Confusing Categories and Common Sense

"How can you hate something that doesn't exist?"

These words were spoken by a friend of mine to someone he knows. My friend doesn't pride himself on his education or his intelligence: he doesn't have reason to be prideful in these regards. He isn't pompous, but very humble. He doesn't really consider himself an authority on anything. But he has common sense.

Many lack common sense, though. You see, my friend was in a conversation with a self-proclaimed atheist who at times would say he doesn't believe in God and other times would say he hates God. My friend's question is a logical question to ask the confused atheist. Hating something and not believing in something are two different things.

And so it is with many people. A tragic event strikes someone's life. "How could God let this happen to me. He must not be good at all." I suppose that sentiment, while misguided, doesn't contain any logical fallacies. But the logical fallacy isn't far behind for most people asking that question. "God isn't good, so he must not be there." And here this person has confused the categories again. It doesn't follow that God must not exist because tragic things happen. Tragic things may happen for a number of reasons (and some people doubt the goodness of God as a reason), but a person cannot doubt the existence of God because of those tragic things. It is two different categories. I would rephrase my friend's question in a lot of different ways, then:

How can you be upset at a God who's not there?

How can you expect goodness from a God who you don't think is good?

How can you expect goodness from a God who you don't think is there?

Simply based on our empirical knowledge, then, we have three conclusions. Either 1) There is no God and everything is a vast wasteland of meaninglessness or 2) God is there but he isn't good or 3) God is there and he is good. (Of course: other options exist for those in a different worldview, but for those who generally take to assume monotheism, these are the only conclusions).

Given the amount of goodness in the world, I opt for number 3.