From a Theistic point of view “in a sense” the dilemma of Epicurus is true. In a sense it is “impossible” for God to be “all Good” and or “All Powerful” if God really exists and evil exists as well. All theists approach the problem by taking on one of the horns of the dilemma.?

Theistic Personalists who rely on Theodicies(i.e. moral justifications for God's inaction in the face of evil) take on the “All Powerful” horn by adopting the Classic Theistic Thomistic version of Divine Omnipotence which tells us God cannot make contradictions true. You might protest “Can’t God do anything?” to which we would reply “Yes but a contradiction doesn’t describe anything. It describes nothing and adds new meaning to the phrase ‘There is Nothing God cannot do.’.” Someone might hold Descartes Irrationalist view of Omnipotence that God can make contradictions true which would solve the problem of evil. Specifically if God can make contradictions true He can make the seeming contradiction of the simultaneous existence of an Omnipotent/Omni-benevolent Deity & Evil both True. Of course this leads to the break down in all rational categories by abandoning the principle of non-contradiction so it is nonsense.
Anyway given God cannot make contradictions true the Theodicy loving Theistic Personalist tries to argue there are some goods God can only give if He temporarily tolerates evil. Plantinga largely solved the logical problem of Evil with this line of thought but then Rowe counter punched with the evidentalist problem of evil by arguing that there exists in the world seemingly gratuitous evil that gives no opportunity to give people any good. Fr. Brian Davies OTOH cuts down all leading theodicies in this work THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL.

Which leads to Classic Theism's solution (see Davies) which grabs the other horn of the dilemma specifically God being “All Good”. God is All Good but God is not morally good. Or more specifically God is not a moral agent. Or even more specifically God is not a moral agent unequivocally comparable to a virtuous human moral agent & or virtuous rational creature. God given His nature & relationship to creation has no obligations to His creatures so He cannot be morally condemned for not giving them what He "owes" them. God is All Good because He is Metaphysically Good and Ontologically Good or Goodness Itself and the source of goodness in all things. But God is not a moral agent as we are moral agents.
Indeed to say Classic Theistic God is not good for not immediately stopping the Holocaust makes about as much sense as saying Plato's Form of the Good is not really good since It too didn't stop the Holocaust(which is actually saying the same thing but I digress....). Which is absurd. Or it is like saying my good root beer isn't really a good root beer because it didn't stop the holocaust.

Theodicies as they are understood post enlightenment, are predicated on the idea God is a moral agent and they try to morally justify God’s inaction in the face of evil. The Classic Theist presumes God is not obligated to stop any evil in the first place and thus is not immoral for not doing so. Morality simply doesn't apply to him. All of God’s good actions toward His creatures in Classic Theism are Gratuitous and as such they are not owed to them. So God can be praised for his Divine Charity but God cannot be condemned for not following His obligations. He simply has none to His Creatures only to Himself...

It is like the difference between night and day. The old covenant which is fading away and the new covenant is upon us. That is why in the Hebrew Bible, the word "yom" a day starts in the evening and then come the brightness of the sun. In the natural mind all cultures teach a day start with the morning. And then the world got worse and get into darkness. The ruler of the world has ingrained into the carnal minds naturally. That is why we blamed God for disasters, diseases, discontents,.....

In God's Word and plan, the beginning "was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep" until the Son is revealed and the the world will be at rest with the brightness of His presence. So Pentecost is the point of change, the first twilight before the dawn.

In the first Pentecost, three thousand people were killed by law (Levites) under the stone law. When the Pentecost was finally come, three thousand people were saved by Holy Spirit. "And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers." In the end of our chapter "Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." (Acts of Holy Spirit Chapter 2)

And if we can't figure out the reason, we continue to trust God and be at peace.

God is responsible for he creation of everything, but one can seek the reasons for why God creates the way that He does.

All that matters to me on this point is that on theism god is the sole cause and responsibility for all natural evil in the world.

A designer can take others' input into consideration, but regardless of what terms you want to use, I don't see any problem with a monotheist accepting the argument.

If the angels decided the laws, god wasn't the designer of it. That's like saying I design a car, but I outsource to my friend to decide the details of the engine. I wouldn't have designed the details of the engine.

Ok but again, I agree that God is the creator and designer of the laws. My argument is that the angels helped DECIDE what the laws would be. God took into account their desires for the natural world.

(3) says "God is the creator and designer of the physical universe, including the laws that govern it," not angels. God still created and designed laws that have natural evil built into them. There is simply no coherent way to absolve god from natural evil. It's intrinsic to his plan.