Latter-day
Saints have addressed the issue of “theodicy” (explanation of the problem of
evil). The most notable LDS to have done such in recent years is that of Blake
Ostler. See, for e.g.:
Sin,
Suffering, and Soul-Making: Joseph Smith on the Problem of Evil (with David
L. Paulsen)
See also
these two episodes from his (excellent) Exploring Mormon Thought podcast
series:
LDS readers
of this blog might be interested in the following which presents a Roman
Catholic (mixed with some presuppositionalism) response to the problem of evil:
You know how the argument goes: If an
all-good and all-powerful God existed, then he would not allow evil to exist.
Because evil does exist, an all-good and all-powerful God must not exist . .
.this classic argument for atheism . .. can be dismantled on two levels.
First, this assertion is an unsound deductive
argument. It’s unsound because it assumes the truth of a premise that cannot be
known. It takes for granted that an all-good and all-powerful God could not or would not allow evil to exist even for a limited time. And since
evil does exist, the God Christians and others believe in cannot exist. Well,
if it’s true that an all-good and all-powerful God could not or would not allow
evil to exist even for a limited period of time, then, of course, the argument
works.
But how does the atheist know that an
all-good and all-powerful God could not no
possible reason for allowing evil to exist for a time? Of course, he cannot
know this. In fact, a good, loving, and all-powerful God might conceivably have
a number of reasons for allowing evil
to exist for a time—and, apparently, He does.
It may be hard for us to understand why God
allows evil, but the existence of evil does not prove the non-existence of God.
But on a deeper, more profound level, the
so-called “problem of evil” becomes a problem not for the believer but for the atheist.
The argument twists and turns to fall on the head of the one attempting to make
it by actually arguing strongly for the
existence of God. Ironically, it’s only on the basis of a theistic worldview,
in which God exists and provides an objective moral standard, that we can call
anything objectively “evil.”
Richard Dawkins . . . presents the “problem
of evil” in traditional fashion to disprove the existence of an all-good,
all-powerful God, But for all his attempts, neither he nor any atheist can
really speak about “good” and “evil,” if they are to be consistent. For if
there is no supreme standard of “good,” which would be God, then nothing can be
rightly called “good” or “evil.” Everything just is. And, therefore, any given human act, such as murdering an old
woman for the money in her purse, or starving homosexuals, amputees, or
mentally ill people to death because they are inconvenient to have around,
cannot really be classified as “evil.” You may not like those actions—but if
God does exist, you have no basis higher than your own private preferences for labeling
them as “evil” or demanding that other people not do those things. (Patrick
Madrid and Kenneth Hensley, The Godless
Delusion: A Catholic Challenge to Modern Atheism [Huntington, Ind.: Our
Sunday Visitor, 2010], 89-91)