and anyone who wants to convert to islam should read qoran in full , not the watered down version found in mosques in uk.find out for himself how violent islam is and how it promotes violence.read it in full.
read how it totally disrespects women and treats them as 4th class citizens.

ebbi britt, valencia,

As a Christian, I agree with Dawkin for bashing organised religions of all kinds. Religions are man-made institutions and come in many forms. Faith in Jesus Christ is a different issue entirely. People who ridicule the Bible without reading it, and I don't mean just a little glimpse at well-known themes, but really read it well, will be delighted and enlightened about all things. Religion will just confuse you.

However, I don't like Dawkin's arrogance as though he has a monopoly on truth. He's not God. As a scientist, he has become hysterical and foolish lacking integrity. As a believer, whether in athietism or not, he has lost the plot.

My point is, that truth in philosophy and truth in science will always harmonise or it's not Truth.

All churches are unique, made up of individuals and so long as they are free to worship God in truth without man-made rules, all is well. Rules evolve into religion. This applies to fundamentalists as much as traditional churches

Jenny, Brighton, UK

God I love this man, finally someone has the stones to stand up for what he believes and make a stand against religion.

Louise, Peterborough,

If someone exhibits reverence for science and the universe around them and believe in a gigantic intelligence can they call themselves atheists? Doesn't this reflect some kind of Theism postulated on firmer than popular beliefs of Christianity? But as long as the public would love to hear the ear tickling messages of the scientists....

Premchand, Hyderabad, India

The difference between science and religion is that science requires repeatable empirical evidence or mathematical logic for something to be "true", whereas religion requires a state of feeling: an emotional apprehension akin to loving a total stranger and making it the object of ones life to marry them: one "knows" that the "truth" is that happiness for both of you depends on this. It is possible for such "truth" to be "true" and also possible for it to be hopelessly, tragically, false. The problem is that scientific or mathematical truth, as such, cannot supply for the majority of mankind the emotional satisfaction necessary for normal motivation. Mankind knows the limits of its knowledge and is inclined to worship or try to appease the power of a universe largely beyond its control. That is an emotional response that is not irrational, but pragmatic and based on the undeniable fact that we scientifically "know" very little.

victor lyon, London, UK

I'm happy to see this more rational side of Mr. Dawkins. It was hard to take him seriously when he was acting like a atheist fundamentalist. This more contemplative side of Dawkins is much more interesting.

Judith M., Brainerd, USA/MN

Dawkins is right to say that people should read their Bibles - because doing so is an inoculation against believing it.

Andy Dyer, London,

Am I seeing things? Is Dawkins beginning to moderate his rantings. I believe everyone should read his books once. If they do so with an open, enquiring mind, they will find somethings that make sewnse. But a lot more that shows a lack of integrity from a man who claims to bea rational scientist.

What people miss about the Bible, is that it was written at a rtime when people thoght a particular way. Ther allusions and stories fit the period. But the message those stories are conveying are every bit as relavent to the 21st century as to the first.

They deal with the human condition. Explaining why we think and act the way we do. Many can't comprehend the concept of 'God.' Okay, that is where they are. But just because they don't understand the truth about God, does not mean He does not exist, or that what we read about in the Bible is not. true.
We have two choices here. Either God does exist, or He does not. Intellectually, I have concluded He does exist.

Peter Hodge, Skelmersdale,

Give me reason, logic, science and Dawkins any day.

cath, london, uk

People should read the various sacred texts once, as they tell us much about our heritage and history, and outline part of man's early search for moral codes.
However, like a cigarette packet, all these texts should carry a warning on the cover: CAUTION: Open with care, this book could be injurious to your health; the contents within are not factual, and should not be taken literally!

frank, sydney,

There is a "Gigantic Intelligence" but He lives within the range of human experience. We creationists call Him God and He is the One who knows all the answers to the un-answerable questions in Prof Dawkins career. Do I perceive cracks in the evolutionary armour? Perhaps! But it is a long way to the experience of changing ones faith. Maybe he and others like him will allow dialogue on our beginnings with some of us heretics. We live in hope.

M Bamping, Rochester, Kent