Record few Americans believe in Biblical inerrancy.

[John V]

After reading the entire Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, I have to agree with you. There is definitely some disagreement among philosophers.  But one thing they do seem to agree on is the viability of logic in leading us to better conclusions.

Agreeing that logic leads to better conclusions while reaching opposing conclusions through logic...is that logical? Also, we have the majority vote issue again. One thing theists tend to agree on is the existence of at least one god, but that doesn't mean much to you.

Philosophers aren't like theists. They are putting their interpretations of the universe out there to be tested not to be believed. If there isn't disagreement, then it isn't philosophy. When someone makes an assertion in philosophy, it is expected that it will be challenged. It's not just a matter of apply logic, then get a solution. Philosophers examine logical arguments. If the logic of an argument is sound, then one has to find a problem with its premises in order to express coherent disagreement.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Philosophers don't make up all secular thinkers, yet you compare them to theists in general. Theologians do the same thing as philosophers. And I've had plenty of secular educators who put things out to be believed rather than tested.

In philosophy, one is encouraged to ask questions and consider alternatives. I'm not including you in this group, but many theists take offense to something as innocuous as a question. It seems like cowardice to me. I welcome scrutiny of my worldview.

But if the Bible is not accurate, if it is just a collection of myths and stories, then those of us who use logic and evidence have figured something out that others haven't.

Point being that you've already asserted that logic is better than faith in such regard, but you don't know if it's true. The assertion just flows from your materialist worldview.

I find materialism plausible, but I don't feel the need to dress it up as anything it isn't.

You already have.

---

I have many problems with the nativity.
Not least of which is the requirement to go to their place of birth for a census instead of having it as a question on the form.

The bible doesn't say that was a Roman requirement. It says Joseph did that. We don't know why. 

If Luke were making this up and wanted the birth in Bethlehem, there were much simpler ways of accomplishing that than inventing an event which would have been public knowledge and would have shot his credibility right from the start if not accurate.