Theologica

a bible, theology, politics, news, networking, and discussion site

Facts:

 

1.  I am not what one might call "an attractive man."

2.  I am, however, married to an attractive woman - whom I love very much.

3.  I have two sons and a daughter.

4.  I have been in the US Army for 12 years, so far.  I am, right now an E7 (Sergeant First Class).

5.  I have lived in many places:

      - Canton, OH (birth)

      - Joplin, MO 

      - Darmstadt and Greishiem, Germany 

      - Clayton, NY

      - Conyers, GA

      - Olympia, WA

      - (and kind of 'lived') Fallujah, Iraq; Baghdad, Iraq; a camp right outside of Ur of Chaldees, Iraq; near Kuwait City, Kuwait; a few other places, too.

6.  I became a Christian at 15 in a Christian Church/CoC in Ohio.  Big church of like 3,000 members back then.

7.  I was a pretty crappy Christian for a while, but didn't know it.

8.  My family (me, wife, kids) are confessional Particular Baptists.  We confess with the 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689), as well as the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, and the Definition of Chalcedon.

9.  Now I know how crappy of Christian I am.

10.  My favorite books are -- meh, I can't really say.  I like a lot of books.  Mostly I read history (mostly American and Church), Theology, and some 'classics.'

11.  My favorite movie is Casablanca - that's easy.

12.  I enjoy long walks on the beach and poetry read from soft, inviting lips during the sunset of a cool spring morning over a glass of a fine Pinot Grigio.  And fishing... I can't fish enough.  More, more, more, and more fishing.

13.  Currently seeking membership at Olympia Bible Presbyterian Church.

14.  Thirteen is a good number so I'll end there.

15.  Crud!

16.  Truthfully, I'm not bothered by that... because I lack feelings.

 

You can go here for some more.

Here is even better.

Tags: 1One, 2Ugly, 3Dude

Views: 858

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

congratulations, Ray, and best wishes to you all - sensible advice from EA, but certainly the baby is cuter than you!

Congratulations Ray!!!!

'Twas fun while it lasted.  

I learned a lot here, and developed some lasting friendships (or, at least, lasting stays of execution).  But, Theo is no longer the place to learn that it once was.  I hope to continue engaging people in other places and in other media.

What I don't want to do is snipe this site in discussions or continue a pointless argument about where the site is or isn't going and whose fault it is or isn't that Theo is or isn't going there.  This is the internets, and these things happen.  Oh, well.  

< /lurking>
< leaving> 

Well, I'm hoping for change.

If I get an indicator of that, I'll hang around.

If not...

See you over there.

Ray Nearhood said:

'Twas fun while it lasted.  

I learned a lot here, and developed some lasting friendships (or, at least, lasting stays of execution).  But, Theo is no longer the place to learn that it once was.  I hope to continue engaging people in other places and in other media.

What I don't want to do is snipe this site in discussions or continue a pointless argument about where the site is or isn't going and whose fault it is or isn't that Theo is or isn't going there.  This is the internets, and these things happen.  Oh, well.  

< /lurking>
< leaving> 

Sad to see you leave, Ray.  But I appreciate the graceful way in which you did it.  And I wish you only the best on your Sanctified Forum.  I really do.  

Jason said:

Well, I'm hoping for change.

If I get an indicator of that, I'll hang around.

If not...

See you over there.


I've been a member of many, many forums going back to the 80s when you had to dial into your local BBS to get to one.  And there is a sad truth that I have seen played out over and over.  People come and people go.  And for every one that leaves because the place doesn't change to however they would prefer, there is an equal number that would leave because it changed and wasn't what it once was.  For every one that leaves because some favorite member got their hand slapped, others leave because they think certain behavior is *not* addressed and should be.  For every complaint that we allow too many of "them" on the site, there are an equal number that we are too much of a clique.  Does it mean the moderation and the actions of the members are perfect?  No.  But forums are like churches.  If they were ever perfect to begin with, they are not as soon as we join them.  So trading one URL for another doesn't solveanything at all. It just changes the location of the issues. 

The other sad truth is that Theologica will be around for 4 years in May.  Many, I'd even say *most*, don't last that long.  Without it being tied to something like a podcast or something that drives new content topics into the site, folks get weary of talking about the same old topics with the same old people and nothing ever changes.  Ray's criticism about lack of learning reflects that.  So while I wish him all the best with his new forum where the "sanctified" people can hang out, the truth is that it will follow the same life cycle of every other forum.  Particularly if the same people who had bad behavior here that had to be addressed just go to the new place.  And lest I'm accused to contributing to that, I've avoided any participation there - even though I would have loved to come to my own defense on a number of occasions when people have sent me links and asked if I know the kinds of things being said over there.  It's a different place.  It has a different personality.  In some ways, it should be much easier to moderate as there doesn't seem to be the same goal of irenic and respectful conversation (given some of the comments about Theologica and the folks here that are allowed to stand and even encouraged).  And I have no problem with folks being told about it so they can check it out.  But watch IT over the next 4 years and see if you don't see the same kind of issues that come up in every other forum out there.  And, given the tone that is allowed over there, I predict that it won't even last the 4 years.  But I wish Ray and the folks over there no ill will and hope for their success however they choose to measure it.
I've seen the internet version of a church-split many times. The grass always looks greener at the new place. And it should seem somewhat familiar. That's because many of the topics there mirror ones here - even with the same titles. And they are carried on by many of the same "sanctified" people. But that doesn't bother me. Neither does ultimatums that if I don't do X or this place doesn't change in some way you prefer that you'll go the the new place. Feel free to go check it out. If you like it better, feel free to stay.  If you want a change, perhaps that is what you are looking for.  But don't expect me to change my beliefs because I feel threatened by any of this.  And don't expect things to change if you go to some place with fresh paint and a new pastor and the same members that many saw as the source for much of the discord here.  

Just my two cents from someone that has seen this over and over and has already learned that the more things change, the more they stay the same...  

What you fail to see is that the change at T has not been positive. Neither do you address where you have failed.

As I told ScottL on another thread, I'm not above apologizing when I see myself in error. I did so to BodPhitPJ. I will do so again when the need arises and I recognize it.

On the other hand, I see you simply establishing yourself as being correct with no apparent effort to examine why I have taken issue with you. I speak specifically in regard to your misrepresentation of me on my Irenaeus blog post.

If you wish to go around and around about issues, fine. I've done plenty of that, and can continue to do so. Tit for tat, I guess.

If you wish to misrepresent me, and if you wish to continue with claims of bad behavior on the part of others without examining Daniel's behavior. That is not fine.

As I've stated, I'm open to change in myself. I know there is a need for that. I've tried very hard to understand you. I've tried hard to be understanding of you. I know you have a handicap that, if I understand what you've said in the past, causes you to experience times when you lack clarity of thought. I've tried to understand that. What I don't understand is the fact that you refuse to accept any part in the fact that T is in decline.

As far as things said bad about you on SF, I don't know. I try not to do that. I don't think that I'm guilty. If you care to show me that I have, I shall gladly discuss that with you and see if we can work it out.

I have only hoped and asked that you have that same sort of openness. I guess I'm destined to be disappointed.

I also am not giving you an ultimatum. My apologies for making it sound that way. I'm simply saying that I won't stay if I see no hope of fair moderation. If you cannot discuss things with me reasonably and deal with the fact that you have misrepresented me, I don't see the hope of fair moderation. I don't see the tone changing. I won't stay then. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to force you to do anything by saying that I'm leaving. I do feel that, at this point, you'd be glad if I did; because I see no sign of your trying to actually reason with me about these things. Instead I see you resisting what I say and further entrenching yourself in your position.

Personally, I truly could care less about the history of discussion boards on the internet. I care about T. I don't think that it is something that is inevitable. We can work to change that.

Do you actually care enough to do so?

Daniel said:

Jason said:

Well, I'm hoping for change.

If I get an indicator of that, I'll hang around.

If not...

See you over there.


I've been a member of many, many forums going back to the 80s when you had to dial into your local BBS to get to one.  And there is a sad truth that I have seen played out over and over.  People come and people go.  And for every one that leaves because the place doesn't change to however they would prefer, there is an equal number that would leave because it changed and wasn't what it once was.  For every one that leaves because some favorite member got their hand slapped, others leave because they think certain behavior is *not* addressed and should be.  For every complaint that we allow too many of "them" on the site, there are an equal number that we are too much of a clique.  Does it mean the moderation and the actions of the members are perfect?  No.  But forums are like churches.  If they were ever perfect to begin with, they are not as soon as we join them.  So trading one URL for another doesn't solveanything at all. It just changes the location of the issues. 

The other sad truth is that Theologica will be around for 4 years in May.  Many, I'd even say *most*, don't last that long.  Without it being tied to something like a podcast or something that drives new content topics into the site, folks get weary of talking about the same old topics with the same old people and nothing ever changes.  Ray's criticism about lack of learning reflects that.  So while I wish him all the best with his new forum where the "sanctified" people can hang out, the truth is that it will follow the same life cycle of every other forum.  Particularly if the same people who had bad behavior here that had to be addressed just go to the new place.  And lest I'm accused to contributing to that, I've avoided any participation there - even though I would have loved to come to my own defense on a number of occasions when people have sent me links and asked if I know the kinds of things being said over there.  It's a different place.  It has a different personality.  In some ways, it should be much easier to moderate as there doesn't seem to be the same goal of irenic and respectful conversation (given some of the comments about Theologica and the folks here that are allowed to stand and even encouraged).  And I have no problem with folks being told about it so they can check it out.  But watch IT over the next 4 years and see if you don't see the same kind of issues that come up in every other forum out there.  And, given the tone that is allowed over there, I predict that it won't even last the 4 years.  But I wish Ray and the folks over there no ill will and hope for their success however they choose to measure it.
I've seen the internet version of a church-split many times. The grass always looks greener at the new place. And it should seem somewhat familiar. That's because many of the topics there mirror ones here - even with the same titles. And they are carried on by many of the same "sanctified" people. But that doesn't bother me. Neither does ultimatums that if I don't do X or this place doesn't change in some way you prefer that you'll go the the new place. Feel free to go check it out. If you like it better, feel free to stay.  If you want a change, perhaps that is what you are looking for.  But don't expect me to change my beliefs because I feel threatened by any of this.  And don't expect things to change if you go to some place with fresh paint and a new pastor and the same members that many saw as the source for much of the discord here.  

Just my two cents from someone that has seen this over and over and has already learned that the more things change, the more they stay the same...  

Daniel,

One more thing: I'm not looking for a reason to leave. I don't have to have one. I'm looking for a reason to stay.

Jason said:

Daniel,

One more thing: I'm not looking for a reason to leave. I don't have to have one. I'm looking for a reason to stay.

One very good reason is that YOUR point of view is different from my own. :)  Sites where everyone has the same view and everyone just pats each other on the back over how right they are do not last.  At least that has been MY experience. Outlasting everyone that disagrees with me doesn't do this place any favors. Nor does going to a place where only the ones that DO agree with you are invited.  But maybe my lack of an invitation was just an oversight. LOL

As far as me being "correct" goes, I have changed my position on some things since I've been here and even grown in my understanding of things.  But the fact that I believe the positions I defend are right and that I don't admit to error can be said about ALL of us here.  We allbelieve we are right and the other guy wrong.  The fact that "they" never see and admit their error can be said of EACH of us.  

The point of Theologica isn't that we all need to ultimately agree.  The point is that we learn from each other as to why others hold the positions they do.  It isn't about wearing the "wrong guy" down and convincing them of their error.  It is about me giving the best defense of MY position that I can and you doing the same for YOUR position.  If one of us repents and sees the light, great!  But winning a debate is not the goal of the site.  Learning what arguments the "other side" find convincing and which ones they don't leads us to strengthening our own arguments.  You don't fail if you don't convince me that I'm wrong.  You succeed because you have fought a worthy opponent (hopefully) with the best arguments that they could provide and still see your position as the stronger one.

As far as my "behavior" goes, it wasn't that long ago (some time last week, I believe), that one of the mods stepped into a conversation that I was having and urged more respect and such.  And, as I posted there, I took that addressed to me as much as anyone else and abandoned a line of the conversation due to it.  So no one here is above moderation.  It wasn't the first time another mod has cautioned me, and it likely won't be the last.  But I submit to it...as I should.  I ALSO submit to the wishes of Michael Patton, who asked me to serve in this position.  And when issues like this one have come up, including this one, I notify him, send him links, and seek his guidance.  And I know others have reported issues to him as well.  I serve here at HIS choice.  And should he choose a change, something I myself have even offered and suggested, I'm fine with it.  I really am.  None of the other mods here want my position and he hasn't indicated that HE wants a change either.  But I submit to that.   So this isn't a case where I am above the law or even the source of the law.  And if other moderators, some whom I have suggested BECAUSE we disagree on things, tell me I have crossed the line, I accept that.  But I think many confuse my pointing out the strengths of why some people hold a particular position AS bad behavior.  I'm seen as being obstinate or constantly being argumentative in a "devil's advocate" kind of way.  So where I believe I have broken the rules, I've been contrite.  But I also believe that many see my way of adhering to the rules, discussing thing in an irenic way, as disruptive or bad behavior because they don't understand the rules and goals of this place the same way I do.  And for *that*, I do NOT apologize.  If I am wrong about Michael's intent for this place, I am welcome to his correction in that matter.  But I am not going to assume that I'm in error on his wishes OR on my positions that I argue when there just MIGHT be a case of my positions not being viewed respectively or objectively from a bunch of folks that go elsewhere to reinforce each other's discontent over me.  I personally believe there is a bias against me here by many folks.  If someone else said what I posted, I believe it would often be taken in a much different way without near as many assumptions that are validated and reinforced elsewhere.  When Scott, for example, challenge the view that something is "heretical" and no one accuses him of misrepresentation and yet MY post challenging the idea that it is "anti-God" gets challenged as being a misrepresentation, I am left scratching my head because I don't see the distinction.  And I've asked what it is.  And if it was responded to, I haven't read it yet.  So perhaps the idea that I'm generally "in error" begs the question just as much as the idea that I'm not behaving.  Just a thought...

Daniel,

Thanks for the clarification.

I have no problem with disagreeing. You and ScottL are two of my favorites here, though we do disagree strongly.

Back to the anti-God thing. I stated that the origins of evolutionary thought are anti-God. You implied that I am saying that everyone who believes in evolution is anti-God- unless I misunderstand you. I would also say that I think you're conflating the issue of anti-God and heresy. I don't present them as one and the same in every instance. Perhaps that is the issue that you're missing.

As far as the issue of heresy goes; I stand by my reasoning. ScottL and I understand each other, I think, though we disagree.

I don't want to get into it all here again, but if you can go to the other thread and lay out the logic of how the origins of evolutionary thought are anti-God, but not the people, that would help.  I just don't get how one can link the origins of the theory to "anti-God" but not those that originated it (or allegedly did).  And how those that believe in something that is anti-God doesn't make the ones believing it anti-God.  Seems like a distinction without much of a difference.   

Jason said:

Daniel,

Thanks for the clarification.

I have no problem with disagreeing. You and ScottL are two of my favorites here, though we do disagree strongly.

Back to the anti-God thing. I stated that the origins of evolutionary thought are anti-God. You implied that I am saying that everyone who believes in evolution is anti-God- unless I misunderstand you. I would also say that I think you're conflating the issue of anti-God and heresy. I don't present them as one and the same in every instance. Perhaps that is the issue that you're missing.

As far as the issue of heresy goes; I stand by my reasoning. ScottL and I understand each other, I think, though we disagree.

Ray told me he forgot to say this, but he also repents for saying anything remotely negative about PeTrA, the greatest band in the history of LIFE.

MWA HAHAHAHAH. Ask mem if you don't believe.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sponsors

Linkologica

Blog Resources

Arminian Today

Anyabwile

Bock

Called to Communion

Challies

Classical Arminianism

Craig

Christian Answers For The New Age

Christians in Context

Conversation Diary (catholic)

Continuationism.com (marv & scott)

Desiring God blog

DeYoung

First Things

Fr. Stephen (eastern orthodox)

 

Internet Monk

KJV Only Debate (jason s.)

 

Köstenberger

Lisa Robinson - TheoThoughts

Mohler

McKnight

National Catholic Register (catholic)

Parchment & Pen

Pierce

Re-Fundamentals

Resurgence

Roberts

Roger Olson

Taylor

Team Pyro

The Apologist's Pen

Untamed Spirituality

WDTPRS (catholic)

Witherington

 

Theological Resources

BioLogos

Center for Reformed Study and Apologetics

Creeds and Confessions

Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Council of Biblical Manhood and Womenhood (complementarian)

The Center for Bibical Equality (Egalitarian)

Evangelical Theological Society

Monergism.com

Reclaiming the Mind Ministries

Society of Evangelical Arminians

Theopedia

Theological Word of The Day

Tyndale House Bulletin

 

Church History

Early Christian Writings

Glimpes of Church History

 

Christian Traditions

Book of Concord

Catholic.com

Eastern Orthodox

Orthodox Catechism

 

Apologetics

CARM

Lennox

Reasonable Faith

RZIM

Stand to Reason

Tektonics

 

Bible Study

Bible Gateway

Bible Researcher

Blue Letter Bible

Bible.org

IVP New Testament Commentaries Online

 

Online Bible and Theology Education

Biblical Training

The Theology Program

 

Theology and Bible MP3s

Covenant Seminary

263 Theology Questions and Answers

Veritas Forum

 

Theologica Chat Room

MiRC Chat

Badge

Loading…

Get the Widget


Sponsor



Bible Options




© 2014   Created by Michael Patton.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

/*============================================================================================ /*============================================================================================