Refuting the New Atheists: A Christian Response to Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins

by Douglas Wilson

The so-called New Atheists have a great deal of moral indignation at all the evil in the world, but, as apologist and theologian Douglas Wilson cheerfully points out, they have no moral basis for it whatsoever.If we are merely the result of billions of years of matter in motion, then why do we feel that concentration camps, genocide, apartheid, and the like are so obviously wicked and despicable, if in fact such events are just time and chance acting on matter? Harris, Hitchens, and Dawkins have made careers out of cataloguing the ways "religion" has messed up the world, from Old Testament genocide to the Spanish Inquisition to the Salem witch trials to Muslim extremism and beyond. However, Douglas Wilson shows that atheists stand on millennia of Christian culture and morality when they emphasize the problem of evil, and that atheistic materialism cannot give any account of truth, beauty, or goodness.A Christianity Today award-winning author and renowned debater, Wilson has many spicy and entertaining refutations to the specific claims of Harris, Hitchens, and Dawkins, but at the center of it all is the Gospel. The real foundation for morality is the fact that God has made us in His image and made us so that our consciences bear witness to His laws, even when we break them. As Wilson shows, man's only hope is the good news that Jesus has taken on the deserved penalty for all the evils of the world in His death on the cross.This book contains all three of Douglas Wilson's book-length responses to the New Atheists, published for the first time in one volume. It includes Letter from a Christian Citizen, written to Sam Harris; God Is, in reply to Christopher Hitchens; and The Deluded Atheist, a response to Richard Dawkins.

Genres: Theology, Nonfiction, Christian

332 pages, Kindle Edition

Published May 25, 2021

About the author

I write in order to make the little voices in my head go away. Thus far it hasn't worked.

Reviews

[Josiah Richardson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wilson responds to three of the four atheist horsemen of the apocalypse books: Harris’ “Letter to a Christian Nation,” Hitchens’ “God is not Great,” and Dawkins’ “The God Delusion.”

I thought that Wilson’s response to Hitchens was his best of the three, possible because their personalities and interests seem to overlap so much. Wilson’s response to Harris was good and almost seemed like a Father-Son conversation. The Dawkins response, to me, was the least impactful of the three. But it can be difficult not to match the pompous nature of Dawkins with a bit of your own.

It is interesting to me how quickly these three atheist men are falling into obscurity already. Harris is running on the last vestiges he has left, Dawkins has been abandoned by his leftist friends, and Hitchens has become an afterthought by most, save only a few who know and appreciated his prose. Daniel Dennett is completely unknown to most people and just sounds like a paw patrol character. The four horsemen seemed to have finished their last trail and as G.K. Chesterton has said “At least five times… the Faith has to all appearance gone to the dogs. In each of these five cases it was the dog that died.”

[Caleb M. Powers · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent stuff here—a strong polemic against atheism.

[Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

A demolition worthy of C.S. Lewis. And would recommend folks not to stop at Lewis either, because the times have changed a little and the atheist arguments have changed with them. Not drastically, but it's helpful to have a more direct response.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book. Classic Doug Wilson apologetic-style refutation of the new atheists. "God doesn't exist, and that is a good thing," say the atheists. But what is "good" in a universe without God?

[Doug · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book does not refute anything. It is simply a disagreement and is therefore predominantly foundationless drivel.

[qivy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wasn't very impressed ...

Wilson's "refutations" were weak at best, and oh so awfully repetitive. You'd think that after making the same argument 5 or 6 times he'd leave it alone, but no, nearly every chapter has the same statement about atheists not having any basis for why humans "ought" to behave the way they do. Maybe he's never considered that biological drives for altruism coupled with the reason and intelligence to understand collaborations' obvious benefits are enough for us all to behave properly. Regardless, even if it was an extremely strong argument, it lost its potency after such exhaustive use.

I couldn't help but laugh whenever Wilson wrote something along the lines of "I actually agreed with what Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris wrote here, and think it was very accurate" any time a religion other than Christianity was being discussed. Like really? Apparently, the "New Atheists" enjoy perfect reason and logic when discussing Islam, Buddhism, or Judaism; but Christianity? Oh no, they couldn't possibly be right about any of that.

I needn't discuss Wilson's pathetic refutation of evolution. "Irreducible complexity" is a quick gist of his entire argument here.

It was also strange that Wilson wrote about how he could detect the tricks Hitchens employed in his writing (something he assumes the reader could never be able to do on their own, had the tricks even been there in the first place). Wilson really did try to make it seem as though Hitchens' book God is Not Great had been written to try and manipulate people into believing its arguments rather than to genuinely raise consciousness and educate the public. A foul move on the part of Wilson, but not entirely uncharacteristic of typical theistic arguments against atheists. He pulls a similar stunt right at the end of this book claiming, despite an astounding lack of evidence or reason, that Dawkins has some sort of shame about atheism and a desire to be religious. As though Dawkins is almost faking his atheism. Again, I'm not entirely surprised given the author, but still no less disappointed.

Overall not a great read. It wasn't very educational and certainly didn't provide the strong refutations I was hoping it would. Many of the questions Wilson raised have either been answered in their entirety by Dawkins/Hitchens/Harris already, or stem from a malicious desire to make it appear as though established science is weaker than it truly is. I give this book 2 stars rather than 1, simply to account for the fact that I was and am likely biased against its arguments in ways I might not be aware of.

[Reid Williamson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another commute listen. A thorough demolition of three of the four horsemen of the new Atheists’ books against God. Doug effectively embarrasses them in my opinion. Be careful saying you are defending reason when you haven’t established a basis for it or are confessing a faith in the absence of any basis for it.

[Julia Alexander · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is extremely well-written, practical enough for a layman to understand but also filled with deep insights that cause one to think critically and question common atheist “logic”. Some of his points can go over your head if you’re not familiar with some of the common arguments from the new atheists. Definitely recommend!

[Sam Clapp · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book, Wilson responds to each chapter of 3 popular atheist books of today. The way he broke down the arguments for an atheist worldview was clever and insightful. Minus a star for some repetition, this book was split into 3 similar sections of arguments (one section for each book he is refuting)

[Tate Mitchell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wilson's writing style shines in this format. While it's clear that his main point is a simple and repetitive one, the books he is addressing are varied enough to make it engaging. This scratched just the right apologetic-loving itch in my brain.

[Jaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

With wit and wisdom, Douglas tackles the tiresome objections and misrepresentations levied against the Christian faith.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sweet music to my ears!

[Justin Pollock · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was well written, good content. A bit repetitive, but it seemed intentional.

[Laurie Myer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very well done. Douglas Wilson quietly and thoroughly addressed all major points of the three atheists. His rebuttals were clear, polite and respectful.

[Saul W · Rating 4 out of 5]

Spamming the moral argument is a cheat code.

[Matthew Rawlings · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fine, well written Van Tillian refutation of the (now) not so new atheists. Still well worth your time.

[Joseph · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good stuff.