so we have to discard our rational compassionate sense and use a spiritual sense to justify letting innocent children starve?
I am not advocating inaction, but still responding to the grief and anger you display in your initial reaction and judgement of God, assuming that He exists. One needs to be able to feel the existence of the transcendent, not merely extrapolate it. This feeling really is something that one has, or doesn't. It will not do us any good to discuss it if neither of us have ever sensed it.
the reaction is simply looking at the evidence,comparing it to what this god describes himself as being,if we are to believe the bible is his word, and calling bs.
The bird is food. To answer your question...Manna was given to the Israelites because they were unsettled. They could grow no crops of their own in the wilderness of Sinai. Look at that picture. There are obviously trees and shrubs growing well there. Crops could be grown if they tried.
The insistence on demonstrable evidence is a premise of the scientific worldview, and yes, it is very, very good in its utilitarianism, but it is not the only worldview and does not meet all needs. Many events we accept as real, but that we did not ourselves experience, cannot be repeated, but we typically accept the testimony of eye witnesses, IF and only if it accords with our own limited experience. This points to the possibility of a sense of the world that many apparently have, and that many don't and thus will never be able to use for argument's sake.
a wrong hypotheses is corrected by new evidence. how is religious delusion corrected when the concept of evidence is shunned?