Another hypothetical for theists.

[GrandizerII]

A world in which killing, for whatever reason, is a necessity is a world that is much more likely under naturalism than under supernatural theism (especially one that posits a loving and caring deity).

You are entitled to your opinion. IMO your certainty is unjustified and not a sound basis on which to make any theological pronouncements. Personally, I don't know as a logical certainty that a world without bloodshed can be attained without sacrificing other potentially greater goods of which I am not aware.

If you disagree with what I said, then there's something not right with your reasoning, because such a disagreement implies that the likelihood of a world without bloodshed is higher under naturalism than under theism. This is clearly not rational.

Note we're not talking logical certainties here, we're doing probabilities.