Biologist Richard Dawkins, as the greatest preacher of modern atheism, seeks to disprove the functions enumerated for religion with an atheistic and scientific approach. Moral zeitgeist, meme hypothesis, the concept of belief in belief and alternatives for the reconciliation of religion, are among the concepts he uses in this regard. In contrast, Alisterr McGrath, a Christian biologist and theologian, defends the moral and psychological functions of religion. Lack of loyalty to the scientific methodology that Dawkins claims to follow is one of the most important criticisms of McGrath to Dawkins. According to McGrath, scientific research suggests a significant relationship between adherence to religion and the positive functions of religion, although Dawkins does not pay biased attention to such research. The purpose of the present article is to show the opposition of these two views and to criticize the plant. In evaluating this research, we have used the library method in terms of collection and the analytical method in terms of judging status. The finding of the present study is that most of McGrath's critiques of Dawkins have been useful and effective, but in some cases there are drawbacks