You can't change the subject of the discussion on a whim. The original argument was that Christians worshiped a God that condone slavery and child murder. I showed that, for most Christians, it isn't the case.

(And by the way, these events did not happen. The Exodus is a myth according to the historians, so yes, I'm allowed to say so)

I’ll use an actual biblical example. Moses didn’t exist, and the Exodus was not a historical event. I think the people who wrote these texts knew that to some extent. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be so many inconsistencies. They weren’t stupid; they knew what a contradiction was.

But I don’t care. How would the fate of a people 3000 years ago change my life today? It wouldn’t. But the story is a lesson, a lesson that can change my life today. I believe that people were inspired by God to convey a message. They did so in their own language and cultural framework, using the rhetorical tools available to them: myth. That message can be summed up in a few words: God wants God’s people to be free, and God walks with us when we try to free ourselves. I’m not a slave in Egypt, but I’m not always free. I can be a slave to my anger, my passions, or a habit, and God helps me in my struggle for freedom. When I read the story of the Exodus, I look for what it can teach me about freedom today.

How do I know the Bible is truer than, say, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, or the IKEA catalogue? The truth is, I don’t. I do think, not just believe, but philosophically think that something beyond the world, which we might call “God” as an approximation, exists. Or, to be more precise, I think its existence is more probable than its nonexistence. I don’t know that it exists; it just makes more sense to me.

As for the rest, yes, those are beliefs, not certainties. I can live with that. Uncertainty is part of life! If we acted only when we knew something for sure, we’d do nothing. A lot of people like to lie to themselves, pretending that we can know whether God exists, that our political ideology is the best one, or what is right and wrong. Sometimes we can know these things. For example, I know that my political ideology is better than fascism; I have no uncertainty about that. But in most cases, we can’t be certain. I could stop at “a God probably exists” while continuing my life as if not, but I choose to thrive in uncertainty rather than fight it, and that leaves me freer to explore and open myself to other traditions and schools of thought.

I said that most Christians (by far) believe people can be saved without believing, while a minority believe that salvation is impossible without the correct belief. I believe something else. I belong to another minority, probably the smallest one: I believe there is more than one legitimate spiritual path. The Catholic Church still teaches that there is no salvation outside the Church; it’s just that some people are members of the Church without knowing it. I believe the Church is one path among others, and simply the one that fits me today. The Bible helps me, the liberal Christian tradition nourishes me, and the community shelters me.

God is unknowable by definition. We’re talking about a being that exists outside time and space, so our words can’t legitimately claim to describe it. When we describe things, words that seem to contradict one another may both be true. It’s like two people describing the same mountain: someone on its northern face might describe it as a different mountain from the one described by someone on its southern face, even though they’re both describing the same mountain.

If I’m wrong, if there is no God, or if I’m irredeemably ignorant of the One True Religion™, it’s not a big deal. My faith has helped me live a better, fuller, and freer life. Who cares if an effective medicine turns out to be a placebo? And if I’m wrong and only people who believe a precise set of doctrines are saved, then I don’t want to be saved by such an assholish God. So everything works out for the best. (Though that idea makes no sense to me.)