I suspect that what has become the Bible was not necessarily the original intent--at least for some of the books/chapters. For example, names and ancestry tree wouldn't be important (IMO) for what is otherwise a sacred religious text to millions. The nuance that Einstein mentions in actual work is interesting to me. I suspect humans personify the concept of God more than what reality may actually be (for believers) because that's what's comprehensible and comfortable. Flexibility in thought is warranted IMO regarding the definition of God, The Creator of the Universe. I also can't rule out His ability to shape shift--i.e. "when in Rome... When on Earth..."

Suffice it to say, I'm a firm believer that faith/religion is personal to the individual rather than institutionally defined.

It sounds like you are closer to the esoterics or gnostics than the average American Christian today. If I came to believe in the supernatural today, one of the esoterics is probably where I'd land. I'd buy the Christian god being a false god and great deceiver before I'd buy that he was true and good. Interestingly the false god narrative is also why so many atheist groups use the imagery of Satan. If you see the Christian god as an evil deceiver the Satan of the bible becomes a hero who stood up to the evil power and was slandered away into martyrdom.

Awoke with a thought about original intent and ancestries being in the Bible. Ancestry is in the Bible because Judaism was exclusive based on kinship. So that makes parentage as key to proper participation as not eating shellfish. It is just another set of rules. Don't lie, be related to one of these people, no cheeseburgers, and so on. That all checks out, except that my recollection is that the geneological records from the Bible are patrilineal. The rules are very clear that being Jewish is matrilineal. @Comte de Sats Germain any thoughts on that one?

Most of the bible is fabricated in ways that would offend modern sensibilities. I say that as a Christian, and I don't care if the whole crowd of pious imbeciles disagree. It was written by men, edited by men, whole sections added and removed, it plagiarizes other religions in some parts (especially Genesis), and then on top of all that, its not even understood, so what was writing all that even for...? We don't need the OT at all, and its totally illogical to begin with. The NT is as fabricated as anyone could dare to imagine. Most of it was only even written as a response to Marcion's "heresy" - which, depending on who you ask could be anything, but it appears to me his real crime was putting a bunch of texts together into a Bible. Marcion did a bible, oh no, gotta do another bible to refute Marcion... Only maybe 1/3 of Paul's epistles can be linked to previous writing, and even that is still not source material. It doesn't serve anyone to pretend this isn't the case. You can't be "more Christian" than another, in any case, but certainly not by believing falsehoods that masquerade as piety.

That's why I tagged you for your opinion out of all of nostrs self professed Christians. I usually unfollow people who start posting religious content regularly and you are permitted by far the most religious posts of anyone I follow. I think you are genuinely looking to be a better person. Most of the religious content I see is virtue signaling in group status, not exploring personal bettering in any way. Jesus took issue with public displays of piety but people are still out here using their social media to blast out "look how much I love Jesus" without a hint of irony.