The Irrelevance of ‘Time-till-Death’; Relevance solely of ‘Actions-till-Death’
Suppose we adopt the premise of existence of God. Suppose also that God applies an optimization algorithm — in context of which man dies at the time that, with God all-seeing, God infers emergence of actions or events, which otherwise (absent death at timing of God’s choice) transpire, whose adverse and harmful implications are significant in magnitude for any or all of the man in question; the man’s loved ones; or the society at large — to the determination of the timing of death.
Suppose then that a man is living a good life, that is, loves his or her neighbors. Well, it really would be egregious for the man to fall off the wagon, that is, begin to do wrong to his or her neighbors. Clearly, God is both magnanimous and benevolent to choose the timing of death of such a man to occur just prior to his or her foreseen devolution into wrong behavior.
Within context of the already stated premise, and with focus solely on man that is good to his or her neighbor, there is not any chink in the inference that ‘God is Magnanimous and Benevolent’.
God sending a warning to a man who hitherto had been good, to wit, a turn towards wrong actions would nullify prior goodness, qualitatively is equivalent to a choosing of time-of-death for the same man.
The rationale for the qualitative equivalence? Typically, “a word is enough for the wise.”
Suppose, on the other hand, that a man is not nice to his or her neighbors. Again, if God anticipates that the man will devolve to actions so egregious as to place his or her neighbors in extreme danger, the choice by God that the man dies prior to engagement with said egregious actions evinces God’s magnanimity and benevolence.