Your assumptions that Christianity is not about belief and is about submission. As an atheist, you have no more grounds to define theist beliefs than a string theorist has to define LQG. If the string theorist could define LQG then LQG would not be a field of research, as string theorists do not think it is valid, and would define it as such. Hierarchy? Just another non sequitur. "So-called" is a qualifier that marginalizes the term "god" so used, denoting false gods. I really try to believe that you are not this obtuse, but after the unmistakable mistake, I am really starting to think you may be. It is because you lack belief that your claims are without merit. It would be the same as me claiming that atheism was only a dislike of god. You would cry foul, and for good reason, just as I am about your claims of a belief you do not espouse. If you really cannot understand that then very little is likely to make it through your attentional bias. It so aptly describes the ease with which your arguments are refuted. The details reported by men are necessarily subjective, just like any self-reported data. Scripture is largely a testament to the beliefs of men. But like I said, theists find evidence beyond the pages of scripture, and that scripture only relates the subjective understanding of this. Again, what you believe of a belief system you do not espouse is irrelevant unless you are arguing someone who agrees with your claims. Maybe you should just go find your usual easy target to ply your lazy arguments on. You know, make yourself feel smart. Now if you wish to debate popular claims, I am more than willing. But you must then establish the popularity of each claim (with objective evidence like polls and statistics) before proceeding. Otherwise you could simply be cherry-picking claims that you find especially ridiculous or or easily refuted. (And preferably in a new thread, as I have no intention of arguing any but my own claims here.) Test? Again, completely non sequitur. Omniscience means that God would know the outcome, and that the test was meant purely for Abraham's benefit (to forge his character by fire). If free will were not ostensibly important to God then there would be no need for scripture to promote a choice. And free will is how we attribute moral accountability.