the name of Christ to be slandered when they pervert and trivialize the truth or tolerate those who do the same.

Here we begin an eight-part series discussing this best-selling book by acknowledging that professing Christians are much to blame for the kinds of critiques Dawkins levies against theism. If we forsake orthodoxy, or if we keep it but trivialize it; if we say we believe something that we don’t think is true, or if we suppress our doubts, then Dawkins is right–our faith is deluded.