Is Dawkins Smarter than God?

I can already feel the comments coming from people who don't understand the arguments I am making in this clip. Here they are again, in the hope that this causes them to stand out more clearly.

1. Dawkins claims that if God exists he is still justified in disbelieving in God because Dawkins rightly assesses that the evidence suggests God doesn't exist. Hence, the question Dawkins gives about God making himself so hard to find.
2. My first response is that countless people, including brilliant scholarly minds, do find evidence for God. The majority of people see that God is real through creation itself. This puts Dawkins in an awkward place of having to defend the idea that there's no evidence for God over and against not only the majority of humans (who Dawkins seems to think he is far smarter than, given that he tried to rebrand "atheists" as "brights") but also puts Dawkins against the majority of scholars who deal with the topic of God's existence (i.e. the smart people). This is why Dawkins and others in his circle deride the discipline of philosophy. It's because philosophers have so often called out their fallacious thinking.
3. Independent of what the majority think, or what other "smart people" think, I offer the evidence of creation itself. While I can't defend that claim in a one minute short there are plenty who have defended it quite well. Look up the fine tuning argument, the cosmological argument, the argument from morality, and find many reasons to see that God is not hiding.

There's no sense in standing before God and thinking you'll be justified in your rejection of him. At some point a person has to be open to the idea that they have just been very wrong.

My website BibleThinker.org/