I think you have the right idea, but I will add to it. Creating something out of nothing would fall under an action God could perform because of his omnipotence. There is no logical contradication in saying that something can exist uncaused or that something can come from nothing (a point made by Bertrand Russell). This is one of the reasons why the cosmological argument is an a posteriori proof for God's existence. It requires somebody to accept that something cannot exist uncaused, but this truth is at worst a metaphysical assumption and at best an inductive inference.

1 and 2. It does depend. But why should all death have the same reason or meaning? "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these." When God takes someone`s life, doesn`t mean He does with the same reason.
In the city of sodom and gomorrah how many were of praise? We don`t know the numbers. What you call desctruction of life is no more than sending the wretched to meet the same end and those of pure heart to take them to heaven. Because that is death.

When Jesus said that, with that line He changed how things were to be from that point onward(as to be as in the beggining). Why? Because now they were ready for change, ready to finally see God as He was from the beggining - and not just in regard of divorce.

"Forgive them, for they know not what they do"
Maybe He was also referring to those who actually contributed to His death, too.
Also, that line talks about humanity, even those who existed prior to Him.
Love for those who wanted love but also those who, like prophets and the good of heart who were in the house of the dead, also needed forgiveness for their sins - since no man was immaculate.
Jesus words were asking for forgiveness for mankind but only those who deserve it will get it. It was true before Jesus and true after Jesus aswell.
This view doesn`t mean the wicked, when whicked, will roam free without punishment.

1, The bible says God exists
2. The bible says that the bibles true
3. Therefore God exists
4. ???
5. Profit

1.  Why were we any more ready then than before?  Why would God have to change his message and methods of action over time? 

2.  But they will be allowed to live on, with the opportunity to repent and be forgiven, as opposed to being suddenly killed in an act of intense violence.

It's two fundementally different approaches.  Offering forgiveness as opposed to unleashing death.

The universe is beyond our understanding and God is beyond comprehension. You assume that both can be defined, tested, and rationalized. We have the Big Bang Theory, not the Big Bang Fact. With God we have faith, which if you think about it is kind of like theory. People observe existence and theorize that it is the result of a creator.

It is impossible to test the Big Bang and it is impossible to test God. Depending on one's perspective there is evidence of both, but no evidence is definitive unless you witness it firsthand. To believe in the Big Bang is to have a certain amount of faith in science. To have faith in God doesn't not preclude faith in science.

The fact that there are so many scientists who believe in God suggests that science and God are not mutually exclusive. I believe in both and have yet to read anything scientific that is incompatible with God.

Why do you demand everything be rigidly defined, categorized, and isolated?

1. Maybe because we grew spiritually or evil wasn`t so dominant anymore, or both. I don`t know the mind of God to give an exact answer.
He changed because we weren`t ready to accept Him or understand Him better. Can you teach a kid about philosophy or science? You can`t because he`s not "ready" to understand the way an adult is. So in a sense, people at that time, for whatever reason, weren`t ready aswell.

3. Suddenly killed? Like doing evil only one time and a second later dying? I honestly don`t know if that even happens. But what you see is people sinning and still be able to repent. Of course, everyone has his or her time. What i know is everyone has a opportunity to repent, some take it whilst others don`t.
Sodom and Gomorrah didn`t exist for a day before they were destroyed. They could have changed their ways.

...Sadly thats pretty much EXACTLY how it works...at least in the minds of the many. 

I always have LOVED being told this classical argument, because in the realm of things, it can never be logically solved based on what we know.

One may ask, where did this first material come from?  There must have been a God to create this material.

I immediately follow, saying, if there MUST have been a God to create this material, then wouldn't it also be necessary for there to be something that created this God, and something that created whatever created God, etc.

The most common response I get is that nothing had to create God because God has simply always been.  He was never created, and he has been in existence for all of time.

If it is indeed possible for something to just exist for all time, then why, I ask, can the original matter not have just existed for all time?  Why can God exist for all time, but the original matter cannot exist for all time.  Saying this is hypocritical.

----------

In the realm of things, I personally think we know SO little about our surroundings it is almost laughable.  We honestly have absolutely no clue how the universe just started.  We can make theories, but even these don't make sense when you really think about them.  There are clearly some fundamentals that we simply are not aware of (perhaps we will never be aware of them).  Perhaps time is infinite.  Yes, it is hard to grasp this concept, but perhaps there isn't actually a beginning.  Maybe beginnings are simply something we have made up that don't actually exist in the realm of things.

How can we think of something that doesn't exist?

I believe that God exists but he's nothing but a thought created by mankind. He exists, just like Athena or Horus or Odin or Morgoth exists.

I don't believe he exists outside of our minds and texts though, and if he does he's one selfish, sick, evil bastard.
Just think about it, the only way for you to be accepted into heaven is to live by his rules, and before we were able to spread information around the globe those rules were only known by a small portion of the world's population.

Basically:
God to a European: "Hey, you were born in Europe! Congratulations, the priests there will tell you about Christ and how to be a good Christian so that you may walk with me in heaven once you're dead and buried. Yay!"
God to an Aborigine: "I don't know how to say this but, you were born in the wrong part of the world. You'll never get the chance to become a Christian since, well, I was too lazy to send you that note. Not that I cared anyway. You'll end up in hell. Sucks to be you I guess, but there's only so many seats in heaven anyway, so..."

If God is some kind of omnipotent thingy that cares about his creations then why didn't he give everyone on earth a fair chance? It's like giving all 1st graders a trip to Disneyland if they go to school wearing this particular hat but you only tell the children of one school about it and all the other 1st graders will have to be mindreaders (and being a mindreader is bloody unorthodox and will get you raped) or they'll miss out. Heck, they'll miss out on Disneyland, they'll get told that they didn't get to go and they'll get beaten up by the principal as punishment for their lack of psychic powers (which, they shouldn't have unless they want to die a horrible death).

You clearly suggest you were using an example of the scientific method in your post. And then in your example you left off the most important step, actually verifying that your counclusions bassed on your hypothisis are correct. Without that step it's not sciance but philosophy. 

Which is why String Theory is considered by a large part of the scientific comunity to be bad science and closer to philosophy as there is no way of verifying any of the conclusions that people derive from the theory yet.