Either suffering is needed to perfect human character or ...

[Sakya kim]

In this following context,
1) according to the usage 'either... or', should I take the underlined sentence as:
'If suffering is needed to perfect human character, then God is not Almighty. In other words, if God is truly Almighty, then suffering shouldn't be needed to perfect human character.'?

2) Does it close to its meaning?


Context:
Commenting on human sufferings and God, Prof. J. B. S. Haldane writes:

“Either suffering is needed to perfect human character, or God is not Almighty. The former theory is disproved by the fact that some people who have suffered very little but have been fortunate in their ancestry and education have very fine characters. The objection to the second is that it is only in connection with the universe as a whole that there is any intellectual gap to be filled by the postulation of a deity. And a creator could presumably create whatever he or it wanted.”​

Source: P. 40
Buddhism in a nutshell
by Narada Thera

 

[Tarheel]

In other words, if God is truly almighty then suffering shouldn't be needed to perfect human character.

 

[jutfrank]

It means that there are only two ways to explain the problem of suffering.

a) God is not almighty
b) God uses suffering as way to perfect us

Any one of these explanations is sufficient to resolve the problem, which is to answer why there's suffering in the world when we have an omnipotent and benevolent god.