Reply #87: that is a rather weak argument, but one bandied about as standard atheist

[humblebum]

reasoning. So much so that it has come to no longer be questioned. The other books you use in comparison have known authorship and their characters are never claimed to be anything other Than fictitious. The Bible by contrast is really a collection of books and those authors do claim that their stories are true. While we are dealing with subjective interpretation here, that certainly does not disallow the Bible to be used as one piece of evidence, be it circumstantial. This argument is no more or less valid than someone who says, "If I cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or feel something then it doesn't or cannot exist (empiricism)."