Sorry for my late reply. Comments have been broken on this site for quite some time.

I reject the Bible as a credible source of information about what happened long before humans existed. The fact that something is written in the Bible is evidence of the writer's belief that it was true not evidence that the statement itself is true. When you take into account that the writer was a primitive man whose knowledge of the universe was limited to a small patch of land on this immense Earth, no reasonable person could consider their proclamations credible. You are going to say, "But the Bible was divinely inspired!" and I say to you that, like Thomas Paine, I believe that any divine revelation ceases to be divine as soon as the receiver attempts to pass that revelation along to another man. What evidence do I have that the other man actually received this revelation from a divine source rather than making it up. Perhaps this supposed recipient of divine revelation is just trying to manipulate me by telling me that his revelation was divinely received.

If god wanted to reveal himself to me, she would have. Until she does, I reserve judgment on her existence and I certainly do not take another man's revelation as sufficient evidence. Further I do not accept the revelation as it comes to us in the Bible which is so far removed from the original revelation I have no reason to believe that it accurately reflects the actual original revelation, if there was one.