Including Intro, Bibliography and Further Reading, this book is still less than 100 pages long.One can only expect so much from such a short work. What this book does not do is provide a systematic outline let alone in depth account of Dawkin's works or ideas about God and as a result of this, one is left wondering at times what Dawkins said more specifically.When Mcgrath does quote him I was really surprised to read so many badly written Dawkins passages, how cliched his ideas and victims were, and so much emotiveness with so little philosophy to back it up. The most interesting parts of the book cover the howlers Dawkins made eg about Paul writing the Epistle to the Hebrews and attributing a quote to Tertullian which the internet has provided him with; and more generally how many other atheists, humanists and non-christians were and are embarrassed by not only his agruments but also his ignorance of the bible in particular and religion overall. This is not the book to take apart such sloppiness but is an OK starting point for anyone who is wondering what all the fuss is about and has little experience of such debates.
I found this book to be hilarious. I must say that it does not address the issues that Dawkins brings up (the few that he does bring up) but it rather criticizes Dawkins fundamentalism. If you want in depth objections to the "God Delusion", I suggest you get "Dawkins God". If you want a short book that highlights the fact that Dawkins is a crummy philosopher and produces unfounded arguments for the non-existence of God, then you should definitely get this book.
This book is not an in-depth coverage of the issues in "The God Delusion". The author writes in an earlier book called Dawkins God (I think) a much more in depth treatise. However with the release of the God Delusion new issues are brought up and a quick response is called for. "The Dawkins Delusion?" goes after these issues which come from what he calls Dawkins "atheist fundamentalism. Dawkins book is a take no prisoners bludgeoning of religion, a complete rejection of God and religion as being childish nonsense. McGrath does a good job of exposing his close-minded "antifundamentalist" attack. He points out areas where Dawkins in his zeal leaves his scientific methods such as his use of the unsubstantiated religion gene called a Meme (which he invented) to carry on his attack. The weakness of Christian fundamentalism is not its passion or its dogged desire to hold on to biblical truth but rather its closed mindedness in learning from critics and real dialog. In its dogged defense of what it sees as sacred it has a great tendency to treat its opponents with little or no respect. Dawkins models this weakness all too well with his own "atheist fundamentalism" and McGrath calls him on it. Not surprisingly many in his own atheist camp are appalled and dismayed at Dawkin's approach. McGrath's review of this book is very helpful. McGrath is not here to argue whether God exists or not. Dawkins has gone too far and this book successfully points out many of his errors. If you are looking for a detailed defense against atheism this is not it. This is an expose of an extremist. I have heard Dawkins on the radio and he sees nothing good in religion and is on crusade to cleanse the land of this blight on humanity. If only everyone was an atheist then peace, love, joy and harmony would reign. I have an atheist friend who previously saw Dawkins as a champion for the atheist cause. However he's a bit embarrassed by "The God Delusion"
I was very disappointed in this book. The McGraths seem to be preaching to the choir, a choir that they believe should have already reached the correct conclusions and so don't bother to thoroughly address any of the points of The God Delusion! The authors just do not seem to understand that, as much as the fallacies of Dawkins seem self-evident to them, many people are taking Dawkins seriously. The point of a book such as theirs is to rebut his assertions one by one. They barely scratch the surface. I understand how maddening it is to try to answer arguments that are so outrageous, that they are 'not even wrong', but in writing this book the McGraths did everyone a disservice. No Dawkins supporter will be convinced to reconsider and those who are no fans of Dawkins theology (I am a fan of his other work, when he can keep his hostility to religion to a minimum) will have gained no insight into ways in which his atheism can and could be answered.