What if we're all wrong though?

[Purple Rabbit]

1-"God is Love: is not a switching of labels or an identity statement. An identity statement contains descriptors. Love in this case is a noun and object, not a descriptor. "God is loving" or "God loves us" would be statements that are ephemeral and only add descriptions as to the possible character of said parts of "type y" wheras the original statement identifies the actual part of type y comprising part of the whole type x. I think you're failing to grasp the concept of God's Love as seperate from the act or human emotion of Love.
2-The OT God was labeled with many acts that were easily explained natural occurances (similar to the bear above). While people of that time probably lived in a lot more fear of God then we do today, I believe that's also a testament to their lack of understanding in what God is about, hence the teachings of Jesus. He may have been personified as a genocidal murdering dictator, but also as a savior, healer, creator and loving father. The fact I've never seen an atheist say the latter seems to be a sure sign of the type of closed mindedness that leads to a greater lack in critical thinking through bias.

Ad 1. Total bullshit tackattack. The 'IS' clearly indicates identity. Love and god are both nouns.
And indeed I fail to see why we should attribute love to virtual agents artificially constructed by the human mind. Get real man, your love is your love. Don't dehumanize yourself by attributing it to other things.

Ad 2. So what are you saying? We cannot trust the crap in the bible? There you go.