Click to Enlarge

Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God By Scott Hahn (Author) & Benjamin Wiker (Author) Our Price $ 11.40   Retail Value $ 12.95   You Save $ 1.55  (12%)   Item Number 92659   Buy New Item Quantity: 1              2              3              4              5              6              7              8              9              10              11              12              13              14              15              16              17              18              19              20              21              22              23              24              25              26              27              28 ABOUT TRUST ONLINE

God and the New Atheism: A Critical Response to Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens Item: 85440

The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine Item: 59486

	The Worst Case Against Dawkins Yet  Oct 2, 2009
I hate giving one star reviews. I really do. This is especially the case when I am optimistic about a book and then at the end I get completely let down. That is the feeling I got as I read through this book. With the authors being two philosophical heavy weights I was expecting some challenging arguments, but I think their arguments could, at best, be called "sophomoric", to use Alvin Plantinga's term when he criticized "The God Delusion". "Answering the New Atheism", by two theistic philosophers Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker, attempts to poke holes in the arguments of Richard Dawkins in his bestseller, "The God Delusion". Unfortunately, while criticizing Dawkins of his own 'assumptions' about the origin of life, the authors boldly display their hypocrisy because they failed (same as anyone else) to prove their god exists to begin with. This being the case, how can they say their god created the first life if they haven't even proven "he" exists yet? The authors seem to be skipping a few steps themselves... I don't blame many of the one-star reviews on this site.com which are very short explaining how bad the book was; it truly was badly argued and the final chapter was one distortion after another about Richard Dawkins and the New Atheists, telling how, if in power, "King" Richard might ban religious services, holidays, try to keep kids from learning religion, etc. It's beyond absurd to say the least. The majority of the book dealt with theistic vs. naturalistic morality and why the christian form of morality (with a god dictating the rules) is better. Again, their hypocrisy rears its ugly head because the assumptions they criticize Dawkins for are on display when the authors assume their god's commands are moral; what if god commanded one of the authors to kill the other? Would this action, then, be "moral"? Clearly, the authors have not thought this through very well, and they seem to have ignored the well-known Euthyphro Dilemma. While all of the arguments were bad, one was particularly interesting (though still bad). They attempted to condemn Dawkins' supposed source of morality (a strawman they used throughout the book), that of natural selection, and condemn Dawkins' morality by leveling the same complaints against natural selection that Dawkins does against god: the god christians worship is a cruel monster, and the authors make the same case against natural selection. There is a problem with this argument however. The authors clearly don't understand that humans do not follow the cruel process of natural selection regarding morality; that cruel process is what created our innate morality. This innate morality can certainly be selfish, but altruistic tendencies are very pronounced (not to mention common), even towards those of the "out group", unlike what the authors claim. All in all, despite the horrendous arguments, the book was an easy read and the authors did a fine job in explaining their arguments in a straightforward, and easily understood fashion. It's just the authors didn't seem to understand most of the arguments Richard Dawkins makes, nor understand his views about religion, particularly, what he terms "child abuse". If this is the best theists have to offer by the way of philosophical argument, the theists are in big trouble.
	A great book misunderstood  Aug 4, 2009
This book was aimed at people who had come to doubt the existence of God through the arguments of Richard Dawkins' and at those who were further entrenched in their atheistic viewpoints because of the same arguments. This book was NOT a Christian defense of the existence of God, as so many reviewers have believed. Hahn and Wike more played the role of defense attorneys, pointing out the irrationality of Dawkins'arguments, creating doubt in a reasonable person. As a defense of the existence of the Christian God, I give this book a 1 out of 5 stars. Thankfully Hahn and Wike knew their mark and stayed true to it. They pointed out the philosophical holes in Dawkins' arguments. Why is this important? Why should Hahn and Wike waste their time with such a book? For two reasons, a great number of people are not critical thinkers, give them an argument that doesn't seem absurd and they will believe it; this book gives Christians who have valued Dawkins' arguments as different perspective on their logic. The other reason is the consequences of state atheism. In the modern era, governments that have expressed atheism have committed some of the gravest atrocities. This is the purpose of the much maligned final chapter of this book. On one hand Hahn and Wike opened the door wide for criticism from those who deny God, on the other hand they could back up their points with examples of God denying governments over the past 200 years. All in all the book hits its intended mark and should not be penalized for being what it is not intended to be. "Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God," is the goal and achievement of this book. 5 out of 5
	Amzingly intellectual book!  Jul 25, 2009
Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker take an unbiased and devastatingly concise approach to New Atheism, particularly Dawkin's shoddy philosophy. Although they are Catholic theologians and apologetics they argue on the grounds of reason alone without coming off as preachy or using any biblical references. The book is short and left me wanting more by the time I came to the end! Highly reccomended!
	A sound, sensible rebuttal to "The God Delusion"  Jul 21, 2009
It's refreshing to read such a well organized collection of thoughts and well-reasoned arguments, particularly when it addresses a collection of irrational, poorly-reasoned ideas such as those presented by Dawkins in "The God Delusion," a book so poorly written as an argument that even prominent atheist Michael Ruse said it made him "embarrassed to be an atheist." Harsh words, particularly when they're coming from a friendly camp. Ruse isn't the only "friendly" critic, by any means. I feel it's a shame, to be fair about it. I have always been impressed with Dawkins' skills as a writer dealing with popular and controversial ideas, and he just doesn't present a very smart argument in "The God Delusion." This book was badly needed. Dawkins is a very persuasive writer and has a devoted following, so getting readers of all stripes to buy into his argument is a simple task. But for anyone looking for a reasonable, rational argument, Dawkins' book is something of an embarrassment, regardless of your worldview. Dawkins proposes to disprove the Judeo-Christian God, but knows next to nothing about Him. As the authors of this book point out, Dawkins creates a strawman God on his own terms, and then proceeds to beat the tar out of him. There's just one problem: this god that Dawkins is trying so hard to disprove isn't even remotely like the God found in the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Anyone can prove or disprove something when they are allowed to invent the premise to fit their argument. If you would allow me to create my own definition of God, I'm pretty certain I could prove His existence using established scientific facts, as I'd simply invent a definition of God that allowed me to do so. As the authors point out, Dawkins has committed this same sleight of hand, and slipped it right past many readers, who apparently saw nothing wrong with it. For those who haven't read this book yet, I'll try to explain it as quickly as possible, as understanding it is critical to understanding the rest of this review. To disprove the Judeo-Christian God, one must accept the description of Him found within the Judeo-Christian scriptures. This description suggests a God who existed before the creation event, and therefore outside of our four-dimensional world. He's also described as existing before our dimension of time began, and therefore not constrained by it. Additionally, this god-being is a spirit, not a physical entity. Dawkins dispenses with all of these annoying points, and moves forward with his own conveniently-designed definition of an evolved god. Dawkins believes that as our own intelligence is the result of evolution, then this God must have evolved as well. The numerous problems with this concept should be immediately clear. For starters, evolution works on physical beings with DNA, which, to the best of our knowledge, only exists within this 4-D Universe. How can you apply the powers of natural selection to a spirit? The problems then continue to spiral outward from this starting point, but you'll need to read this book as well as "The God Delusion" to fully enjoy them. As the authors point out, Dawkins tries to create an evolved, somewhat material god who's little more than an amplified version of himself. It's no wonder Dawkins couldn't find him. The real meat of the authors' argument, however, comes near the end, which addresses the problems encountered with Dawkins' increasingly flawed argument regarding morality. Morality, Dawkins claims, is an evolved trait, the result of millions of years of evolution. The problem with this idea is that if morality is purely the result of Darwinian processes, then, from our human perspective, it's cold and heartless at its core, and not the type of social structure that Dawkins himself would want to live in, and he admits as much. But how can that be? In a totally material world, good and bad are simply subjective tags we give things. How can evolved, amoral behavior be cold and heartless, and why do we largely reject "Darwinian" social behavior in our societies? This is just one part of Dawkins' argument where he paints himself into a corner. Even more bizarre is his attack on the God of the Old Testament. As the authors point out, Dawkins refers to this God as heartless, xenophobic, selfish and racist. Dawkins is now attacking both God (and by extension, the Jews) for behaving exactly as evolution would have Him behave; selfishly preserving His own at the expense of others. If Dawkins' God is an evolved entity, then He's behaving exactly as Dawkins would expect him to behave. The Jews, as described in the Bible, are brutally efficient at preserving their genes and their environment, qualities that Dawkins praises elsewhere in his arguments, but finds repugnant when actually applied by a particular group. The ancient Jews, by Dawkins evolutionary definitions, are genetic geniuses, and since there is no God in Dawkins purely physical world, how can you ascribe attributes such as good and evil to an "evolved" race that appears so brutally efficient at exploiting natural selection to its fullest advantages, a trait so strong in them that they've survived intact as a distinct group for over four millennnia? As the authors point out, Dawkins wants to have his cake and eat it too. Pick your poison, say the authors of this book. Dawkins cannot argue in favor of evolved, amoral behavior as the basis for all morality, and then turn around and condemn it as unfair and biased elsewhere, particularly since his natural world, as its core, has no use for such subjective classifications. Evolved traits must be viewed as amoral, says Dawkins. So why does he feel he can change the rules to attack a race of people (and, by extension, their God) that simply came to be (claims Dawkins) as the result of blind, amoral evolutionary processes? In summation, this book picks apart Dawkins' argument and shows its fatal flaws; flaws, I'll note again, that were roundly criticized by his own colleagues. That point alone should have been a warning sign to readers not to blindly accept Dawkins rhetoric, no matter how inflamed and stirring it may be. I sincerely hope that anyone who reads "The God Delusion" and who considers themselves to be a critical thinker will also take the time to read this excellent argument against it. If you're going to develop a rational basis for your beliefs, be they atheistic or theistic, you should be willing to entertain a sound argument against them. This book is a good place to start. The authors did their homework, and produced a sound rebuttal to an inflammatory book from an author who didn't. And, if you're a theist who wants to develop a fair and balanced view of the God vs. naturalism debate, I would suggest you skip "The God Delusion," and instead read Carl Sagan's The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark as it's a far better argument than the one delivered by Dawkins. As a theist myself, I found Sagan's book to be far more compelling and thought-provoking, and it gave me much to consider in refining my own Christian worldview.
	Nice try but utterly fails in its mission  Jul 19, 2009
Simply cannot counter even one of Richard Dawkins' arguments. Misrepresents some of his arguments then spends page after page disproving their strawmen. This book is intellectually dishonest, which is made crystal clear in the final chapter. Read it at a book store to see what the authors are really like. They just don't have the morality that Dawkins does.

Write your own review about Answering the New Atheism: Dismantling Dawkins' Case Against God

Contact Info
1-800-381-8079
International +1-678-546-9300
Contact Us – Contact Us

Address
Bible Knowledge Bookstore
1734 Clarkson Rd
Suite 234
Chesterfield MO 63017
1-800-381-8079

Store Policies
Customer Service
Shipping Info
Return Policy
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy

Account Info
My Account
Track My Order
Gift Certificates
Newsletter