Th Old Testament. The New Testament. King James. Apparently laws aren't the only things that change...hmmm.

In they way most people discuss it; no. It's absurd.

I find it funny that subjects so abstract and with a deep foot on metaphysics, like religion and spiritualism, have been so reduced to fit in a discussion that is bordered by empiricism and positivism. It's like discussing colour with someone blind since birth; rather pointless. I find even funnier that some people like to think themselves as smart because they keep beating on a dead horse that was never alive to begin with. It's not like the other extreme isn't in that group either, but I would rather to be naive by following someone else's word than to be naive by my own ego.

God's existence is important, in a way, I think, but not in a literal-material way. God has never been either of those things, as far as we know. God has existed in human stories; we know God from stories first and then we know God from within us (some do, at least). So God exists, at least, in that form.

Continuing that we know God through stories, first, I have some more interesting questions, IMO:
- Why would multiple people at different stages of time decide to write down these stories?
- Why would people decide these stories are worth keeping for thousands of years?
- Were these stories creates as they were being written or were they probably sung or told through generations first?
- For what purpose? Maybe people thought there were some utility in them?
- What if these stories were distorted through time? Were simplified or dramatized?

I think God is a set of fundamental values, values to maintain us alive for the longest time and in the best possible conditions. Most of these values are obviously good for most of us, but it's not like we taught these values to ourselves. It took mankind thousands of years of trial and error to figure out these values, and the results needed to be passed through generations. There weren't always psychologists, anthropologists and philosophers and language wasn't created full featured from the start; these stories is the best people could do in those times, and they were good enough. Societies were founded on top of these principles and values and then perfected, so now we take them for granted. So, in a way, there's a part of God, in every one of us whether we like it or not.

But, as some people take their values for granted, and then proceed to try to form new values that have already been proven to fail in death and suffering multiple times, like communism. That's what happens when one throws away past experiences and take values as our own.

History should be the most important subject taught in educational institutions.

You need to answer those two questions to know the existence of god:

1- What is our purpose in life? were we created to just live and die? would you consider eating and sleeping.. etc.. the normal daily things as a purpose of living or a mean to live?
2- How things around us were created? Everything needs a creator? Nothing comes out of nothing!!!!! a building, a car needs a creator. Likewise, our universe could not be created on its own? The human being himself is a marvelous miracle created like no other with brain, vines and a system which no one can replicate. Our universe created in a balance, engineered with accuracy were a small deviation in the operation of this universe means a catastrophe and total unbalance and destruction to this universe.

Works fine these days if anything I digest gid morality because it stands in the way of medical advancement. Wasn't it moral during the dark ages to impregnate a minor btw. So be glad morals change over time because you don't want to live in a age which had the exact same morals as during the dark ages.

You can't misinterpret leviticus 20:13. ''Misinterpretation'' is a common term used by religious people to make up for the awful things that are described in their holy book. The things we ''misinterpretate'' were taken seriously in the middle ages and before and religious extremists still do take it seriously these days. You can't say they are wrong, since they literally do what the bible is telling them. It makes them even better people in the eyes of God according to that logic.

The Old and New testament are rules made up by people because they knew the things described in the bible do not correlate with us anymore. People would lose faith without the Old/New testament excuse. Never did God show his face through the clouds and said ''I did some epic thinking about the bible last night with Hey There Delilah on the background and now for no reason I'll punish you if you follow these parts of the bible''

Morality changes, always, with or without God. This is because we change and continue to change. 

You know you can be an Atheist/Theist AND an Agnostic at the same time?

What really gets me curious is why isn't there something from back to 2000 years ago that disproves everything described in the Bible as a farce and as an invention?

Not sure what you mean exactly. There has never been proof that God or the bible is true. In the thousands of years humans believing in hundreds of different gods, angels, demons, not a single one has been proven to be true. The absence of proof is proof not only from 2000 years ago, but any time back in the past. 

God's existence would change nothing. If he did exist he'd just be a fancy programmer and we'd be a simulation of life. If he doesn't exist we just know that all we have is ourselves and the world as interpreted through our senses, as arbitrarily defined as they may be but I'm not going to get into the philosophy of solipsism.

At the end of the day whether or not God exists we wouldn't be able to distinguish the difference, we'll just live our lives unaffected until our inevitable end.

Wow you got a bit intense in the end there, but no it's the literal definition of the terms. No interpretation.

Athiest = I don't BELIEVE in God
Thiest = I BELIEVE in God
Agnostic = I don't KNOW if there is a God or not
Gnostic = I KNOW there is a God.

You have to be both, there is no choice. Thiesm is about belief, gnosticism is about knowledge.

You either believe in God or you don't, you either know he exists or you don't. ie.

I don't believe in god but I don't know 100% that he doesn't exist.
I don't believe in god and I know for sure he doesn't exist.
I believe in god but I don't know for 100%.
I believe in god, I know he exists. 

To be gnostic in anything is illogical. The only viable positions in my opinion is an Agnostic athiest or an Agnostic thiest.