Atheism is more rational than Christianity

Thank you, unitedandy, for your polite and timely response. I accept your definitions. Atheism: "A single, solitary belief that there are no good arguments for theism, and that there are good arguments against such a proposition, particularly Christian theism." Evil: "Anything which causes pain, suffering, disability and death." We are to debate rationality. Since you have brought up the existence of God, it must be debated at this time. I will do so as I attempt to refute your arguments below. Firstly, I would like to address the WSA inductive problem of evil, which you have already defined for us. ============================== The WSA inductive problem of evil (P1) If there were an all-powerful and all-good God, then there would not be any evil in the world unless that evil is logically necessary for an adequately compensating good. (P2) There is lots of evil in the world. (P3) Much of that evil is not logically necessary for any adequately compensating good. (C2) Therefore, there is no God who is all powerful and all good. ============================== You defined evil as "anything which causes pain, suffering, disability, and death." You also defined two types of evil: "moral evil, and natural evil. I shall now split your definition up to address the WSA argument. I would also like to define "all powerful." Although you argue that Christian rationality cannot be merely maintained on selective fittings with Genesis, you do acknowledge that certain selective passages in Genesis are rational. Therefore, I must reiterate the importance of my "bara" v. "asah" case. God's omnipotence comes from His ability to "bara." God cannot simply strike down Hitler with a thunderbolt. He needs favorable scientific conditions in order to "asah" that thunderbolt. The Christian God's only choice is to punish sinners like Hitler, and the theoretical politician or doctor you mentioned, in Hell. I believe that Premise 3 of your WSA argument is a simple fallacy of exclusion. God can allow the presence of "pain, suffering, disability, and death," both morally and naturally, however, there is ALWAYS an adequately compensating good, from a Christian perspective. I believe that I am able to support my argument for each type of example of evil you stated in your argument. First, however, I would like to define "compensating good." Assuming that a Christian God exists, the Christian God is a "jealous" God. The Christian God (assuming He exists) ultimately wants all of mankind (his creations) to love and respect Him, and follow His laws. Therefore, I would like to define the phrase "compensating good" as "1) the potential of the said measure of evil to serve as a warning and compensate for mankind's sins related to crimes against nature in the present and past, or 2) the potential of the said measure of evil to affect people around the Earth and rally people toward the Christian God and his teachings." Let's start with the Tsunami. The Tsunami is indeed an evil event, but it's occurrence is fully compensated with definition 1 of the phrase "compensating good." Mankind's first responsibility when he was put onto God's earth was to "care for the garden," and to make sure that the Earth was supervised with integrity. Obviously, mankind has not cared for "God's garden." Man persists in polluting the water, causing disease. Man's persistence in using CFCs, nuclear reactors, oil rigs, etc. etc. etc. and the disasters resulting from these events are far more numerous than the Tsunami. The Tsunami is in fact a disaster "to compensate and serve as a warning for mankind's sins related to crimes against nature in the present and past." Mankind is also an important part of God's garden. I would like to define "deliberate sin" as the "deliberate infliction of pain, suffering, disability, and death" to oneself or others. Without getting into a long protracted discussion about deliberate sin, assuming that the Christian God created mankind, mankind certainly cannot expect God to take immediate action to save them from their own deliberate sin. In short, if you jump off a bridge, don't ask God to save you, because you did it deliberately. If you put a gun to your head, don't ask God to save you, because you did it deliberately. If you take drugs, don't ask God to save you, because you did it deliberately. Let's talk about Down Syndrome. Down Syndrome is a justified evil due to definition 2 of "compensating good." The ultimate goal of our existence, assuming that God exists and that we believe in Him, is to bring his teachings into the lives of other people. We cannot relate to other people unless we have gone through what they are going through. To quote John Clayton: "Some years ago my wife and I decided that as a part of service to the Lord we would adopt some children. We had this child for about six months when we began to recognize that something was not developing normally in the child. While my wife went in to get something at a shopping center, I can remember sitting in the car holding this little baby in my arms, looking into that little face I had grown to love, and saying to God over and over, 'Why Lord, why? Why would you do this to me? After I've sacrificed everything I know to sacrifice. After I've done everything I know to do, why would you do this to me?' I kept reading passages like John 9, "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him." I read passages that said that " … all things work together for good to them that love God …" (Romans 8:28). Because of this experience, I began to realize that I had a talent. I had an ability. I had an opportunity to relate to people to whom no one else in my immediate area could relate. A couple months later when I was in New York I met an elder in the Church who had a Mongoloid (Down syndrome) child. I could relate to him. I could help him realize that there were others who shared his burden and his problem. Sometime later in my own congregation a family that we loved very much had a child born with the same problem. Once again we could help, advise, and relate to their needs. We could help them get programs that were useful to them and to their child. You see I have a talent and an ability that nobody else has in my immediate area relate to people and to bring Christ into the lives of people who are experiencing this kind of difficulty." Furthermore, I would like to state that although I understand and appreciate the concept of "retrospective evidentialism," I must assert that there is no way to prove that it is or that it is not intellectually dishonest to use events to justify previous judgments or viewpoints. Dr. George Kerkut writes in his book, meanings and implications of evolution, that Evolution involves a "forest of many different tree models", not just a single "tree model." According to 1 Corinthians 15:39, there are four kinds of flesh: Birds, beast, fish, and man. Kerkut's viewpoint is remarkably similar to this model in the Bible. Also, I cannot presume to know how God works. Because of these factors, I do not doubt for a second that this form of evolution is compatible with Christian theism. Lastly, I'd like to close by offering some contentions of my own. Our universe arose from a certain point called the Singularity. Matter cannot arise from nothing. In the concept of nothing, there is no space, no matter, and no energy. If matter is able to arise from nothing, even if it was by chance, all our laws of chemistry and physics would have to be instantly invalidated. Therefore, someone or something created the universe. Nobody knows how long it took for the Universe to be created. If Earth and the Universe were created in the same exact instant "in the beginning", which is highly probable, then the Holy Bible is one of the only scriptures to provide rational evidence of Earth's beginnin