If you are athiest, why would you be concerned. To you, there is no God and therefore it shouldn't matter.

This depends no the attitude and intent behind it.

For example, if you believe in heaven or any kind of afterlife, then I see no reason to be joyful that an individual is "in a better place." It is also not a sin to be thankful that an individual is removed from the earth and that justice has been served (as in the death of people like Ted Bundy, Adolf Hitler, and Osama Bin Laden).

Regarding the latter portion of the above, there it is not a sin to feel relief for the fact that justice has been served, but in my opinion, it is a sin when you take pleasure in said individuals death. When I say you take pleasure in it, I mean actions that would be equivalent to pumping your fist.

Ad hominem has never been an admirable argumentative tactic, nor a means to a call to action.

There are many reasons that Christianity should be respected:
1) It promotes a sense of community and an aspiration toward the "General Will" of humanity, perhaps, and of a church in specific. (Reference here to Rousseau. I recommend reading his Social Contract and Discourse.)
2) In Christian Apologetics, the explanatory scope of Theism with the additional evidences of the Resurrection of Jesus and textual criticism provides wealth of knowledge that theists, agnostics, atheists, and individuals of all walks of religious backgrounds may investigate. With that said, studying Christianity promotes the study of knowledge. Going with your naturalistic assumption that knowledge is the ultimate means of power and that tolerance should be advocated, this is a huge asset to anybody's education.
(By the way, many New Testament scholars, whether Christian in belief or otherwise, are typically well-versed in Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin, and many other ancient languages. As a result, they read some "good literature," such as the ancient classics. In fact, without being well-versed in said literature, they would not be able to date the Bible texts.)
3) As a religious movement, it has great importance in human civilization, perhaps from its very beginning. Since Christianity is ultimately rooted in Judaism also, then it extends very far back in history. If you want some good "literature" for historic times, some of which has been corroborated by archaeology, then the study of Christianity and the Bible could be respected.

The list could be extended even further, but I think you get the point. My main contention here is this: Above you have encouraged individuals to think for themselves and study other things and not be "force fed" by parents and peers. This is precisely what I have done, and many others have as well. Instead of using profanity and misrepresenting the beliefs of many of us in the Christian fellowship forum, I would plea with you to be intellectually honest about what people speak about here, even if you do not entirely agree with it. You will find even within world religions, there is debate as to what should be taken literally and figuratively.

I have spent many years of my life taking the advice in your P.S. statement. Not everybody here as as "ignorant" as you suppose. We deal with statements like yours on this subforum and in life frequently. Quite frankly, statements like yours often go ignored because they are so bland, irrelevant, and unwarranted. I am not attacking you as an individual, but your methods. I wonder how much you have heard of Christianity through the grapevine, and have not heeded your own advice, My friend, I advise you to do so.

And one reason not to.

1. It is made up.

By made up do you mean contrived for no reason? That certainly is not the view of many individuals. People who study humanities recognize that many forms of religions arise for specific purposes. Of course, that does not necessarily make them true.

However, if we can take "made up" to mean that a system was derived based on spiritual experience, historical fact, and philosophical reason, then Christianity is no more "made up" than the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

It was created for a reason, but its just a "fantasy" novel imo.

Most of science is based on "historical fact" the laws on the universe.

Which you cant say the same about the bible.

You are simply assuming naturalism is true in this context. If naturalism is true, then what you have said has some merit. However, I find no reason to believe that it is true.

Archaeology, astronomy, geography, and history all confirm many aspects of the Bible, to be accurate. It is not simply 100% contrived of nothing with no historical or logical merit from academics.

total bullshit. Jesus said turn the other cheek
ghandi said an eye for eye makes the entire world go blind.

History only confirms aspects of the bible insofar that humans are a pattern seeking species. If you approach history with the outcome of what you want to already in place, than yes, you will find validation for what is claimed in the bible.
That is not history however. The reason anything you find in the past might correlate to the bible is because several thousand years ago, the peoples that wrote the different segments of the bible looked at the world around them and used that
for their scriptures. The overall ambiguous nature of these writings does mean however that you can find the traces of its origins all over the books, as evinced by paleography. It also means that, to this very day, the bible can seem to be applied to modern times.

scripture or didn't happen