The theodicy of protest is a theodicy that arose in post-holocaust theology.  The theodicy of protest is going to reinforce hope of removing evil through faithful protest and complaint and address God whose power is not limited by any rational rules and only depends on his absolute will. The theodicy of protest’s expectation is that God will change the circumstances in favor of the people who are suffering. In this article we try to analyze and criticize the theodicy of protest. The theodicy of protest in comparison to other theodicies has advantages and disadvantages. Unlike other theodicies which undertake maximalist approach to discover God’s reasons and motives, it takes an average and skeptical approach. It also has a pragmatic and victim-oriented, rather than a theoretical, approach; it provides a response to the emotional problem of evil; and it pays attention to historical events; it is going to solve the human problem through a human approach, rather than solving the philosophical and theological problems of evil. However, this theodicy has faced several criticisms: pessimistic eschatology, its opposition to divine beneficence, the contrast between human freedom and divine interference, the contradiction between divine love and divine power, the denial of hope in God, incorrect generalization of its efficiency. Some theologians and philosophers have criticized this theodicy including: John Hick, David Ray Griffin, and Stephen T. Davis and D. Z. Phillips.