The issue of ‘god’ isn’t being resolved by the secular humanist (new atheist) movement: I recommend a look at the entire complexification of the problem visible in studying the Axial Age, and its complicated contradictions.
That said, secular humanism (generally atheist, but not exclusively), has addressed the ‘idolatry’ of ‘god’ that arose ironically in the monotheistic attack on pagan (idolatry) polytheism. The problem is that by challenging the representations of ‘god’ you end with a new a different set of abstractions that equivocate the ‘god’ question, for good Kantian reasons. One key issue is that atheism can’t solve the ‘god’ question through negation, first and foremost because it can’t define what is meant by the term any more than believers can. There are so many different forms of semantic usage that to negate all of them is completely counterproductive. A new terminology becomes essential as the whole legacy is left behind.
You cannot safely say either that god exists or doesn’t exist, and that’s the case on many levels. Still, for all intents and purposes conceptual theism is rightly challenged by modern atheism. However, the issue has already been turned into another crackpot religion by the new atheist cult: we see the distortion of science as scientism, the abuse of darwinism promote reductionist evolutionism, the fad of Nietzsche used to undermine ethics, etc…The atheist regime will soon prove to be even worse that the religion it wishes to replace.