You're 100% wrong. I spent 3 years of independent searching and research, reading Institutes, the early church fathers (Augustine, etc), and coming to the conclusion that the works-based church I attended was not the home of the gospel. I left my church family, many of whom i was extremely close to, over the truth of Reformed theology.

I didn't mind the slavery either; I was a Christian Hedonist (John Piper's term), who found satisfaction in the truth of scripture, the word, and history. Just because it's fun doesn't make it true.

I appreciate you openly admitting your desire to ignore my writings, and not invest extensive thought in something which would challenge your views. The focus is not on God hating evil; it is on the fact that God blames us for His mistakes; Blame shifting and victim blaming are not characteristics of a well-developed moral being; they are characteristics of an egotistical child.

Concerning the established theories that are taught in seminaries across the country, what proof do you have that anything I said was untrue? I'd love to look at it. The Documentary theory has given way to other theories that share the same time frame and multiple-author ideas, but vary on exact dating and who contributed what.

The Blackwell companion to the new testament (standard fair for Seminary) points to the 2-source hypothesis, holds that the authors of the gospels are today unknown (the names were added later), that half of Paul's letters were pseudoepigraphical.

Codex Sianiticus (our oldest manuscript) provides a really cool insight into textual criticism: Mark, which was the first gospel written (30-35 years after Jesus' "crucifixion"), has no virgin birth nor resurrection. The story of the virgin birth, added in Luke and Matthew from the Q source, has multiple inconsistencies. The fact that you've never been taught any of this in church highlights the dishonesty of the whole enterprise. This is what theologens know to be true but don't tell anyone.

So I'll ask: Show me the evidence. Give me a link to a source that, in a scholarly way, proves anything I've said untrue. I actually value the truth of what I believe, so i don't brush things aside like you apparently want to. But I've been looking hard for a few years now, and have found nothing to the contrary.

P.S. the coffee shop atheist is my blog. If you want to understand why someone would go from a strong, reformed believer to antitheistic atheist, you should read it. But if you want to continue being comfortable, ignore this entire message; don't research, don't learn, and certainly don't investigate history, archaeology, science, or anything that might sway you. But don't have the audacity to say that you don't have blind faith, or that you've done even a cursory attempt to satisfy 1 Peter 3:15.

True freedom of intellect is better than anything offered by Jesus. It's a hard road to admit you're wrong, but it's worth it in the end.

Edit: here is an AMA from an atheist NT scholar. Pretty cool stuff.