Book III, XII, p. 110
[Philosophy] ‘Just now you thought it was beyond doubt that this world was ruled by God.’
[Boethius] ‘I still do think it is beyond doubt, and will always think so. I will briefly explain the arguments which convince me in this matter.
This world would never have coalesced into one form out of such diverse and antagonistic parts had there not been one who could unify such diversity. Their very diversity in turn would make them break out into dissension and tear apart and destroy the unity of the world unless there were a power capable of holding together what he had once woven. Nature’s fixed order could not proceed on its path and the various kinds of change could not exhibit motions so orderly in place, time, effect, distance from one another, and nature, unless there was one unmoving and stable power to regulate them. For this power, whatever it is, through which creation remains in existence and in motion, I use the word which all people use, namely God.’
Then she said, ‘Since this is your opinion, I think little remains for me to do before you acquire happiness and return safe and sound to your true homeland.
‘But let us look at the arguments we have set forth. Under happiness we have included sufficiency, haven’t we, and we have agreed that God is happiness itself?’
‘Yes.’
‘So that in regulating the universe He will need no external assistance — otherwise, if He needs anything, He won’t have complete sufficiency….Now, we have proved that God is the good itself….(111) So that it is by goodness that He rules all things, since He rules them by Himself and we have agreed that He is good….Since we are right in thinking that God controls all things by the helm of goodness, and all things, as I have said, have a natural inclination towards the good, it can hardly be doubted, can it, that they are willingly governed and willingly obey desires of him who controls them, as things that are in harmony and accord with their helmsman.’
[Boethius] ‘It is necessarily so, for it would hardly seem a happy government if it were like a yoke imposed upon unwilling necks instead of a willing acceptance of salvation.’
‘There is nothing, therefore, which could preserve its own nature as well as go against God.’
‘Nothing.’
‘If it did try, it wouldn’t make any progress against Him whom we have agreed to be, because of His happiness, supreme in power.’
‘No, it would be completely powerless.’
‘Is there anything, then, which might either wish to be or be able to withstand this supreme good?’
‘I don’t think so.’
‘It is the supreme good, then, which mightily and sweetly orders all things.
Then I said, ‘The conclusion of this highest of arguments has made me very happy….’
[Philosophy] (112) ‘No one could doubt that God is omnipotent.’
‘No one, at any rate, who is in his right mind would have any doubt about it.’
‘But there is nothing that an omnipotent power could not do?’
‘No.’
‘Then, can God do evil?’
‘No.’
‘So that evil is nothing, since that is what He cannot do who can do anything.’
‘…. Or are you creating a wonderful circle of divine simplicity? Just now you began with happiness and said it was the highest good, and you said it was to be found in God. Then you began arguing that God Himself was also the supreme good and perfect happiness and added as a kind of bonus that no one could be happy unless he was also divine. You said that the very form of the good was identical with the substance of God and of happiness. And you taught us that unity itself was the same (113) as the good, because all things had a natural inclination to it. Then you argued that God rules the universe by the helm of goodness, that all things obey willingly, and that evil is nothing….’
The Bible and meaningful books 
‘Is there anything, then, which might either wish to be or be able to withstand this supreme good?’ My answer would be, “Yes.”