As it's required to be a lawyer, the answer must always be "that depends"
First of all, it depends on where in the world you are, since there are different applications and interpretations to "force majeure". I'm since presuming you're in a common law country, and applying the common conceptions of US Law in general.
In this case, we need to trace some comparisons, since, obviously, there's no jurisprudence in the case.
Let's work some scenarios: Is this a known God? If so, how is the literature on its temperament? Is he known to make such displays of power? If you're assuming the risk that he will "behave", than you're very much liable. This would be in line with bringing a Tiger to the party, trusting it being raised by humans and "domesticated" it would pose no danger. It's still a dangerous wild animal, that can react unpredictably, no matter your experience with it.
Otherwise it would be like bringing a friend to a party who you knows like to carry a weapon. Do you know him to be violent? Or is he just a gun guy? If he opens fire in the party, your liability would be directly related to how much of his temperament you had previous knowledge, and how much chance you assumed of him not being violent. It's a judicial battle in which cross examination would be central do the case.
I'm also assuming you had previous knowledge of his "Godly" status, and it's not hapchance that him of all people was your "guest of honor", in which case it would fall under "force majeure".
I'm also discarding his will, and assuming it was an accident, with no intent of hurting and killing people, in which case the questions of "did you know, or had meanings to become knowledgeable about his intentions?" would play the central role in devising your guilt in the matter.
Also, you put him in the status of a "God", and it bears the question, is this a status solely related to his level of overall power, or it has a religion in which he plays a role as revered deity? This would also change how laws would read the situation, because he would no longer be a "regular guy doing unpredictable things", but a true, real and alive deity, which would mean that the religion is much more central to your world, being that the deities are empirically real (as in it's not an act of faith, but a proven fact), and it could be easily dealt in it's own cards, as in it's not supposed to be in your power to control a deity, and his presence is such a high praise and note that's not at all reasonable to expect you wouldn't want him there. Therefore it wouldn't be "force majeure" per se, but it would have the same legal effect.