People believe and teach that God used people as though they were secretaries to write the words of God down for us. But, it seems to me that God speaks without words. God communicates meaning with no speech and without words.
If that is correct, there would be no need for a Bible, and God would not have authored one. It must, therefore, have a human source.
I've long believed that if there were an omnisicient, omnipotent being that wanted to communicate with humanity, it would be directly and, as you suggest, not using language, but through urges to act and emotions that reward or condemn choices, wordless ideas including recollections.
Of course, this is how our extra-mental neurological circuits communicate with us.
You're probably aware that the ancient Greeks thought that it was invisible muses implanting creative ideas into their heads. It's tempting to identify our own original thoughts as coming from an external agent.
How do I know this? I don't know. But I do know that wonderful meaning comes to me in less time than a human second. If it was words and speech coming, it would take as much time as the words come and I would hear some kind of sound.
As I just indicated, that's also the way that ideas come to us that we assume are of endogenous origin, like memories or original thoughts. The words you just read were not in my head when I decided to answer you - just an amorphous, wordless understanding that then had to be rendered into words at the keyboard.
How are you so sure of the source of your ideas that you attribute to God?
Experience is the only way to know.
It is a relationship that produces fruit because we are the tree.
Belief is for children.
You must mean unjustified belief, or
believing in (something). Believing in Santa is for children, but I'd bet that you agree that we couldn't function without our beliefs, the sum of which comprise our mental maps - maps that tell us how the world works, and what is the likely outcome of various actions in various circumstances.
And most of the ideas in our maps are derived from experience, which may be indirect, such as believing that drunk driving is a bad idea based on the misfortunes of others. The rest is derived from pure reason, and perhaps intuition if one recognizes the limitations of intuitions and their truth value. We may have a sense that somebody is lying - an intuition not yet confirmed - but should recognize that while the idea may have merit, we should remain wary yet agnostic on the matter until we have enough experience of this person to have a justified belief about his or her honesty.
Ideas believed by faith do not come from experience, which is evidence, and are not justified. If an idea believed by faith is correct, that is just a coincidence.
It is. LOL