Evil Vs. A 3-O God

782 Words4 Pages
The issue that arises most commonly comes when all three of God’s characteristics are observed. As an omnibenevolent being, God, in theory, would not allow evil to plague the earth. One might assume God’s omnipotent nature would discount the existence of evil because he is able to stop it. Along with these, God’s omniscient powers would allow him to know of all of the evil. Therefore, believing God to encompass all of these traits would leave anyone in their right mind wondering how anything bad could ever happen in the world. Some suggest that accepting two of these three qualities allows for the possibility of evil. For example evil could thrive if God were omniscient and omnibenevolent, but not omnipotent. God would then be all-knowing of the evil that takes place. Also, he would crave goodness in the world. But a lack of omnipotence would prevent him from being able to pursue the threat of evil. Similarly, if God were omnipotent, and omniscient, evil could exist. Possessing these attributes would allow God to take any action necessary to rid the world of evil, and he would always know where and when to be in order to do so. However, in the case that he lacked omnibenevolence, evil would still cast a dark shadow in the world because perhaps God does not desire to relieve it. In actuality, God can be all three, and evil can and does exist. This is true because God is not responsible for the evil in the world. Evil blemishes the world wherever the world is lacking in goodness. If evil did not taint the world, the world would lack good and freewill, too. God chose freewill for his people rather than a deficit of evil. To have the freedom to do anything outweighs the sum of the evil in the world. Evil can also be viewed as an alternative to a lack of goodness in the world. Without evil to counter good, good would not
Open Document