The Second Wave of the New Atheism

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. I don't think study of *scripture* is particularly important; it's modern religious thinking

that critics of religion should be familiar with.

It doesn't matter much what ancient writings say; they are just writings, often from anonymous authors and with unclear context or editing process. Rather than being coherent arguments for religion, they tend to just assume they are authoritative, and thus lay down the law without reasoning. And it's not as if a religion must have scripture to be a religion.

When discussing any pros or cons of religions, it's the actual history that matters. How they've influenced ethics, laws, political policy, relations with other ethnic groups or religions, and so on. And how reasonable it is to follow the precepts of a religion doesn't come just (or even mainly) from scripture, but from the modern-day philosophy of a religion (including how it justifies itself as a feasible belief system), and its current views. If the emphasis is on the authority of ancient scriptures, then it may be worth knowing the scripture thoroughly to point out contradictions or awful moral standpoints, but if followers aren't literalists, it may not be that useful in argument.