As one of those pesky Gnu atheists, I really don't have time for much theology. While this might make me seem that I'm basing my atheism on ignorance, I feel this is an unfair characterisation. The study of theology is about as much needed for my rejection of God as the study of astrology to reject astrology. I could give more examples of this, but I hope the point gets across without it.
When it comes to astrology, I take into consideration whether or not there's a correlation between the position of planets and stars and the effects on our lives. As far as I can tell, there is none. I take into consideration the correlation of star signs to personality types. As far as I can tell, there is none. I take into consideration the predictive success of astrologers to use the tools to be able to predict world events. As far as I'm aware, there's no evidence for this. So there's no prior plausibility to astrology, so what would I get out of studying it from an internal perspective?
To take theology as a consideration would mean showing how theology is necessary to the question of God's existence. As far as I can tell, it isn't. The burden is on those who believe it is to show why it is, otherwise the objection falls flat. It seems the best way to respect theology is not to take it as more than it is, after all we don't look to the contradictions in Genesis as the reason for rejection Creation. Internal inconsistency doesn't matter so much when the case is made irrespective to that.