First, with an apology for not doing so first post, may I bid you warm welcome to this forum This is at least the third time here I have seen this phrase used in this context. Humanity is no longer a baby. Or need not be. The time of being content with goo-goo's and gaa-gaa's has surely past. In light of the radical changes that have expanded human knowledge in the last two centuries, and the exponential growth that has marked that trend being set to continue, our collective whole has to reach a new consensus. Hanging on the word of a collection of factious desert leaders and renegades lost in the mists of time is no longer good enough in my opinion. There never was a baby in the bathtub. What on Earth is a sacred text? What causes more faction than this need of people to self appoint themselves to (a) define sacred and (b) have it defined as some personal redefinition? Seems like navel gazing to me, with a borrowed, ancient and withered navel. To what benefit though? If these texts have any benefit at all they are as a model for a collective morality. But in religious texts that message is confused and biased by countless contradictions and narratives that render it too corrupted to be fit for purpose. We do not need religion to teach us to love and think beyond our personal desires. All other content has about as much meaning today as any badly written, otherwise unpublishable novel. Should we construct temples to worship every ancient writing? You could join a scrabble club! Make note of every word in your games and fit them into verses!! They would then have a conversational merit at least comparable to the desert texts. Great idea yeah? You can thank me later I think my meaning here was clear and needs no expansion. As you can see.... I just do not see any benefit in continuing to invest in any way in such tenuously relevant texts. They are a part of the problem and the past, not the cure nor the future. Or so I hope.