Amazing resources from Wikipedia.

[Jehanne]

I think that they think that, because religious belief is a meme that infects individuals and cultures; in other words, they are the product of the belief systems that they were raised in, just as you were.

In any case, neither of you have "good" reasons to claim what you do -- both the Bible and the Quran are products of the human imagination, nothing more.

I didn’t become a Christian until later in life.  But nice try..    and from this thread, and the way you keep running away from critical thinking preferring to assume motivations, I’m not interested in your opinion. And don’t think you can support your claims.

I noticed your quote from Vilenkn in your sig;

It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man.  - Alexander Vilenkin

Have you read the following paper by Professor Vilenkin's colleagues:

Inflation without a beginning: a null boundary proposal

Have you ever thought, critically, that maybe they are right and he is wrong?

Support what "claims"?  My claim is that most classical scholars do not believe that the Bible is without error:

There are major difficulties in accepting Luke's account: the census in fact took place in 6 CE, ten years after Herod's death in 4 BCE; there was no single census of the entire empire under Augustus; no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors; and the census of Judea would not have affected Joseph and his family, living in Galilee.[6] Some conservative scholars have argued that Quirinius may have had an earlier and historically unattested term as governor of Syria, or that he previously held other senior positions which may have led him to be involved in the affairs of Judea during Herod’s reign, or that the passage should be interpreted in some other fashion.[8][9][10] These arguments have been rejected by mainline scholarship as "exegetical acrobatics"[11][12] and most have concluded that the author of Luke's gospel made an error.[6]

Census of Quirinius

Seems completely reasonable, no?  The author of Luke's gospel made a historical error.  Ergo, the Bible is not inerrant, that is, "without error".