Is OotS a redundant read in this context now that we have more complete knowledge from more up to date sources?
I think OtOoSbMoNSotPoFRitSfL (to give it its 'full' abbreviation
) is a fairly important read for anyone in the EvC debate purely because of the frequency that Creationists say "Darwin this" or "Darwin that". Although it is not his only work on the topic, it gives a pretty solid argument for evolution - and it still remains one of the clearest arguments out there despite the errors.
Do you think that those who advocate the E in the EvC should have a decent knowledge of the bible?
I don't think the Bible is as important a read for EvC, though it is useful to know what is going on in the books for some of the ancillary debates that crop up time and again. The same goes for the Koran. It also might be an idea for some of the C in EvC to read the damned thing!
Would those who advocate the C in the EvC do well read OotS or would a more up to date text be more relevant?
They are faced with a choice - either talk about what Darwin said and his original argument after having read it. Or talk about the more modern argument after having read it. Or both. But mixing them up, and not having read either...that's just going to cause fail. Personally - I think its a good idea to read it. And, like the Bible, it's free online!
Or are the details of the two books irrelevant as long as one knows enough about the current evidence and arguments for/against each position?
I think one can argue E or C quite easily without knowledge of either book. They are after all, only books (and by the C book I mean Genesis, some of the other Biblical books might be useful for the debate, but Genesis is obviously the directly important one - and only about 10-15% of that is really relevant to the debate anyway). Most of the creationist argument is not in Genesis anyway - that's just the story. The argument is in the millennia of apologetics.