The "problem of evil" I spoke of has nothing to do with a generic or personal interpretation or extrapolation. That doesn't mean your atheist opinion doesn't count. It just isn't relevant to what I originally said. I explained why, you took offense at me having to explain, and went straight back to an out of context, irrelevant rant, prompting further explanation of con ...[text shortened]... where one side eventually has to give up and move on. Oh I know. It sure as hell won't be you, eh?
I didn't misunderstand. I didn't take offence. I didn't rant about anything. I didn't say anything irrelevant to the notions regarding "the problem of good" and "the problem of evil".
There is no "game of chicken" going on here, as you put it, at least on my part. And any "rabbit holes" you perceive are perhaps in your mind. You appear to be trying to poison the well by introducing all these gimmicky rhetorical notions. You should try to post in a more principled way.
I don't see how explicit atheists attributing their disbelief to "the problem of evil" amounts to anything very convincing with regard to the existence of a supernatural being because it really is nothing more than a critique of particular religious concepts and assertions promoted by theists.
I see theists and atheists arguing about whether "the problem of evil" - as if it proves or disproves the existence of God - as being a debate that resides in a discursive cul-de-sac. This is certainly not "out of context", as you claim.