The proverbial gilded cage? Interesting choice of words.

From a person who studies logic as a philosophy, and attempts to apply it to all bits of my life, I think you should consider a few things.

'Intellectual' is merely a label to place on something to imply that it is reasoned and that more thought is associated with it that of the actions of a simpleton or a monkey. Even when true, this isn't exactly meaningful. Important to note as well, it is not something that is the opposite of emotion, it is just a descriptor of the magnitude of complication while functioning. Opposite of emotion is logic, which is something of a great deal more use.

Logic is the use of understanding the world and knowledge to come to a conclusion. It is, at optimum, grounded only in fact; or, in the very least, grounded in knowing conclusions that would be if everything you presume is in fact true.

Given this, your questions, you evaluation is in fact not utter emotion. Emotion may have guided you to the questions, but you are already examining them in a logical sort of fashion. You give the statement 'I know I need to rely on the Lord' and are making the logical question 'If I need to rely on the Lord, and I am, why must I endure as I do?'. Now, of course, there isn't a direct logical link, but let's take things a bit more broad as then we will be able to make at least broad conclusions. You know that you rely. You know that you love God. You know God provides. You God answers prayers (and yes, you know that the answers can be no). Then why, you can ponder, question to God... or at least the internet, why do I feel like nothing? Why then do I seem merely an icon, a bird in a cage. Why do I not feel like a daughter? Any time you have a list of things known, and then a conclusion that doesn't match the expectations of the things known, there can only be four errors. One, the things that are 'known' may in fact be false. Two, the expected conclusions are incorrect and you should be expecting something else. Three, you find that A simply doesn't cause B, and can not be related. And four, you are incorrect in your results, and you in fact do have the results you expected, you just don't realize it.

All of this is, in direct or implied form, is here. Most notably in your 'emotionally' section. In fact, the least logical things are in your 'intellectual' section, since they appear to be nothing more than unchallenged dogma. This may not be true, but from an objective view, your 'intellectual' conclusions are by far the weakest; in fact, they are not intellectual even, since they are the sections that show a lack of thinking on the subject, not excessive and complex thinking.

But I digress, what can you conclude? I will list the previously mentioned in order that I think is least likely to most likely. Develop your own conclusions though; I hope my skeletons of logic will be easy to build on.

(I am working with the question 'If God has rest for me, he is good, he has a plan, I exist as I do because of that plan [your 'intellectual' statements], why must I endure, why am I separated from Him, why am I just a symbol, a signpost of God's glory?[the 'emotional' statements]')

4) You are incorrect about your situation:
Considering the very point of questioning and pondering at all is because you lack an emotional connection and are in fact suffering, it is by it's own nature somewhat impossible. It is a paradox to think that you can argue with logic that you are not in fact suffering when the entire concept is subjective. There is a slight variation though that fits in this category that may exist. Though you may be suffering, God may in fact be right there with you as you would expect, you just do not realize it. Again, this logic borders on other categories, and still doesn't answer the 'why must I endure' question.

3) Things don't work that way:
This conclusion is similar to #2, but it has a twist. The fact that you have to endure your torment and the fact that God has answers and rest for you may not be related at all. This could only be from a few things. The most likely logical conclusion is that you are incorrect in what kind of things God does through the rest he gives- something a kin do the woman at the well who thought the eternal spring Jesus offered would mean she'd never have to come to the well again. This seems to be the kind of conclusion you have come to; ie, the rest is coming, I feel away from God in a way I made, I am a symbol because I made myself so and I'm not a daughter because I have kept God away as a father and all that rubbish. Yes, I say rubbish. If your standard logic be true, while you certainly could never come to the conclusion, there is NO logic in the thought that you are keeping yourself away and this IS indeed the kind of rest that you know God provides. This will, most likely, still be your position when I am done talking to you... or typing for an hour... whatever, but I assure you, it is rubbish, and I expect better than this from you. You will, though, assume your reasonable and logical question is still, as you've stated, 'emotional' and continue not questioning the most likely emotionally driven 'intellectual' conclusions, embracing them further.

2) Your questions are incorrect.
This is another bundle of fun that is unlikely in my thoughts like #3. This is to say that 'why must I endure' is not a question to be asked. To say that your response to your current situation should be different. Such as thinking the 'real' question is 'how much more will you give me' or that you should be asking God how to deny the temptation of such questions. This is catch all response to questions in the Roman Catholic church, and I'd say is probably the root of their negative aspects. I think you are asking the right questions, and there should be conclusions.

I will say though, there is a more reasonable conclusion in here, but I'll bundle that with #1

1) Your 'facts' are not true.
This is what I would place my bets on, considering the lack of options and this being quite open. This, of course, is a kettle of worms (ick, worm stew?). There has been a multitude of basic facts here that have been used to get you to the point you are now. We know from Jesus, a good foundation weathers a storm- so I suggest just that. Throw everything at everything you've taken for granted. Don't hold back. Anything that survive scrutiny should be tossed away. If this is the logical conclusion, then somewhere your foundation has been compromised. Somewhere you built, thinking it was firm and it was nothing but sand and air. I even suggest searching for flaws in your foundation and for you to consider every possibility. Nothing fears scrutiny but lies; it is the light against the shadows of foolishness.

If you conclude to #1, I myself will not 'suggest' what may be wrong. Not only is this not the way someone grows from conflict, but I would utterly taint such a search. Though, I will gladly answer any retort or question you've got.

Go in Peace~ Bradley