(Romans 16:17) Keep your eye on those who cause divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them.

(2 Corinthians 4:4-6) The god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers

(Philippians 2:14-15) In among a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you are shining as illuminators in the world

(1 Timothy 6:3-5) If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, he is puffed up with pride, not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/20030301/article_01.htm
References :

If you really wanted to find the answer to many of them, a book I found helpful is called Hard Sayings of the Bible by Peter H. Davids, Frederick Fyvie Bruce, Manfred T. Brauch, and Walter C. Kaiser. This book addresses questions people have about how some verses contradict each other or what appears to be inconsistencies, but are actually not.

One of the important things when approaching the Bible is to read for it in context of the passages around it, how they fit into the Bible as a whole, and the cultural background at the time.

Some of the passages that you ask about are explained in the context of theology. God progressively reveals himself to his people.

In the passage about wine, drinking wine was a common thing in the time of the Bible and without the cultural stigma that it somewhat has today. Paul writes in one of the epistles that another of the young pastors should drink more wine so he could be more bold. In your summary of Romans 14:21 it oversimplifies to not drink wine. However this isn't what the passage in context is about. The passage was written by Paul to tell Christians to not do things that would make other people stumble, particularly in regards to respecting their previous Jewish spritual beliefs. So while Paul says no food or drink is clean or unclean now, other people may think it is. So when around those people, it is better to respect them and not drink or eat a particular thing that will be an obstacle to their spiritual walk. For example I went on a date with a girl who thought eating meat was wrong. So when we went out I didn't eat meat, even though I didn't have a personal spiritual issue with eating meat.

The passage that you quote to support the idea that circumcision is eternal is Genesis 17:7. However this passage instead actually has to do with the Abrahamic covenant and this is what he says is everlasting. God does fulfill the promise that Abraham will be fruitful and the father of many nations and kings and that God will be their God. In the passages regarding circumcision, many things were done away with in the coming of the New Covenant (after Christ came). Some of the actions laid out in the laws were done for many reasons among which was God showing the people the consequences for sin and testing their obedience. In the time of Abraham, circumcision was vitally important for God to test the obedience of the people. When Paul wrote Galatians, if you look at the passage you quoted in context, Paul is telling them that acting holy or following some ritual isn't what makes you holy, but it is a new spirit and a new heart. What's actually on the inside is what really counts, not how you appear to be religious on the outside. After Christ came, his eternal sacrifice for mankind's sins fulfilled this requirement and abolished much of what came before.

In the passage where God asks Cain where his brother is, it is clear from the other passages (and knowing the omnipotent qualities of God) that God knew the answer to that question. God knew Cain had killed his brother and was giving him a chance to respond to God in faithfulness.

Other of the passages that are cited in your question compare topics out of context. In comparison of Genesis 2 and Hebrews 5, they address different issues regarding evil. In the Genesis 2 passage, this disobedience of Adam and Eve which resulted in their knowledge of good and evil was wrong. In the Hebrews 5 passage, the author was writing to warn those who believe that they are Christians from falling away and following false teachers. The author is rebuking these people that by now they should have learned enough of the (Bible) to be teachers but they are not as spiritually mature as they should have been to this point. The author is telling them that it is important to know well and use the Scriptures as a guide to discern what is good and what is evil to avoid following false teachers and false doctrine.

Regarding Lot and his daughters, Lot was a righteous man as was evidenced by his protecting the angels at the risk of his death and leaving everything he had at the warning of God to escape the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. However there is sin in the world and we are all sinful and note that his daughters had to get him drunk to engage in that sin.

God does not tempt anyone. Satan tempts man in hoping for the downfall of God's creation.

Regarding another comparision of verses you made, God is a vengeful God and God is also a loving God. This issue is often difficult for many people to accept. I know I had a hard time accepting this at one time. God wants all of his people to have salvation as He is a loving God. However, God holds something higher than love and that is holiness. God knows that we cannot come into His presence without being holy.

This was just a short and very rough summary of just a few of the questions. Each set of passages that you provide deserve their own question and answer and there are many more relevant details and nuances to every topic. If you actually are trying to find an answer to the questions you have, I also recommend bible.org which has a research section. Hope this helps.

P.S. Does it seem like I'm trying to dance around the truth and not giving a straight answer?
References :

There are some that clam that the Bible has no inaccuracies, as you have noted that is simply not true. Does that mean it is not the word of God? No. It means it is not a perfect work.

I believe the Bible to be the word of God … as far as it has been translated correctly. The truth is that the Bible has been translated many times from the original Hebrew and Greek. I do not know the exact line of translation, however I know that it was translated into Latin, German and others before English.

The NIV is a pretty good translation of the Bible, but some could argue that updating the language from the KJV to NIV the old English to a more modern English may have changed the meaning or nuances contained in the KJV. That may be true. Just an example.

Regardless the over all question is still is it of God or of Man.

The Bible in my opinion is of God, careful study and prayer are required when you truly study the Bible. If you are sincere you will find the truth.

I will not take the time to answer each instance you have mentioned, it is a bit overwhelming. However saying what I have, not all your examples fit the translation issues.

For example the whole wine issue. you need to know if you are talking about old wine (the strong stuff) or new wine (simply grape juice). Both are identifed as wine in the scriptures.

Anyway, as I have mentioned before I think the issues are with Man not with God.
References :

"Talking about the Bible, do you think it right, as Matthew 8 tells us,for Christ to drive the devils into a legion of swine, who were drowned? Matt 8:30-32 30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. 31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. 32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.

What would you say if I destroyed a stock of swine?"
If you did it, I would say you deserved punishment, as you had no right to destroy another man’s property. But your right, and the swine owner’s right to property, was secondary to Christ’s right to do it.
Christ being God, being Lord of the world, having dominion over all things, all property is subject to His will. Creatures such as you and I have no right to question God, who is the source of rights.
If the swine belonged to the Jews, which is likely, they deserved punishment for violating the Mosaic Law, then in force, of which they were no doubt conscious, as are Jews today. There is a story abroad that a demonstration of consciousness of wrongdoing that took place recently on Boston Common. A Jew, seated on a bench, was eating a ham sandwich. A sudden thunderstorm broke out. Lightning struck a nearby tree, a large branch crashed down at his feet. Conscience-stricken, the Jew looked up excitedly, with part of the sandwich still in his hand, and irritatingly cried out, "What a lot of fuss about a little bacon."
If the swine belonged to Gentiles, they may have offended God’s law by raising the then forbidden meat in the land of the Jews.
A greater good was done by driving the swine out of the demoniac, and permitting them to enter the swine, then the death of the swine as a result of their rushing headlong into the sea.
"What became of devils that went into the swine?"
“My guess, if you want that, is that they became deviled ham”.

"Bible - A Closer Look!"
http://www.islamtomorrow.com/bible/bible_closer_look.htm
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/MB_BQS/default.htm
References :

Without an understanding of God's character and events, one cannot understand scripture that is pulled out of context. Read and study all of the Bible to get a fair perspective.
References :