How do theodicies respond to the problem of evil?

Before responding to the question, we must ask: what is the problem of evil, and what is a theodicy? The problem of evil is a challenge to theism. It questions whether the existence of the God of Classical Theism is reasonable given the evidence of evil in our world. If God is omnibenevolent (all loving) then he has the motivation to eliminate evil. If he is also omnipotent (all-powerful) he has the means to eliminate evil. Yet we still see clear evidence of suffering in the world. Epicurus formulated this as the inconsistent triad (diagram can be drawn to illustrate this).A theodicy is a religious response to the problem of evil which tries to justify God in light of our experience of evil and suffering. There are many different types of theodicy addressing the problem in different ways. One way is to eliminate God’s all-powerful nature in the trilemma to compensate for evil. Scholars like Whitehead and Griffin argue that God cannot ensure goodness but only persuade goodness. Another way is to deny the existence of evil altogether. Augustine used the Greek idea of telos (purpose) to argue that evil is just a privation of goodness in creatures (use whiteboard to draw up examples). Finally, some theodicies claim that there is a morally sufficient reason for evil. Some scholars argue that evil must be possible to allow for the greater good of our freedom, which we use to do consciously good acts. Others like Irenaeus and Hick argue that there must be evil to allow for certain goods. For example, a natural disaster might be considered evil, but the aid given is a type of selfless compassion which could not be demonstrated without the evil occurring first.