Why Does God Allow Child Abuse? A Three-Faith Comparison

Jewish thought confronts the suffering of children through the lens of tzelem Elohim (the image of God in every person) and the principle of individual moral accountability. Deuteronomy 24:16 is foundational here: each person bears responsibility for their own sin, meaning God does not design or ordain abuse — human perpetrators do Deuteronomy 24:16. The suffering of innocents is therefore a consequence of human moral failure, not divine will.

Rabbinic tradition, particularly as developed by Maimonides in the Guide for the Perplexed (c. 1190 CE), argues that most evil in the world is caused by people acting against one another, not by God. Children, who lack the full moral knowledge to choose between good and evil Deuteronomy 1:39, are considered especially blameless. Their suffering intensifies the communal obligation — kol Yisrael arevim zeh bazeh, all Israel is responsible for one another — to protect the vulnerable.

The book of Genesis records Reuben's anguished cry when harm came to a child: "Do not sin against the child" Genesis 42:22, signaling that Scripture itself frames violence against children as a grave moral transgression demanding accountability. Jewish theodicy doesn't fully resolve the 'why,' but it firmly places the blame on human actors and calls the community to prevent such harm.

Christian theodicy — the attempt to justify God's goodness in the face of evil — is perhaps the most extensively debated in Western theology. Thinkers from Augustine (354–430 CE) to Alvin Plantinga (b. 1932) have argued that God permits evil, including the abuse of children, because genuine human freedom necessarily includes the freedom to do terrible wrong. God's refusal to override human agency is not indifference; it's the cost of a world with real moral actors.

Jesus himself placed children at the center of divine concern. He rebuked his disciples and declared, "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven" Matthew 19:14. This passage, echoed in Luke 18:16 Luke 18:16, suggests that children occupy a place of special honor before God — making their abuse not merely a human crime but a profound theological offense. Many Christian theologians, including N.T. Wright in Evil and the Justice of God (2006), argue that God's response to child suffering is not passive acceptance but active solidarity through the incarnation and cross.

It's worth acknowledging real disagreement within Christianity. Calvinist traditions emphasize divine sovereignty so strongly that some struggle to explain why God doesn't simply prevent abuse. Arminian and open theist theologians counter that God genuinely limits divine control to preserve human freedom. Neither camp finds the answer fully satisfying, and honest Christian theology admits this tension rather than dissolving it.

Islamic theology approaches this question through the doctrine of qadar (divine decree) alongside the concept of fitra — the innate, pure nature with which every child is born. Classical scholars like Al-Ghazali (1058–1111 CE) taught that God permits trials and suffering as part of a larger divine wisdom (hikma) that human minds cannot fully grasp. This doesn't mean God approves of abuse; Islamic law (Sharia) places strong obligations on adults to protect children, and harming them is considered a major sin.

The Quran (Surah Al-An'am 6:151) explicitly prohibits killing children and commands their protection, and the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is recorded in multiple hadiths showing profound tenderness toward children. Islamic theodicy holds that God is Al-'Adl (the Just) and Ar-Rahman (the Merciful), and that victims of injustice — especially innocent children — will receive full recompense on the Day of Judgment. Suffering in this life, while real and wrong, is not the final word.

Like Judaism, Islam emphasizes that children who die or suffer without having reached the age of moral accountability (bulugh) are guaranteed paradise. The perpetrators of abuse, however, face severe divine accountability. Contemporary Muslim scholars such as Tariq Ramadan have stressed that the question 'why does God allow child abuse' must be answered not just theologically but practically — the community (umma) bears a collective duty to prevent it, mirroring the individual accountability principle found across all three traditions Deuteronomy 24:16.