>>You're confusing His all-powerfullness with His choices.
>
>Lets assume god existed. If he didn't want people to suffer, and he was all powerful, he woud not let people suffer. But, people suffer. So, either he is not all powerful, or eliminating human suffering is not something he is particularly concerned about.
>
>Could be both, either way, it HAS to be one of them, correct? Whichever you choose, I don't think I want to spend my life pursuing a deity who can't live up to the hype.
>
>At this point, your god's existence is not even desirable, much less useful.


Ugh...I should know better than get in these discussions....But....(I'm actually more agnostic) but there are more possible answers to your question than the answers you provided.

In order to be truly free, you have to be free to make your own decisions. In order for things to have any meaning, you choices have to have consequences. Have you ever played any games in "God" mode? I can normally only play it that way for a short period of time, because after a while, it becomes pointless; you can't lose so winning is meaningless. So is it too big of a leap in logic to assume that if there was a God, that he/she/it understands this? Apply these same priciples to life and I think you've added another possibility to your list of options: If there is a God, he may NOT want human suffering but in order to allow us to be free, can't/won't intervene.