And in cases where the function of a being is not unique,the goal of enhancing the effectiveness with which a function is performed raises the question of how to weight the competing interests of different functions of the same being.

As an example of this, consider your case of the river.It is effective at several competing functions – transport of precipitated water back to the ocean, carving valleys, filling other valleys and deltas with silt, providing habitat for birds and fishes, etc,etc,etc. Now ask whether drilling a tunnel to bypass a long sweep of the river around a massif (which enhances the water flow at expense of carving), or building a dam (which enhances bird habitat at the expense of some kinds of fishes) is “good for” the river. How can you answer these questions without imposing some relative value on the different functions? And from where can you find that relative value except in your own preferences? (or appeal to authority, the choice of which is really just another expression of personal preference)?

Why is there something rather then nothing? This is because God is a necessary being, he could not fail to exist. As such he is the ground of being, that which everything else that exists derives their beingnes from. The universe, being such a thing is thus derived from Gods being (which is the first being and the necessarily existing being).

As for the praise for the honest atheist—of course I appreciate such emphases. Chapter 3 of my dissertation was devoted to exploring the dynamics by which morality ironically overcomes itself through truthfulness (and, more specifically, we might say the atheist’s truthfulness). The challenge though is also to deal with Nietzsche’s charge that even the freethinkers still have faith insofar as they believe in truth (which makes me cringe at his use of the word faith in such a misleading way). That text is not that hard to contextualize so it does not undermine the kind of things which you just quoted which he says elsewhere, but it is still a moderation of his praise for atheists that needs to be mentioned and allowed to temper.

This is my reading of Nietzsche on morality and it’s so nice to see you interpret him in this way with such clarity and so succinctly. I look forward to your posts when (perhaps) you write about Nietzsche’s claim that rigorously honest atheists are “the most spiritual men [and woman] of today.” (Example, Genealogy of Morals)