Why is it that the religious disagree on the specifics of religion, but those of us who agree that science is the best explainer of reality do little bickering about the details? Why aren't there hundreds of versions of the periodic table, each hawked by a branch of science that disses all others? Why aren't there thousands of versions of evolution, each adhered to by the warring members of different denominations of science? Why aren't there Churches of Latter Day Quasars laughing at the First Presupposition Church of the Android Galaxy?
Because science isn't made up and doesn't need variation to satisfy it's followers. Science isn't made up from bits and pieces of broken history and myth. Science isn't made up of what people hope is true. It is made up of truth period. As best explained by current knowledge and technology.
But every single person who believes in a god who shows up on this site has either first state his or her version of religion, or get that version sweated out of them by our insistent questioning, before the discussions can truly be productive. We are forced to assume a generic version of our opponents religion unless or until they clarify. In this instance, the writer has been kind enough to clarify, indirectly, their loyalties, which will speed up the discussion process should the writer return. But when the first hurdle to explaining the "truth" is to tell us which version of the "truth" you adhere to, something in inherently wrong with your argument.
As for me, if asked to respond to the OP, I've asked all sorts of questions. That they don't match your list exactly is sort of because my methods are wanting, I guess. I forgot to take into consideration your specific set of imagined realities. So I failed to follow your exact path. And I guarantee you, nobody else has followed your exact path either. Even amongst fellow members of your congregation.
That's your bad. That is other believers bad. But it is not my bad.
Edit: forgot some question marks, which is more than I can say for the OP.