My House Did not have a Builder (or did it?)

[Whateverist]

You are right, scientific books are not the same as the Bible in the way you mentioned it. While science can be updated as new discoveries are made, etc, The Bible is a standard. And yes, I would compare what a theologian says to the Bible to see if he was right or not. 
I know I'm not allowed to say that I know the Bible is the revealed word of God because it says so, and it would take hours to explain all the reasons I believe it to be so. But one reason I have other than it saying so, is the spiritual confirmation I get from God that it is true. And as I told someone else, I understand that that is hard to believe, or really impossible to believe by someone who doesn't believe in God or the supernatural. It's not like I could say, "God proves it to me." and you'll say, "Oh, ok, well then that answers that." Because you don't believe He's real. So really it's a difficult question to answer, because there's not really much I could say that would make sense or be believed. But still, that is one of the reasons I believe it. There are literary reasons, prophetic reasons, etc, but the main thing is the spiritual reasons, which is why it's hard to explain and answer.

Well then, how do you propose believers and non-believers should carry on in light of the fact that neither of us can give the other a reason he would accept as valid to change what we believe?

I just need not to be proselytized to in order to help someone win a holy merit badge. I don't need you to actually lose your belief in god, but I have to tell you that anyone who just believes what they think they're supposed to believe isn't someone I'd be able to carry on a conversation with for long. My goal for believers is that they think realistically about what they know and what they hope is true. If someone tells me they can no more prove that god does exist than that I can prove he doesn't but that they choose to believe any how, I can respect that. You won't like it but that would make you an agnostic theist, just as I am an agnostic atheist. You wouldn't have to actually be in any doubt that god exists -any more than I have any doubt that one might exist- but if you acknowledge that there is no reasonable way to persuade a fair listener, then you acknowledge that faith does not lie within the provence of knowledge. Your choice to believe has more to do with who you are, what else you believe and what you need to believe than it does with any evidence.

I wonder how you feel about the idea of uncoupling faith from the concept of knowledge? To me, I've always thought that someone who believes in the clear light of the absence of conclusive evidence shows more strength of character than the person who psyches themselves up to make the unqualified claim that God just does exist as certainly as the sky is blue, etc.