How many of those papers and studies you cited were done cross-culturally?
Why is that relevant? If psychopaths clearly have very different brain structures or empathic centers, I cant imagine what examining the brains of people of other cultures would achieve. We have one person who has a typical empathic response, and we have another person who doesn't have that response, accompanied with genetic differences in brain structure, proving that some people, of no fault of their own, cannot feel guilt, and if guilt is important in salvation, it's entirely not their fault, and they are victims of a not quite so benevolent deity.
Do you see the problem there?
Well, I do in relation to transgenderism, not so much psychopathy.
. It's not that he causes them to happen, he allows them to happen.
But doesnt the act of "disciplining" someone involve, well, disciplining them, rather than allowing them to be disciplined? You stated "Why does God do this?" clearly defining it as an act, something God does. This also conflicts with your other statement. "That is why God brings so much difficulty into the life of a believer." Even this, I think, does not make much sense. How can God "allow" someone to become, for instance, depressed? Which is one of the things you mentioned. That's illogical. If you had the ability, you could make someone have depression, allowing them to have depression on the other hand, I think, is not something that makes much sense. And if God, for instance, "allows" someone to get beat by their parent in some cases, and in other cases, prevents the child from being beaten. How does he do this? Well, one would assume that he is possessing the mind of the parent to prevent this, which would destroy the idea of free will consequently.
Your idea of what God should be.
Well, frankly, I've no idea of what God "should" be, I do, however, think I know when a characterisic of his is illogical. For instance, "allowing" people to become depressed as a means to discipline them, doesn't exactly seem too logical. The number one cause of suicide is depression, so if allowing someone to have depression (Interestingly enough, preventing someone from having depression would involve very complex manipulation of chemicals in the brain, making the idea of free will suspicious) is a means to discipline them and set them on the righteous or narrow path, then it clearly isn't working very well, is it?
- reveal Himself in a way that there is irrefutable proof that He exists.
Well, from a logical standpoint, if his desire is to make people follow the holy, righteous, narrow, path, it might make more sense to appear to these people, rather than allow them to have suicidal depression and end up killing themselves. I dont think one needs to be particularly knowledgeable to understand which of the two would be more effective in helping people?
never punish anyone for anything that they've done
If he has, we're clearly not seeing it, at least in this reality. If anything, some of the most evil, psychopathic and corrupt of us are the millionaires and billionaires, making the lives of the rest of humanity, people who are likely by comparison much kinder and empathetic, a living hell.
typical atheist/agnostic diatribe
I don't think I was being bitter or aggressive. I was merely trying to pick apart your arguments.
concerning isolated peoples and societies that have never heard the Christian gospel, and what happens to them and what the consequences are, and why God would allow that.
Well, if following Christian guidelines is a means into heaven, and isolated peoples such as the Inuits have never heard these teachings, then they are destined to go to hell of no fault of their own, even if they live as closely as possible to the ethical guidelines of their own societies, which has no logical backing, and cannot be said to be anything other than cruel imo