No. I asked 'how is ANY OF THIS representative of logic? Where is the logic you claim... anywhere? If the logic exists, it should be possible to demonstrate it somehow (as I do with my points below).
Then respond to the points I made. I will repeat and expand on them below:
> The reality that humankind experiences, does not match up with your claim of a loving god. A child suffering with cancer or starvation or abuse does not need this supposed (as you say) "pinch" from God to awaken them to reality. Logically, this shows that there is no such god.
> Throughout human history, there have been so many varied imaginings and claims about various gods from the minds of men obviously for their own purposes/circumstances. Logically, this shows gods as being products of man.
> None of these gods have ever been demonstrated as real. Instead, men make up all kinds of excuses for why this must be so. Logically, this shows that people do this in order to preserve their imagination and continue making claims that serve themselves.
> It is not logical to think that a god who supposedly creates ALL would be intent on saving or condemning any part of that creation, rather these are needy and fearful human attributes attributed to the god.
> It's not logical to claim that the creative spirit/energy that flows/exists throughout all is loving while ignoring everything else contrary to that, nor is it logical to identify that creative spirit/energy that flows/exists throughout all as any separate 'beingness'. Claiming there's a separate being (often referred to as a 'he') is what humans create and use for their purposes which very easily turns into intoxication and delusion which they insist that others believe as the only truth.
> Based on all of this above, it is more logical to embrace the life experience we find ourselves in with more awareness and flexibility and responsibility than pretending there's a god in charge.
If the same creative spirit/energy is flowing throughout all, then logically there must be potential for empowerment through that, and representation of it, throughout all. No imaginary and problematic figurehead needed.
Does that seem logical to you? Can you provide the same amount of logic for your beliefs?