Nice stretch. I believe that what the authors of the various books wrote is what they perceived, and then documented to the best of their ability and understanding at what they witnessed and/or understood. But that does not make it gospel (pun intended). Case in point, eyewitnesses are convinced they know what they saw, but then get it wrong.
Likewise, the Bible is accepted as truth by those who want to believe. There is nothing wrong with that, and there are some similarities in other cultures such as a creation theme, a flood, etc. Some of these ideas even span time before the pages that make up the bible were written. So why would those be any less accurate or untruthful since they don't correspond to what is exactly in the bible? Especially since for the longest time there was no concept of monotheism.
I do believe there is something, and that the Big Bang just didn't happen. Which is why I'm an agnostic and not an atheist. Likewise, I do find it plausible that our development throughout the years was guided given some of the accomplishments throughout history. The question I'd really like to know is who or what did the guiding. I'm just going to need a little more evidence than someone telling me that the truth is in some book.
But that does not make it gospel
\/
. you talk like one who thinks he knows what hes talking about and assumes hes correct.
yet you show you have zero idea what the word “ gospel” means but instead use the worlds colloquial use.
fwiw, litterally it means
Good News.
so consider,
you may have more to learn.
again today i recomend
( since i take you at your word you are an honest learner )
read the book
Mere Christianity
by C.S. Lewis.
he was also an agnostic , till he looked close and hard at the gospel of the new testament.
Seems likely if your position is true, that maybe you might want to read the Bible - I’d suggest the 4 gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke & John for starters.
Or for some modern science and reason to defend the faith:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hhE6tzJR_c