Not surprisingly, the debate quickly turned to science vs. faith. At the end of the debate (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132-1,00.html)
Dawkins said something extraordinary: “If there is a God, it's going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.”

It was an unusual admission for an atheist – perhaps more suited to an agnostic - and I found myself in ready agreement with at least the first part of that statement.

God is much grander than even many Christians allow. The universe is vaster, more intricate, more mind-boggling and complex and a more exciting place than is found in the confining strictures of biblical literalism that insist – quite unnecessarily - that the earth was created in six 24-hour days.

My religion not only allows for but encourages a cosmic view. Its scriptures teach that there are worlds without number, that many of those worlds are inhabited, and that as worlds pass away, others come into being as part of God’s grand design for the immortality and eternal life of man.

My faith doesn’t get hung up on issues which for the moment are without resolution. Neither is it frightened of science. God works with natural laws – he understands their complexity and what appears to us as a miracle is simply the operation of some principle or law we don’t understand. I subscribe to the view that science and religion will be in harmony when all is understood.

Scientific breakthroughs and understanding can be seen either as a challenge to religious faith, or as yet another glimpse into the working of the mind of God and how He might have created the universe. I don’t expect we will find answers to very many pieces of this complex puzzle, but I don’t resent science for trying.

Why not? Because my religion is much more concerned with the whythan the how Where do come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? Is there a purpose for our existence and if so, how are we supposed to live our lives to achieve that purpose?

The fact that my religion addresses these questions about the purpose of life is more important for me than the fact that it can’t tell me whether there is a single universe or a multiverse. Scripture gives us a moral compass for how we ought to live on this planet and how we should interact with our fellow humans. Scriptures aren’t a manual for the nuts and bolts of how God put it all together.

Can we discuss it? Of course, if we honestly recognize that we are all looking at the same evidence from very different perspectives. Unfortunately, since atheism commonly allies itself with science, situational ethics and relativism, many atheists have a tendency to ridicule or be dismissive of religious faith (just read the comments on this site, for example).

As Collins said in the recent debate, religious faith is not the opposite of reason – it is reason with the added component of revelation. Meanwhile, some people who claim religious faith tend to make sweeping generalizations of non-believers that cause resentment and force them into entrenched positions. We all have to do better than that.