LOL.  It is like offering a pack of cigarettes to someone who quit smoking 30 years ago.  No thanks.

The whole system is just overly complicated if the primary purpose of the creation was a specific member of the Ape family to worship and believe in the creator. You would have to be an idiot to design something like this if you just wanted obedient primates who would believe in you.

If I was God, I would just...

Why would he create life in the first place? What would be the purpose?

You missed the point... Christians claim their god is omnibenevolent... which itself is a claim that god would prevent all evil from existing... it is not my argument, that is the Christian argument...

So I guess his 1755 earthquake in Lisbon (on All Saints day when all people were in church, the tallest buildings in the city) was a practical joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1755_Lisbon_earthquake

Nice going God...

Need I go on?  AIDS in newborns, flesh eating bacteria, cancer, birth defects...The list is endless of "his" creations.

The sooner you realize that there are natural forces at work, not the supernatural the better, for your own sanity.  Continue to ignore the obvious, it does not matter what you folks believe, the nature will continue to evolve, regardless of your belief in the Jewish Zombie myth.

There are three kinds of evil in the world. The first is based on the fact that man is a physical and temporal being. Because of this, we are subject to physical ailments, whether based on weaknesses in our own constitutions or exposure to harmful agents in our environments. But creation and destruction go hand in hand; the same temporal nature that requires us to ultimately perish is also what enables us to come into existence. We therefore see that our physical nature, with all its limitations, is the result of God’s kindness. And, despite our limited natures, evils of this type are relatively rare. Most people are in fairly good health and physical defects are rather uncommon.

The second type of evil is the kind that people inflict on one another, such as by physically abusing others. These are greater in number than the first kind of evil but they are still not ubiquitous. It’s pretty uncommon for a person to scheme to rob or kill his neighbor. Large numbers of people can be affected by this kind of evil in wars but, again, these are relatively infrequent in the big picture of all inhabited countries.

The third kind of evil is the type that a person inflicts upon himself. This is the largest category of evils, far greater in number than those in the second class. Only a few people are not guilty of this kind of self-inflicted harm. This type of evil is spoken of by such prophets as Malachi (1:9 – “this has been of your doing”). King Solomon also wrote of it in Proverbs. For example, in 6:32 it says, “one who does this destroys his own soul,” while 19:3 tells us that “the foolishness of man perverts his way.” Solomon also discussed this topic in Koheles (Ecclesiastes). In 7:29 he tells us, “God has made man upright but they have come up with many thoughts.” These thoughts bring evil upon man.
The evils that a person brings upon himself are because of his vices, such as a desire for more food, drink and sex than is actually necessary. People engage in too much of these things, or they enjoy them inappropriately, and it causes them both physical and spiritual injury. Since the soul resides in the body, if one accustoms himself to superfluous amenities, he simultaneously conditions his soul to crave unnecessary things. This is especially bad when you consider that actual necessities are relatively few in both number and required quantities, while superfluous things are potentially without number.

People’s thoughts can become so twisted that they’re in constant agony over their inability to acquire as much silver or gold as someone else. They will expose themselves to great danger in order to acquire things they don’t really need. When they come to ruin through their own decisions, they blame God. They curse the circumstances they blame for their inability to acquire as much wine, women and song as money could buy as if the world exists solely for their gratification. Some go so far as to disparage God, saying the if He were able, He surely would have created a world more fair than this one.

Wise people, on the other hand, live their lives consistent with the words of King David in Psalms 25:10, “All the paths of God are mercy and truth to those who keep His covenant and His testimonies.” Those who keep their own role in the universe in context see God’s mercy and truth in everything. Rather than railing against God’s judgment, they seek to better understand His ways. Their needs are modest – food and clothing in limited quantities – and they are happy with their lot. In truth, all the self-inflicted injuries stem from a desire for that which is unnecessary, so that man cannot be satisfied that his actual needs have been met.

Belonging to a social club, meditating and exercising all have the same effect, without a boogie man or Santa Claus.  Not sure what your point is.

I would not hire anyone who believes that Earth is 6000 years old, or believes that the religious scriptures are the "word of God", no matter how happy and social they are.

People who believe those things lack critical thinking skills and have poor judgement.

Teaching children that God created universe in 6 days, and that Earth 6000 years old is child abuse.  But I digress.

....
As for religions adapting, well, they don't have a choice.  They cannot kill all the scientists.  They tried, but failed.

I get your point, but only partly agree with it. Religion, as you detailed in your post, is impacted by 'local cultural practices'; for example, someone born in the Middle East is likely to be raised a Muslim, whereas someone born in Ireland is likely to be raised Catholic. This doesn't happen in science. What is true in Saudi Arabia is true in Ireland, or anywhere. Someone's religion is (99% of the time) directly linked to their place of birth, or at the very least, by those that raise them. This isn't true with science. So while I accept that religion has evolved, in some respects even diluted, it is only in how people choose to practice it or which 'almighty power' they worship.

You do know that something becomes illegal when somebody says it is illegal, don't you? I mean, if a cop says "That's illegal," then it's illegal, right? But if you won't accept a cop, maybe a senator who gets together with other government people and say, "That's illegal," then its illegal, right?

Is it illegal if 10,000 people say, "It's legal," and 500 Congress people say, "It's illegal?"

If you don't know something, an honest position is to say I don't know, not to invent some imaginary entity to fill your gaps in knowledge.

You believe in the God of the Gaps.  Google it.

Science will eventually explain everything.  

Have you noticed that the space where your "God" existed is getting smaller and smaller, all thanks to science.  Now you have to place him outside of the known universe.  But in reality he only exists in your mind.  For most people God is just that good feeling, supplemented with iconography of their church and memories of religious ceremonies.

Your God concept has been created by years of indoctrination by the cult you were born into.

Apparently the Mormons borrowed the Catholic playbook for pedophile priests...

Leaked Doc: Mormon Church Was “Reluctant” To Punish Elder Who Sexted with Minor
http://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2018/09/11/leaked-doc-mormon-church-was-reluctant-to-punish-elder-who-sexted-with-minor/

You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof?  Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution?

500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was.  Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me!

Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not.

You forgot to add "blah, blah, I can't hear you, blah, blah...evolution is a hoax, blah, blah, I can't hear you, blah, blah".

Here is the difference between the two:

Religion provides answers without evidence.

Science provides answers based on evidence.

You have to call a spade a spade.  Stupid ideas should be ridiculed so that we can move on as humanity.

Perpetuating Bronze Age or 6th century world view is just wrong.  The year is 2018, not 618.