Maybe ...

... 'You just don't understand my religion' is not good enough | Julian Baggini | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk. (Hat tip, Dave Lull.)

While it is certainly true that one need not have expert knowledge of theology to criticize religion, there are, as Baggini indicates, certain basics that must be taken into consideration. Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, pats himself on the back for what he thinks a brilliant insight, that since the universe is so large and complex, God, were there one, would have to be even larger and more complex.Apart from the fact that this is an odd notion coming from someone who is evangelical about a theory that posits all the world's biodiversity deriving from a most simple start, it also ignores what the religious think regarding God's transcendent simplicity. At the very least, one must address the issues in a debate in accordance with the terms as understood by those you are attempting to refute.
I have said in the past that no one in his right mind believes in the God Richard Dawkins doesn't believe in, and I have also noted that Dawkins has done very little throughout his career in the way of actual science. Recently, he said in an interview that he had never much been interested in the science itself, but in its philosophical implications. Then why didn't he study philosophy? His grasp of it as reflected in The God Delusion is not impressive. So we have a propagandist for "science" who doesn't practice science and a philosophizer who hasn't really studied philosophy. Dawkins is obviously well-schooled and highly articulate. But deep down he seems to be something of a simpleton.