Promotional Information

This short book primary focus is simple and consistent: a critical engagement with the arguments set out in The God Delusion.

About the Author

ALISTER McGRATH is Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University. JOANNA COLLICUTT McGRATH is lecturer in the psychology of religion at Heythrop College, University of London.

Reviews

"The Dawkins Delusion? Sets out to rebut Dawkin's central claims, particularly the one suggesting that knowledge of science should lead inevitably to atheism. It is a brief and concise book, dispelling with clarity and efficiency much of what McGrath calls the 'half-baked nonsense' in The God Delusion."
*Philip Wainwright, Salvationist*

"For those irritated by Dawkins and his attitudes to faith, this book represents the response of intelligent Christians everywhere."
*Matthew Cowie, Life and Work*

"At only 60 pages, McGrath's work is concise, coherent and, most of all, devestating. By the end of it, Dawkins' work is left looking like the hatchet job it is, the whole thing ripped to pieces by someone with far greater knowledge of the subject."
*James Kelly, Catholic Times*

"McGrath's book is a fine, dense, yet very clear account, from his particular Christian perspective, of the full case against Dawkins."
*Bryan Appleyard, New Scientist*

"...The Dawkins Delusion deserves to sell many more copies than The God Delusion. I am sad that Dawkins, once my hero, has descended to unscientific nonesense. McGrath makes more sense."
*Revd Jeremy Craddock, Church Times*

"The Dawkins Delusion, for example, is excellent at challenging Dawkin's absurd demonisation of Christian history and the concomitant white-washing of secularist history as though atheists have never killed or persecuted religious believers explicitly in the name of anti-religion."
*David Quinn, Catholic Herald*

"The Dawkins Delusion? Sets out to rebut Dawkin's central claims, particularly the one suggesting that knowledge of science should lead inevitably to atheism. It is a brief and concise book, dispelling with clarity and efficiency much of what McGrath calls the 'half-baked nonsense' in The God Delusion." -- Philip Wainwright, Salvationist
"For those irritated by Dawkins and his attitudes to faith, this book represents the response of intelligent Christians everywhere." -- Matthew Cowie, Life and Work
"At only 60 pages, McGrath's work is concise, coherent and, most of all, devestating. By the end of it, Dawkins' work is left looking like the hatchet job it is, the whole thing ripped to pieces by someone with far greater knowledge of the subject." -- James Kelly, Catholic Times
"McGrath's book is a fine, dense, yet very clear account, from his particular Christian perspective, of the full case against Dawkins." -- Bryan Appleyard, New Scientist
"...The Dawkins Delusion deserves to sell many more copies than The God Delusion. I am sad that Dawkins, once my hero, has descended to unscientific nonesense. McGrath makes more sense." -- Revd Jeremy Craddock, Church Times
"The Dawkins Delusion, for example, is excellent at challenging Dawkin's absurd demonisation of Christian history and the concomitant white-washing of secularist history as though atheists have never killed or persecuted religious believers explicitly in the name of anti-religion." -- David Quinn, Catholic Herald

In his 2006 best seller, The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins, who has made his reputation as generally a fine popularizer of science, argued that belief in God is no more than a delusion and that atheism is the only respectable position for a thinking person to adopt. Alister McGrath (historical theology, Oxford; Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life), originally an atheistic molecular biophysicist, and his wife, Joanna (psychology of religion, Heythrop Coll., Univ. of London; coauthor, Meeting Jesus: Human Responses to a Yearning God), see Dawkins as a brilliant thinker who went down the wrong path with his last book. Combining scholarship with a popular style, the McGraths examine Dawkins's arguments and find them wanting. They do not respond to every one of his points; instead, they show the inadequacy of his argument on the major points, contending that Dawkins's critique of religion is based on hearsay and anecdotal evidence rather than on hard research and that he employs rhetoric rather than rationality. Where Dawkins's criticisms are justified, they have no problem agreeing with him and in fact have nothing but praise for his earlier works. Recommended for all libraries.-Augustine J. Curley, Newark Abbey, NJ Copyright 2007 Reed Business Information.