You are right, it is a unique environment in that respect . Of course, so is your goal for this thread to engage the literalists in this forum ? So it sounds like you have a little catching up to do there CZ . There have been hundreds of opponents of Bible throughout history. The trick is making the suitably sophisticated argument. I have mentioned Spinoza before, he is one of the critics that I am interested in studying further. Right, I think we are having a misunderstanding here. What I meant is that you are building the position as though it is a literalist position and then exposing the faults. I was saying that all of us here on the this thread are not literalists, so you are knocking down a strawman as far as I am concerned. I think I understand that you are addressing a literalist reader, even if they are not here (yet). Often looking at ideas from a new perspective is very enlightening. I encourage you to continue your journey. Absolutely, as a scientist I would say the inertia is enormous. This might be the key to opening the discussion more widely. I will give you a few examples, but there are many more possible: 1) Foundational concepts - so many of the bible stories are found in our everyday lives. In the example you pick, A&E (Cain and Abel), think about sibling rivalry. Think about the fall of man/woman (which you have been discussing). Consider the role of the devil (serpent). 2) Ethics and morality - again foundational in these areas. Much of western philosophy has grown from biblical examples. A later work called "Ethics of our Fathers" comes for Biblical ethics. 3) Ideas of the Law - the Jewish perspective on bible, which we call Torah, is that it is the foundation of the Law. Much of this is detailed much later in what is called the Talmud. In my view this was preliminary to later development of Church Canon and then British Common Law. I could give you many more examples. Interestingly, I am pretty sure some of the literalists could give you even more examples. Another interesting point is that it may be more difficult for the literal believers to debate some of these notions as though they are philosophical arguments. These beliefs are deeply held by many but not always easily explained.