I agree, and would add that, in my experience, one of the key errors in thinking by atheists is their attempts to describe God’s attributes, including the things He would do or not do. They kind of undermine their own arguments by doing this since they move to the realm of metaphysics, the very place they deny exists.
I would assert that this is not logical, or sincere, discussion but posturing using rhetoric. It is certainly not scientific.
That’s an excellent point, and I would tend to agree with you. Here’s the thing, though, we (and I use that term advisedly) cannot begin to try and address the majority of believers in scientific terms, so often do try to present arguments based on metaphysics, which probably can’t help but turn out badly. However, I would argue that the same Bible that’s available to you is available to us, and we’re certainly free to use it to make an attempt to describe God’s attributes. I myself don’t do this, and I don’t think it’s a good idea for non-believers to do it, but I can see how it happens.
Is it an error to point out that this supposedly infinitely-compassionate, omniscient being created humanity with the full and precise foreknowledge that billions of people would stray from His One True Path - and that he also created Hell in order to punish those (an eternity of torment for only a lifetime of sin) who strayed? Why create beings with the full foreknowledge that you wil just consign them to eternal torment? Does this perfectly reasonable exercise in logic have a flaw? Could someone please show me where that flaw might be? Or is it just “The Lord Works in Mysterious Ways” - that tired old cop-out. Why would anyone want to: 1) believe in a deliberately-malign deity, 2) Want to worship such a deity? I hear Christians always talking about the Creation as an act of Love - was it an act of Love to create Hell? I’d say it was the worst act of sadism ever if it was true.