Point-by-point responses to claims from Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, and other "New Atheists"
Beginning in the early 2000s with books like The God Delusion (Dawkins, 2006), God Is Not Great (Hitchens, 2007), and The End of Faith (Harris, 2004), a movement emerged that claimed to provide scientific, rational arguments against God's existence.
New Atheism isn't primarily about evidence—it's about rhetoric.
Instead of engaging with serious Christian scholarship, New Atheist authors:
This resource provides point-by-point refutations of New Atheism's six major claims and shows that Christianity is far more rational and evidence-based than New Atheism admits.
| Author | Book | Year | Main Claim |
|---|---|---|---|
| Richard Dawkins | The God Delusion | 2006 | Religion is delusion; evolution disproves God |
| Christopher Hitchens | God Is Not Great | 2007 | Religion is the root of evil |
| Sam Harris | The End of Faith | 2004 | Faith is irrational; religion causes suffering |
| Daniel Dennett | Breaking the Spell | 2006 | Religion is a natural phenomenon, not evidence of God |
"I don't believe in God"
"Belief in God is irrational, dangerous, and disproven"
The difference: New Atheists claim to have positive arguments against God, not just lack of belief in God.
"Religion is the root of all evil" - Christopher Hitchens
False. Atheistic regimes (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot) killed over 100 million in the 20th century—far more than religious wars. Evil comes from human hearts, not religious beliefs. Christianity teaches enemy-love, not violence (Matthew 5:44).
"There's no evidence for God" - Richard Dawkins
False. Multiple lines of evidence exist: cosmological (Big Bang), teleological (fine-tuning), moral (objective values), historical (resurrection), consciousness, and philosophical arguments. Dawkins ignores evidence outside his narrow scientific expertise.
"Faith is belief without evidence" - Sam Harris
False definition. Biblical faith (Hebrews 11:1) is trust based on evidence. Christians have reasons for faith: historical resurrection, fulfilled prophecy, changed lives, philosophical arguments. Faith is warranted trust, not blind belief.
"Religion is a delusion" - Richard Dawkins
Circular reasoning. Dawkins assumes naturalism, then declares anything supernatural 'delusional.' But if God exists, belief in Him is rational, not delusional. The question isn't 'Is it delusional?' but 'Is it TRUE?'
"Science has disproven God"
False. Science studies natural processes; it cannot address supernatural causation. Many founders of modern science were Christians (Newton, Kepler, Pascal). The Big Bang, fine-tuning, and DNA's information all point TO God, not away from Him.
"The Bible is full of contradictions"
Alleged 'contradictions' are misunderstandings. Differences in Gospel accounts show independent testimony (which historians value). No contradictions affect core doctrines. The Bible is 99.5% textually accurate—the most reliable ancient document.
Religion is the root of all evil
| Regime | Dictator | Years | Death Toll | Ideology |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soviet Union | Stalin | 1922-1953 | ~20 million | Atheistic communism |
| China | Mao | 1949-1976 | ~45 million | Atheistic communism |
| Cambodia | Pol Pot | 1975-1979 | ~2 million | Atheistic communism |
| North Korea | Kim Il-sung | 1948-present | ~2 million | Atheistic communism |
| Total 20th Century | 100+ million | Secular/atheistic regimes | ||
Total deaths from religious wars throughout all history: ~15-30 million
The math is clear: secular regimes killed 3-10 times more people than religious conflicts.
Jesus taught:
"Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. For out of the heart come evil thoughts—murders, adulteries, sexual immoralities, thefts, false testimonies, blasphemies."
— Matthew 15:18-19
Key point: The problem isn't belief systems—it's human sinfulness. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot demonstrated that atheism is equally capable of producing evil.
"Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you."
— Matthew 5:44
Love for enemies
Romans 12:14-21
Forgiveness
Colossians 3:13
Peace
Ephesians 2:14-15
Meekness
Matthew 5:5
When Christians killed in the name of religion, they were violating their faith's core teachings, not following them.
First hospitals were Christian (4th century)
Built universities: Oxford (1096), Cambridge (1209)
Christian founders: Newton, Kepler, Faraday, Lemaitre
Christian movement (Wilberforce) ended slavery
Christian theology grounded dignity and rights
Red Cross, Salvation Army, orphanages, hospices
"The love of money is the root of all evil."
— 1 Timothy 6:10
Psychology's Answer: Tribalism, power-seeking, and in-group favoritism drive human conflict, regardless of ideology.
Conclusion: Hitchens' claim doesn't hold up under scrutiny. Atheistic regimes killed far more people, and evil flows from human hearts, not belief systems.
There's no evidence for God
Universe began ~13.8 billion years ago
Space-time had a beginning
"Something cannot come from nothing"
An eternal, powerful cause is required
Who: Physicist Georges Lemaître (Catholic priest) proposed this
| Constant | Precision | If Different |
|---|---|---|
| Gravity | 1 in 10⁶⁰ | No stars |
| Strong Force | 2% variation | No chemistry |
| Cosmological Constant | 1 in 10¹²⁰ | No galaxies |
Probability of all constants being right by chance: 1 in 10¹⁰¹²³
Implication: Design is the best explanation.
We experience objective moral values
We believe murder is actually wrong, not just "wrong for me"
Morality can't be explained by evolution (which predicts self-interest, not altruism)
God best explains objective moral values
Who: C.S. Lewis, William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga
Multiple independent sources confirm Jesus existed and was crucified
Earliest creed (1 Corinthians 15:3-8) dated within 3-5 years of crucifixion
Skeptical scholars (Bart Ehrman, John Dominic Crossan) affirm Jesus' existence and crucifixion
Disciples' transformation from hiding in fear to boldly proclaiming resurrection
Conversion of skeptics (James, Paul) after resurrection appearances
Best explanation: Jesus rose from the dead.
Hundreds of peer-reviewed philosophy papers argue for God's existence.
Who: David Chalmers, J.P. Moreland, Alvin Plantinga
Dawkins dismisses all this evidence because:
Verdict: Dawkins' claim of "no evidence" is false. There's substantial evidence that serious philosophers, scientists, and theologians take seriously.
Faith is belief without evidence
"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."
— Hebrews 11:1 (ESV)
Founded confidence, not blind hope
Conviction means being convinced by facts
Not irrational, but forward-looking
Probability: Less than 1 in 10¹⁷
Christianity has transformed:
Christians believe because of:
| Biblical Faith | Blind Faith |
|---|---|
| Based on evidence | Contrary to evidence |
| Requires reasonable grounds | Requires no justification |
| Seeks understanding | Avoids questions |
| Welcomes investigation | Fears scrutiny |
| Example: Believing resurrection based on historical evidence | Example: Believing despite contradicting facts |
"I believe in order that I may understand"
— Augustine
"Faith and reason are not opposed; they complement each other"
— Aquinas
"Faith, in the sense of Christian faith, means the entire surrender of the human will—in all its provinces—to the divine will"
— C.S. Lewis
Verdict: Harris' definition of faith is false. Biblical faith is reasoned trust, not blind belief. Christians have evidence for their faith: historical, philosophical, moral, and personal.
Religion is a delusion
Assume: Only natural things exist (naturalism)
Conclude: Belief in God is delusional
"Evidence": Anything supernatural is delusional
⚠️ The Problem:
This assumes what it's trying to prove! It assumes God doesn't exist, then concludes belief in God is delusional.
The question isn't
"Is it delusional?"
but
"Is it TRUE?"
Belief in Him is reasonable
Belief in Him is justified
Belief in Him is true
Belief in Him is not delusional
(See Claim 2 responses for detailed arguments):
Cosmological argument
Teleological argument (fine-tuning)
Moral argument
Historical evidence (resurrection)
Philosophical arguments
Evidence from consciousness
Many atheist arguments commit the same fallacy:
1. Assume naturalism (only nature exists)
2. Observe that Christianity claims the supernatural
3. Conclude Christianity is false
4. "Evidence": It contradicts our assumption
But this proves nothing. It just restates the original assumption.
Verdict: Dawkins' "delusion" charge is unfounded. He assumes naturalism, then calls supernaturalism delusional. This is circular reasoning, not evidence. The question of whether Christianity is true requires examining actual evidence, not assuming naturalism at the outset.
Science has disproven God
Important: Science cannot address supernatural causation because it studies only natural phenomena by definition.
| Scientist | Discovery | Faith |
|---|---|---|
| Isaac Newton | Laws of motion, gravitation | Devout Christian |
| Johannes Kepler | Planetary laws | "I am thinking God's thoughts" |
| Robert Boyle | Gas laws, chemistry | Founded Royal Society, funded Bible |
| Michael Faraday | Electromagnetism | Devout Christian |
| James Clerk Maxwell | Unified EM fields | "None will work without God" |
| Georges Lemaître | Big Bang theory | Catholic priest |
The greatest scientists in history were Christians. Science didn't disprove God; Christianity inspired science.
✗ God doesn't exist
Outside its domain
✗ Miracles are impossible
Would need to know all possible actions
✗ Resurrection is impossible
Would need exhaustive knowledge of nature
✗ Prayer doesn't work
Can't measure subjective experience
Why? Because science studies natural, repeatable phenomena. God, miracles, and the supernatural are outside its jurisdiction.
Verdict: Science hasn't disproven God. In fact, modern physics (Big Bang, fine-tuning) supports theism better than atheism.
The Bible is full of contradictions
Comparison:
Verdict: The Bible is better preserved than any other ancient document.
The four Gospels give different accounts of Jesus' life—but this proves independent testimony, not contradiction.
If all four accounts were identical, critics would claim coordination and copying!
Independent differences actually strengthen the case for authenticity.
But these don't contradict; they supplement.
Verdict: The Bible isn't full of contradictions. Minor differences between accounts reflect independent testimony, not fabrication. Core doctrines are consistent. The Bible is textually the most reliable ancient document.
New Atheism isn't about evidence—it's about rhetoric. Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris use emotional appeals, mockery, and straw-man arguments rather than engaging with the best Christian scholarship.
They dismiss philosophical arguments and historical evidence without serious engagement
They create a false definition of faith as 'belief without evidence' and attack that
They ridicule rather than interact with serious Christian thinkers
Serious Christian scholars who engage New Atheism with evidence
Alister McGrath
Direct response to Dawkins
Multiple scholars
Response to Hitchens
Tim Keller
Thoughtful apologetics
C.S. Lewis
Classic defense
Lee Strobel
Historical evidence
William Lane Craig
Philosophical arguments
Rather than dismiss New Atheism, serious Christian scholars have engaged it with rigorous evidence and sound reasoning.
Key Books:
• The Dawkins Delusion
• Why God Won't Go Away
Background:
Former atheist, molecular biophysicist & theologian
Focus:
Dawkins misrepresents theology, arguments are philosophically weak
Key Books:
• The Reason for God
• Making Sense of God
Background:
Pastor, theologian, apologist
Focus:
Engages modern skepticism with respectful, accessible reasoning
Key Books:
• Reasonable Faith
• The Apologetics of Jesus
Background:
Philosopher, theologian
Focus:
Cosmological argument, resurrection evidence, fine-tuning, moral argument
Key Books:
• Mere Christianity
• Miracles
• The Problem of Pain
Background:
Former atheist, Christian apologist
Focus:
Anticipated modern objections 70 years ago with rigorous logic
Key Books:
• The Case for Christ
• The Case for the Real Jesus
Background:
Former atheist journalist
Focus:
Historical evidence for resurrection, Gospel reliability, Jesus' claims
Key Books:
• The Resurrection of the Son of God
• Jesus and the Victory of God
Background:
New Testament scholar, bishop
Focus:
Rigorous historical analysis, resurrection evidence, academic credibility
Evidence exists for God
Multiple lines of evidence
Christianity is rational
Not blind faith
Resurrection is historical
Best explained by Jesus rising
New Atheism is weak
Philosophically unsound
Serious engagement required
Not dismissal or mockery
✗ Religion isn't evil
Atheistic regimes killed more
✗ No evidence for God
Multiple lines of evidence exist
✗ Faith is irrational
Biblical faith is reasoned trust
✗ Religion is delusion
Circular reasoning
✗ Science disproved God
Science can't address supernatural
✗ Bible is contradictory
Textually reliable, internally consistent
Christians believe in God not because we're irrational, but because:
Cosmology:
Universe began (Big Bang)
Physics:
Universe is finely tuned
Philosophy:
Moral values require a ground
History:
Jesus rose from the dead
Experience:
God transforms lives
If you claim Christianity is irrational:
Engage with William Lane Craig's arguments
Respond to Alvin Plantinga's philosophy
Address the historical evidence for resurrection
Grapple with fine-tuning in physics
Don't just mock. Argue.
"Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect."
— 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV)
New Atheism sounds confident, but it's built on weak foundations. Christianity has 2,000 years of intellectual tradition, evidence, and changed lives. Truth will prevail.
This interactive page covers key responses to New Atheism, but the full resource includes detailed refutations of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, and Dennett, with quotes, logical analysis, and comprehensive apologetics.
✓ 35+ pages • ✓ Detailed refutations • ✓ Author quotes • ✓ Comprehensive apologetics