Basic HTML Version
WhyMustMen
SUFFER?
"Many are the affiictions of the righteous," says
Scripture. Why? "1 am the Eterna/
. . .
1 create
evil," says lsaiah 45:5,
7.
How can this be? The
real meaning of the book of Job brings the true
W
Y
DOES
God permi r war?
WHY does God allow
human sutfering and mis–
ery? " If God is
GOOD -
if God is
love - if He is merciful , He would
nor wish for people ro sutfer," is che
reasoning of many humans. "And if
He is Almighry," rhey conclude, "He
could prevenr i r. So why doesn' r
He?"
Whar's wrong wi rh rhis reasoning?
But I s the Common
Explanation Right?
The common conceprion is rhis:
God finished H is Crearion as de–
scri bed in che firsr chaprer of Genesis;
God creared che firsr man perfecr, im–
morral; che work of Crearion was fin–
ished - complete. Adam was perfect
in characrer - innocenc of sin - en–
dowed w irh immorrality. Bur rhen,
when God wasn'r looking, rhese
people believe, Sacan enrered and suc–
ceeded in overrhrowing rhe man,
36
answer.
by
Herbert W . Armstrong
wrecking God's perfecr specimen of
human crearion. In so doing, of
course, Sacan rhwarted God's pur–
pose.
When God re turned and beheld
what Sacan had done, says this con–
ception, He was forced ro think out
sorne plan for repairing rhe damage.
And what is rhar damage supposed ro
have been? The man's narure had
been changed. He had "fallen" from
che nature of perfecrion, innocence
and holiness ro a fallen, sinfu l narure.
According ro chis concept, God
must have shaken H is head in near–
unbelief and near-frustra tion. But He
did think ou t a plan ro repair che
damage - a plan ro resrore man ro a
stare and condi rion
as good as Adam,
before the "fa!!." The plan of salva–
tion is, therefore, regarded as designed
ro restore damaged mankind ro a con–
dition
as good as
Adam ar creation.
But, of course, Sacan didn't give up
and go away. He has been around
ever since, opposing God's etforrs and
winning rhe conresr.
What Men Don' t Understand
Either chis common idea is rrue, or
the only alrernare possibiliry - rhar
God was Jooking, expressly permi tted
ir, and rhar God therefore is
RESPON–
SIBLE FOR IT!
And che preachers, rhe churches,
and che professing Christian people of
rhis world símply cannor bel ieve this!
Yet, ro reject
it
makes Sacan more
cunning, more powerful rhan God.
The common idea represenrs Sacan as
oursmarring God.
What meo do nor undersrand is
God's purpose, and God's plan for ac–
complishing Hís g rear purpose.
Yes, God
is
responsible! And being
responsible, God will see ro ir - He
and He alone is responsible fo r ac–
complíshing Hís grear original pur·
pose. Bur being
wponsible
does nor
PLAIN TRUTH
Jonuory
1973