Approved~Løki
At least one good thing about religions is their longing for the improbable and ability to put together logically incompatible ideas, which gives much more food for thought than contemplation of the dry and uninspiring truth of 2 x 2 = 4. So for someone enjoying the process of thinking for the sake of thinking, regardless of outcomes, religions have a rich offer.
This especially applies to the classical definition of God as omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent, three absolute characteristics excluding one other.
If we start with omniscience, this necessarily implies full knowledge of the future, which turns a God into passive observer of everything that happens in the universe, without possibility to change a single thing in the known future. They can be called Gods of Order.
If we go along the line of omnipotence, then, being able to do absolutely anything would necessarily include REALLY anything, even suicide of God. Then the famous question about ability of God to create the stone that it cannot lift gets a definite “Yes”. Yes, a really omnipotent God can do things that will result in its losing the omnipotence. Thus, Gods of Chaos.
And what about Gods of Love? What kind of conclusions can we make if we go along the line of omnibenevolence?