Quotables

"It's like you had a religious awakening...you are a bald-again!"
- Jerry Seinfeld to George Costanza

"If God would actually eat anything, it would be Prosciutto di Parma."
- Me explaining to Jamie the importance of fine cured Italian meats

"We've always sat in the middle...we never made any changes"
- MichaelB claiming proudly that he doesn't change his mind on theology

"There's a shocker. It's a good thing he didn't die while he was a preterist, huh? He would have gone to..."
- Anonymous answering to the charge that Preterism is a "damnable heresy"

"After 45 minutes the seal gave up, swam into the water and then completely ignored the bird it had just assaulted, the scientists report."
- Article describing a seal trying to mate with a penguin: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7379554.stm

"The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get it and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!"
- Rocky Balboa

"We began to realize, that for our existence to hold any value, it must end. To live meaningful lives, we must die, and not return. The one human flaw you spend your lives distressing over...mortality, is the one thing..well, it's the one thing that makes you whole."
- Six, speaking to humans in Battlestar Galactica


19 May, 2008 | Virgil
« Prev item - Next Item »

Comments


by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 18:46:10
Virgil writes:
"We've always sat in the middle...we never made any changes" - MichaelB claiming proudly that he doesn't change his mind on theology

Virgil - please kindly remove this quote - since you took it WAY out of context. The CONTEXT was that we have not changed our stance that

A) Emergent is whacked and wrong but that...

B) We had always been willing to interact with it / you / ie NOT going back and forth from "we will interact" to "we will not interact" like other people we know.

You TOTALLY took it out of it's context.

Thanks, MB

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 19:08:26
PS - notice - it doesn't say ANYTHING about theology in my quote ... what exactly would we be "sitting in the middle" of as far as theology ??? ... that makes no sense Virgil ...I am a Calvinist / Sov Grace Preterist. How exactly is that "in the middle" theologically - geesh.

Don't ya think what I am saying fits the context a little better...

that we (me Sam and Jason) have disagreed with much of what is going on, but we (me Sam and Jason) Have never gone back and forth from interacting with you guys and Tim M and others that we disagree on like the TD's and the RE's and the ST's and Brian S and TJs and WF's etc.

It doesn't make any sense what you are saying that it says Virgil. Since we have all gone from futurists to Preterists. I would never say that in regards to theology. And I would never claim some "middle ground" regarding never changing theology.

That doesn't EVEN make sense Virgil, what does "middle ground" have to do with theoloogy? Only guys I can evene think of that would relate middle ground and thoelogy are Calminians =)

Don't ya think what I am saying might really be the contexts since

A) What you are saying does not make any sense (see above).

and

B) What I am saything that the subject was, when I said that, makes the quote make sense.

MB

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 19:59:02
PPS - if I remember correctly, the context of the statement was that if we can't convince you guys (and others) with Paul's words and his condemnations etc. etc. why would I think that using my own words would work. etc...which is what i meant by "middle ground". Always willing to interact - but also standing my / our ground on truth - and going after arguments rather than making it personal and instead of condemning people. If Paul condemns something and someone won't listen to his words. Why put it in my own words etc...

Our "middle" is to stand for truth and be willing to interact with everything. We have never waivered on that.

Can you see this makes more sense in CONTEXT Virgil?

MB

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 20:17:47
Mike, you are wrong. You, Sam and Jason are waxing eloquent on truth, creeds and "how wrong Planet Preterist is." You responded with the quote above. Start at minute 43 with this podcast: http://www.blubrry.com/play...

As a result to that thinking, you will never adjust, never learn and never accept ANYONE or ANYTHING no matter what position is being proposed or discussed.

Lighten up dude...if you make comments in public, expect to be called on them...plus my Quotables is meant to be a lighthearted entry anyways.

by Jer - 19 May, 2008 - 20:27:45
Thank you for protecting my anonymity, Virgil.

by Jer - 19 May, 2008 - 20:28:15
As a follow-up to my previous post, I would like to add: Oops :D

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 20:53:39
Whatever Virgil - I am not that worried about it...but you are wrong - just listen to the context a few minutes earlier - what Sam says about extremes. We don't wnat to go to the extreme whacky views of Planet Pret and we dont want to go to the etremes of condemnation as RE and ST etc. This is exactly what I was saying above...

What else could it mean Virgil? Theologically, we hold (held until recently) the SAME view as Roderick etc. So OBVIOUSLY we can't be talking merely about theology. Checkmate - you made my point with the audio.

We were talking about being in the middle of "anything goes" PP and "condemnation" of ST and RE. That was the entire point.

We are allowed to "tinker with the creeds" when we think they are wrong. Hello Virgil - does that sound like we are saying we never change theologically - OOPS...

I said "consistent on how we delt with these things" - is what I said - "if Paul the apostle can't convince them how is it gonna help if I tell them in my own words that they are wrong"

HELLO...knocks on Virgil's head...anyone there?

The whole point of the broadcats was we are in the middle. We don't hold to the creeds to a T, where they disagree with scripture, and we dont throw them out, and start making stuff up like at PP. That was the entire point. Wake up Virgil...listen to it again...

"We are just talking about a couple of tweaks, thats not a complete overhaul" - Sam

How can we "tweak" if we can never "change" our theology Virgil - that makes NO sense whatsoever...

by Ed Burley - 19 May, 2008 - 20:56:44
But Jeremy, we still don't know who would have gone to hell if they'd died a preterist - that's the real mystery.....?????

ed

Oh and PPPPPPPPS: yeah Mike, lighten up. I read the whole thing with a smile on my face. It's good to have something to smile about. Besides, it doesn't matter to what Virgil attributed your words, we all know what you are like...that's why I usually ignore you. :)

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 21:08:55
The ENTIRE conversation was this in a nutshell...

Throw out baby and bathwater = define nothing, no systematic = make animals on ark people etc. = PP

Don't throw out baby or bathwater = condemn everyone based on creeds = Rod, Scott

Throw out the bathwater, keep baby = tweak systematic according to truth of preterism, don't deny historical truths = "middle" Jason, Sam, and I.

That's all - sorry you don't get that...

by kingneb - 19 May, 2008 - 21:42:40
It doesn't surprise me. Virgil thought i accused Tami of having an affair...did no such thing. Virgil ignored the context..go figure Mike.

You can explain it all day long, but once these guys have you in the radar, it doesn't matter.

Virgil doesn't seem to care about the context, but hey, i speak lightheartedly and it's just my opinion. ( ;

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 21:44:34
Mike, OK - if I did get you wrong, I am glad you are here to clarify it brother :)

by Middleknowledge - 19 May, 2008 - 21:45:57
Virgil,

Great one by Rocky Balboa...

Tim Martin
http://www.beyondcreationsc...

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 21:51:36
LOL Tami - you crack ME up...

Guess you can't read...

Jason wrote:
Let's all make an agreement to "ban" Roderick on this site. I don't want to see his name anywhere anymore. I don't want links to his pages, links to audios, links to photos. I want zilch to do with him.

Ban Roderick "on this site" - Hello - Tami?

Well I guess I should have expected that from you Tami...

Anyone that would make Satan = flesh and Animals = people in Genesis etc. I probably should not expect to be able to actually read the details of a simple post either.

Look you even spiritualized Jason's post. Turned "on this site" into "everywhere".

Hey - don't be so bitter because we didn't let you on our site Tami...

Ed Burley - I don't blame you for ignoring me - but it is really the scriptures that you are attacking. Universalism is just not there. Right Tami? You agree with that right Tami - or is Universalism A-O-K as long as you believe in covenantal Creation - geesh...

And all along I have been told by Tim and JL that covenantal creation ABSOLUTLEY defeats universalism - go figure...

by J.H. - 19 May, 2008 - 21:51:48
King Neb,

Lift some weights dude, you have to much aggresion you need to release : )

by J.H - 19 May, 2008 - 21:53:12
Mike when you disagree with someone thats cool man. But to always throw in , well I expected that because you beleive Noah ate bologna sandwhiches on the ark, is really lame : )

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 21:54:07
Jason, to compliment what I would say to Mike also, neither one of you guys ever come here to post something uplifting or constructive; you guys are always combative, defensive and critical to the extreme.

In fact, I don't think I have ever seen you or Mike ever admit that you are wrong or ponder the possibility of being wrong about any topic whatsoever. :)

I am not attacking you guys...I am just making an observation.

Does that happen? :)

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 22:01:18
Holy hell...Mike and Jason - dudes...you guy are turning 10 words into the Klingon War!

You guys need to lighten up!! You get upset about ONE quote, but have you heard me point out all the inaccurate characterizations of PP you guys have made? No..mostly because I don't care.

by jim kessler - 19 May, 2008 - 22:06:16
Virgil & Tim,

Yea, I liked the Rocky quote also but after Rocky one he should of retired the gloves.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing if it inspires quotes like this because Rocky 2,3,4, and 5 sure beat the crap out of his acting career :-)

The real question becomes; Rambo vs. Balboa....who wins?

Jim Kessler
http://www.InChristVictorio...

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 22:08:44
The real question becomes; Rambo vs. Balboa....who wins?

Neither - Tropic Thunder baby!!! (watch the language if you decide to watch the trailer)



by Rich - 19 May, 2008 - 22:09:32
"Jason, to compliment what I would say to Mike also, neither one of you guys ever come here to post something uplifting or constructive; you guys are always combative, defensive and critical to the extreme."

And that's an understatement.

by MichaelB - 19 May, 2008 - 22:10:38
Tami - I took down the post on our site. I forgot about our rule - didn't realize the "RE" on there - because I had copied it from Platet P comments and forgot about that becuase that was not even the subject - but the post really had nothing to do about Roderick anyways. It wasn't "attention drawing" to him.

It had to do with taking me out of context.

But Tami - it is mine and Jason's site - and we can decide on our own what goes and what stays. I think Jason know that was not at all directed at Roderick - I was just explaining my quote.

Virgil - thanks for the words above. No worries. I will take your above word into consideration. Try to be more "constructive" to balance out the "critical"

See...it happens...=) Sometimes we listen...

BTW - though - if you listen to the broadcast we have said before, that some of the points on various subjects we can see. But when we test other things it contradicts scriptures etc.

That was my whole point of the "nutshell version" above...

The ENTIRE conversation was this in a nutshell...

Throw out baby and bathwater = define nothing, no systematic = make animals on ark people etc. = PP

Don't throw out baby or bathwater = condemn everyone based on creeds = Rod, Scott

Throw out the bathwater, keep baby = tweak systematic according to truth of preterism, don't deny historical truths = "middle" Jason, Sam, and I.

John H - the animals thing was not directed at you. Just using it as example. Like with the Satan exeample. (+ Virgil brought up the broadcast and if you listen both of those were mentioned) I know you were just contemplating it in the past. Now, however, people are flat out sayting it as fact. It is RIDICULOUS when you exegete Genesis.

by jim kessler - 19 May, 2008 - 22:16:21
Tropic Thunder????????????

The only thing missing in this movie is Rambo's "missing in action" father, Chuck Norris ;(

Jim

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 22:24:05
The only thing missing in this movie is Rambo's "missing in action" father, Chuck Norris ;(

No worries man..Nick Nolte took a break from smoking weed just for that role!

by jim kessler - 19 May, 2008 - 22:46:06
Nolte's still around?

Anyway the perfect guy to play the commander in this movie would of been that Steven Seagal. Vigil, here's one of his quotes that you should of used.

"Trust your doubt. Always fight for your beliefs. That is the path beyond thought.”

Sounds pretty cool for someone who still wears a ponytail:)

Jim

by Virgil - 19 May, 2008 - 22:58:02
Jim, that's not bad man, coming from a ponytail guy. Does he count as one of Driscoll's "dudes" worthy of Christ? hehehe

by jim kessler - 20 May, 2008 - 00:34:07
INSPIRATIONAL MEDITATION:

Speaking of ponytails. The image of Christ we see in our society is one of a man with long hair. So is it possible that at some moment during His lifetime Jesus was also a ponytail guy?

:-)

Jim

by Sammy - 20 May, 2008 - 03:18:47
And here I thought, could have sworn, that Virgil loved my presentation at his conference....and now to find that I never have said anything but that which is combative.....Wittgenstein, anyone?

Sam

by Jamie - 20 May, 2008 - 08:12:32
Sam, Virgil did not say that about you (being combative)and I have a question for you. Why...in person, are you SO nice and treat Virgil as your best friend and then online you are so mean? I don't get it. You seem to be the nicest guy in person.

by Jer - 20 May, 2008 - 08:21:55
MikeB: "Hey - don't be so bitter because we didn't let you on our site Tami..."

MikeB "But Tami - it is mine and Jason's site - and we can decide on our own what goes and what stays."

So, one has to be pre-approved before participating at your site? What are the criteria? I mean--would someone like Virgil be allowed to join? Myself?

BTW, I don't hold to any of "the extreme whacky views of Planet Pret" that you have attributed to me by association, but I'll forgive your generalization. You have my approval to post on PP :)

Jer

by Middleknowledge - 20 May, 2008 - 08:36:56
Might as well ask,

Can I join, too? I have a Reformed background.

Tim Martin
http://www.beyondcreationsc...

by Ahab - 20 May, 2008 - 08:47:24
Isa 5:15 And the MEAN MAN shall be brought down, and the mighty man shall be humbled, and the eyes of the lofty shall be humbled:

by Virgil - 20 May, 2008 - 09:17:08
So is it possible that at some moment during His lifetime Jesus was also a ponytail guy?

That's obscene - Driscoll would very much object to that...the ponytail would turn him into a "chickified dude." If you don't slaughter a few hundred people and play football, you aint a Christian buddy.

by Tami - 20 May, 2008 - 09:22:06
"If you don't slaughter a few hundred people and play football, you aint a Christian buddy."

And don't forget the tattoos!

by Virgil - 20 May, 2008 - 09:29:39
Good grief, for guys who start a site that denies memebership to virtually everyone posting on this thread, you sure spent a lot of time here.

That is an interesting comment in that apparently Jason doesn't want all the "bickering" and arguing on their site, but they bring it HERE any time they want! WTF?!?

by Jer - 20 May, 2008 - 12:53:19
So much for levity :) This has already gotten way out of hand.

OK. Virgil was wrong about Mike. Mike was wrong to generalize about the "whacky" beliefs of Planet Pret. Jason was wrong to say, "Seriously, you guys are pathetic." Ed--well, of course "intellectual retardation" was over the top, too. Sam was wrong to take a comment directed at Jason and Mike as referring to himself. I was wrong to open my mouth at all. I think that covers everyone--in more or less chronological order.

So, can we move past these snipes and extend a little grace toward one another? Someone has to step up and be the bigger man. If a particular person gets your goat, talk to him privately, ignore him, or, better yet, pickup up the phone and have a real conversation. These invidious exchanges reflect poorly on us and the God we all claim to serve. So, please, please, please consider that before clicking the "Add Comment" button :) Be wronged or be gracious in reply. That's my take anyway.

Jer

by Jer - 20 May, 2008 - 13:10:53
Jason:

I can certainly empathize with your frustration. I tried to be an equal opportunity offender with that list, so I couldn't leave you unmentioned however tenuous the charge :) It was not my intent to gloss over anything. I prefer to move past this stuff--to the benefit of everyone involved.

You said, "There are people over here who refuse to accept responsibility for what they say and they are going to drag everyone else down with them if they have to."

So, what can we do to make it better? I'm willing to sit in the "middle" :)

Jer

by Norm - 20 May, 2008 - 13:29:30
Jer

While you are sitting in the middle would you ask Jason if his trio could show some civility on their radio program toward some of us here? It would sure help calm things down if they would avoid some of their debasing rhetoric which offends others (Such as the program Virgil refereed to). If we could get an agreement on some of those issues we might have the basis for getting along better.

Norm

by Virgil - 20 May, 2008 - 13:38:17
Jason - I deleted the last several comments you posted; I also deleted several other comments from other people because they are only making the situation worse.

It's not that I don't want you or Mike here - I don't want crap here on my blog, and just like you decide what goes and stays on your site, so do I :)

by Jer - 20 May, 2008 - 14:23:00
Norm:

I would be happy to try. May I suggest an airing of grievances followed by feats of strength? I'll bring the aluminum pole. Serenity now! :D

Seriously, though--I would be happy to help in any way I can. I'll talk to whomever will listen.

Jer

by Norm - 20 May, 2008 - 16:01:46
Jer,

“Feats of strength”!

Maybe 30 years ago in my military and football days but alas no more “feats of strength” anymore ;-(

Jer we simply have some of us that are just not compatible in dialoguing properly with each other on some subjects. It would do no good to be self justifying so it may be best to just avoid each other and not make remarks publicly about each other (written or audio).

It requires concentration and the willingness to repent of remarks for ongoing dialogue between two diverging viewpoints. The problem is that just one slipup can train wreck the process if both parties are not amenable to repentance. Only one side repenting will not work. I think we in marriages realize that dynamic.

So the bottom line is that you must have two willing repenters.

Norm

by Ransom - 20 May, 2008 - 19:24:40
I'm not trying to call anyone out, but I need to say this - and many of you need to listen. I can honestly say I value every one of you who have commented on this thread, regardless of what you think of me. I can disagree with you strenuously all day long, and you could lambaste my theological position on every podcast, but I want to feel like brothers, replete with knock-down, drag-out disagreements, but who always have some Christian affection for one another that far transcends toleration.

As long as we insist on feeling like a victim and demand recompense of some sort, humility does not have its proper place in us; you can't offend a dead man, but a man proud of his positions and reputation sets himself up for a thousand deaths.

Jesus takes us on long before we've got it all together; then once He's called us His own, He doesn't deny us and stand up there with arms crossed until we acknowledge our trespasses against Him. Do we have higher standards than He does? Are our good names and intellectual positions so much higher than God's that we must exact a higher price when someone slanders us or misrepresents our position?

Paul's admonishment, "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone" (Ro 12:11), cannot be implemented as long as we hang on to our right to be offended and demand to be treated justly. This is what "turn the other cheek" is all about, guys. How far does it depend on us? All the way up the hill to the cross.

In hope of better fellowship,
Stephen

by Virgil - 20 May, 2008 - 19:42:26
Stephen, I hope of better fellowship too :)

by Jer - 20 May, 2008 - 20:36:56
What Stephen said :)

Jer

by Ed Burley - 20 May, 2008 - 20:41:02
Hey, I roomed with that guy.

by plymouthrock!! - 20 May, 2008 - 20:43:40
Yes, Planet Better Fellowship!

Rock

by davo - 20 May, 2008 - 20:51:31
Well said Stephen...

by Paige - 20 May, 2008 - 22:23:36
Stephen just knocked it out of the ballpark!!!

by Ransom - 20 May, 2008 - 22:51:06
Glad what I wrote resonates with you all. I'm really just taking off on Jer's even-handed comments.

by Sammy - 21 May, 2008 - 01:44:21
wow...

by Jer - 21 May, 2008 - 07:34:12
And Jack Scott's podcast is finally available. I can almost hear angels singing :)

Jer

by Scotty - 22 May, 2008 - 11:01:00
Hah! Hah!

Leave comment

(comments are moderated and will need to be approved)
:

Permitted HTML: <a>, <i>, <b>, <u>, <strike>, <blockquote>
Line breaks will be added automatically.

:
:




© 2008 unfinishedchristianity.com | Designed by DesignsByDarren
Ported to Nucleus CMS: Suvoroff