Would an omnipotent, almighty, merciful God permit a man to be struck with blindness for most of his life, so that in God's own time, he might become the object of His glory? Would this same good God permit a man to lose his family and possessions, be struck with disease, and find himself sitting in ashes wishing he'd never been born, just so that God Himself would be vindicated? Is it within the realm of understanding that a God of love would allow one of His children to die, bringing grief to his family, just so that He would be glorified? Imagine the sense of hopelessness felt by those affected by the recent tsunami – is God to blame for the earthquake that caused the death of over 250,000 people in South Asia?
Pain, suffering and catastrophe create a rift in logic between the event and an all loving, sovereign God; they seem utterly incompatible to those who do not know Him. The logic goes like this: If God were good, He would wish to make His creation happy, and if God were omnipotent, He would be able to do what He wished; but since all of His creatures are not happy, God must lack goodness, power, or both. God's response to pain puts an end to all of the questions. It doesn't always answer our questions as we would like, but it stops our mouths. His answer is to suffering is the cross upon which His only Son was pierced for us. To all who grieve, He says ‘look at Him who bore your grief.' To the sorrowful, ‘look to the man of sorrows.' Thankfully God's answer is far better than any answer that human reasoning can fabricate. |
