All Activity

Our Unwritten Seoul

Vigilante I.C.U. The Wolf of Wall Street Whiskey Tango Foxtrot The Legend of Tarzan I, Tonya Mary Queen of Scots Once upon a Time...in Hollywood Bombshell George

"I guess they're dead. I guess I've known that deep down for a long time." "I'm not giving up. Don't you give up." "I didn't want to be just another orphan. I wanted to believe I was special." "You are special! Never stop believing that!" "You spend your evenings in the shanties." "You had me followed." "Imbibing quarts of bathtub gin." "Bronchitism." "And here you're dancing in your scanties..." "Great gams." "With some old geezer called Little Caeser." "He's an uncle." "Absolutely not! I'm a businessman. I love money, I love power, I love capitalism. I do not now and never will love children." "What are you just standing around here for? You're supposed to clean the bathroom and the kitchen before lunch, my little pig droppings, and if you skip the corners, there will be no lunch. And we're not having hot mush today." "Yay!" "We're having cold mush!" George

Expectations of Allied POWS in this WWII movie were that Japan should have honored the Geneva Convention. Actually, Japan wasn't a signatory to the treaty until 1953. (Interestingly, misdeeds by the Japanese prompted revision of the treaty in 1949.) The commandant of the prison was portrayed as being ruthless. According to many of his prisoners after the war, the actual Japanese officer on whom the role was based was one of the more humane and reasonable ones. To keep costs down, producer Sam Spiegel decided not to hire any extras, using crew members and Ceylon locals instead. This meant that some of the British prisoners were really natives of the region wearing make-up to appear Caucasian. For the scene when he emerges from "the oven" after several days confined there, Sir Alec Guinness based his faltering walk on that of his son Matthew when he was recovering from polio. Guinness regarded this one tiny scene as some of the finest work he did throughout his entire career. Sir Laurence Olivier was offered Guinness's part but turned it down in order to direct The Prince and the Showgirl (1957) instead. In retrospect, Olivier said that it was a sensible decision to go off and do love scenes with Marilyn Monroe rather than tough it out in the jungles of Ceylon with director Sir David Lean. For those who haven't seen the movie, it is best remembered by the whistled march tune it features. George

Bernadette Peters Pink Cadillac Clint Eastwood George

Okay...another exchange from the same movie: "Kill me before the war is over, will you? It appears that you are not the better man." "You're right. My sons were better men." George

I would have thought that one pretty easy (though the show was on decades ago). Maybe this will help: "And awaaayyy we go!" "And now, the June Taylor Dancers!" George

This was the most expensive television show to produce at the time, costing over a million dollars to make each episode, which was one of the reasons it was canceled after only 13 episodes. The actor playing the titular character based his performance on William Shatner as Captain Kirk in Star Trek (1966) of which he is a big fan. A video game based on this series produced by Bug-Byte Software was released for the Commodore 64 platform in 1985. The titular character was a hologram, but no CGI was used on the show, just traditional animation and editing techniques. The star of the show was far less famous than his Cuban bandleader father (whom the star portrayed in the movie "The Mambo Kings"). The father and his (then-) wife were TV innovators, credited with developing the three-camera technique and syndicated reruns. George

I'd like to take a stab at answering this even though it's rhetorical. In a word, experience. God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost (each individual persons) desire people to love them each personally from the heart. What do you do when you love someone? You talk to them. Ask them things. Spend time with them, think about what they want and try to do what pleases them, because you love them and want to make them happy. And they in turn love you back. All of this takes time, energy, patience, persistence, and faith. And at times, suffering and inconvenience. I believe this is how a relationship is formed with these great persons without any middleman.

I can save you some time WordWolf. That's definitely "White Room". Good for you.

Wait, that last part sounds familiar.... Cream's "IN THE WHITE ROOM".

Hear that lonesome whippoorwill? He sounds too blue to fly.

Did God prove his existence in the garden of Eden to Adam and Eve? Will he prove his existence to those in the afterlife? So why couldn't/can't he prove his existence during the period between those two times in order to directly give us his word? If I still haven't answered your question, perhaps you could state what point you are trying to make. Thank you Rocky..

Oh.

Considering the forum this thread is under, the serious point I was making relates to all the different doctrines there are around the same topic that theologians have come up with, all of which are supposedly based on scriptures. It can be exhausting dealing with them all when one is wanting to find out what is the truth which Jesus himself spoke of in John 8:32, "and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” My rhetorical question is why didn't God make himself and his true word known directly without any middlemen and then prevent it from being changed, suggesting in a fantastical way the threat of a lightning strike upon anyone who tried to do. Jeremiah 32:17 says "Oh, Lord GOD! Behold, You Yourself have made the heavens and the earth by Your great power and by Your outstretched arm! Nothing is too difficult for You,"

1) Men wrote the scriptures, not God. 2) How would the scenario you suggest God should/could have used have proven his existence?

Thanks - I agree.

I suspect many people will have made that "jump" right along with JS without noticing what you have pointed out above.

So, you have what JS believes about end time punishment and on the other end of the spectrum, you have what Sean Finnegan from Living Hope (Vince Finnegan's ministry) believes. In his video The Lost Suffer Eternal Torment in Hell (after the 41:00 mark), he teaches that the lake of fire is simply the symbol for the second death and later says, “Now, you may ask the question...what about proportional justice. What if God wants somebody to experience pain for so long before they’re executed? I don’t know. I don’t have a verse on that. So maybe God is going to do that, maybe he’s just going to be merciful." Rhetorical question: Why didn't the almighty God (who is not the author of confusion) not make the one topic of end time punishment clear and concise in one piece of writing (necessarily in different languages) and preserve it forever (without any changes on the threat of a lightning bolt immediately striking anyone who tried)? That would definitely prove his existence! IMO, we have too many cooks spoiling the broth.

Hoo boy! That's a real knee slapper.

Yes, but honestly, did he seem like he had the slightest idea what he was talking about?

Charity, I think you can get a pass on calling the idea of punishment by immolation "abhorrent." I don't think that's an atheist conclusion and I do think a significant number of Christians share it. I suggest in the future you could add a qualifier to make it clear that you're interjecting your feelings, ("abhorrent to me") to make the statement a little more diplomatic. I will leave it to the page's Christians to determine whether you crossed a line in their view. In mine, you did not. But I will yield to our brethren of faith ...

Did you Turn the Page? Bob Seger

*reads the 9 verses* Even in his own version, it says people will be judged according to their works, and that's all they say. He went from those words to "they'll suffer for some time, and then they'll be annihilated." That was a heck of a jump on his part. It said they would be "judged" (HOW?) and they would be judged "according to their works" (WHAT'S THE CRITERIA, WHAT'S AT STAKE, AND WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES?) With no other verses, JS inserted his own ideas into the subject. -He footnoted and cross-referenced all sorts of things....but not when it came to that. So, it seems that his ideas were more important than being truthful on this subject. It speaks of vanity. It's the kind of thing that you would expect of a man who would publish his own version of the Bible.