Which translation did you read? How do you square being uncomfortable with much of what you read with having more faith at the end?

NASB2020. That's a tricky question to answer. It's definitely not all bad. And I'm super skeptical of bias in translation. There is so much interconnectedness to the Bible and much can be learned from the Bible and applied to modern day happenings. Being that I read the work chronologically (down to the verse) I would jump between different books, written by different people across time, writing the same or similar things strengthened my conviction that events likely actually happened as documented. When read through the eyes of someone knowledgeable of pole shift and the growing field of study that has become, I see documented evidence of what I've been learning. It is veiled to some degree, which I'm suspicious of being translation error (intentional or otherwise) or possible limits of language complexity, IDK. Do I have a bias looking for pole shift evidence? Absolutely. But being able to tie modern scientific study to teachings within the most shared, copied, read, and translated work in human history (that we know of) isn't by accident. What I think is happening and what I think is going to happen is more than a passing mention in the most popular faith works of the past millennia. I've always had this mental tug of war between science and faith, but they aren't competing. They're complimentary. Going through this study helped clarify that.

I was curious because as an atheist it struck me as odd to see a self professed Christian admit that there are parts of the Bible that are a bit rough to modern moral sensibilities. I have read the bible, KJV. I imagine you were wondering. That's probably one of the things Christians find most annoying about me. Einstein never said that, frequent misattribution. While he did admit to believing in god, he was clear it was not the Christian god. It was closer to a worship of the idea of a grand unifying theory of physics.

I suspect that what has become the Bible was not necessarily the original intent--at least for some of the books/chapters. For example, names and ancestry tree wouldn't be important (IMO) for what is otherwise a sacred religious text to millions. The nuance that Einstein mentions in actual work is interesting to me. I suspect humans personify the concept of God more than what reality may actually be (for believers) because that's what's comprehensible and comfortable. Flexibility in thought is warranted IMO regarding the definition of God, The Creator of the Universe. I also can't rule out His ability to shape shift--i.e. "when in Rome... When on Earth..."

Its one of my biggest annoyances to see Christians say "culture" as a disclaimable dog whistle for racism. Their religion and its people have a long history of willfully destroying other peoples culture to the point that many people's history is almost completely lost. Of course now we must freeze time and defend the one true culture, white American 1950s Christianity. It isn't just brown people either. There are only 3 books about Norse mythology that survived from that time and 1 of them was written by a Muslim trader.

Suffice it to say, I'm a firm believer that faith/religion is personal to the individual rather than institutionally defined.

It sounds like you are closer to the esoterics or gnostics than the average American Christian today. If I came to believe in the supernatural today, one of the esoterics is probably where I'd land. I'd buy the Christian god being a false god and great deceiver before I'd buy that he was true and good. Interestingly the false god narrative is also why so many atheist groups use the imagery of Satan. If you see the Christian god as an evil deceiver the Satan of the bible becomes a hero who stood up to the evil power and was slandered away into martyrdom.

Awoke with a thought about original intent and ancestries being in the Bible. Ancestry is in the Bible because Judaism was exclusive based on kinship. So that makes parentage as key to proper participation as not eating shellfish. It is just another set of rules. Don't lie, be related to one of these people, no cheeseburgers, and so on. That all checks out, except that my recollection is that the geneological records from the Bible are patrilineal. The rules are very clear that being Jewish is matrilineal. @Comte de Sats Germain any thoughts on that one?

#💎