Other theological issues:
Let me briefly go over a few more significant theological issues that I studied between the ages of 23 and 25 which changed when I allowed myself to honestly seek the truth.
Tongues: While I doubted tongues at an early age, I believed that perhaps it was real for some people just not a gift for me. However, upon thorough observation of the inconsistencies already mentioned and satisfactory explanations given for other interpretations, I rejected tongues all together. In short, Biblical references to tongues was simply the ability or gift of speaking another language. God had indeed gifted some people with that ability, I was not one of them. Random languages spoken as a private or public communication with God was not readily deduced from the Bible.
The trinity: This idea is claimed to be essential to Christian doctrine. God the Father is one with his Son Jesus and with the Spirit. They are 3 persons but still only one God. This doctrine is never mentioned in the Bible. Ever. It is perhaps alluded to but not clear. Historically it was not officially accepted by the church until nearly 400 AD (see this article from a Christian perspective http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/is-god-a-trinity/the-surprising-origins-of-the-trinity-doctrine).
Logically the trinity is impossible. For example if Jesus was one with God (therefore fully God) He could not have been (by definition) fully man. Similarly there was just as much reason to believe that the spirit of God was his nature or ideals (as the spirit of a man would be considered) as there was that the spirit was a separate person. Why this doctrine is considered so essential to Christianity, I am not fully sure. However, at some point while still considering myself a believer in God’s salvation, I rejected this idea.
Jesus was God: essentially all Christians believe that Jesus was God. However, the actual evidence is slim. “I and the Father are One” is often used as proof. However, this is essentially the same as two people agreeing as if they are one on an issue. If you attack the ambassador of the United States, you are in essence attack the United States. If you as an individual represent a corporation as a whole, than you are in essence one with that corporations ideals and goals. There is much more to this argument, but suffice to say there is good reason to doubt this theological view point.
Once again, rejecting that Jesus was God didn’t change salvation at all. God is in control. He determined that a sacrifice needed to be made to pay for our sins. He didn’t have to do this but chose to. Once again, he chose the type of sacrifice he wanted. He wanted a perfect person. He could have just as easily created a perfect man (Jesus) as he could have somehow sent himself as a sacrifice to himself. In fact, creating the perfect man makes more sense. How does one sacrifice himself to himself to satisfy himself that people he himself created could be forgiven for things he could have prevented in the first place?