But I still see it as confirmation bias

What answer that one arrives at, isn't?

The true test is when the very thing that you were consciously/unconsciously looking for, still ends up challenging you.

I may have readily accepted love, non-violence (morality), but I wasn't looking for or prepared to confront my shortcomings (sin). If I could have my way, there'd only be a goody-goody, neat, self-affirming philosophy that skipped over things that are uncomfortable.

If you look at the philosophical spectrum there is in all of human thought about itself, it spans two extremes - cynicism and unexplained optimism (kumbaya)

Atheism is cynicism to me. It accepts all of our human foibles as they are but has no explanation for where our yearning for morality comes from.

Buddhism - a religion known for its peaceful ways - preaches innate morality but fails to explain why we have so horribly failed as humans at that very measure despite our intentions.

Only christianity explains both Sin and Salvation. Islam and Judaism, both close relatives of christianity address both but leave it all to our own struggles and human life as a bleak russian roulette of meeting an angry, demanding God's high expectations.

Christianity has the Holy Spirit - the living guide, advocate of God who speaks to us here and now. We don't navigate this chasm on our own.

What traits does Jesus have that says he hates women and homosexuals? If anything, the bible is a lesson on how wrong the very people of god have been in understanding his nature throughout the ages.

We are still catching up with God's true love and I suspect that will be the case for humanity for a while. The arc of history as MLK said, tends towards justice.

On why God chose a slow and agonizing process for this to happen instead of snapping his fingers and correcting everything? I don't know. I guess some things will still remain mysteries for us :)