In an attempt to have a working explanation of God's sovereignty and the problem of evil I was tossing around the idea that while God might be in control of a bad event his 'moral favor' was withdrawn from it. However I think the old Reformed permissive will of God explanation is best, given the opaque nature of this topic in Scripture. So it's back to Van Til on this one.
"On Van Til's view, divine sovereignty extends to all things, and therefore also to evil and sin. God is not responsible for sin, but we should deny 'that anything happens in spite of him and in circumvention of his purpose.' ... God's decree 'is inclusive and permissive of the fact of sin.' According to Van Til, we may 'speak of the permissive will of God in order to stress man's undoubted responsibility for sin, but this distinction may never lead to subversion of the clear teaching of Scripture on the all-controlling if ultimate and mysterious power of God.' ... Because of his biblical view of divine sovereignty, he is unable to 'defend' God by appealing to human free will, the unreality of evil, the weakness of God, etc." (Van Til: An Analysis of his Thought, John Frame 83)
"Essentially, Van Til's theodicy is an appeal to God's inscrutable wisdom. God has the answer, but he has not chosen to reveal it to us, at least not comprehensively. Our thinking must be subject to his revelation and where that revelation is silent, we must be silent as well." (85)