To be able to say that God never fails you means that you need to have some criteria in place as to what constitutes a failure on God’s part. What exactly is that? I’m sure your average Christian/Muslim/Whatever would have no clue and wouldn’t even begin to try to determine such criteria, because they have the mindset that God never fails and have that mindset from the beginning.
Nevertheless, how can we ever make a claim that he hasn’t failed us when all we ever do is look at the times we had a positive result and praised God for it, while flagging all the negative results away as the fault of some other factor apart from God? Why should God be praised for the things he does do, but yet be excused for the things he doesn’t do? Why the double standard?
Let’s look at a Maths exam for instance… and before someone cries out “God will not be tested!” let’s just assume that he can be… and let’s face it religious folk test God all the time with their prayers, even thought they may not see it as a test. There are rigidly defined ways to show a pass or a failure on the part of the Maths student. Eg, Get 50% or more and you pass. Get less than 50% and you fail.
Now imagine that God was the student taking the test. If we go by the way a Christian determines a result, this would be the outcome:
50% or more = God passes. Hallelujah, he’s a genius! (even if he only passes by 1%)
Less than 50%
Possible reasons for failure:
I maintain that God, if he exists, does fail. It’s just that Christians will only ever focus on the times where he supposedly passed or try to justify his failures. Nevertheless, I am more inclined to believe that the reason God didn’t pass the test was because he was never around to pass any tests, ie, he is non existent.
Assuming he does exist… and if religious people cannot create some specific criteria to determine whether God has failed or not, how can anyone take them seriously when they claim “God never fails”? They can’t, it’s as simple as that.