View source for Omnibenevolence

{{Short description|Property of possessing maximal goodness}}
{{Attributes of God}}

'''Omnibenevolence''' is the property of possessing maximal goodness. Some philosophers, such as [[Epicurus]],{{efn|The earliest statement of the problem of evil is attributed to Epicurus, but this attribution is uncertain.}} have argued that it is impossible, or at least improbable, for a deity to exhibit such a property alongside [[omniscience]] and [[omnipotence]], as a result of the [[problem of evil]]. However, some philosophers, such as [[Alvin Plantinga]], argue the plausibility of [[Alvin Plantinga's free will defense|co-existence]].

==Etymology==
The word ''omnibenevolence'' derives from the Latin prefix ''omni''-, meaning "all", and the words ''bene'' and ''volens'', meaning "good" and "will", respectively. Thus the term means "all good will".<ref>{{cite web |title=Definition of Omnibenevolence |url=https://www.oed.com/dictionary/omnibenevolence_n |language=en}}</ref>

==Usage==
The term is patterned on, and often accompanied by, the terms ''[[omniscience]]'' and ''[[omnipotence]]'', typically to refer to conceptions of an "all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful" deity. Philosophers and theologians more commonly use phrases like "perfectly good",<ref>This phrase is used in many notable encyclopedia and dictionary entries, such as:
* {{Cite encyclopedia |first=Michael |last=Tooley |title=The Problem of Evil |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |year=2021 |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/}}
* {{Cite encyclopedia |first=Simon |last=Blackburn|title=Evil, the Problem of |encyclopedia=The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy}}</ref> or simply the term "[[wikt:benevolence|benevolence]]". The word "omnibenevolence" may be interpreted to mean perfectly just, all-loving, fully merciful, or any number of other qualities, depending on precisely how "good" is understood. As such, there is little agreement over how an "omnibenevolent" being would behave.

The earliest record for its use in English, according to the ''Oxford English Dictionary'', is in 1679. The [[Catholic Church]] does not appear to use the term "omnibenevolent" in the [[liturgy]] or [[Catechism]].{{citation needed|date=May 2019}} [[Thomas Aquinas|Saint Thomas Aquinas]] in particular explained in ''[[Summa Theologica]]'' that God may indirectly want evil in the physical world, when this is necessary for the greater good of the order of the universe.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Summa Theologiae: The cause of evil (Prima Pars, Q. 49)|url=https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1049.htm#article2|access-date=2020-08-12|website=www.newadvent.org}}</ref>

Modern users of the term include [[George H. Smith]] in his book ''[[Atheism: The Case Against God]]'' (1980),<ref>{{Cite book | last=Smith | first=George H. | year=1980 | title=Atheism: The Case Against God | publisher=Prometheus Books | isbn=087975124X | url=https://archive.org/details/atheismcaseagain00smit_0 }}</ref> where he argued that divine qualities are inconsistent.  However, the term is also used by authors who defend the coherence of divine attributes, including but not limited to, Jonathan Kvanvig in ''The Problem of Hell'' (1993),<ref>{{Cite book | last=Kvanvig | first=Jonathan L. | year=1993 | title=The Problem of Hell | url=https://archive.org/details/problemhell00kvan_269 | url-access=limited | publisher=Oxford University Press | pages=[https://archive.org/details/problemhell00kvan_269/page/n12 4] | isbn=019508487X}}</ref> and [[Joshua Hoffman]] and [[Gary Rosenkrantz]] in ''The Divine Attributes'' (2002).<ref>{{Cite book | last=Hoffman | first=Joshua |author2=Gary Rosenkrantz | year=2002 | title=The Divine Attributes | publisher=Blackwell Publishing | isbn=0631211543}} Used throughout the book.</ref>

The terminology has been used by some prominent [[Roman Catholic]] figures, examples being Bishop [[Robert Barron (priest)|Robert Barron]], [[Doctor of Sacred Theology]] in his 2011 book ''Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith''.<ref>{{cite book|author=Robert Barron|author-link=Robert Barron (priest)|title=Catholicism: A Journey to the Heart of the Faith|date=2011|isbn=978-0307720511}}</ref>

==Philosophical perspectives==
The notion of an omnibenevolent, infinitely compassionate deity has raised certain [[atheist]]ic objections, such as the [[problem of evil]] and the [[problem of Hell]]. Responses to such problems are called [[theodicy|theodicies]] and can be general, arguing for the coherence of the divine, such as [[Swinburne]]'s ''Providence and the Problem of Evil'', or they can address a specific problem, such as Charles Seymour's ''A Theodicy of Hell''.

Proponents of [[pandeism]] contend that benevolence (much less omnibenevolence) is simply not required to account for any property of our Universe, as a morally neutral deity which was powerful enough to have created our Universe as we experience it would be, by definition, able to have created our Universe as we experience it. William C. Lane contended that pandeism thereby offered an escape from the [[evidential argument from evil]]:<ref name="Lane">{{Cite journal | last = Lane | first = William C. | date = January 2010 |title = Leibniz's Best World Claim Restructured | url = http://apq.press.illinois.edu/47/1/lane.html | journal = American Philosophical Journal | volume = 47 | issue = 1 | pages = 57–84 | access-date = 9 March 2014}}</ref> In 2010, author William C. Lane contended that:

{{quote|In pandeism, God is no superintending, heavenly power, capable of hourly intervention into earthly affairs. No longer existing "above," God ''cannot'' intervene from above and cannot be blamed for failing to do so. Instead God ''bears'' all suffering, whether the fawn's<ref>[[William L. Rowe|William Rowe]] used, as an example of needless suffering, a fawn horribly burned in a forest fire and unable to move, yet suffering for additional days before its death.</ref> or anyone else's.

Even so, a skeptic might ask, "Why must there be ''so'' much suffering,? Why could not the world's design omit or modify the events that cause it?" In pandeism, the reason is clear: to remain unified, a world must convey information through transactions. Reliable conveyance requires relatively simple, uniform laws. Laws designed to skip around suffering-causing events or to alter their natural consequences (i.e., their consequences under simple laws) would need to be vastly complicated or (equivalently) to contain numerous exceptions.<ref name="Lane"/>{{rp|76–77}}}}

==Religious perspectives==
The theological justification stems from God's [[aseity]]: the non-contingent, independent and self-sustained mode of existence that theologians ascribe to God.{{citation needed|date=May 2019}} For if he was not morally perfect, that is, if God was merely a great being but nevertheless of finite benevolence, then his existence would involve an element of [[Contingency (philosophy)|contingency]], because one could always conceive of a being of greater benevolence.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08004a.htm|title=The infinity of God|encyclopedia=Catholic Encyclopaedia|publisher=newadvent.org|access-date=2008-05-02}}</ref> Hence, omnibenevolence is a requisite of perfect being [[theology]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Perfect Being Theology|url=http://www.reasonablefaith.org/perfect-being-theology|access-date=20 May 2014}}</ref>

Theologians in the [[Wesleyan]] tradition (see [[Thomas Jay Oord]]) argue that omnibenevolence is God's primary [[Attributes of God in Christianity|attribute]].{{citation needed|date=May 2019}} Some [[Hyper-Calvinism#Hyper-Calvinism doctrine|Hyper-Calvinist]] interpretations reject omnibenevolence.{{citation needed|date=May 2019}} For example, the [[Westboro Baptist Church]] is infamous for its expression of this stance.

Christian apologist [[William Lane Craig]] argues that Islam does not hold to the idea of omnibenevolence.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-the-islamic-conception-of-god-morally-inadequate|title=Is the Islamic Concept of God Morally Inadequate?|publisher=Reasonable Faith|author=William Lane Craig|author-link=William Lane Craig}}</ref>

==In the Holy Bible==
{{bibleref2|Galatians|5,18-23|NKJV}} lists "kindness" among the nine fruits of the Holy Spirit God. So far, it is believed to be an attribute of God.

{{bibleref2|Numbers|14,18|NKJV}} affirms that "The Lord is longsuffering and abundant in mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but ''He by no means clears the guilty,'' visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation."

==See also==
{{portal|Religion}}
* [[Benevolence (disambiguation)]]
* [[Christian universalism]]
* [[Dystheism]]
* [[Good and evil]]
* [[Light and darkness]]
* [[Love of Christ]]
* [[Love of God]]
* [[Misotheism]]
* [[Omnipresence]]

==Notes==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
* Basinger, David. "In what sense must God be omnibenevolent?"  ''International Journal for Philosophy of Religion'', Vol. 14, No. 1 (March 1983), pp.&nbsp;3–15.
* Bruch, George Bosworth. ''Early Medieval Philosophy'', King's Crown, 1951. pp.&nbsp;73–77.
* Flemming, Arthur.  [https://www.jstor.org/stable/2381377 "Omnibenevolence and evil"]. ''[[Ethics (journal)|Ethics]]'', Vol. 96, No. 2 (Jan. 1986), pp.&nbsp;261–281.
* [[Thomas Jay Oord|Oord, Thomas Jay]]. ''The Nature of Love: A Theology'' (2010) {{ISBN|978-0827208285}}
* Oppy, Graham. "Ontological Arguments and Belief in God" (''Cambridge University Press'') (1995), pp.&nbsp;171–172.
* [[George H. Smith|Smith, George H.]] ''Atheism: The Case Against God'',(Skeptic's Bookshelf) [[Prometheus Books]] (June 1980).  {{ISBN|978-0840211156}}
* Wierenga, Edward. "Intrinsic maxima and omnibenevolence."  ''International Journal for Philosophy of Religion'', Vol. 10, No. 1 (March 1984), pp.&nbsp;41–50.

==External links==
* [https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/on-the-goodness-of-god The Goodness of God]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20030724060920/http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Omnibenevolence.htm Notes on God's Omnibenevolence]

{{Good and evil}}

[[Category:17th-century neologisms]]
[[Category:Conceptions of God]]
[[Category:Good and evil]]
[[Category:Philosophy of religion]]
[[Category:Superlatives in religion]]