You're making a "baby with the bathwater" argument, which I respect. But how is that not an attempt to salvage the idea when the institution is shown to be fraudulent? Surely, the idea itself is partly to blame for the distortions that came of it.

Also, the "Satan" stuff doesn't track. You claim he should look to what the Bible "does say." That's precisely what he's done here! He's shown what the Bible actually says, versus the parts that modern-day Christians claim is the "true message."

You can't tell me that the Bible isn't riddled with contradictions and mixed messages. The only reason it comes off that way is because the insistence that God is "loving, forgiving," and not responsible for suffering is in total contradiction to what much of the Bible asserts.