Debunking Atheist Bible Distortions Part 2: Refuting Dawkins

WARNING: Please go to the warrior channel and FIRST review the rules for posting text on my video pages. The warrior does not tolerate nonsense comments or crybabies over "censorship" when they break clearly posted rules.

The Christian Road Warrior is back with more slapdown on some ridiculous claims of atheist Richard Dawkins. This video deals with the claims about the "origin" and "veracity" of the Bible.

Dawkins obviously hasn't done adequate research in this area, and the warrior begins beating the crap out of his false claims. And remember, people, this is a SERIES of videos. What does that mean? Stay tuned...

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Christianity
• God
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Old
• Testament
• atheism
• apologetics
• comedy

[BEOWULF9965]

if ratings are so inconsequential then why dont you enable the ratings.

[BEOWULF9965]

no wonder the comments are disabled i have noticed that almost every every pro christian channel on you tube i see that the comment ratings are disabled. just like their god they dont take critique very well.

[SuperPatrick777]

@CRoadwarrior as i asked before what is your opinion on uncondistional predestaination as calvin type preachers believe . ps how are your studies going .......

[CRoadwarrior]

eread2002. In case you missed it, I corrected my own error. LOL. I refute Dawkins over the series, which is not complete yet. Stay tuned...

[CRoadwarrior]

zakabog. Actually, the video did have a point which you apparently missed. My example of Ps. 14:1 is a simple and clear example of just WHY taking something out of context produces nonsense, and WHY it is important to take context into consideration for proper understanding of ANY literature. If you don't get that you won't get anything.

[CRoadwarrior]

zakabog. My argument from context stands and simply points out that if you rip a passage out of context, you can make up practically any nonsense you want, and say the opposite of what the passage IN context actually said. In the series I do refute the claims of Dawkins. If you missed it, hit rewind.

[CRoadwarrior]

Com457. Blah blah block zone...LOL.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL...and donsteitz, you think you made any kind of argument worth addressing?? LOL. The joke is on you.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL. Sarcasim will get you nowhere except perhaps the block zone, yellowporpoise. I never claimed to have "THE" ultimate interpretation and that I am the "only" man who does not take any verse out of context. There are many good Bible colleges and schools teaching sound hermeneutical skills all over the country. And people like Dawkins could benefit from them.

[CRoadwarrior]

You miss the point. They are meaningless but some people try to use them as if they were some accurate measure of the quality of a video. There is a reason YT allows you to put the ratings on or off. I elect to have them off so that the CONTENT of a video can be the focus. The rating system is flawed anyway, as I have noticed that anyone with several computers and different IP addresses can vote more than once, AND there is the issue of 2 people voting while 2,000 watched. You figure it out

[CRoadwarrior]

Beowulf...What the heck are you talking about? And if I had a dime for every lame comment about ratings, I'd be rich. If you can't make comments of substance, don't comment at all. Ratings don't prove squat, except that some are preoccupied with inconsequential things.