And whenever someone tries to pass religion off as science, for me a red flag goes up. We all have our hangups.
What does it contribute to resolving whether or not Holy Scripture is myth?
It doesn't. It erases the myth that science is a cabal of atheists intent on destroying religion.
What of preeminent scientists (such as Dawkins or Dennett) who declare no genuine scientist can be religious?
I don't often agree with the likes of Dawkins who have for themselves essentially turned atheism into a quasi-religion.
Why would Agnostics not be included among the “hard-core Christianity haters”?
Because they're on the fence. In any case, atheist plus agnostic is still a minority.
I would think that an overwhelming majority of scientists would understand that scientifically they can assert no more than agnosticism.
Science is supposed to ignore the supernatural. People do have the ability to not inject their personal beliefs into the work they are doing.
I do not understand how you can say that. Every day we see contradicting evidence on this very forum.
Show me. Persecution complex is common in religions, even when that religion comprises the vast majority of a country's population. It helps solidarity among members.
It's not a myth when you see the likes of Dawkins doing that very thing.
Science has become the weapon of choice of the atheists with which to bludgeon Christianity.
It is no myth these days.