Because it isn’t a less enlightened view, and so people better educated and more intelligent than you still find it logically coherent to do so. It’s only a leap of logic to those who haven’t worked out the logic yet.
Wow, trolling is easy! I should stop wasting my time actually working on posts and do this instead! 
More seriously, what you see as a leap of logic just isn’t seen as a leap by many educated and intelligent people. They see a logical path to the conclusion that, to them (us), makes sufficient sense, even if you don’t see it.
Which doesn’t of itself mean they’re (we’re) right and you’re wrong. It’s pretty normal for some educated people to see logical coherencies of accurate facts where even other educated people can’t (yet) see them; and it’s also pretty normal for some educated people to be mistaken about seeing logical coherencies of accurate facts where other educated (or occasionally even uneducated) people can see obvious real problems with the logic and/or the proposed factual claims. People just don’t always agree with each other on evidential and/or logical assessments; and often it isn’t even because one side is making more mistakes about the data accuracy or the logical validity. It can just as easily come down to different inductive likelihood expectations (i.e. how much the evidence weighs to a person in one direction or another).
But people who lack natural sympathy with other people, or who haven’t worked at cultivating sympathy where they lack it, will just as naturally not see or understand that – whether they’re Christian, alt-Christian, non-Christian, anti-Christian, anti-religious, whatever.
Which I can sympathize with! – I see various non-/anti-Christians making gallumphing huge logic-cracking leaps, or persistently playing with faulty data, all the time, and I have to fight myself hard about dismissing them as a bunch of mouth-breathing imbeciles or inept ignoramuses! And because of my temperament I have to work really reaaaally hard at that.
But you’d want me to work hard at not seeing you as a cretin, even if I think you’re freakishly mistaken on a bunch of topics. So, since I would prefer people grant that same charity to me, I work at bending over backward to grant that charity to them even when they clearly have no interest in granting it to me.
Of course it does help that, working from a position of strength, I can afford to be generous. 
(But by the same proportion if I’m not generous to my opponents where I have the strength to be generous, I’m more liable for not doing so. Which I realize is only of interest to me, not to you, but I try to make a habit of being self-critical.)