Christian belief in eternal torment is indefensible.

"1. God already knew most would reject. 2. God chose to create us anyway." I aggre with these premises. "3. Therefore, God followed through with a plan that results in billions of people ending up in eternal torment." God "knowing" that most would reject is not what caused them to reject, so God doesn't bear responsibility for them rejecting the message. Past experience might teach you that a person will act unwisely because it is their habit, but your "knowledge" of this doesn't cause you to bear blame for their actions. I am suggesting, that God's foreknowlege of how we will choose to use our free will doesn't imbue him with any blame for our actions. If I know that you are going to loose this debate, is it might fault that you lost? Conversely, if I know you will win, is it my fault that you win? If we know the sun will rise tomorrow, is it our fault that it does? No! Knowlege of the future doesn't imbue the knower with responsibility for the actions taken by the entities it has this knowlege of. God creating us is not what caused any of us to reject Christianity. Simply having conscious existence doesn't cause anyone to reject Christianity, so God is not to blame here either. A man's parents gave him birth, the man rejects atheism, should his parents be blamed for his rejecting atheism later in life just because they gave him birth? If my opponent is going to blame God for the actions of free moral agrents just because he gave them life, he must blame all parents for the actions of their children because they gave these human life too, for his logic to be consitent. The Christian teaching is that God made man with free will, and man choose to use that free will to disobey him. So God never made man in an imperfect state; but gave man a perfect start. Also, God does not create of physical bodies, for if he did, he would be the author of evey baby borned deformed. Rahter, it is our spirits and souls he creates, while our bodies come from the natural process of sperm and egg developing into the human body. The word "plan" is used in point #3. The word "plan" would make it sound like God planed (orchestrated) man's sin, which is incorrect. God didn't plan a world where any were unbelievers. Rather, God's purpose (plan) was for all to obey him and live forever in good conditions; but when humans used their freewill to turn against God and reject his original plan, God then revealed his plan of redemption in which those who were willing would accept the truth and live in happiness forever. He didn't plan who or how many would accept, for that is a free choice; it just so happens that only few would accept it. "This is absurd cruelty. And frankly, I don't even feel I need to explain why because it is self-evident." If giving people free choice and then punishing them for using that freedom in an evil way, then the entire justice system in all the earth is cruel for putting people through the horrors of life in prison for using their free will to commit heinous crimes. This reasoning is flawed. My oppoent seems to think that a doctrine cannot be true if it "appears" to be cruel "to him," and yet, what is cruelty? Wikipedia defines it this way: "Cruelty can be described as indifference to suffering, and even positive pleasure in inflicting it." Now, the Bible says that God does not even delight in the death of the wicked, so God doesn't enjoy punishing them anymore than parents enjoy punishing their children. (Eze 33:11) Is God "indifferent" to suffering? No. He's not. If he were, he would not put in place a means by which people can be saved from sin and gain life in paradise free from suffering, but those who refuse to take hold of this opportunity will indeed suffer. This doesn't mean God is indifferent. For example; if you see a man locked up in a cell with poor bathroom facilities, no entertainment, no freedom, and you find out that this man is a serial killer and rapist doing time in prison, would you help him out? Chances are, you're not going to help this man get out, but does it make you indifferent to suffering? No; it makes you just. Justice is being served. Watching the wicked suffer hurst God, but justice has to be served. They have sinned against an eternal God, and the consequence os sin are eternal. "It is my firm conviction that people who accept this are: A. In denial because they have not considered how repulsive this is, or B. Do not love as Jesus commanded. Jesus said to love your enemies, so anyone who believes this should have trouble sleeping at night, to say the least!" Loving their kids doesn't mean parents shouldn't punish them. God loves us, but that doesn't conflict with his giving just punishment for our sins. "Humans did NOT create hell, nor did humans choose to be born in the first place." Agreed. "God's insistence that all non Christians remain conscious throughout eternity, rather than be wiped out of existence, is indefensible." Gpd created us to live forever, why should he change his plans now to spare wayward people who chose that suffering for themselves anyway? "And this does not take into account the fact that evidence for God is inconclusive at best. Not only that, but even if there were evidence for God it would not mean Christianity is the correct version of God. Granted, evidence for God is outside the scope of this debate, but many intelligent, sincere truth seekers do not believe in God. Certainly others do believe in Christianity, which shows my original contention that evidence is inconclusive." Many sincere seekers of truth believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy, and that man never landed on the moon, and that reptillian aliens are ruling the world. Many sincere seekers of truth also believe in God, the devil, and the tooth fairy. Hailey (after whom Hailey's Comet is named) believed the hollow earth theory. So persons belief or lack of belief in a thing is no evidence for or against it. Truth isn't decided by vote, so this argument is flawed. The evidence for God is actually very weighty, and just because some don't accept it doesn't mean it is lacking in any respect. It is just as clear as the planes that crashed into the twin towers. In fact, it is so clear, that the majority of the world's population bleieve in God or at least in the supernatural. There certainly are more theists than atheists on earth. The evidence for God includes such things as (1) the existence of absolute moral values, (2) inference to the best explanation for the orgin of information in the cell and DNA, (3) the fine-tuning of the constants of the universe, etc. But God's existence isn't the topic of this debate. "I agree with the common saying that God can neither be proved nor disproved." To whom? God cannot be proved to them whose heart and mind are closed to the evidence, but it convinces many others. What is proof anyway? "According to your belief, most are headed to hell (Mathew 7:13-14). So, either the way to salvation is too difficult, or humans are flawed. If the way to salvation is too difficult, God must bear some responsibility. Or, if humans are flawed, then the creator of humans (God) must bear some responsibility." Neither! The way of sin is easier to follow, that doesn't mean the road to salvation is too difficult. Those who get saved face the same problems as those who don't, and all are human beings, so if these can accept the way of salvation so can all others. What it means is that people find the instant gratification of sins more appealing that having to wait until the resurrection in the next life to enjoy the full benefits of salvation. Why? Becasue humans are flawed as my opponent says, but no fault of God's. Our human ancestors used their free will to become sinners, and since then we are born with sinful bodies. God didn't make it this way, so he's not to blame. He provided a remedy that will one day permanently fix this problem.