Why are we here?

[KevinM1]

Morally perfect?  Really?  This is circular logic at its finest/worst.  God is morally perfect because the bible demands you take its word for it rather than going by the actual actions described in the book itself.  God's immorality begins in Genesis chapter 2 and continues throughout.  You hand wave the atrocities described within because of a book - whose only authority on the matter comes from itself - tells you to.  Utterly ridiculous.

As far as not being able to have sin in its presence, it sounds like your god is a wuss.  Surely the almighty - which created everything, including, presumably, sin itself - should be able to handle it in a better way than sending those who have sinned to eternal torture.  Moreover, it brings up all the problems that have never received an adequate answer, such as:

Why did god create creatures that are at least as likely to fail as to succeed?  Even with free will, he could've made us more likely to follow his lead than not.
Why does he continue to create creatures that are destined to sin, and thus go to hell?  Isn't that incredibly wasteful?
Why does a perfect being desire us to rejoin him?  Doesn't want/desire point to imperfection?
Why hell, which isn't corrective, and not some other mechanism?
Why doesn't he simply provide unambiguous evidence of his existence and power, thereby greatly reducing the number of people who are sent to hell?
etc.
etc.

I deem your god petty because he thinks a finite crime, even those that don't actually hurt anyone (like unbelief) to be worthy of eternal torture.  Saying, "Well, the bible says he's just, so it's just" is laughable.  And, no, arguments from ignorance aren't going to cut it as a response.

God's "immoral" acts in the OT does not advance your argument against the existence of God. You would have to demonstrate that God either 1) did not have the right or 2) did not have suffient reasons for doing what he did. Since, if Christianity is true, everyone is eventually judged for their actions, you can't claim 1.  Since you do not possess an infinite mind that can grasp the trillions of consequences of each action, you cannot claim 2: God did not have sufficient reason.

Your entire 'reasoning' already already presupposes the existence of your god, so your argument is fallacious.  Regarding 1, the notion of might makes right is inherently immoral.  Just because, for argument's sake, your god created the universe, it does not follow that he should be judge, jury, and executioner over it.  If we have free will, then treating us as objects to be discarded in a pit of fire for simply not giving god what it wants is immoral.  Your god is supposedly infinite, yet the only system it can come up with is one that results in no chance to learn and change?

And your response to 2 is simply the argument from ignorance fallacy.  You need to do better than that in defense of your god.

I'm assuming you're an American.  It never ceases to amaze me how people who claim to value freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility in this life are so willing to be ruled by a monarch in the next.  It's utterly baffling to me that anyone would want to be, literally, lorded over.

Sin was not created. The possibility of sin is a result of free will. It would be defined by an act of commission or omission that violates Gods moral law as revealed in 1) the OT and 2) the NT.

And yet, your god supposedly created the entire universe, including the notion of free will.  Sin not being created is simply not true if you believe god created everything.  You can't have it both ways.  Moreover, your god should be able to handle sin without requiring the wishy washy blood sacrifice of itself/its son.  Of course, the entire notion of original sin is idiotic and immoral anyway.  Every action your god does simply places more limitations on it and damages its character.  It's lessened at every turn.

This brings us back to the point made several times, God made us because God wants us to have a relationship with him.

Which, again, implies that your god is lacking.

Sin prevents this. The crime is not unbelief. It is simply that we have sinned and that sin needs to be attoned for. Attonement has been provided. The choice is ours.

This is such bullshit.  Nothing I have done in my life warrants eternal torture.  Period.  That you're so okay with it speaks volumes about your own character.  The whole setup is one of extortion.  "Well, you can either have a relationship with me, or suffer for eternity.  It's your choice."  Except, it's not really a fair choice, is it?  It's a wholly despicable system, with god as the tyrant at the top.  Fuck him.

You think the consequences of a lifetime of not being interested in a relationship with God should have some corrective finite punishment. God apparently feels that was enough.

God acted very directly in the days of the ancient Jews. Then through the prophets. Then through the events of the NT. For the past 2000 years, Christians have been able to live with a personal relationship with God. Notice the progression of interations? For many reasons, we are in the best of those periods of God's interation with us. God apparently considers his previous revelations and the evidence of the now-possible relationship (changed lives of Christians) to be sufficient evidence to his existence.

Blah blah blah.  Lots of words saying nothing of value.  "I believe that god is right before considering the evidence, and in the face of such evidence I simply point to its mysterious ways as a way to wave away the contradictions."  Your version of apologetics is really quite hilarious since it merely only reinforces all of the stereotypes with your regurgitation of tired fallacies and talking points.