Etritonakin
Well-Known Member
You aren't understanding what I am saying.
Both the Iliad and the Bible have verifiable historical facts. I agree that Athena is not real. So, having verifiable historical facts does not substantiate the stories of supernatural influences. In particular, the verifiable historical facts in the Bible do not show that the stories of Yahweh are true. Nor even that Yahweh is real. So, using the Bible as evidence of God is no more justified than using the Iliad as evidence for Athena.
As for personal experiences. ALL religions have such experiences. ALL claim to be special in some way. The Christian mythology is no different than every other mythology on this point.
So, why should I believe Christianity and NOT believe all the rest? Isn't it much more reasonable to think that ALL are mistaken?
I do understand your point.
You should not believe anything until you have good reason.
It is never reasonable to assume. Accurately-perceived experience would be the necessary difference.
The bible itself does contain proof of an intelligence able to have written future history, but few will consider the matter seriously or thoroughly.
"God" is not of a simple description. "God" is essentially the sum of that which exists (God is one).