How do world religions argue for an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God despite of the problem of evil and suffering?

The question asked here is a fundamental argument against the exist of God, known as the Inconsistent Triad. If God is omnibenevolent, then he would not want the people that he loves to suffer. If God is omnipotent, then he would be able to prevent people from experiencing harm. Yet, there is evil and suffering in the world; so how can there be an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. Any being that is not at least both of these things cannot be God, at least not according to these world religions. Explanations for the problems raised by Inconsistent Triad from Christianity tend to refer back to fall, where in Genesis, humans chose to eat disobey God and eat from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, and in doing so, introduced sin, the root of all evil, to the world. Many Christians believe that it is through human sin, that there is evil and suffering in the world, and that there is no just (fair) way to remove evil and suffering from the world as this would remove human free will. Christians also believe therefore that Heaven is place free from evil and suffering, and that after they die, having used their free will to follow Jesus, they will spend eternity with God in Heaven. Similar origins of evil and suffering are referred to in Sikhism. Many Sikhs believe that Haumai (human selfishness consisting of pride, lust, anger, ego and greed), drives people away from God and causes evil, which leads to suffering. Unlike sin, Sikhs believe that a level of Haumai is necessary for human functioning, and that excessive behaviour that leads to evil. Sikhism also describes times of suffering as an opportunity to grow closer to God and for others to show compassion; a vital part of life.