John Schlitt's involvement

Shell · Post by **Shell** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:22 am

You don't know it yet Daniel, but I have plans to get back at you for stealing my Petra collection...I'm just waiting for the best time to carry out my devious schemes...Nobody messes with Shell's Petra collection... Bwahhahahahaha... Watch your back....

blayze5150 · Post by **blayze5150** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:26 am

I just don't see Classic Petra as a real reunion unless David Lichens is somehow involved. He was instumental in the band's legacy.

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:28 am

I don't think John has to say anything about classic Petra, why would he bother... When John joined Petra after Greg left.. Greg didn't comment on John joining Petra. You have to remember between 1986 and 2005 Petra was John's life.. People even thought that John's name was Petra lol, my sister still thinks John is Petra. We have to embrace Greg, and hope that one day there will be a John S. reunion as icing one the cake.

Shell I would like to see you try... those mp3's are 256k/s they are good, I can scan your.. I mean my covers so you can print them

executioner · Post by **executioner** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:43 am

blayze5150 wrote:I do wish John would acknowledge Classic Petra publicly. He's just such a large part of Petra's legacy. I can understand if his feelings are hurt a little, and I think others on the board should be as well. He has given a good portion of his life to this band. As Christians we are still human. He has to at least be taken back by it a little. Here is a band who called it quits a few years ago that he was largely identified with and even served as the leader on the road after the founder's retirement. John and Bob prayed about this difficult decision, and retired the group. Now, the former lead singer, the guy John replaced, is "getting the band back together." I'm sure he understands and wishes them all the best, but... he's probably questioning alot of things about it. I think anyone in that situation would. John Schlitt is one of the Christians who exist in this world that I respect more than almost anyone else on the planet, but this event has to have at least some toll on his mind. I know I would have trouble with it. I'm sure he will eventually address it... and I'm sure that will be in the form of a blessing. We just need to give the man time. This can't be easy!

I think if I was in John's shoes and for almost 20 years poured my life and heart into Petra yeah I would question what is going on, and I would be asking God these questions, but also out of respect for not only for God but Greg and the others I would probably send out my best wishes and leave it at that. Why should John acknowledge this on his website? His website is for John and not Petra.
I think John has done the noble and right thing and is standing back and rooting for their success.

CatNamedManny · Post by **CatNamedManny** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:16 pm

Yeah, I don't see why John has any obligation to speak publicly about this reunion, given that it seems he's still doing reunions with Petra, too. I imagine any concerns he had were worked out one way or the other with Bob, given the two of them were performing shows together after the Classic Petra announcement.

It's a neat trick to say: "Why doesn't so and so give his blessing to such and such? The fact that he hasn't is troubling/distressing/interesting/speaks volumes" without thinking that maybe he's OK with it and actually feels no imperative to speak. Just because some fans may think he should say something doesn't mean he actually should say something.

Shell · Post by **Shell** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:29 pm

It's a catch 22. If he did say something, some folks probably wouldn't think it was good enough or whatever.

There tends to be a "danged if you do" and "danged if you don't" attitude when you're dealing with the public/fans/people who don't actually know you. You can't please everyone, which I'm sure John is aware of, and he probably has other things to do with his time other than to try to pacify a demanding public. The same goes for the rest of the band members.

CatNamedManny · Post by **CatNamedManny** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:03 pm

Shell wrote:It's a catch 22. If he did say something, some folks probably wouldn't think it was good enough or whatever.

It should be called the Birther Complex.

"Show us your birth certificate!"

[Shows birth certificate.]

"It's not the right kind! It's been forged!"

[Presents confirmation from state officials.]

"It's a coverup!"

Sometimes you just can't win.

separateunion · Post by **separateunion** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:30 pm

fcollazo wrote:Call it like it is, and let's stop ben hypocrites.

What's wrong with good ol' Ben? He never hurt anyone!

fcollazo · Post by **fcollazo** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:50 pm

Who is Ben?

fcollazo · Post by **fcollazo** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Who is Ben? I meant being!

separateunion · Post by **separateunion** » Mon Oct 11, 2010 10:04 pm

fcollazo wrote:Who is Ben? I meant being!

It was a joke...

gman · Post by **gman** » Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:57 pm

CatNamedManny wrote:
Shell wrote:It's a catch 22. If he did say something, some folks probably wouldn't think it was good enough or whatever.
It should be called the Birther Complex.

"Show us your birth certificate!"

[Shows birth certificate.]

"It's not the right kind! It's been forged!"

[Presents confirmation from state officials.]

"It's a coverup!"

Sometimes you just can't win.

The birth certificate may be the only thing right with that guy.

CatNamedManny · Post by **CatNamedManny** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:40 am

gman wrote:The birth certificate may be the only thing right with that guy.

Well, he's certainly not right-wing. Which is all right in my book.

/hijack

Preacherman777 · Post by **Preacherman777** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 8:59 am

Woo Hoo! Let's all hear it for Socialism! LOL! Just kidding. Well, not really but....

CatNamedManny · Post by **CatNamedManny** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:11 am

Preacherman777 wrote:Woo Hoo! Let's all hear it for Socialism! LOL! Just kidding. Well, not really but....

Socialism. Just like Roosevelt. And Kennedy. And Johnson. And Clinton.

Every Democratic president and major piece of social legislation in the past 70 years has been the one person or thing that will bring socialist tyranny to America, at least according to whatever right-wing voices were opposing these people or initiatives at the time. Yet here we are, still a democratic republic.

The debate over a smaller vs. a larger government has been going on since the Federalist Papers, as has the use of silly, untrue labels for those who believe a larger government is a more sane way of carrying out the functions of society. Back in the 18th century, it was "monarchist!" Since the 1930s, it's been some form of "socialist!" It's a little annoying, but the use of such labels, on the other hand, is a handy guide for whom to take seriously (or not) in a discussion about the role of government in society.

The Petra Zone

John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Re: John Schlitt's involvement

Who is online