AgLiving06 said:
I think given the vagueness of the example, there's really no "right" answer to be had here. It's also includes multiple "decision points" that each need their own facts.
So first off, lets define our terms.
God allowed - I would argue this is a passive action.
God caused - This would be an active action.
When I look at your story, I see a couple decision points:
1. Man brings his young daughter(s) to the cabin.
2. Man leaves the door open when he leaves
3. Wolves take daughter(s) for food.
Given the information we have, I'm not sure we could draw any real conclusion one way or the other.
For example:
1. Did the man have a choice in bringing his daughters?
2. Did the man decide to leave the door open of his own will?
3. Why are the wolves there? Why are the wolves hungry?
You can make an argument that every action was passive, or active, or somewhere in between.
It really only becomes a problem (in my opinion) if you take an absolute standard of passive or active as the only answer.
The father in our example may have been 'Dad of the Year' taking his daughters on the yearly camping trip and decided to leave the door open to give the girls fresh air while he went for a short hike in an area that is not known to have wolves, bears, or any other potentially dangerous wildlife. For the reasons that AgLiving mentioned, I don't think the analogy really works.
I think the most problematic part of OPs analogy is that implies a comparison of how causation and consequences works with humans with how it works with God. Human actions always have all sorts of unintended consequences (like for the girls and the wolves). Can you say the same about God? I think that just depends on your opinion and 'version' of God.
A better example would be a child born with a severe birth defect. One that is purely genetic and happens by chance rather than by any action of the mother or father. Does God allow that happen through chance? Or does God cause that?
Trying to understand or describe intention of a being that you define as 'all-powerful' or 'all-knowing' or 'beyond time' or whatever is a fool's errand. It seems to me that the only way for us to describe celestial causation with a human analogy is to forfeit a lot of the power you assign to God.