So let me get this straight:
God is going to have to beg your forgiveness for the evil perpetrated by human beings?
I can just about understand blaming God for natural disasters (although not really because, clue is in the title, they are natural). Or blaming God for twists of fate (although not really because, clue is in the title, they are fateful).
But who on God’s earth could possibly sanely want to blame God for the evil of man?
Only if you think of god as a creator who did, in some way, deliberately design suffering in to human lives… How cruel would that be!
For us at the current time, existence involves suffering — but the alternative (non-existence) is arguably a worse alternative. However, when you look at pictures like the one at the top — or experience any amount of real suffering — it is easy to think non-existence would be better.
Possibly a more useful question than “does G/god exist ?” is “For the aim of maximum benefit, what use or uses should we use the word ‘God’ for ?”
— I do not think scapegoat is a good choice.
I tend to think that the best use for the word God is “god like a possibility” — possibility in the existential sense ie. a possibility of or for being — not possibility as in possible vs. not possible.
God as a possibility is god as an opening for action. I would prefer not to be deprived of that — especially in moments of greatest peril.
The philosophical tradition
The two greatest thinkers of the last century, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger, although neither exactly dedicated theologians, both give us major clues about the what to use the word “god” for.
“God is the meaning of the world”
~ Ludwig Wittgenstein
“Only a God can save us”
~ Martin Heidegger