The existence of God together with our background knowledge does not logically entail that no good that we know of justifies an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good being in permitting E1 and E2.
background knowledge(Popper's philosophy of science)
Items that must be taken for granted during scientific criticism, but which are not conclusively established and may be challenged at any time, especially if their uncritical acceptance is suspected of causing subsequent difficulties.
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.
logically entail(describing logical relationships between ideas)
To necessarily follow from something; if A logically entails B, then B must be true whenever A is true.
omnipotent(Used in the context of arguing about whether multiple omnipotent beings could coexist.)
A being whose will is never thwarted; a being capable of bringing about any willed outcome.
perfectly good(describes a traditional attribute of God)
Completely morally perfect; always acts in the most ethical and moral way possible.
permitting(what God does regarding evil events)
Allowing something to happen; in this case, allowing evil or suffering to exist.
Secondly, if the existence of God is neither a logically necessary truth nor entailed by our background knowledge, and if the existence of God together with our background knowledge does not logically entail that no good that we know of justifies an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good being in permitting \(E_1\) and \(E_2\), then one can support (2) and (3) by appealing to the very plausible principle that the probability of \(r\) given \(q\) is equal to one if and only if \(q\) entails \(r\).