That was a pretty strange way of introducing your thoughts... accusing all Christians and theologians of corrupt intent. Granted, from the beginning of the Jesus Sect of Judaism, there have been corrupt teachers bringing false teachings, and if I remember correctly all the New Testament letter writers warned about them - even Jesus warned of their ilk: "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.” (Matthew 7:15)

Maybe you should consider the possibility that you also cherry pick and/or misrepresent. Your example of Matthew 19:30 illustrates my point, because your interpretation seems odd to me. The quote is in the context of a discussion about the government of the Kingdom. specifically the ask, "Jesus, can we sit on thrones next to you on your Throne?"

You claim that the chapter in Matthew is "all over the place." I assume you characterize the discussion of many topics and precepts as being "all over the place." Wow! You'd better steer clear of Ecclesiastes and Proverbs! Those books will explode your brain!

Your comments on Marriage and Divorce (Matthew 19:1–10) are nonsensical. You are correct about this passage not attacking LGTBQ+. Jesus rarely attacks anyone. Yet, the passage has a focus on heterosexual marriage. Tangentially, it assumes marriage is between a man and a woman. I find nowhere in the Bible a justification for homosexual relations, let alone marriage.

God gave everyone free will. Anyone can choose anything they want, including what to believe, how to live, and how to love. However, God does not approve all our choices - not unlike parents who only want the best for their children and for no harm to fall on them.

Next, you go on to judging people and presuming their thoughts are perverse and twisted. Perhaps that is true in many situations, but I would suggest the same is true for any social group, civilian or religious.

Moses was quite specific about why a man could divorce his wife. There was no "vagueness."

According to Jesus, Moses was not "just plain wrong." Jesus explained that it was an allowance made, because their hearts were hard and unforgiving.

Now, "...in the ancient Middle East, as well as in Islamic Ethiopia and in Muslim India during the Mughal Empire, eunuchs were not always castrati." - https://muse.jhu.edu/article/42904/summary. Eunuchs were highly regarded officials in many cultures, not just overseeing harems. Anyways, this Bible excerpt is a discussion limited to heterosexual marriage.

Some men never get married, but the assumption that all unmarried are homosexuals is ridiculous, presumptuous, and untrue. Paul is clear that forced celibacy is not what he is talking about. Rather, he is simply saying, if you don't feel the necessity to get married, "I'm okay and you're okay." But if you have an itch you can't scratch, go ahead and get married.

Seems to me that you are twisting things quite a bit in order to "prove" your argument.

You say Jesus "rattles off" as if He was making up some more random rules to throw out there. Jesus never was random but always purposeful. He was referring to the Ten Commandments.

You probably will be happy to know that the Bible says everyone is going to be judged, both Believers and Non-believers. Still, I'm not sure that you understand the principle which states our unrighteousness separates all of us individually from righteous God. The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man gives a picture of the situation. where "hell" is a place for people who die in said state of separation to remain in that state of separation, until a final determination, or judgment, can be ascertained.

Good golly! Finally! Something we can agree on! The so-called Prosperity Gospel, often used as a con for the "evangelist" to collect money from the naive, making himself or herself rich... That whole section I agree with, but diverge a bit on "With God all things are possible," being limited. After all, Jesus did say that if we have the faith of a mustard seed, we can move mountains, right?

My general conclusion in response to your essay is that your summation again puts all Evangelicals into one basket, and I think that is due to your limited exposure to their vast variety of Believers out in the world. Also, your intense mission to quickly judge and correct people's understanding appears to make you rather narrow minded - a trait you disapprove of, I think... Also, I would advise you to prayerfully continue to read the Bible, the whole Bible, in order to get a clearer, panoramic view and interwoven understanding of its content.

I would be interested to know why you left your church since many leave due to disappointments, hurts, and harmful behaviors by certain individuals. It isn't usually caused by inconvenience. Of course, it's none of my business... So whatever...