Craig expects eight-year-olds to believe that an all-loving, all-good and perfect god would allow child rape and torture. Surely even a six-year-old could see the glaring contradiction here.
The Problem of Evil is an insurmountable one for Christians (and all other theists who believe in a perfectly loving, all-powerful and all-knowing god). There have been intense and motivated efforts over the past two millennia to defend such a position rationally, and they have all failed. Miserably. Utterly. And in many cases, dishonestly.
I invite all children to consider these questions.
Are good deeds good because god commands it, or does god command it because it is good?
Would an all-loving parent allow their children to be raped?
Would an all-loving god value the free will of child rapists more than the free will of their victims?
Would an all-loving human being allow preventable suffering?
Would an all-loving doctor force surgery on a patient when medication would be painless and just as effective?
Would an all-loving god tempt his or her creation and punish them with eternal torture for doing what he KNEW they would do?
Would an all-loving god torture anyone for eternity?
How could a perfect creation ever become imperfect?
Do any of the other books in this series contradict the content of this book and/or reality?
Now on to the Problem of Suffering.
Some approaches involve invoking an unknown "greater good" defense (which throws god's omnipotence under the bus. An omnipotent deity could simply actualise a desired goal without needing to use suffering as a "middle man"). Attempts to shift the problem by asserting that human happiness is not the goal of life (but knowing god is) removes the omnibenevolence and omnipotence of god (if you love someone, you don't want them to suffer. It really is that simple).
Here, Craig takes the old canard of free will. Unfortunately, free will is meaningless unless everyone has an equal amount of it. This is undeniably NOT the case. Not everyone is given the same lifespan, physical strength, mental acuity, political clout, financial resources, and so on. Craig is pontificating from the luxurious confines of his residence, funded by conveniently gullible sheep. This has certainly damaged his ability to empathise with the billions who live on less than a dollar each day. And the thousands who starve to death every time the Earth completes a full rotation.
Craig also, perhaps unwittingly, advocates a social Darwinism in which the rich and physically powerful are able to murder, rape and steal from weaker individuals (and are therefore less able to exercise their own free will to prevent their own suffering). Craig worships a cosmic pedophile who revels in granting freedom to abhorrent individuals while getting his jollies from seeing the most vulnerable suffer and die in agony (only to get thrown into even more torture in the Christian vision of hell).
Lastly, a loving god would take away free will from those who would willingly surrender it in return for a life without suffering. Funnily enough, Craig seems to believe in a heaven without suffering but with all the bells and whistles of freedom. So why not create that universe from the get-go and stick with it? Why create a universe with even the possibility of corruption? It certainly is not something a perfect god would do. Then again, a perfect god would not blackmail beings he supposedly loves for eternal worship.