Porpoise?

Points in response:

• I agree -- saying, "We’re so constructed as both to love this world and to look beyond it" is indeed an assumption. It's an assumption with a long, long pedigree. Paul alludes to something similar in Romans 1:20. But it's still an assumption; without proof.
  
• I think the key to Knippenberg's "In a random natural world, 'justice' is a human construct and is humanly imposed" is the word "random." I see what he's getting at ... if indeed the natural forces at work are "random" -- bad word, actually: random suggest unordered, which nature is not ... a better word would have been uncaring, or perhaps indiscriminate -- then the concept of justice is indeed of human construction. A tornado can kill an innocent baby as easily as a pedophile on the run, but the killing of the baby is not an injustice if indeed the natural force made no judgment whatever about the relative value of either, or both. The killing of the baby would be simply a fact, but not an injustice.
  
• What I was getting at with my "binary condition" question was whether you allowed for any alternatives between the God of the Bible and a godless existence. I asked because if people are truly faced with only those two extremes, they seem to get very uncomfortable. They desperately want a middle ground, and that's exactly what they opt for ... a sovereign, caring God that oversees things, but one that does not really impose any obligations on us or one that won't really hold us accountable. That's the "Vending Machine Jesus" both you and I seem to rail against. But truth is, that's what the vast majority of people believe in. Just listen to them talk.
  

Personally, I can't quite fathom an existence where there is absolutely no creator being. It makes no sense whatever. I can't get over the "then who or what created things?" question.

The "pros" of that proposition are entirely selfish; the "cons" are many. Religion is the force that controls people's behavior. If we were a planet full of people that truly, sincerely believed there was no God, then we'd be a planet where anarchy and chaos reigned. Some say, "Yeah, but look at modern-day atheists ... they don't rape and pillage!" I say, "That's because they're held in check by a majority who do subscribe to societal norms based on religious beliefs."

You asked why God would create a person who did not want to exist. That's akin to the question why God would create a person that would disobey Him. Or why God allows sin. Or why God allows bad things to happen to good people. My answer ... I don't know. I have my guesses, but I don't know for certain.

The question that rattles around in my mind, relative to your question, is this: Did God create that person without the capacity to want to exist? Or did God create that person with the capacity, but the person chose not to desire existence? If the former, then I have trouble with it. If the latter, then it makes more sense within the framework of my understanding.