All Activity

For those who were told by a certain leader that they should follow him blindly: Facebook

You shake my nerves and you rattle my brain.

That's it.

Watching the Wheels

Well, they give me all kinds of advice Designed to enlighten me"

It's greenlit for another season. It is airing, but not on commercial TV.

I think I figured it out. But I'm up on too many other threads. If I'm right, the current show is not being broadcast.

What are the 2 incorrect assumptions extracted from 1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2, which yield this faulty conclusion: The Rapture is “signless” because Christ is coming as a “thief”? The Day of the Lord: 1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2 “Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” First Incorrect Assumption: The Rapture is “signless” because Paul used the symbol of a “thief in the night.” Did Paul say, Now, brothers and sisters, about signs we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night? No, of course not. What exactly did Paul say? “Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” The figure of speech— “a thief in the night” —refers right back to the immediate context: “times and dates”—not the lack of signs. The first incorrect assumption is to equate “thief in the night” with a lack of signs. There is no scriptural justification in the immediate context to support this position—and this includes verse 3. 1 Thessalonians 5:3: “Sudden” “When they say, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape.” “Times and dates” and “sudden” refer to timing—not signs. The Day of the Lord: 1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2 Second Incorrect Assumption: “Christ” is coming as a “thief” at the time of the Rapture. This is simply a gross misreading/interpretation of the text. Did Paul say, Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that Christ will come like a thief in the night. No, of course not. What exactly did Paul say? “Now, brothers and sisters, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” Is the “Day of the Lord” “signless”? No, of course not. It’s the complete opposite. Peter: The Day of the Lord: Acts 2:19, 20/Mystery: Joel 2:30, 31 “And I will show wonders in heaven above and signs on the earth below: blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and glorious day of the Lord comes.” *Paul—in Romans 10—quoted Joel, as did Peter in Acts 2, why? Answer this, and you will eliminate any lingering thoughts that Paul prophesied of a “signless” event. John: The Day of the Lord/Wrath: Revelation 6:12-17 “I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. The heavens receded like a scroll being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the rich men and the commanding officers and the strong and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains. They called to the mountains and the rocks, 'Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can withstand it?'” "Signless"? Zephaniah 1:14, 15: “The great day of the Lord” = the “day of wrath.” Thief in the Night: There is no scriptural justification in the immediate context to support equating “the day of the Lord” and “thief” with “signless.” And there is no scriptural justification in the remote context: Christ’s precedent and use of a “thief.” “Signless” is worthless. Deception. Next: Christ: The Precedent: the symbol of a “thief” and its visual representation. Peace. revvel

I don't know if there's a current Spider-Man show, but it did have a live-action show years ago, and a Broadway musical (not to mention cartoon series). The first paragraph has clues which I don't recognize. George

Isn't it good, Norwegian Wood. "People say I'm lazy Dreaming my life away"

"I once had a girl. Or should I say, she once had me."

This show is not a current show. HOWEVER, a current show can be considered either a sequel or a spin-off of this show. If you're paying attention, there's at least one continuity error if you do, since two characters, in effect, switch ages, the older becoming the younger. The current show has had more than one season, and has had fast-food promos and tie-ins with it from one chain. The original show may be well-known, but it is NOT a recent show by any reasonable standard for "recent". The original show is famous. It has had at least two cartoon series', and at least one theatrical release-and a Broadway musical. Which show is the original show? (Or, which show is the current show, I will accept either answer.)

Interesting guess, but no. A Study in Terror A Midsummer Night's Dream Wetherby Shakespeare in Love Chocolat The Importance of Being Earnest The Chronicles of Riddick Pride and Prejudice My Week with Marilyn J. Edgar The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel Victoria & Abdul George

Correct. George

WW is up. George

Before addressing the 2 questions... 1. What is the symbol—the precedent—in the Gospels that gives the visual effect of Christ coming as a “thief” to Israel/Armageddon, and where did Christ reveal how the symbol of a “thief” is relevant to end times, and how does this all translate to the revelation of the mystery for the Church that Christ gave to Paul in 1 Thess. 5? 2. What are the 2 incorrect assumptions extracted from 1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2, which yield this faulty conclusion: The Rapture is “signless” because Christ is coming as a “thief”? If you still believe in a “signless” Rapture, you will be set free from this “signless” snare… And you will be free to believe the revelation of the mystery, our hope of glory, as Christ revealed to Peter, Paul, and John: the Rapture will occur at the onset of the Day of the Lord, accompanied by dramatic celestial and earthy signs—prior to the wrath. Peace. revvel

Lena Olin?

A Hey Hey..... "Everyday" ~Buddy Holly~

Bump

okay

Humberto joins the fold, though the disturbance currently around Cuba may be more likely to affect the US coast: George

Or Carl Perkins. Correct. George

The following makes more sense to me. Suppose a couple live in ABC-land. Then they decide to move to another country, XYZ-land. They live in XYZ for a while and have children there. Their children are XYZ-ers by birth. And so also will their children be. And so on. The family consolidates its interest in being citizens of XYZ. Later children may never know anything about their ancestors' original citizenship of ABC. In many countries nowadays, citizenship / nationality rights can be passed down one or two generations. The first children, and maybe the grandchildren, may have a legal right to claim citizenship in ABC-land. (Such rights don't usually go down beyond grandchildren.) After that, legal rights to return to ABC as citizens by birthright is lost. Now suppose that ABC-land is a generous country that is willing to accept anyone who wants to live there, regardless of background or original associations. All the wannabe new citizens have to do is swear an oath of allegiance. And that's it! ********* Now, suppose that XYZ-land is not a country but a way of life. A life of criminality, of dependency on benefits, of some other socially reprehensible set of actions. Maybe illiteracy, not seeing the benefit of learning to read and write properly. This can tend to be taught to children: their parents may teach them to truant school, steal, rob, be violent to get what they want. They may feel that they are "getting something" by depending on state benefits (often coupled with a life of petty criminality), or end up with an attitude of "entitlement" to things they have not worked for. Such families may become socially ostracised, thus deepening the attitude of whatever started such a lifestyle anyway. It's "normal," or even expected, to get sent to prison for periods. This is the "sins of the fathers" coming home for generations of later children. And again, it can be cancelled, broken away from. It takes a change of mentality, thinking patterns, and a willingness, a desire, for something different. A new life can be chosen. ********* Your life now is a result of choices taken by your parents - and their parents. It's not your fault, or your good, that you live in the country you live in, in the circumstances that you live in. You live in a rich country, with educational and healthcare facilities? Great, your good fortune; enjoy it, but you didn't earn it. You live in a poor country, where education is expensive and healthcare is expensive or hardly accessible at all? Too bad, your mis-fortune; but again, that wasn't your fault.

Welcome, Edgar. Nice you've decided to join us instead of just peeking round the door! You are very welcome here, and you may find some genuine "release from your prisons" that were built by the iron strictures of TWI. Neurodivergent? Good, you bring a different viewpoint. We're all ready to hear, discuss, consider. Have a cup of coffee while you're pondering what to think.