I just want to know if there is any t.v. up in heaven so the Angeles and GOD can see us from Heaven especially Elvis Presley can see me from Heaven making things right with him

Jesus Christ was more free than us, yet was incapable of sin. The souls in heaven are more free than us, yet they are incapable of sin.

I think you are using the word "incapable" to mean unable, but incapable could also mean "choosing" but not choosing unwisely.

"It's commonly thought that the reason he [creates us with the ability to reject him] is that, if he didn't let people freely choose between good and evil then they would just be puppets--programmed robots."

There really is no Catholic teaching supporting this. In fact, it supports the opposite. The less capable we are of choosing evil, (i.e beholding the Beatific Vision) the more free we become. The souls in heaven, as you mentioned, are incapable of sin, yet are more free than us. For, freedom itself is defined as the ability to choose the good. Being incapable of choosing evil is the purest instantiation of freedom, it seems. Freedom has never been defined as simply a choice between good and evil anyway. It's a choice between perceived goods.

Then, when you pose the question "Why didn't God create us initially with the Beatific vision" you end up answering "God wants us to freely choose to commit to him--or not." Again, this cannot be the answer. Jesus Christ was more free than us, yet was incapable of sin. The souls in heaven are more free than us, yet they are incapable of sin.

I don't see how Catholicism can answer the objection that God could have just created us with the Beatific Vision originally, considering it's not something that can be earned to begin with. It's an infinitely disproportionate reward compared to whatever actions we take, including loving God himself.

What I meant is that there is no way to solve the problem of evil when you adopt the pressupositions inherent in Christian theology (any version of it). But, in my view, there is no compeling reason to adopt these pressupositions. In fact, "theology" is invention and all "theological problems" have no merit. In this sense, is pointless trying to solve this problem. It doesn't really exist, like the Christian god. I think this is precisely the point advanced by Epicurus. Argumentum ad absurdum...

I agree that Christian theology is a problem. But I fail to see how that makes evil a false problem.

>I've answered it three times!
Are we having the same conversation?

Tell me how an atheist can say raping a child is always wrong. Where is his source for morality?

I've answered your question three times, which you've ignored, and you've refused to answer any of mine. "Letting me off" LOL try again.

I'm not letting you off that quickly. You imply there are alternatives to atheists besides subjective morality.

Tell me, for an atheist, what is the basis for an objective morality? Be clear.

Therefore, they have no standard of morality, it's all relative.

Incorrect. Some agree with this, others don't, to another extent it's semantics.

I notice you haven't addressed the standards that people are responsible for the foreseeable consequences of the choices they make, or that suffering an eternity of torment is an extremely negative outcome. You're the one who supposedly has standard of morality when others don't - do you disagree with those statements ?

Dodging the question. Atheists disbelieve (or 'lack belief' if you prefer), in God. Therefore, they have no standard of morality, it's all relative.

Is raping children always wrong? Yes or no? If you say it is, then what's your standard for that morality? Who decides it's always wrong?

If you say it isn't, there's nothing left to discuss.