Not as shocking as someone actually commenting on the original topic of the thread. Welcome to the forum.Pattern-chaser said: I am stunned that this old saw still merits discussion on forums like this one.
I presume the God being referenced is the Christian Omniscient/Omnipotent/Omnibenevolent diety. As you correctly point out, the latter attribute and/or one of the others is incompatible with material existence.
Understandably, most people have a problem worshipping a god who is fickle when it comes to good and evil. If He is truly omnibenevolent, then we must presume that he is not omnipotent or omniscient. If I had to pick one deficit, I'd go with non-omnipotent, because who wants an uniformed god?
His other potential alibi would be that he is concerned not with our physical health but with our metaphysical health, i.e., the welfare and progress of our immaterial soul, but that leaves us with the riddle of the nature and purpose of this spiritual "progress."