Since, on here you only seem to show benevolence to those you like or those you consider 'on you team' Dicky I'm not sure you can make pronouncements on omnibenevolence with anything like certainty.
And there was me thinking that I was in a team of one! I do wish you could rid yourself of this annoying habit of thinking in such binary terms. Ironically though, the synoptic gospels give clear indications that the historical Jesus himself was primarily concerned with those "on his team" (i.e.Jews), and only came to acknowledge the significance of people from other nations if he was convinced of their genuine faith in Israel's God. Such a reading naturally conflicts with other statements in the synoptics and elsewhere that indicate that he had a universalist message. I believe that the scriptures relating to the two points of view are irreconcilable - you have to believe in one or the other.
There is of course a troublesome text (found in some early manuscripts) which states that "Jesus was angry" (Mark 1:41) when asked by a paralytic? man to heal him......
There are huge problems nailing benevolence down definitionally.
Problems which Omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence won't have since they are far, far more clear cut.
I think you'll find that all the latter have some sizable problems of their own. The last has caused oceans of ink to be eked out, from the Jewish concept of Tzintzum, to Milton: "Boundless the Deep, because I am who fill
Infinitude, nor vacuous the space.
Though I uncircumscrib'd my self retire,
And put not forth my goodness, which is free
To act or not,..." or something
PL, Book 7
