Satanism is the ONLY Rational Religion

[WesOlsen]

If they existed as physical beings and had power over the physical world as they were described then we would see them wouldn't we? God you don't actually see as there is nothing physically there to see. Though I'm sure there are immortal godlike beings besides God that's kind of what angels and demons are meant to be.

This is an interesting point that a lot of christians/muslims make, that god occupies no physical spacial/temporal location and is composed of nothing. The problem is that there is either matter or anti-matter in the observable universe. If god is composed of something he should be scientifically detectable, theoretically (maybe not with our current level of technology but hypothetically speaking of course), whereas if he is composed of nothing he is empty space, not even composed of quarks or some sort of spacial-membrane. Either there is a god or there isn't, vague definition-dodging attributes don't help either yourself or us when it comes to the god debate. Angels and demons on the other hand, they're frequently described as having a very earthly presence, as are Jinns in Islam. These guys should definitely be measurable if they have any sort of physical properties, if they too are composed of nothing, then by definition they don't exist either.

The Bible says that the universe is the purpose made creation of a single supreme intelligence. So if you can explain what we have discovered through science that would render this supposition null and void I would be interested to see it. The process of creation described in Genesis fits with an orderly sequence of natural formation over time from a starting point in time, time itself had a beginning.

That's what people thought the world was at the time so that's how they depicted it. How else would they depict it?

But this is our problem, you arbitrarily cherry-pick the truth from the fiction. Some biblical information is literally true whereas other biblical information really is just what people thought at the time. It seems you've adopted the more liberal 'the basic gist of the bible creation story is true, but most specific claims are man-made interpretations' stance.

Mathew 4:8 - 'Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them'

An exceedingly high mountain indeed if we are to literally see every kingdom of earth, including those of South america and Australasia. Of course you say people discerned a flat-earth notion at the time, but then what real criteria are we supposed to use for discerning the literal from the symbolic, in the present day? If most of the banal desert stories of oxes, raping daughters, bartering, collecting sticks etc is just epoch-relative bewilderment at the natural world, then why not just extend this interpretation to the final few stories about genesis as well? We are given no rational criteria, which is precisely why christianity has splintered in to so many different sub factions who bicker (often with fatal consequences) at how to interpret the thing. What use is a book of truth if nobody can decipher it? Even if you make the case that all christian factions are sort-of right, it doesn't change the fact that to this day some of them are still prepared to butcher one another for their differing views. We just can't accept that this confusing and vague mess is divine revelation, we see it as 100% man-made.