>[snip]
>>>>You know, I'm still waiting for a good explanation of why 1 God is better than 100 Gods. I think the ancient Romans/Greeks/Norse/Chinese/Native Americans (choose one) were far more realistic. Each God had his/her own department to look after. I've always had trouble with the idea of "Jack of all trades, Master of all" concept. The old Gods didn't have to spread themselves so thin, and at least they were simply given human traits.
>>>
>>>This notion of having faith in 1 God only, made me think: I am a 100% atheist. But Christian people like Brett and Del are over 99% atheist, because they deny the existence of the Gods of all those other religions.
>>>
>>>Another thing: You want an explanation why 1 God is better? It probably is the wrong question. The question should be: Why are the major religions monotheistic these days? ONE reason is that there has been a huge crusade against polytheistic tribes. The bible is full of 'proof' of masacres among those polytheistic tribes.
>>
>>Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but I guess you know how much 'faith' I put in the bible. ;)
>
>Ouch, dilemma here indeed. :)
>Which of the bible stories hold some ground? None? Some? Some to a certain extend? One of the stories I'm referring to is the story where God instructed Joshua to conquer tribe after tribe and kill ALL men, women and children. Being a 100% atheist, I think it was not an instruction from some God, but I think it is plausible that the event has occurred.

I agree, and today, they'd lock him away in an asylum because he hears voices that tell him to kill people. He certainly wouldn't be unique in today's world.

>
>
>>I have a few thousand books, and there is not one of them on which I would base my entire existence and accept as some sort of incontrovertable spiritual 'truth'. Anybody can write anything in a book and say it's the word of God.
>
>[snip]