it all makes sense now, doesn't it?

It does. I think I am a new born religious man now. I can't argue with such infallible reason.

just in time! because he also said that the end is near!

Oh wow, this is some sort of deal/sale thing.

I don`t think you understood what i was trying to say.
When something is said to be sacred, normally it`s done so with a context, like in very religion.
In the end it`s not a question of what you believe or what i believe, is all about the others: like it or not, believe it or not, if someone comes to me and says "this is sacred to me" while explaining why, even i find it weird, wrong or whatever, i should at least respect that feeling. That respect is what makes people tolerant.
It`s all about respect. And when you say the Bible is like any given book - that it`s all the same - to someone who hold that book to be sacred, it can really be offensive.
That`s why people shouldn`t make such comparisons like that. No one`s gonna stop you but at least consider other people when you say such things.

But stepping out of the faith domain, i don`t think it`s fair to compare a book about a simple man with a book about a divinity and how that relates to mankind in general. It`s not a good comparison per se. Especially when both have different origins as context.

not sure dude?

i beleive in whats possible yet and still that means i beleive in everything which some would say doesn't make much since. i also freely contradict myself which doesn't make since either.

i also beleive that there exsist a god because we beleive there is one by which means theres many gods whos power is determend by how many people beleive in him or her, yet i'm a faithfulist and throw nothing away with the name or pic of a god in it or on the cover, still i beleive life start with the big bang? puzzled i see!

life in other galaxies?, could prove to have relegion crushed and call us all fools, or thay could be the ones pulling the strings, but we'll never know now will we.

wether crazy or hard to explain, its all possible so why not beleive., or not cause this all could still be an accident  and we only exsist to live and die.

we could still be the only ones that exsist in the cold dark lit up ever expanding place?

That right there is the thing. It SHOULDN'T be offensive because the bible IS like every other book. The person who thinks its sacred gives it special meaning. If someone is so sensitive and insecure about their beliefs that they feel deeply offended when simple, true, facts are presented, then I really don't give a shit about that person's feelings. He obviously did not thing his beliefs through, otherwie he would have accepted them wholly, both negatives and positives, and would not feel offended.

Now if I was going around spouting lies and used illogical thought to demean a belief, then yes that's pretty low. However that is not what I am doing.

As for the last comment. The new testament, bible, deals with one man and his dealing in life, Jesus.

When people take offense it`s not because they are insecure, at least not always. It`s because when you  habe something you hold so dearly, it becomes a part of you and "insulting" - not saying it was what you said - does hurt the person or people related to it. It`s like saying something bad about you bothers, parentes, girlfriend ans one ends up getting offended aswell. It`s like that.
What you did was take something "sacred", something that has all the value and meaning to religious people and say that it`s like any other book. To religious people it`s like saying what they believe and hols sacred means nothing, you know?
As i said, even if people don`t believe, we should always try to understand that somethings, no matter what they are, are... well, sacred and in this case it does relate to a deep understanding.

I get it that a non believer sees the Bible like any given book, but even then, what that book is supposed to mean is a very different thing from a fairy tale or whatever try to significate. They serve different purposes and exist in different contexts.

That`s all that i was trying to say.

What exaclty is false about New Testament? Did you even read it? Stories like Jesus's resurection, I can see why peole find it doubtfull but the point of the New Testament are the teachings of christ and the morals of Christianity. Some stories in the Bible usually have a moral message, but they dont nececarly have to be true. Its the moral message that comes out of it that matters. Stuff like ''walking on water'' or ''truning water into wine'' are just symbolics and dont really matter if they are true or not. Its the God's word that matters. There is also historical evidence for the existance of Christ. As far as i know there is no evidence for Lancelot and Merlin, is there?  So Bible holds a lot more historical credit and value than King Arthur. The Bible was also written by the very people Christ considerd his brothers, the peolle who witnessed his whole life.

A culture of inquiry and reason, does not deem this sane in the free market of ideas anymore. It used to be it didn't matter how stupid what you said was, if you followed it with "and that's my religion" it automatically demanded respect. In the information age this is no longer the case. Ideas and beliefs are meant to be kicked around, abused, held under the microscope, and then tossed out or changed if found faulty. If you tell someone that their views on corporate regulation are absurd, then it's ok. If you tell someone that you disagree with their views of lateral gene transfer and it's effects on long term evolution, you go to the drawing board. If you tell somebody that you think that a jewish zombie saving us from a talking snake that made a woman eat an apple is dumb, then they will scream persecution and bigotry.Ideas are meant to be scrutinized, but certain ideas have had a priviledged status for so long that ones that hold them think they are beyond criticism.

It doesn't help that alot of religions have built in persecution complexes, so if somebody says "that's dumb" the recepient can immediately respond "my beliefs said you would say that, so I'm even more right! Ridicule me some more, my beliefs said you would do that too! I'm being martyred!!!!". Saying an idea or belief is dumb is not bigotry or persecution however. African Americans were hung and burned on crosses, weren't given legal rights and suffered numerous atrocities at the hands of bigots. Somebody saying "Let's debate the merits of bible's morality." or "Taking a literalist view of the bible is ignorant at best." is not persecution. But again and again this is seen as "militant" behavior, or gross "intolerance". If you think that is militant and intolerant, consider yourself lucky enough to live in a time where that can be said with a straight face.

Also, I take exception to the idea that people single out christians. This is confirmation bias at it's finest. Statistically there are far more christians on this site than muslims, of course there is going to be more discussion of the bible than the koran. I certainly don't think the koran is any more sane than the bible, but opprotunities to debate that point are few and far between. In fact looking at the topic "what religion are you" 47 checked christian, 13 checked muslim, 2 hindus, 2 buddhists, and 116 non-religious. Now just from a mathematical standpoint why do you think there are more topics about debating christianity than say...the Vedas?

Also saying "people are only willing to pick on a religion of love and peace" while claiming people only attack christians shows considerable bigotry and prejudice towards other religions. Just pointing that out.