No, in the matter of God's response [or lack thereof] it is not an answer that is logical.
I disagree, dear one (again, peace to you!). It is quite logical to me, based on WHY it is the way it is: man CHOSE it. What is ILLOGICAL to me... is (for the fiftieth time) how someone who doesn't BELIEVE in God... can be mad/angry/upset, etc., with "Him". It is ILLOGICAL to ME... that people who are illogically "mad" at and take issue with an entity they don't even believe EXISTS... can call anyone ELSE... or their arguments... illogical. But... that's just me and how I think.
Believers cannot have it both ways - saying on one hand that God is love, and on the other hand that he ignores the plight of mankind because it 'is man's problem to deal with'.
Sure we can! Love does not negate a child's problems, brought on my that child's actions and decisions... or a parents declination to get involved/bail him/her out. Yet. So, okay, some would call that "tough" love... but it's still love...
IF though, in spite of it's contradictory nature, that is the case to which you stick, then you definitely take the #2 position - God ignores or never hears prayers or cannot act on them.
Well, there is the FOURTH choice (which you REFUSE to acknowledge - which is also illogical to me; I mean, what competent scientist would present a hypothetical with only three of the four or more choices that exist, then, when a fellow scientist (or other person of competence) points out the omission REFUSE to include it? What competent scientist would insinuate to those undertaking to respond that the fourth (or other) possibilities are invalid because HE doesn't accept/desire/like them... and so try to restrict them to the three HE likes? Wouldn't his colleagues not only question his hypothetical... but perhaps even call for it to be thrown OUT... because it not only doesn't include all (or all currently known) possibilities, but REFUSES to do so?
But... okay... you want to box my responses into No. 2. But that one is also inaccurate, dear one... because it's lacking. How so? It does not fully address what it purports to. It insinutates that He ignores/never hears or cannot act on ALL prayers... and I responded to that accusation, specifically and in great detail. By proposing the FOURTH option... and truth: No. 2 applies to SOME prayers, even MOST prayers... but not ALL prayers. Not to the prayers of HIS children.
But... for some reason... you refuse to hear that truth... refuse to consider the truthfulness, even the reality of it. You don't reject it - you don't even HEAR it.
No matter how you wish to 'qualify and quantify' his/her/it's response to the problem, God's lack of action must be due to his ignoring prayer on the matter, or his inability to act.
And this is the GIST of your position: no matter HOW I or others [wish to] qualify or quantify. NOTHING will convice you of ANYTHING else other than God's lack of action MUST be due to... YOUR position. CAN'T be anything else... and no matter what anyone else presents, your position is no, it MUST be such and so. But... you don't KNOW God... so how can you SAY what it MUST be due to? Worse... you don't even BELIEVE in God... so how can you even have a position as to what it "must" BE?
If one has already made up one's mind as to what something is... or is not (and I totally get that, because there are things that MY mind is made up about)... how can one propound the questions that you have? What is the purpose... if not to find others who agree? If they don't agree, though, how can you take issue with them PERSONALLY? Did you not ask for THEIR position on the matter? Or did you tell them, "Here is what I think... and you'd better agree with me or I'm gonna call you names and go on a rant about what you believe and why it's wrong?"
For none of the believers would or ever has stated that millions of believers are not praying in behalf of these starving children - people all over the world have been so praying for millennia without answer.
Oh, contrare, dear one. While I may not have said that, specifically, I have absolutely stated that, in essence, although millions may be so praying... they are NOT "believers". Nor are they praying to the One YOU are taking issue with, the One you BELIEVE they believe IN... but do not. That you REFUSE to acknowledge this... is on you... and no one else. Not even God.
How can there be any other choice?
We have explained that... ad nauseum. Because YOU can't wrap YOUR mind around HOW... you refuse to accept any other choice. Do you SEE that? The limitation is yours, dear one... and no one else's. It's NO different than those who cannot wrap THEIR minds around evolution of ANY species. Or that the Bible ISN'T infallible... and ISN'T the Word of God. They REFUSE to do so... and so cannot. Same thing here.
Even if he ignores those problems because he views them as man's problem - then he falls into #2 - can you at least make that concession?
I mean, if you're stating that as to SOME, yes. If you're stating the position of No. 2 as to ALL... which, for some reason, you cannot seem NOT to do (because, for some reason, you, like many others, seem to think that ALL are God's children... yet, NO ONE has presented any "evidence", Biblical or otherwise to support THAT; to the contrary, the Bible states quite the opposite, almost throughout!)... then, no.
So... can we now agree to disagree... and move on with our lives? Here's hoping... but doubting...
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
