When my "Get Pissed at This Guy" button gets pressed, there can only be one consequence. :)
First of all, you seem to be focusing on a tangent rather than talking any more about the original topic, namely can an omnipotent God exist who judges us be truly just? Am I to take this as a sign that I convinced you, or that you just don't want to go any further on a conversation you cannot logically defend against?
"Do you really think the Bible has corrupted so much in 2,000 years that the whole entire point of it has changed?"
I seem to recall (though I could be mistaken) that the entire split between the Islam community (on whether or not killing for Allah is acceptable) is based on the interpretation of ONE line in it. The "message" of the Bible is amorphous and can fit any definition, first of all. Second of all, let us examine some historical evidence on the subject (of tje entire Wholly Babble, not just the teachings of Jesus. Let's make this an 'all over' kind of thing):
The Old Testament was originally a set of oral legends passed down among the Hebrew tribes. Only after centuries of this did they bother to write it down. Ever play telephone, Sam? Imagine playing it for hundreds of years, and tell me with a straight face that the stories will be exactly the same. Not to mention all that is lost in the translation from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English. And the subjective people translating.
Now, consider the New Testament. They didn't come straight out of Jesus' mouth. There wasn't a page following him around wherever he went writing everything down. They were written decades after Jesus' death (around 40-50 years) and those writers were in the process of creating a movement in Rome. Now, given a certain thing Jesus said, are you going to tell me that these people, these potential revolutionaries, would not embellish a line here or there to better inspire the troops? NO embellishment at all? I'm not saying the message was DEFINITELY corrupted beyond repair, but I will say that you should be open to the possibility. There were fifty gospels condemned as spurious by Pope Gelasius and they never saw the ligh of day. Think there was ANY interesting info in there that just maybe the Church didn't want let out? The Gospel according to Thomas said that a church isn't neccesary: faith should not be organized and publicly preached. Any guesses as to why THAT one didn't make it in?
I think you should admit that, even if the Wholly Babble is divinely inspired, it was still written by fallible human beings who may have missed the point. But you won't. Far from being an eye-opener, you use your faith as a blindfold. I am beginning to wonder whether your sarcastic endorsement of close-mindedness really was sarcastic. :)