The problem of evil has been examined by many
philosophers and theologians over the years. In recent years, the evidential
argument from William Rowe has inspired intellectuals to reexamine the problem
more critically. In this text Rowe’s evidential argument will be examined premise
by premise to determine if this argument is sound, and to do this some
arguments against his position will be observed as well. Rowe’s main objection
towards belief in God is founded primarily on the idea being if God is truly
good and just, He would not tolerate gratuitous evils. Now, Rowe is very
confident all people must ultimately confess there are evils which have
occurred, and will occur again, serving no greater purpose, completely
unbeneficial for humanity. The notion of unnecessary evils must be examined,
and one must consider to what degree the evils tolerated by God help serve a
greater purpose. If Rowe is correct about unnecessary evils being evidence against
a good and just God, this will be revealed upon investigating the counterarguments
to his claim.
To see the only possible hope for an answer with regards to the problem of evil please read the rest of the article in the link provided below,
Why the Truth is Hidden
