Theist Argument

1381 Words6 Pages
One of the first ways a theist might respond to this argument is by denying premise 1 because one might claim that Rowe has given no sufficient reason to believe that it is true. All that has been solved the theist believes is that there is evil in the world and that we don’t know why or what the good is that can justify God in permitting such evil (Rowe, 2004, p.7). This line of argument is also known as the argument from ignorance. Could we, the theist argues, even comprehend the goods which permit much of this horrendous suffering given the infinite transcendence of Gods mind? (Rowe, 2004, p.7). They give the analogy of a parent and child. In the analogy, God is likened to us the way a loving parent is to their child. For…show more content…
Theists believe that they can think of some good reasons that would constitute for God allowing natural evils to exist (Horn, 2015, p.3). They argue that most of the virtues in the world that make it a better place are related to some evil (Horn, 2015, p.3). For example, Trent Horn considers virtues such as; compassion which we show when suffering alongside someone, courage which we show when doing what is right in the face of danger and love which we show when putting another person’s needs ahead of our own (Horn, 2015, p.3). Theists therefore hold the view that from living in a world governed by natural laws that lack needed interventions, natural evils may be considered an acceptable consequence (Horn, 2015, p.3). Philosopher Richard Swineburne provides us with a sophisticated attempt at rebutting the evidential problem also arguing that there are a surplus of goods which require the existence of natural evil (Tattersall, 2015, p.4). He argues that there are other goods that are also satisfied by the suffering of animals. He uses Rowe’s example of the fawn who slowly dies in a forest fire and argues that the fawns suffering may have been witnessed by other deer who will learn from the incident (Tattersall, 2015, p.4). The…show more content…
For example, there is the problem of geography where suffering from natural disasters could have been more evenly distributed around the world by God, at present it is only happening in certain regions, most predominantly the third world countries (Tattersall, 2015, p.4). There is also the problem of quantity, the quantity of natural evil in our world is far too much to be explained by the advantageous effects of showing human virtues such as courage, compassion and love (Tattersall, 2015, p.4). Thus, it can be suggested that the evidential problem of evil does in fact show that evil is evidence against the belief in God, although it does not disprove his existence as this is not what I have set out to do here, it does significantly lower the probability that there is a God. We can therefore agree with Russel that: "Because the hypotheses which are offered to save theism are unlikely on what we know, theism is defenseless against the evidential arguments from evil" (Russell, 1996,
Get Access