[sigma]

How can God exist as an extension of benevolence and also moral good if he is omnipotent and merciless? That is illogical. You can't just discuss this as a conundrum, either. It's paradoxical, and needs to be addressed.

Colloquial usage of the word "good" or "great" does not always imply a value-judgment, but may just be shorthand of conveying that you enjoyed a particular experience. But when you literally mean something is "good", I don't know what that would mean. A person does not contain some ethereal essence of good. An object is not made of "moral" molecules. And an action or intention does not emit "moral" wavelengths. So what does calling something good mean if you're not just expressing merely an emotion you literally have access to?

1. You can but it's weird
2. Objectively define morals, this is what religious books attempt to do. All-good means nothing in relation to God, when God is the definition of good.

God isn't the definition of good, he's the *assumption* of it. Assumptions aren't based in logic or truth. They're conclusions jumped to by people afraid to do the math.