Here's something to start you out on ... mostly philosophical.
Topic: The existence of the soul and an afterlife that humans can go to. Specifically, "Where will I go when I die?"
I'll start. (I'll even let you know that there is a weakness in my argument that I know of but I haven't gotten around to addressing yet.)
Important: This does not address all of your religious beliefs. The comments below only focus on the topic (above). As far as I'm concerned, except for the narrow exceptions made here, everything about your religion could be true. Yet, from what we know from knowledge gained from a variety of disciplines, I think this narrow but important part (an afterlife) can not be based in reality. Keep in mind that this also applies to any claims of an afterlife -- regardless of the religion (if any) that is involved.
"Where will I go when I die?"
I know the answer to that. When I'm alive, I am -- when I'm dead, I am not.
Here's the long version;
Summary: There is no such thing as a soul. Because of that, there is no existence for us after our lives are over. That's why it's called death.
How can I write that with any confidence?
Think about what we know -- what we can actually check and examine. Think about what we do not need to speculate about -- on both life and death.
1. Death is not a clear line; on one side alive, on the other completely dead.
Death happens in stages as individual cells no longer retain integrity for a variety of reasons, often because of oxygen starvation from organ failure or trauma that prevents the blood from circulating. Parts of us are dying and new cells are being made all the time.
2. Organ transplants. Even when 'we' cease to be, parts of us are still coherent, allowing organ transplants. There is even a method of blood extraction from corpses that is used occasionally.
3. All of our thoughts while we are alive are contained in a structure of neurons. This can be seen in a variety of well documented cases from Phineas Gage through to the impacts of severing the corpus colosum and the impacts of traumas such as strokes and alzheimers as well as the structures found that map nerves to a variety of tasks and thoughts.
4. When people start to die, the brain is frequently one of the last organs to be starved of oxygen.
5. The 'tunnel of light' is caused by the visual cortex losing oxygen and the remaining parts of the brain attempting to deal with that. The same 'tunnel' can be simulated. Pilots experience this when they use a centrifuge under high G forces for training or to test new gear. Both these are documented and can be duplicated with the proper equipment and/or circumstances.
6. People who live after being through this oxygen starvation tell stories based on their brain's attempt to deal with the stress. They talk about 'flash backs', they talk about 'stepping outside' of themselves and seeing themselves. The same thing the pilots in the centrifuges report.
7. The more time the brain or any organ is starved, the more damage.
8. People don't act any differently from more damage (that brings them closer to complete death and thus an 'afterlife') then other victims of brain damage.
9. When people 'come back' from 'the dead' their bodies have not suffered complete cell death; they weren't completely dead.
10. When cell death is complete, there is no place for 'us' to stand; there is no way to 'see the other side' and return to talk about it.
11. Think back to #3. Now, with that in mind, where do 'we' go if our brains suffer a stroke or other damage? Are there surpluses of souls hanging around, waiting for brain damage before they can be inserted into a live body?