kirkstaller wrote:
Which questions are they? Care to point me in the right direction?
What a pisspoor tactic. What you do is ignore every question, and you hope it will be submerged and your swerve not noticed, or forgotten.
Now, and for the second time, you innocently ask "What questions"?
As if you didn't know.
They are those questions that YOU READ when I posted them, and consciously decided it was best to swerve. Those questions.
And now you have an even more pathetic swerve, you no doubt "can't be be bothered" or "haven't the time" to look back in the thread for them.
You've been rumbled, pal. There is only ONE reason you have not answered and that is the questions defeat you so you choose to pretend they never happened. Well done.
kirkstaller wrote:
... God does not intercede anymore like he did in the OT.
Er, or else god never did intercede in any of the OT fairytales, and the reason we never see god interceding nowadays is not because he's (for reasons you don't explain) changed his rather erratic game plan, but because he doesn't exist. You are quite correct in that he has not intervened since the OT. All you need to get your head around now is that he never did during OT times either, and as Occam would explain why that is.
tb wrote:
So, accepting your premise: there's no point in prayer - except as sycophancy. It also, incidentally, says that your 'conversion' experience where you personally met Jesus (who is but one aspect of the triune god) didn't happen.
kirkstaller wrote:
... I met Jesus.
This is in need of explanation. God doesn't intervene. But in your case, he did, to the extent of a one-to-one chat with JC, which is why you are where you are. You need to explain how that is not "intervention". Or did he decide never to interfere with the rest of humanity, but made a single exception in your case?
tb wrote:
... if you claim that your belief is based on meeting Jesus, you've just destroyed faith - a central tenet of your own theology.
oops.
kirkstaller wrote:
(aimed at tb)
Can i just point out to kirkstaller and his apologists and others objecting to one sided name calling that this here is kirkstaller calling tb "CRAZY". Not very Christian, IMHO.
kirkstaller wrote:
Interceding in world events is different to being open to a relationship freely sought by us, mankind.
Explain that to me. You are saying that you sought a relationship with JC, and so he popped round? I would suggest that your god or his son personally visiting one of his sinners is the clearest intervention in human affairs there could be. How is personally meeting a deity, and thus knowing, as opposed to believeing, they exist, not intervention?
kirkstaller wrote:
You seem jealous that God only has 1-2-1 meeting with 'some of us' - this is a good thing, it means you too want the same relationship - however, this opportunity is only open to those who are open to it.
Until I was in my early teens I had been brainwashed into all this religious bullshit and so was a firm believer. Why did JC pass up on the opportunity of popping round to mine, then, while he had the chance? (Knowing in advance, as he does, that if he did. I would forever be saved, but if he didn't, I was a goner? Not very fair that. Why did he choose to intervene to save your bigoted ass but leave me to rot in hell?
kirkstaller wrote:
I also think you need to revisit the Biblical definition of faith.
He doesn't nor do I. You can't advance your own argument by quoting your own written materials! The one who needs to revisit it would presumably be the one who claims to have met god personally thereby removing the need to have any faith.
No doubt Kirkstaller will come back agreeing with me saying his way is the only way. 
