A - the problem of evil - Rowe

evidential challenge, based on intense human and animal suffering that occurs on a daily basis.

What does Rowe argue?

• if this evil and suffering resulted in ‘some greater good’ that could only be achieved by its presence then the suffering could be justified.

• But he can’t accept God allowing gratuitous/intense suffering with no point, that is avoidable.

What is the argument in premises?

• An omnipotent and omniscient being would know when intense suffering was about to take place.

• such a being could prevent the suffering from happening.

• an all loving being would probably prevent all evil and suffering that had no purpose, was pointless and avoidable.

• but this evil and suffering does happen.

• therefore, God probably does not exist.

What is the fawn example?

• a forest fire, where a fawn is trapped and horribly burned, in terrible agony for several days before death takes away its intense suffering.

• No greater good, the fawn could have died quickly rather than intensely suffering.

What is the case of sue?

• 5 year old girl severely beaten, raped then strangled to death on new years day 1986.

• She did not need to endure intense suffering before being murdered if her death was necessary to bring a ‘greater good’

• she could have died without the excessive/gratuitous suffering, was there even a greater good in this scenario?