[Serious] What God's justification for eternal torment?

[R00tKiT]

You're the one who just told us that earthquakes were a demon doing random bad shit.  Heaven forfend you were being disingenuous or just plain stupid. 

I am afraid you're missing the point. The idea is not that the demon provoking earthquakes exists, or may exist, it's simply that you cannot rule it out. If you cannot rule out an alternative explanation to all evil, then your argument for the nonexistence of a benevolent god who gave us free will [because there is too much evil] no longer works.

That has to be the cutest and quickest retraction from a batshit claim that I've ever witnessed. 

Who cares if it's batshit ? The important thing is that it dismantled the argument. A random imaginary demon that can't be excluded seems to account for all the atheist's objections to evil. That's it. The logical problem of evil... is no longer a problem.

I really don't understand what's so compelling about this problem. It clearly isn't a problem for any theist believing that God gave us free will. Maybe it's a more serious one for christians, who consider God an all-loving deity , that loves them so much it died for their sins [and condemns some of them to eternal punishment at the same time]

Human beings also disagree on the answer to 2+2.  Disagreement is not an argument against objectivity or for a god.  It's not even a credible suggestion on it's own grounds.  People disagree -with- gods, and in a universe in which god exists, allegedly.

Okay. If all human beings agree on what 2 and + stand for, then there should be no disagreement about 2+2, if someone disagrees nonetheless, then he is demonstrably mistaken. I should've been more carful with the word disagreement, as it should only entail, in this context, the kind of disagreement that can't be settled by a simple appeal to logical rules.

Not the same thing can be said about moral issues, good and evil are hard to define, unless one copies some verse from some scripture doing so. As a result there are many controversial issues that people will never agree on such as abortion, homosexuality, emancipation of women, etc.
It's true that there are some moral golden rules out there, but again, what makes them authoritative ?

Though, at the end of the day I agree with you, for things to be right or wrong there must be some moral authority, and that moral authority can't be swayed one way or another by a moral agents existence or it's own moral disagreement with that authority.  Your god is an asshole, or there are asshole demons your god can't handle (or maybe earthquakes don't have anything to do with gods or demons)...hardly matters to me, doesn't matter at all to objective moral claims.

And now you have a new problem, what moral authority to pick. If this absolute moral agent doesn't exist, then clearly there is no exemplary moral code to follow. And one might simply adopt his country's criminal law, for example, as the list of good/bad actions. But again, criminal law changes from one country to another.

I'm not sure what you're driving at, though, mentioning demons and earthquakes. You don't seem to understand the point of invoking the imaginary demon. Again, it clearly shows that atheist's attempt to disprove the existence of a three omni god based on evil is a non sequitur.