From guest blogger, Allie G.
Assuming evil and proof of compensation for such acts exist in this world, a necessarily moral and omniscient God would have to be the source for such compensation. In establishing whether or not God can make wrongs right, it is important to understand the limitations of an omniscient God. It can be said that God only allows human action but does not directly cause them, is capable of anything logically, morally, and physically possible, possesses the most relative power, morally justifies evil acts, and compensates for such evil acts. In the first and second case, God has been reduced to the power level of a human and can no longer be regarded as omniscient. In the third case, God has allowed/actualized evil and can no longer be regarded as omnibenevolent. By the definition of omniscience, God must be capable of actualizing all that he wills, all acts performed, all acts to be performed, all acts being conducted, morally justify all acts, provide compensation for evil acts, and be incapable of performing evil acts in the first place.
Such limitations on God’s power do not weaken the argument for his existence. Clarifications are made as follows: an evildoer not God performs such evil acts, God is capable of compensating for evil because he does it all the time, and God does compensate for evil through his Divine Gratitude. However, these seeming clarifications incite prior responses. In case one, God is defying his omnipotent nature. In case two and three, God is defying his omniscient nature. This circular yields the following argument:
P1: Evil exists
P2: A necessarily omnipotent God would be responsible for actualizing all acts performed, all acts being conducted, and all acts that will be conducted.
P3: A necessarily morally perfect God could not actualize evil acts and must compensate for all evil acts.
P4: If God exists, then he must possess the three Os.
P5: Any being lacking three Os cannot be God.
P6: God does not exist.
Conclusion: Therefore, God cannot compensate for evil.