1. What makes offering a very fully filled-out theodicy so difficult?

To begin by offering a defense regarding evil would be premature. One would need first to have reason
to suppose that evil is evidence against the existence of God. Unless there is good reason to think this,
there is no need for the defense regarding evil. While it is often assumed that the religious believer
should provide evidence that God exists and also provide a defense regarding evil, the idea that the
religious believer should always be the one who offers arguments is without justification. The place to
start in considering God and evil is by asking whether there is any successful, or at least initially
plausible, argument from evil. There are quite a variety of attempts to offer a successful argument
against evil. It is time to consider some of them.

The purpose of mortal life for the children of God is to provide the experiences needed “to progress
toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. We progress by
making choices, by which we are tested to show that we will keep God’s commandments. To be tested,
we must have the agency to choose between alternatives. To provide alternatives on which to exercise
our agency, we must have opposition.

Opposition was necessary in the Garden of Eden. If Adam and Eve had not made the choice that
introduced mortality, they would have remained in a state of innocence, … doing no good, for they knew
no sin.

2. Is the theist inconsistent in her moral judgments regarding God and human beings?

It must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, … righteousness could not be brought
to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness
Same as you cannot write a law when you did not know what is good and what is evil.
Because God loves us with infinite, perfect love and because He knows we cannot see everything He
sees, He has given us laws that will guide and protect us.