Do problems with the historocity of the Bible affect your faith (or lack of it)?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm not sure I'm willing to bite the bullet and say that I think these sorts of questions are entirely irrelevant, but I'm really not that interested and don't care very much, so no.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm not sure I'm willing to bite the bullet and say that I think these sorts of questions are entirely irrelevant, but I'm really not that interested and don't care very much, so no.

Just out of curiosity (and feel free to ignore me if you think this question is disrespectful, because I fear it may come off as such), would your rationale thusly be that God wanted the Bible to exist in its present form, and thus filtered out all the unnecessary bits?

I don't find the question disrespectful but I'm not entirely sure exactly what it means. My rationale for what, precisely?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Einzige, do you find the figure of Jesus 'numbing' and 'droning' as well? If so, does the extent to which you find Jesus 'numbing' and 'droning' vary at all from Gospel to Gospel, or for that matter from Christology to Christology, or is it more or less constant? I'm legitimately curious. I think I know what you mean by 'numbing, droning Love' as applied to Christian theology more generally, and to that I'd say that there are ways of understanding God in Christianity that do depart from that rather markedly, but they generally depart rather in the direction of 'weird anti-personality' than in that of the clearly delineated and kind of off-puttingly characterized figures of the Hindu scriptures.