The production of the Bible 1 - VBHH-E0005-I

To understand the production of the Bible, we must understand two factors!
The first would be: are we alone in the universe? In other words, are we the only conscious beings in the universe?
If the person says yes, then they would have to accept a factor of contrary probability that tends to infinity. In a universe that is supposedly 13.6 billion light years away, defining that only our planet has life would be totally improbable.
The other point would be, does life in the form that it exists have an acceptable probability of being spontaneous? The probability for life to be formed in the form that it exists tends to be impossible. Thus, the big problem is in accepting two impossible probabilities, that we are the only beings in the universe, and that life is spontaneous. Once these impossibilities are accepted, then the person has chosen something that tends to be impossible, and in this case he would not accept the concept of the Bible, because this individual tends to believe in the impossible.
Now, if one believes that we are not alone, and that life as it exists does not arise spontaneously, then we can analyze the Bible.
First, we must clearly understand that the Bible is a book assembled by men, that is, the construction of the books is decided by groups, so there are Bibles with 66 books, others with 73, others with 78, and still others with 39. Therefore, there is no idea that the Bible as it exists is something coming directly from a deity.
The first point now is, if there is life on another planet, if it does exist, is it spontaneous? If we accept the improbability of life arising spontaneously, then it is unlikely that spontaneous life exists on another planet. In this case, we get into confusion, how, then, did life arise? Because as Descartes defined, "If I think, therefore I am". There is only one way for this to happen. It is for thought to exist outside of time. Since the probability of the emergence of life is tending towards the impossible, then we have to define that there is no such thing as consciousness before there is no consciousness. Thus, what we would have is that consciousness is something inherent to the universe.
And if it does not exist before, then there is no formation of consciousness, it just exists. Examples of this are the physical laws. They just exist, they did not evolve. Thus, the law of entropy is not a law evolved from other laws, it just exists outside of time.
Thus, the only rational way to understand the existence of consciousness is to define that it exists like the physical laws, it is something that is inherent in the universe. Thus, it is natural to understand that the universe can only contain consciousness if it is more conscious to be able to support other consciousnesses.
Understanding this fact, we can now define whether such consciousness would or would not present itself to conscious beings. Is there more logic in it presenting itself, or more logic in it not presenting itself?