The Problem of Evil combined with the problem of Free Will

[Aroura]

So the answers I'm getting are:

God is not just.  We are all sinners, so if he saves anyone, then hurray.  He's not saving anyone on merit, either, but apparently picking them for reasons unknown to humans, as apparently even denying him isn't enough to send you to hell.  ?  Is this all correct? [1]

So basically, God works in mysterious ways, he'll save those he chooses to save for his own reasons that we can't possibly understand.  Also, life isn't a test, yet it isn't Gods fault we suffer, even though he made us able to suffer in an unjust and uncaring universe? [2]

None of this makes ANY sense to me.  How can you believe all these contradictory things, like that God is omni-everything, yet isn't responsible for our suffering?  Not all suffering (nor even most) is a result of human behaviors.  Drought, flood, earthquakes, disease, hunger, are most often the outcome of things humans have zero control over.  

If Life isn't a test, why are we put here to suffer, instead of just going directly to heaven, as some other beings supposedly got to do?[3]

1. God is just and I don't know how you got that from anyone's answer. Why do you say "picking them"? In your scenario, you said Jamal rejected God because of his experiences. 
2. Why "for his own reasons" again? God could easily have created a universe without suffer. Obviously that was not his goal. Free will and the ability for people to love each other and love him seems to take precedence. 
3. There is no logical problem with the concept--let's call that the intellectual Problem of Evil (PoE) (which has largely been abandoned by professional philosophers). You objection is based on empathy/emotions or the emotional PoE. I fully agree and understand that this is one of or the biggest obstacle for an open-minded person to have when considering the God of Christianity. However, I do have a couple of points about a Christian perspective on this issue (adapted from a podcast I listened to):

a. The chief purpose of life is knowledge of God, not happiness. 
b. We are in a state of separation/rebellion against God and his purpose-spiritual evil can prevail for a time. 
c. This life is but a blip when considering eternity and God has that perspective that we often don't see/remember.
d. The knowledge of God is of immeasurable importance--and far outweighs finite suffering.

Bold mine. 
Could you kindly back up this assertion with a link or two?
I actually spent some time seeing if this statement had any basis in fact, and only come across many modern references to people STILL discussing it.  It is referenced in the "Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy", and I see conferences and meetings scheduled this very year to discuss it.  I have yet to find any claim that it has "largely been abandoned".  
There are modern philosphers even composing new arguments using the Problem of Evil, and of course, modern apologists right there to form there counter-arguments.  This hardly seems largely dismissed