Christianity is heading for a full allegorization

[Ferrocyanide]

I just don't see this as being a "hard problem".  Qualia are what the conscious mind experiences - full stop.  The conscious mind must have some experience - it might as well be the qualia we know.  It could be different qualia if we had different brains or different senses, but it has to be something.

Now, identity and a sense of self is a bit of a mystery, but I feel that is an illusion created by our mind.  If we were part of the Borg collective, we wouldn't experience a singular identity.  Our separateness and our memories creates the sense of self.

It's not that easy though. Just examine two competing theories of mind: functionalism and biological naturalism. Both theories are materialistic (ie. physicalist). Both theories posit that conscious experiences are causally dependent on brain functioning. They agree there. But, otherwise, they arrive at two different conclusions concerning what consciousness is.

One theory (functionalism) states that conscious states arise due to the information feedback that happens with brain function. According to this theory, a computer could have conscious experiences if it somehow transmitted the same information your brain does when say, eating a hamburger.

The biological naturalist disagrees. The biological naturalist says you can transmit that information in a computer system and the computer will not experience eating a burger. To the biological naturalist, consciousness is a product of the physical features of neurons. If you wanted to create an artificial consciousness, you'd need to create a physical object that does the same physical thing that a neuron does when it fires. (A whole bunch of them actually.) Then you'd need to get them to fire in one of the myriad ways a neuron can fire when hamburger-eating is being done.

Who of us can say which of these theories is correct? Each has its merits. Each has its problems.

So while, yes, our conscious experience has to be something ... exactly what that something is eludes us. Hence, questions about consciousness are worth exploring. And the problem is indeed hard.

***

As for identity, I tend to agree with you. It's a key assumption of many that "self" is an actual unified thing to begin with. I think Locke put together a fine explanation with continuity. Hume's thoughts are good too (self is illusory). But, at the end of the day, we don't want to dispense with the notion of THIS person or THAT person. I know I don't. And if we want to make such distinctions, we ought to be able to explain ourselves.

The functionalism version seems to be the correct one.

1. If I can accurately model the interaction of a single electron and a single proton via software, wouldn’t I be able to bring them together and have a virtual hydrogen atom? Wouldn’t I be able to predict its bonding properties, its electron energy levels and the energy levels inside the nucleus?

2. If I can do it for a single hydrogen atom, why not do it for a group of H2 molecules?
Would I be able to determine the melting point and boiling point of hydrogen purely via software? Would I be able to predict all of hydrogen’s macro properties?

3. Would I be able to simulate any molecule via software? Can I design any structure, such as a neuron and run a software simulation?

4. Can I simulate the entire planet Earth, including every single atom in my software?

There are software that simulate atoms/molecule. I believe that it is often used in the pharmaceutical industry to figure out molecule to molecule interactions.

Sometimes, you don’t need to simulate every molecule. The electronics industry designs digital circuits via software. The CPUs and GPUs that we have in our PCs are entirely designed via software. Some of the designing is done via software. Some of the optimizing is done via software.
I think that they run simulations to see if the CPU would work well at a certain clock before they build one.

One theory (functionalism) states that conscious states arise due to the information feedback that happens with brain function. According to this theory, a computer could have conscious experiences if it somehow transmitted the same information your brain does when say, eating a hamburger.

Hmmm. There is feedback but that is not going to magically give you consciousness. It very much has to do with the very large scale circuits that brains have.
It’s not the computer that would have consciousness. It is the software.
Of course, whatever you design via software for a general purpose CPU, you can also implement it as a specialized IC.