25 July 2005


Phil's signature


Brad Williams said...

Okay, you've got me. My name is Brad Williams, and I am a Pyromaniac addict. I like the discussion and your graphics are great.

I might add one thing though. It's sort of eerie the way you find we who link you. I know you haven't read Harry Potter, but if you had, it's kinda like when those characters say "Voldemort" and look around like he's going to appear. I think instead of "he who must not be named," you could be "he who must not be linked."

Anonymous said...

To be precise, although I can see how one may think the insinuation is there, I did not say that you did not believe in the fourth commandment. However, your dislike of Eric Liddell's strict sabbatarianism does show a less than robust biblical view. After all, application is meaning and meaning is application. So imho, your comment does reflect the fact that the fourth commandment has fallen on hard times, though not necessarily complete disbelief (in your case).

Matthew Self said...

That's two blogspots in a row for me, and I was the one making fun of people who were brazenly attempting to get blogspotted. Is that a stoning offense?

Wish my blog had some interesting writing to justify all the attention!

Chris Pixley said...

Patrick said:

"After all, application is meaning and meaning is application."

Would you mind elaborating?

Mike said...

As soon as I saw Neifi hit that ball I thought about deleting the post.

Frank Martens said...

Could someone explain why technorati doesn't pick up my posts on Phil?

It's weird, and I've also noticed it doesn't pick up other peoples sites that link to me.

Dave Davis said...

boy o Boy I cannot get picked up by technorati on my shameless blogspot to Phil's site either.

Maybe it's the Lord's way of telling me I shouldn't be on the internet at work.

Oh, the life of a me-ist!

Who will rescue me from this bondage of death!!!!

DJ Word said...

I must question your understandingof theological truth and its absoluteness based upon your completely postmodern way of looking at anything absolute.

Why are you a postmodern who has no understanding of absolute or objective truth?

You, my friend, are a Cubs fan. You see anything officials do that is based upon unbiased observation as tainted and against your precious worldview, which shapes your understanding of truth.

While the Cubs did win the game in a dramatic fashion, the umps did not attempt to "give the game to the Cards," only a postmodern looking through such lenses, based upon bias and desire (not obervation) would think that.

I now know you are just a Postmodernist like the rest of us.

There is no excuse for being a Cubs fan otherwise.


An believer in the absolute truth of the superiority of the Cardinals organization, fan base and talent (look at baseball histroy as you look at churhc history).