[lafroste]

But the authors do not believe that the delusion is harmless. Instead, they make clear that they see religion as a major source of evil in the world

If this is in the author's own words, then this is the achilles heel of their argument right here. Evil is a religious concept and means "that which is contrary to the Will of God" and not the secular meaning of "bad". If there is no God, then there is also no evil. They cannot argue that religion is a delusion by employing religious concepts to do so.

[Diamond]

Evil is a religious concept and means "that which is contrary to the Will of God" and not the secular meaning of "bad". If there is no God, then there is also no evil. They cannot argue that religion is a delusion by employing religious concepts to do so.

Very astute observation. And I would also argue that even the moral concept "bad" has no real ethical content if it is nothing but the product of impersonal biological Darwinian evolution. After all, how can mere deterministic, physical processes produce soemthing "bad"?

The moralizing atheist is foolish and self-refuting.

Cordially,

[GraniteStateConservative]

You can define evil as senseless, malicious harmful activity-- especially against "innocents."