I'd like some feedback on the following approach. The evangelist begins with some basic law/gospel about how our sins make us worthy of condemnation and that the only salvation is found by trust in Jesus who died on the cross so that whoever believes in him will have eternal life and the warning that those who reject the free offer will suffer forever in Hell. The atheist objects that Hell is tyrannical and that if it existed it would make God into a monster. The evangelist responds that while it is true that justice requires punishment for every evil deed, it is also true that every pleasure and pleasant thing comes from a gift of the Lord. So any person who rejects God also rejects all of his good gifts. In a certain sense, the person who goes to Hell gets exactly what he wanted which is alienation from God, but he is also alienated from all his benefits. The atheist disagrees and when pressed says that even though he does not believe in God, his life right now is pretty good and something that he is fairly happy with. He doesn't feel like there is a void in his life that needs to be filled by God to make him happy. The evangelist responds that God loves the atheist so much that even if he never repents and remains an unbeliever and enemy of God forever that he still gives him so many gifts in this life: air to breathe, food to eat, a career, a family, air conditioning, health, and all kinds of luxuries. All these things God gives to people who are his enemies because of the general love he has for them and that there is a great danger in presuming that these general gifts will remain forever when the recipient hates the giver. God actually promises that after death there will be total alienation that removes even the most general and slightest of gifts to the point that there is absolutely nothing good that they have since they rejected the giver. The atheist has mistaken God's kindness towards him as evidence that rejection of God will work out for him, when God promises it will not. Any thoughts on this argument?