William Rowes Argument for Atheism Based on the Problem of Evil

Introduction

Ever since the scientific community developed the concept of the scientific method, there has been a centuries-old dispute between them, philosophers, and theologians about the existence of God. This topic is particularly relevant to Christian discourse and is viewed by many atheists as the ideological crisis of Christianity. However, theists see it as a challenge that must be overcome in order to strengthen the Christian faith and philosophy. The author of this paper will summarize and explain William L. Rowes argument for atheism based on the problem of evil and provide a theological objection.

William Rowes Argument Summary and Explanation

There are two critical premises in William L. Rowes argument for atheism based on the problem of evil that needs to be explained. The first premise he brings is that there are many cases of suffering and acts of evil that have happened, are happening, and will continue to occur on Earth (Rowe 336). If God is kind to people and is an omnipotent, omniscient being, then he could prevent all of it without losing the essential element of the divine will to establish greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse (Rowe 336). This statement creates the second fundamental premise.

William L. Rowes second premise hints at a contradiction in the concept of the existence of God. A divine being who is benevolent to humanity and also possesses such qualities as omnipotence and omniscience would prevent any case of intense suffering and severe pain, but only as long as it is possible without violating Gods plan to establish greater good or permitting an equivalent or worse phenomenon of evil (Rowe 336). A conceptual contradiction is very noticeable that leads to a conclusion that is obvious to all atheists and non-Christians. It is the second premise that has the most significant evidential value and serves as a shared philosophical element in the dispute between atheists and theists.

This conclusion is the core of the argument that William Rowe brings to the readers. According to Rowe, there does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being (336). It can be said that Rowe denies the existence of a divine being in a broad sense and a Christian God in a narrow sense. The researcher also provides a detailed explanation and justification for the premises using imaginary experiments (Rowe 337). Moreover, Rowe reflects on how theists can refute this argument; namely, he describes direct and indirect counter-argument approaches (338). He also explores three positions that atheists can take the rationality of theists belief in philosophical discourse with theists (Rowe 340). These three attitudes are unfriendly, indifferent, and friendly atheism. Another important mention is that the researcher believes that it is paradoxical for an atheist to be a friendly one.

Objection to William Rowes Argument for Atheism Based on the Problem of Evil

Before providing an objection to William L. Rowes argument, it is essential to provide the premise. Judging by the way William L. Rowe describes God, it can be assumed and considered as a premise that he believes that there is no Christian God. According to Rowe, God is a supremely good, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal being who created the world (335). Such a description is best suited to the concept of God in Christianity. Despite the fact that Jews, Christians, and Muslims believe in one divine being, their ritual practices and interpretations of the one god are different; it is the Christian God that is described as the most virtuous and least indifferent to human suffering in scripture. It means that the author of this work will consider God in his Christian interpretation in the objection. William Rowes definition of an atheist fits this premise. According to him, an atheist is someone who denies that there exists a divine being that is all-knowing, all-powerful and perfectly good (Rowe 335). Therefore, Christians are theists here.

It is essential to mention that this objection will be theological in nature. As already described above, according to Christian mythology, God is an omnipotent being who not only existed before the emergence of the universe, but he is also its creator (Rowe 335). It means that the application of logical and evidence-based approaches to the concept of God is possible, but only to a certain extent. Put differently, human logic and the idea of evidence are not able to fully explain the intentions, actions, and way of thinking of God because, firstly, he is outside of the material reality, namely he in is Paradise and, secondly, he existed before the creation of the universe. This statement denies the non-existence of the Christian God but does not prove its existence either. Moreover, it means the divine being perceives his environment and the world in which people live differently and, therefore, God understands such phenomena as, for example, suffering, good and evil differently. It is why he does not prevent suffering simply because he does not consider it as suffering.