Truth OT = Truth Over Tradition
ok well “ot” will obv be read differently, but thats your decision
no offense but “why” is not even really relevant imo, and regardless of any misguided religious persons’ perspective on the matter of “God,” we still use the convention of saying that someone who is greedy for instance is “serving Mammon,” and we might refer to Mammon as “he” or “him” even though he really does not “exist,” so no offense but really all you are likely doing is reaffirming the principle of an unpronounceable “YHWH” (“AEOU,” translated) and “empty room,” which dont get me wrong, i agree with; Yah does not “exist,” as dealt with in the I AM passages even.
or iow Yah does not “exist,” (no “objective evidence” iow) yet here we are talking about “Him,” so really you either gotta reinvent the wheel, basically, or ignore the ones who are referring to an Olde Whyte Guy with a long white beard, white robe, or even do both i guess, but you still would not be able to very easily/concisely answer “why” i dont think?
“Why” dont you have faith in Yah? Bc “He” does not exist? rinse/repeat, see
i also have no faith in any “God” that is postulated on this forum, and really, no one else does either, im pretty sure? I mean we might say we do, or agree at certain points, but really