Dawkins and Stein had a lengthy conversation, which was recorded in the movie.
Liberalism has showered accolades on atheist author Richard Dawkins' best-selling book "The God Delusion." But when Stein suggests to Dawkins that he's been critical of the Old Testament God, Dawkins protests -- not that Stein is wrong, but that he's being too mild. He then reads from this jaw-dropping paragraph of his book:
"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."Dawkins' arrogant blasphemy was no credit to him. He thinks of himself as quite a scholar and virtually mistake-free in his assessment of God. The Father in heaven will one day "assess" him.
Then came this brilliant piece of logic and wisdom from the mouth of Dawkins:
Moderator Ben Stein asks Dawkins how life began:
DAWKINS:Nobody knows how it got started. We know the kind of event that it must have been. We know the sort of event that must have happened for the origin of life.
BEN STEIN:And what was that?
DAWKINS:It was the origin of the first self-replicating molecule.
BEN STEIN:Right, and how did that happen?
DAWKINS:I told you, we don't know
BEN STEIN:What do you think is the possibility that Intelligent Design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution.
DAWKINS:Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer.
BTW, how did this highly evolved, tech-savvy form of life evolve? Dawkins didn't answer the question, he merely transferred it from one world to another. If Darwinian means hadn't worked so well here, how did it work there?
Dawkins has fallen into a trap like Aquinas' infinite regression. He can't answer anything for sure, because, having rejected God, he is only guessing. Why, friend, should anyone base their lives on his futile and empty guess.
In Scripture, the fool is not necessarily someone who is mentally deficient. It is someone who chooses to live his life without the knowledge or the acknowledgment of God.