I expect that you are in great physical shape with all the jumping to conclusions you do. I’ve explained to you before, I’m not married to the unbiblical ideas of Sola Scriptura. While you choose to look the other way when confronted by the fact that Sola Scriptura was an invention of the 16th Century, and not held by anyone until the second major rupture of Christian unity at that time, I (having read the scriptures from cover to cover more than once, despite your assertions that I have not) and after much prayer don’t come to the same conclusions as you have.
While I do think you come to your errors in all good faith, and you truly believe in the human invention of Protestantism, or at least a mixture of a couple of schools of Protestantism, I can see very little in your theology that is supported by the teachings of Scripture and the interpretation of it by the Early Church. I also see no point in supporting arguments from a fallacious Sola Scriptura point of view. Point in fact the Theology you are attempting to support only has any validity when you edit the scriptures and interpret them in a mindset that refuses to look at the original languages, vocabulary, grammer and tenses, and historical context. You have made it clear that none of that matters to you. I’m sorry you live in a world that can be so upset by a comprehensive study of the Scriptures and is limited to individual proof texts and an interpretation of the scriptures utterly divorced from it’s proper context.
But I’ll still keep you in my prayers, and enlist the assistance of God’s best friends, the Angels and Saints in intercession for the enlightenment of your soul, and your swift return to His bosom.