God is a cruel, immoral and unjust figure.

I come to realize myself that I cannot agree that god is moral and just, for the logic I obtained below: 1. We assumed god is all-powerful and hence all-knowing before the debate. 2. If god is good, it must not allow an cruel act when it sees one. 3. A god is all knowing and hence will see every act happening. 4. There should not be a cruel act in the world by 3, if god is good. 5. Someone innocent just die of disaster. It is a cruel act. 6. god is not good because there are cruel acts. OMG I just disagree with my own stance? O.O Well I was out of points as I did not read the bible or any god related books, but then I noticed that even that god is not good, it can also be not bad :D. And by some logical reasoning, I form the following similar to above arguments: 1. We assumed god is all-powerful and hence all-knowing before the debate. 2. If god is bad, it must make someone suffer when it sees one not suffering. 3. A god is all knowing and hence will see every act happening. 4. There should not be someone not suffering in the world by 3, if god is bad. 5. A forest fire just got extinguished by a sudden rain. this is a good act. 6. god is not bad because there are good acts. By your point (1), just like how you can bring out as many evidences on how god's evil act can signals his immorality, I can bring forward good acts to state that he has his moral side. So, by logical sense, god cannot be all immoral, just like how god cannot be all moral, if god were to be all-knowing and all-powerful. By opposing your first point, I bring forward my standing that "God cannot be a cruel, immoral, unjust figure, because god is neutral." I think now is the good timing to elaborate my first point: [1] The light cannot be formed without the dark, peace cannot be known without war, good cannot be defined without the bad. We do not know that a line is curved if we never saw a straight one. The term "cruel" you are using is only a relative term to the existence of good acts. The fallacy we are doing here when we think god to be all-knowing and all-powerful, we assumed directly an all-knowing god should only do good things, as good things are the right thing to do. Our knowledge is insufficient, and the term "good" is only a relative term we made to differentiate bad. And here is the problem, god did not define the term good himself, we are the one that did it. God might have other definition of what is right to do, so we cannot say god is immoral by the fact there are cruel acts alongside good acts. Then it seems I have to oppose your (2), wow I'm getting tired of typing. I'll just oppose your point and post my points at the same time. [2] I'm a lazy person, so I'll simply say iUderdog points are my points to the direct opposition to your point two :D. Then I'll add that, from my [1], I said that the mere bad examples do not justify directly god is immoral, because there are also good examples, this only strengthen the possibility that god is neutral. Also, now my second point is there are other teachings other than the bible as well, example buddhists believe the idea of Dukkha which supports suffering as a means to greater self, so you cannot simply use the bible. And all religions are founded and preached by humans, there can be distortions during the thousand years preaching, as they were not backed with solid logical proofs like what we do in science today. So, since the evidence of teachings we think we know from god have weak supporting evidence, you have to put forward evidences of the trustworthiness of the teaching before stating its bad :P.