When approaching the problem of evil it is important to begin by making some key distinctions.  Distinctions help us to define the issues more precisely, which leads to greater clarity of the problem as well as the solution.  This is just one reason philosophy is an indisensable tool for believers.  Here are some of the key distinctions:

First, it is important to distinguish between the intellectual problem and the existential problem.  The intellectual problem requires a tough-minded philosophical response while the existential problem requires a tender-hearted pastoral response.  If you attempt to answer the existential problem merely with philosophical abstractions or Christian cliches, you may as well keep your mouth shut.

This distinction needs to be considered on a personal level as well.  You may have answered the intellectual problem with careful philosophical analysis but another question remains:  Is your soul prepared for suffering?  This question haunts me a bit, particularly since my wife and I have had children.  Sometimes I ponder how I would respond to God if something tragic were to befall one of my kids and I must confess, I am a little pessimistic about my own response.  I think it reveals my ever-present need to cultivate greater virtue and not just philosophical acumen.

Second, we need to make a distinction between different kinds of evil.  There is moral evil, perpetrated by human beings (think 9/11), and there is natural evil, perpetrated by physical events (think Hurricane Katrina).  This distinction is important because our response to each may be different, nuanced as such to address the relevant features of these different kinds of evil.  It may also be helpful to distinguish between non-gratuitous evil and gratuitous evil or between evils that differ in quantity, intensity, and effect.

Third, we need to distinguish the logical (deductive) problem from the evidential (inductive) problem.  The logical argument claims the existence of God is logically impossible given evil and therefore, belief in God is necessarily false.  If the logical argument succeeds, it would spell the end of Christianity in particular and theism in general.  The evidential argument attempts to show the existence of evil makes it unlikely that God exists.  It claims the evidence of evil against God's existence makes it more probable that He does not exist rather than that He does exist.  Again, this distinction is vital as our response to the logical and evidential problems will be different.