As several others have pointed out, it is clear that the early Jews did not think JHVH to be either omnipotent, omniscient, or omnibenevolent. They did think he was very powerful, very wise, and very benevolent, but not so much of any of those things as to trigger a paradox. And indeed throughout much of the Old Testament God is one short-tempered asshole.
As time went on, though, this thinking consolidated toward extremes. God was no longer one God among many who happened to choose the Jews; he became the most powerful God, then the only God. This then meant he must have created the Universe, which meant he must be not just very powerful, but omnipotent.
Meanwhile, the Jews had an original thought with the idea that God made the Universe, in the way a potter shapes clay and fires it to make a pot. This was a sharp departure from previous thought, which tended to liken the origin of the universe to a birth or hatching. Nobody would make the idiotic mistake of thinking a mother has perfect knowledge of her child, but any potter who was unskilled would make a crooked leaky pot. So God, the maker of the Universe, must have perfect knowledge of it or it would be malformed. (It would be 3,000 years before chaos theory would finally put a dagger into the heart of this common misconception.)
Then, expanding on the idea of God as a craftsman, it seems clear that he put a hell of a lot of effort into making the Universe as big and diverse as it is. Hell of a guy that God, to give us life and such a big neato place to live it. Nobody else has done anything that nice for us lately. Extrapolating just a little more, if God is that good maybe he's perfectly good. Yeah, that's nicely symmetrical with those other omnis he's been collecting.
Of course this nicely symmetrical set of superlatives also gives rise to the question of how such a perfectly wise, powerful, and benevolent guy could create a Universe containing Adolph Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer, and disco music. Well see, he obviously must have a reason which we imperfectly mortal schmucks are just too dense to see. Yeah, that's the ticket. If you meditate on that long enough in a monastery while eating no meat on Friday it will actually start to make sense.
In fact, why stop at one stupid paradox that doesn't make any sense when we can have a few more, like the "mystery" of God's supposed three in one nature. The central absurdity makes all other absurdities seem natural and even necessary.
The need to dance around the Problem of Evil has kept Christian intellectual thought remarkably shallow. You simply can't look at it too closely or the whole thing falls apart. So while people of other religions are inventing decimal math and gunpowder, the Europeans are too busy debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin to even notice the Crab Supernova. Big bright light in the sky for a week? God did it, no big deal, move along.
Of course when so much, um, intellectual effort has been invested in something it becomes very hard to let go, no matter how ridiculous it starts to appear. It's much easier to close your eyes and keep on believing than to admit it: I have been stupid. This is why you get people with college educations who are capable of ignoring all the evidence to the contrary and insisting that the world was created by fiat 6,000 years ago. If the Problem of Evil doesn't give you fits, creationism makes perfect sense by comparison.
Of course the problem with believing in things that are crazy is you eventually get handed a Reality Check. The Christian reality check has been going on for several hundred years now, in the form of an explosion of Protestant offshoot faiths and an explosion of technology that keeps forcing our attention to those paradoxes we dare not look at too closely.
It makes sense that more and more Christians are of the fanatical variety because it takes a very deep level of commitment to continue believing everything is OK while the house is burning down around you. Muslims have the same problem for the same reason, since except for very minor doctrinal differences Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are essentially the same religion.
Meanwhile, religions like Hinduism and Buddhism don't have this fundamental incompatibility with common sense. Neither do most paganist constructions, nor the Eastern philosophies like Confucianism and Taoism. Indeed, most of these systems are quite compatible with the idea that their gods and mythos are human creations allegorizing the natural flow of the Universe. They can get away with that because their myths make sense and they do allegorize the flow of the Universe -- they aren't, well, stupid.
In this regard common sense is kind of like the tomato. For centuries tomatoes were thought to be as poisonous as nightshades. They were not widely cultivated or eaten; why would you risk eating such a dangerous thing? Even though a few people knew the truth about tomatoes they didn't become popular until the mid-19th century.
Of course today we take it for granted that tomatoes won't kill us; they're found in all our favorite foods. I figure it will take about the same amount of time for us to collectively figure out that exercising common sense won't damn us to hell.
What will people of the future think of us? Will they say, as Roger Williams said of some of the Massachusetts Indians, that we were wolves with the min