I’m sure children have many abstract notions, and I don’t deny that a belief in a great (not always benevolent) being or deity is a base attribute of human nature. It is one of the great things about our species that we have the ability to look into available evidence and make up our mind beyond base conclusions, and one of the most deplorable things when people refuse to do so.

Your arguments for the veracity of the Bible all boil down to faith, with I have no problem with and don’t intend to argue against. I agree that my analogy to comics and the Archers was inadequate (and possibly slight insulting, I apologise). Here I am truly sorry that I am not more familiar with the Bible, and cannot argue with you in this sphere. I know ignorance is no excuse, but I promise I will read it more closely than cursory school meanderings soon.

As for the motives of the writers, ‘barking mad’ is extreme and carries many negative connotations, but a kind of mass delusion disseminating from the base desire to acknowledge a creator those studies find in children seems much more consistent with reality – you may be more liberal, but there are many that see the many incompatibilities between their faith and others as proof of the others' falseness. Yet other faiths have texts with just as much consistency, both across their content and in their observations of the world, as the Bible. I would understand if you reply ‘but I am in that sense “liberal” as you sweepingly term it, and see no great differences between the religions.’ That would be fine for you, but I don’t see the closeness and am not convinced.

This 'mass delusion' continues through today, not in much established religion - I don’t wish to label all faith as delusion – but in cases like The Church of Scientology and violent radical abuse of Islam, all of which are perfectly consistent with the observations their followers make of the world.

As you asked, my views at the moment verge on the nihilistic, but without the implied aggression (although not without a degree of anger). I’ve never believed in a creator (not to my knowledge, anyway). I do believe passionately in the rights of others to believe what they like, as long as it doesn’t harm others (although I definitely condone allowing people to make others feel uncomfortable, or troubled – that’s quite different to actual harm). My openness to other’s views and angry nihilism-lite probably makes me a prime candidate to find either religion or a more fervent atheism at some point. I am interested in your labelling of a claim to rely purely upon logic as ‘arrogant’ (not without some truth in it) as that is exactly how I feel about a claiming ‘I was created in God’s image and I know that he exists’ – there seems to be a breathtaking arrogance implied in such a claim, even if it is tempered by the idea of being a servant to this creator.