Common sense/logic vs. the bible

[connermt]

Some people think you can't argue against christianity without referncing the bible. This is a flaw in logic as the bible won't try to prove itself false.
That said, of course the bible is basically "all" christians have to work off of. The facts that the stories were written by men, edited by other men and some works weren't even included in the "finished product", all while claiming to be the 'word of god' is disheartening. Add to the mix that fact that the bible - which is the way to heaven for the whole of the human race - has very little to say about other people in the planet at the time.
Putting all that huba-baloo aside, let's look at it from a strictly common sense/logical POV.

A being that is perfect (in no particular order):
- creates everything, but seems to only be concerned about a very small amount of matter (humans). When compared to the solar systems it should have created, caring about such a small % seems odd.
- creates people to worship it (or, depending on where you got your christian teachign from, wants to share its love). Teachings indicate they angels "good enough" to share its love/worship freely. Then it's illogical to create them in the first place.
- creates people knowing what the outcome would be (sinning) but created them anyway.
- allows a temptation to come into the garden and tempt them, knowing what would happen
- seemingly gets "upset" when it "finds out" what happens and curses them (as if it didn't know what happened)
- destroys a city, save for one family, because it's "unpure". Surely that wasn't the only city that was unpure at the time, no? Then when lot's wife lokos back, she turns into a pillar of salt. That seems rather...unimpressive for sucha being. Surely something more akin to a phaser blast would have been more impressive....?
- destroys the world (with water) save for one family. Again, water seem very unimpressive for such a 'everything' creator. Obviously, since the human race was so 'bad', this supreme (and loving) deity caused almost all of humanity and almost all of the animal species to drown. Ok so he's ticked off at people, but why not spare the animals? What did they do to him? Makes no sense
- comes to earth as a man. It makes no sense why a supreme being that knows everything needs to come down as 'a man' while, at the same time, being different than the man/son.
- employees several different people to write his story of his life (while he's a man) years (in some cases decades) after the fact. One would think, common sense would have god write it himself, or at least have someone else write it while it was happening. It's illogical to wait so long.
- employees terrible writers as their accounts of the same story differ slightly to enormously - some containing parts of the story that others don't. Surely, a logical all knowing god would know that, if this book is to be the guide to mankind's future, it need to be more accurate and not confusing. Yet this isn't the case.

We'll end the examples there. If one wishes, they could go into much more detail with later books.

So where's the human logic in these examples? Surely such a supreme being would have been able to foresee these "issues" and address them in a way outside the biblical text (that not everyone has accessto, or even finds believable).

So where's the logic? Why does one seem to need the bible to prove what the bible says is correct? Surely god must have given us logic, yet when we use it in an unbiased way for such an important goal in mind, it doesn't come full circle.
Logical? Sensible? Where is it?

[Wootah]

Of course I am. This thread is on common sense/logic. There are claims in the original post that I am analysing.

You said - 'You are assigning anthropomorphic characteristics to this God such as "caring for people". ' But I never said 'caring for people' in this thread.

Finally you said 'Until you can show that there is a logical reason for such an omniscient, omnipotent God to pay attention to such a useless, trivial species, this view remains illogical. The onus is on you to back up the assertion that this is not illogical.'

What makes it illogical to focus on X or Y? Whether X is an ant or Y is the sun? What makes it illogical?

Yes, and clearly the same is true of my post. I'm analyzing the claim in the original post that I quoted earlier.

It does not matter if you said it or not. This God was said to be "concerned with...humans" in the original post. We are working within that framework are we not? Or are you going to abandon that now?

A logical choice has a rational reason behind it. There is no rational reason to focus on a weak, imperfect species, when God can simply create a perfect, beautiful one to worship and love him. It would be more satisfying to receive perfect love and worship from all members of this perfect race than to receive a fraction of the love of the imperfect human population.

- creates people to worship it (or, depending on where you got your christian teachign from, wants to share its love). Teachings indicate they angels "good enough" to share its love/worship freely.

That is what God wanted, yes? It is therefore illogical for God to stick with humans and try to receive their love. He could easily create a perfect species that knew he existed and loved him with all their hearts. Humans are very fickle in their affections. It is illogical for such a God to have to deal with this problematic race.

Now you must provide a reason that it IS logical to focus on humans. That there IS a VERY GOOD REASON for an OMNIPOTENT, OMNISCIENT GOD to pay special attention to humans.

I am still on point 1.

[1213]

Force? Who said anything about force? Going straight to the negative is very telling.

Ok then, I ask only, would you want that God gives you understanding?

What I would love is tangible evidence for any God, and with the proper evidence, I can figure it out myself.

The lack of tangible evidence , and the conflicting stories in the bible make it very difficult to distinguish anything from 'I am just making it up'.

Yes, I taught that you would like to have tangible evidence. I only wonder, would it make any difference. I think if knowledge wouldn't make you righteous, it would be meaningless. And if you don't become righteous with information that is in Bible, then I think tangible evidence wouldn't really make any meaningful difference.

It is sad thing, if you have understood Bible so that you think there are conflict stories.

[connermt]

You said I said something I didn't. I replied to that statement as it being incorrect. What more do you want, a discussion on something I didn't say? Try again.

I'd ask you to answer the questions and as part of that show where I misinterpreted you.

Sorry - somehow I missed these responses in the last few days. I'll try to address them now:
You said "So you think a logical being should focus on 100% of matter?" when that's not what I said.
Please show me where I said "...a logical being should focus on 100% of matter". At that point, you will see where you mis-represented my statement.

[connermt]

Some people think you can't argue against christianity without referncing the bible. This is a flaw in logic as the bible won't try to prove itself false.
That said, of course the bible is basically "all" christians have to work off of. The facts that the stories were written by men, edited by other men and some works weren't even included in the "finished product", all while claiming to be the 'word of god' is disheartening. Add to the mix that fact that the bible - which is the way to heaven for the whole of the human race - has very little to say about other people in the planet at the time.
Putting all that huba-baloo aside, let's look at it from a strictly common sense/logical POV.

A being that is perfect (in no particular order):
- creates everything, but seems to only be concerned about a very small amount of matter (humans). When compared to the solar systems it should have created, caring about such a small % seems odd.
- creates people to worship it (or, depending on where you got your christian teachign from, wants to share its love). Teachings indicate they angels "good enough" to share its love/worship freely. Then it's illogical to create them in the first place.
- creates people knowing what the outcome would be (sinning) but created them anyway.
- allows a temptation to come into the garden and tempt them, knowing what would happen
- seemingly gets "upset" when it "finds out" what happens and curses them (as if it didn't know what happened)
- destroys a city, save for one family, because it's "unpure". Surely that wasn't the only city that was unpure at the time, no? Then when lot's wife lokos back, she turns into a pillar of salt. That seems rather...unimpressive for sucha being. Surely something more akin to a phaser blast would have been more impressive....?
- destroys the world (with water) save for one family. Again, water seem very unimpressive for such a 'everything' creator. Obviously, since the human race was so 'bad', this supreme (and loving) deity caused almost all of humanity and almost all of the animal species to drown. Ok so he's ticked off at people, but why not spare the animals? What did they do to him? Makes no sense
- comes to earth as a man. It makes no sense why a supreme being that knows everything needs to come down as 'a man' while, at the same time, being different than the man/son.
- employees several different people to write his story of his life (while he's a man) years (in some cases decades) after the fact. One would think, common sense would have god write it himself, or at least have someone else write it while it was happening. It's illogical to wait so long.
- employees terrible writers as their accounts of the same story differ slightly to enormously - some containing parts of the story that others don't. Surely, a logical all knowing god would know that, if this book is to be the guide to mankind's future, it need to be more accurate and not confusing. Yet this isn't the case.

We'll end the examples there. If one wishes, they could go into much more detail with later books.

So where's the human logic in these examples? Surely such a supreme being would have been able to foresee these "issues" and address them in a way outside the biblical text (that not everyone has accessto, or even finds believable).

So where's the logic? Why does one seem to need the bible to prove what the bible says is correct? Surely god must have given us logic, yet when we use it in an unbiased way for such an important goal in mind, it doesn't come full circle.
Logical? Sensible? Where is it?

This my friend, was precisely my struggle with christianity. That is, the 'word of god' was written by men, edited by men, plagiarised, replicated, lost in translation, misconstrued and not to mention written 2000 odd years ago in illiterate, tribal, bronze age middle east. When you look at it like this it is indeed very disheartening for a christian. It's the only argument for god and the only thing christains can use in debate with sceptics or non-believers, yet it's validity cannot be proven, it was not conceived of god but was conceived of men, is more than likely a bunch of fabrication and brainwashing and is somehow god's word? If you are discerning of the holy book, what grounds are there to base your whole life on this document? How is it ANY different from other books written by men? This is the struggle I had as a christain and I'm sure many other impartial believers struggle with this also.

I would suggest, but have no way of proving, that every believer has these issues of belief even if they don't want to admit it. Otherwise, we'd all be spiritual robots.
Most likely just accept it because it's the easy thing to do.

[connermt]

Force? Who said anything about force? Going straight to the negative is very telling.

Ok then, I ask only, would you want that God gives you understanding?

What I would love is tangible evidence for any God, and with the proper evidence, I can figure it out myself.

The lack of tangible evidence , and the conflicting stories in the bible make it very difficult to distinguish anything from 'I am just making it up'.

Yes, I taught that you would like to have tangible evidence. I only wonder, would it make any difference. I think if knowledge wouldn't make you righteous, it would be meaningless. And if you don't become righteous with information that is in Bible, then I think tangible evidence wouldn't really make any meaningful difference.

It is sad thing, if you have understood Bible so that you think there are conflict stories.

It works both ways.
I once watched a preacher - leader of his church - say that even if science proved 100% that being gay isn't a choice (and therefore not a sin), he would still consider it a sin.
Yes, knowledge may not make one righteous, but it also doesn't make one any less "righteous'".
In regards to the stories conflicting, the four gospels directly show conflicts in some aspects of the same story. God breathed imperfect stories by a perfect being? Really? God breathed perfect stories written imperfectly by imperfect people who a perfect being picked to write its story? Seriously?
Or are we going to change the definition of perfect? Or, perhaps, create a religious/church term to deal with this issue and make it "all good"?

[Goat]

Force? Who said anything about force? Going straight to the negative is very telling.

Ok then, I ask only, would you want that God gives you understanding?

What I would love is tangible evidence for any God, and with the proper evidence, I can figure it out myself.

The lack of tangible evidence , and the conflicting stories in the bible make it very difficult to distinguish anything from 'I am just making it up'.

Yes, I taught that you would like to have tangible evidence. I only wonder, would it make any difference. I think if knowledge wouldn't make you righteous, it would be meaningless. And if you don't become righteous with information that is in Bible, then I think tangible evidence wouldn't really make any meaningful difference.

It is sad thing, if you have understood Bible so that you think there are conflict stories.

It is a sad thing, because if you understood the bible, you would realize there was contradictions in not only stories, but in values, depending on the writer.

For example, the values that it attempted to be taught in parable in Luke 19:1-27 vastly different than the values that was attempted to be taught in Matthew 25:19-43.. in fact, mutually exclusive.

[ThatGirlAgain]

Force? Who said anything about force? Going straight to the negative is very telling.

Ok then, I ask only, would you want that God gives you understanding?

What I would love is tangible evidence for any God, and with the proper evidence, I can figure it out myself.

The lack of tangible evidence , and the conflicting stories in the bible make it very difficult to distinguish anything from 'I am just making it up'.

Yes, I taught that you would like to have tangible evidence. I only wonder, would it make any difference. I think if knowledge wouldn't make you righteous, it would be meaningless. And if you don't become righteous with information that is in Bible, then I think tangible evidence wouldn't really make any meaningful difference.

It is sad thing, if you have understood Bible so that you think there are conflict stories.

It is a sad thing, because if you understood the bible, you would realize there was contradictions in not only stories, but in values, depending on the writer.

For example, the values that it attempted to be taught in parable in Luke 19:1-27 vastly different than the values that was attempted to be taught in Matthew 25:19-43.. in fact, mutually exclusive.

I am a bit confused by your references. Luke 19:1-27 covers two unrelated things: Zacchaeus the Tax Collector and the Parable of the Ten Minas. Matthew 25:19-43 covers a portion of the Parable of the Ten Virgins and the Parable of the Bags of Gold and a portion of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.

I am guessing that you meant these:

Luke 19:11-27

The Parable of the Ten Minas

11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’�

Matthew 25:14-30

The Parable of the Bags of Gold

14 “Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his wealth to them. 15 To one he gave five bags of gold, to another two bags, and to another one bag, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16 The man who had received five bags of gold went at once and put his money to work and gained five bags more. 17 So also, the one with two bags of gold gained two more. 18 But the man who had received one bag went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
19 “After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20 The man who had received five bags of gold brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five bags of gold. See, I have gained five more.’
21 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
22 “The man with two bags of gold also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two bags of gold; see, I have gained two more.’
23 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
24 “Then the man who had received one bag of gold came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your gold in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’
26 “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
28 “‘So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. 29 For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

Can you explain what differences you perceive in the values expressed in these two parables? They seem the same to me.

[Goat]

Force? Who said anything about force? Going straight to the negative is very telling.

Ok then, I ask only, would you want that God gives you understanding?

What I would love is tangible evidence for any God, and with the proper evidence, I can figure it out myself.

The lack of tangible evidence , and the conflicting stories in the bible make it very difficult to distinguish anything from 'I am just making it up'.

Yes, I taught that you would like to have tangible evidence. I only wonder, would it make any difference. I think if knowledge wouldn't make you righteous, it would be meaningless. And if you don't become righteous with information that is in Bible, then I think tangible evidence wouldn't really make any meaningful difference.

It is sad thing, if you have understood Bible so that you think there are conflict stories.

It is a sad thing, because if you understood the bible, you would realize there was contradictions in not only stories, but in values, depending on the writer.

For example, the values that it attempted to be taught in parable in Luke 19:1-27 vastly different than the values that was attempted to be taught in Matthew 25:19-43.. in fact, mutually exclusive.

I am a bit confused by your references. Luke 19:1-27 covers two unrelated things: Zacchaeus the Tax Collector and the Parable of the Ten Minas. Matthew 25:19-43 covers a portion of the Parable of the Ten Virgins and the Parable of the Bags of Gold and a portion of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats.

I am guessing that you meant these:

Luke 19:11-27

The Parable of the Ten Minas

11 While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12 He said: “A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13 So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. ‘Put this money to work,’ he said, ‘until I come back.’
14 “But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, ‘We don’t want this man to be our king.’
15 “He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.
16 “The first one came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned ten more.’
17 “‘Well done, my good servant!’ his master replied. ‘Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.’
18 “The second came and said, ‘Sir, your mina has earned five more.’
19 “His master answered, ‘You take charge of five cities.’
20 “Then another servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21 I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.’
22 “His master replied, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then didn’t you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?’
24 “Then he said to those standing by, ‘Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.’
25 “‘Sir,’ they said, ‘he already has ten!’
26 “He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’�

Matthew 25:14-30

The Parable of the Bags of Gold

14 “Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his wealth to them. 15 To one he gave five bags of gold, to another two bags, and to another one bag, each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16 The man who had received five bags of gold went at once and put his money to work and gained five bags more. 17 So also, the one with two bags of gold gained two more. 18 But the man who had received one bag went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.
19 “After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20 The man who had received five bags of gold brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five bags of gold. See, I have gained five more.’
21 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
22 “The man with two bags of gold also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two bags of gold; see, I have gained two more.’
23 “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’
24 “Then the man who had received one bag of gold came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your gold in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’
26 “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
28 “‘So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. 29 For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

Can you explain what differences you perceive in the values expressed in these two parables? They seem the same to me.

One. the values is 'DO good for giving money to God, and increase the churches holdings'.. the focus is on creating wealth for the church/god, and with the 'bring those who don't want to have me rule over them and slay them'.,, i.e. .. kill the unbelievers.


Matthew, on the other hand, says 'What ever you do to the least of my brothers, yo do to me'.. and pushes, instead of giving money to God, and the church, giving time and love to the less fortunate.

[Wootah]

You said I said something I didn't. I replied to that statement as it being incorrect. What more do you want, a discussion on something I didn't say? Try again.

I'd ask you to answer the questions and as part of that show where I misinterpreted you.

Sorry - somehow I missed these responses in the last few days. I'll try to address them now:
You said "So you think a logical being should focus on 100% of matter?" when that's not what I said.
Please show me where I said "...a logical being should focus on 100% of matter". At that point, you will see where you mis-represented my statement.

you said - Considering all that exists that we know of and how much more exists that we don't know of, it's illogical for such a great being to focus so much of itself on humanity.

So how much matter should a logical being focus on?

Also: My responses were questions. Questions are used to clarify. And therefore it is clear I am trying to get a better understanding of your viewpoint. You aren't answering the questions and not assisting the discussion.

[PREEST]

Some people think you can't argue against christianity without referncing the bible. This is a flaw in logic as the bible won't try to prove itself false.
That said, of course the bible is basically "all" christians have to work off of. The facts that the stories were written by men, edited by other men and some works weren't even included in the "finished product", all while claiming to be the 'word of god' is disheartening. Add to the mix that fact that the bible - which is the way to heaven for the whole of the human race - has very little to say about other people in the planet at the time.
Putting all that huba-baloo aside, let's look at it from a strictly common sense/logical POV.

A being that is perfect (in no particular order):
- creates everything, but seems to only be concerned about a very small amount of matter (humans). When compared to the solar systems it should have created, caring about such a small % seems odd.
- creates people to worship it (or, depending on where you got your christian teachign from, wants to share its love). Teachings indicate they angels "good enough" to share its love/worship freely. Then it's illogical to create them in the first place.
- creates people knowing what the outcome would be (sinning) but created them anyway.
- allows a temptation to come into the garden and tempt them, knowing what would happen
- seemingly gets "upset" when it "finds out" what happens and curses them (as if it didn't know what happened)
- destroys a city, save for one family, because it's "unpure". Surely that wasn't the only city that was unpure at the time, no? Then when lot's wife lokos back, she turns into a pillar of salt. That seems rather...unimpressive for sucha being. Surely something more akin to a phaser blast would have been more impressive....?
- destroys the world (with water) save for one family. Again, water seem very unimpressive for such a 'everything' creator. Obviously, since the human race was so 'bad', this supreme (and loving) deity caused almost all of humanity and almost all of the animal species to drown. Ok so he's ticked off at people, but why not spare the animals? What did they do to him? Makes no sense
- comes to earth as a man. It makes no sense why a supreme being that knows everything needs to come down as 'a man' while, at the same time, being different than the man/son.
- employees several different people to write his story of his life (while he's a man) years (in some cases decades) after the fact. One would think, common sense would have god write it himself, or at least have someone else write it while it was happening. It's illogical to wait so long.
- employees terrible writers as their accounts of the same story differ slightly to enormously - some containing parts of the story that others don't. Surely, a logical all knowing god would know that, if this book is to be the guide to mankind's future, it need to be more accurate and not confusing. Yet this isn't the case.

We'll end the examples there. If one wishes, they could go into much more detail with later books.

So where's the human logic in these examples? Surely such a supreme being would have been able to foresee these "issues" and address them in a way outside the biblical text (that not everyone has accessto, or even finds believable).

So where's the logic? Why does one seem to need the bible to prove what the bible says is correct? Surely god must have given us logic, yet when we use it in an unbiased way for such an important goal in mind, it doesn't come full circle.
Logical? Sensible? Where is it?

This my friend, was precisely my struggle with christianity. That is, the 'word of god' was written by men, edited by men, plagiarised, replicated, lost in translation, misconstrued and not to mention written 2000 odd years ago in illiterate, tribal, bronze age middle east. When you look at it like this it is indeed very disheartening for a christian. It's the only argument for god and the only thing christains can use in debate with sceptics or non-believers, yet it's validity cannot be proven, it was not conceived of god but was conceived of men, is more than likely a bunch of fabrication and brainwashing and is somehow god's word? If you are discerning of the holy book, what grounds are there to base your whole life on this document? How is it ANY different from other books written by men? This is the struggle I had as a christain and I'm sure many other impartial believers struggle with this also.

I would suggest, but have no way of proving, that every believer has these issues of belief even if they don't want to admit it. Otherwise, we'd all be spiritual robots.
Most likely just accept it because it's the easy thing to do.

I felt this way when I was a christian, however, I felt unintelligent and embarrassed that I had to answer all sceptics with 'faith' as my proof and evidence for my ultimate beliefs. Once one emancipates them self from believing because they feel they have to, then life is a lot more fulfilling. You love your life and don't consider it a sinful, disgusting waste of time, and no longer wish and dream for the afterlife that we don't even know exists. What disregard and disrespect for our humanity that is.