Consider: Arabs are Semites, too, and considering the degree of European admixture in Israel's Jewish population, Arabs are probably more genetically Semitic than the Jewish Israelis.
So where's the rub: Religion, genetics, or behavior?
If you're using it as epistemic tool, to assess reality, then you are substituting emotion for intellect. and attributing it to some nebulous stuff you're calling "spirit."
Think about it: Given a certain set of objective, measurable facts, intellect will usually yield a pretty consistent...
If faith were well founded it wouldn't be faith; it would be knowledge.
Poorly evidenced belief can, indeed, be influential, bur the ability to motivate and ontological reality don't correlate.
Feelings are as varied and unreliable as hallucinations. It's objective, demonstrable evidence that launched the explosion of knowledge and technology that created the world we now live in.
For thousands of years we had visions and revelations. They got us nowhere. Knowledge and technology...
Hallucinations aren't that uncommon, and delusions are practically the rule. How common are hallucinations?
People accepting these 'revelations' as real and important are common, as well. Sometimes individuals and social situations are such that these hallucinations and interpretations are...
How is that hard to grasp?
If there's little evidence for a thing it might or might not exist.
At one time both gorillas and unicorns were thought to be mere legends.
Some people declared that both positively didn't exist. They were the "no god exists" equivalents.
Others said they'd withhold...
But those claiming revelation make thousands of different, contradictory claims. This doesn't evidence a reliable method.
Scientific findings, on the other hand, are consistent and produce consensus.
Mutations and other selections do accumulate. Any genetic variations retained by natural selection accumulate -- that's what selection is; preferential accumulation of genetic variations, whether from mutation or reproductive variation.
What width of classification does "kind" correspond to...
Beginnings are familiar aspects of lived reality. Stories and legends almost always presuppose beginnings. Such a presumption can hardly be attributed to special revelation.
If God exist He's given no clear indication of His objectives, much less His existence.
There are a thousand different religions outlining a thousand different Gods with a thousand different objectives. If any god exist, he apparently does not care whether we're aware of hime or his objectives...
And you say God does not care to provide such evidence, so wouldn't the reasonable thing to do would be to defer belief till He does?
Great! What is it?
No. Logic is an algebra. Mathematics is objective. Truth values can be calculated. Evidence can be objectively assessed.
https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/boolean/bool_7.html
So the reliability of scripture sounds poor, and the truth-value of the myriad different accounts pretty much equal.
On what, then, should we base belief, and our choice?
Why should we choose a scriptural option at all?
So it must be taken on faith. It's not a rational conclusion.
OK, then. Be...
Not really. In the absence of evidence science dictates nothing. It just says "I don't know."
Hopefully it has some possible, speculative explanations it can research, otherwise it's dead in the water till more evidence comes to light.
Theoretical physics is an active area of research. We...
Nobody's asking for proof. What real evidence is there that this faith-giving God exists?
A thing is either rational or not. Logic is not subjective.
I understand that you do honestly believe, that it's convincing to you, but so far I've seen no evidence that that belief is rational, ie...