WordWolf

How long it took to go from "name it after my uncle" to "name it after something they did in the Bible." More than a decade after it started, more than 5 years after its namesake's death, and THEN it changed. For those paying attention, it mocks the idea that the Bible is the only important thing in twi.

If you're watching Batwoman, I highly doubt you have a "phobia." I object to the casual misuse of words, even if others do not. Disliking something is not a "phobia" any more than liking something is a "fetish". Some people may misuse both words that way, but I do not (unless it's in jest, and exaggeration is a legitimate figure of speech.) So, "the New Guardians" sprang from "Millenium." The cast from "Millenium" sounded like someone was trying to tick their way down some odd list, then handed the cast list off to the story's writer and said "Write this story." I suspect the overt acknowledgement of their inability to carry out their appointed task was the writer's way of admitting he thought it was stupid, also. That interested me MORE in the series, because the writer was aware of what was going on and was writing his story accordingly. But, that's really all that can be said for either story. Marv Wolfman complained, over a decade after CoIE, that they may have set the bar too high. Now, people were expecting a huge crossover in the Summer, and it wasn't mega enough if there wasn't a body count. In fairness, some big crossovers worked, some did not. "Atlantis Attacks" didn't work. "Operation Galactic Storm" DID work. "JLApe" worked because DC doubled down on the cheese factor, and didn't pretend the story was serious. "JL?" worked because they made it short and just involved the JLA cast's series, plus the framing issues at the beginning and end. "Invasion!" worked- which was amazing, considering how much they crammed into it. "Our World At War" and "Panic in the Sky!" didn't garner more than token audiences, so if that's what they were aiming for, they succeeded. With the name to live up to, and all the hype they've generated, I hope the Arrowverse CoIE lives up to its hype. The possible problem is being unable to do so. JK Rowling promised a lot for the end of the Harry Potter series, and foreshadowed a lot, and pulled a "read and find out" when asked about "the Prophecy" and its implications- then failed to deliver. (As phrased, it didn't come to pass, and she said she'd phrased it "extremely carefully and that's all I have to say on the subject!") She also said not to trust anything that didn't come from the official sources of Warner, Bloomsbury, Schoolastic, or herself like her own website. Then she wrote something on her website that she contradicted heavily in Book 7 ("What happens to a secret when the Secret-Keeper dies?" Her own answer on her own website was the opposite of what she wrote in Book 7 when it happened.) The movies where pretty good, but I felt the last 2 books didn't match up to her hype- and, frankly, could NOT have done so. Her mouth had written checks her writing ability couldn't cash. Robert Jordan used to pull "Read And Find Out" on questions about his Wheel of Time series (not all questions, though). but he delivered on those by the end of his epic. The comic "Identity Crisis" was hyped to the heavens when it was coming out. Renowned mystery writer etc was writing it. And the miniseries failed as a good story AND failed as a mystery! (The "thunk" just before the first murder was never addressed, until several years later when a different writer added something, and the Deathstroke fight was just insulting- starting with how Deathstroke moved a LOT faster than the Flash, who apparently chose to shove his chest onto a stationary sword.) When I speculated on the solution, I used all the elements he'd introduced into the story, and only added a minor piece of tech to the entire thing. Someone else had speculated early, and guessed the correct answer, based on it being the STUPIDEST possible way to resolve the story. They followed that up with "Infinite Crisis", which struck me as a mockery of the original CoIE, as if someone heard a description of the previous one, and decided that it didn't sound hard to do it again, then came out with "Infinite Crisis." After that, I stopped giving DC the benefit of the doubt on anything. This has saved me a lot of disappointment since then. Considering how good "Invasion!" the comic was, I found the Arrowverse version a major letdown. I'm cautious about whether or not to hope for the best for the new crossover.

TLC: "Geesh... can't say that I've ever even heard reasoning against seeing it as periods of time because there was some hard cut off point where one starts the other ends. When or where or why did "transition periods" get cut out of that picture? But, perhaps the intention is merely to make that particular aspect or perspective sound as difficult or as "unlikely" as possible... " I have to see it work "on paper" if I'm going to take it seriously. If it's "administrations" like the US government, then at any point, technically, one President or another is officially in charge, and the Secret Service are clear on who it is if no one else is. In college, I was in a student organization for a number of years, and I discovered that it was actually important to know exactly who was in charge at any moment in the school year. (I had written into the group's constitution the specific determinant on when the group's president changed- it was tied to the Final Exam schedule of the semester, so that the next president and cabinet was in power during Winter or Summer break, so they could get things prepared, and we were clear who was supposed to be prepping things.) If it's a governmental thing, the US is hardly the only government where "who is in charge this minute" after elections has become a sticking point- I saw one country's president decide to vanish as soon as they lost re-election, which prompted the president-elect to immediately assume the office to prevent an absence of president (he got sworn in immediately.) It's not about how the ideas are made to sound, it's about trying to get clear concepts, then looking at them coldly and seeing if they hold up under scrutiny. I don't hold to a doctrine if it doesn't withstand my scrutiny, whether or not I LIKE the doctrine. (That's been true for a VERY long time.) When vpw introduced the concept of "administrations" in pfal, he himself said that some of them ended ABRUPTLY, so the idea was introduced by him. If that's not true but the rest is, I'm open to hearing how "transition periods" are supposed to work. Adam and Eve were cast out of Paradise, and the Patriarchal "administration" supposedly began immediately. Moses was given the Law, and the Law "administration" was in effect.

I did forget LL was made one of their agents, aka a "manhunter" with all the others, like Laurel Kent from the Legion of Super Heroes' farm team. (Wait- if Superman had no decendants, who is she? *Laurel android explodes* ) I was one of the few people who was reading "the New Guardians", the series about the Millenium folk, mainly because I was interested in where the story was going to go when even the characters realized their primary mission was doomed to failure. Ok, in "Millenium", the Guardians (of the Universe) and the Zamarons (male and female from Maltus, respectively) decided to jumpstart the next species to replace them, and went to Earth to do it. With the entire population to choose from, their list of about a dozen included a dead villain (Terra), a South African white supremacist, and a plant being who was also in Arkham Asylum (Floronic Man.) When they were done, they had Harbinger (from CoIE), Jet (who was given identical powers to Harbinger, and nobody knew why), Floro the plant being, Betty or whoever who merged with the Earth, and a gay man. For people who were supposed to get a headstart on a new species of human, who had received extensive instructions from their instructors (one Guardian, one Zamaron), even THEY admitted their small group was ill-equipped to have offspring- of all the males, only RAM was able to sire children (Extraño was technically capable but disinterested) and only Gloss, Jet and Harbinger were capable of bearing children. Then again, Tom Kalmaku ("Pieface") was supposed to be in the group but initially refused, adding one more male. I'm baffled why they thought the white supremacist was going to be a good choice, or why the sociopathic dead criminal made the short list. Floro was already genetically infertile, and Betty was made so when they gave her powers and she merged with the Earth. On paper, even "the New Guardians" knew this didn't work, and were unsure how to proceed even with whatever they were told. So, I was curious where their story would go. The answer, ultimately, was "nowhere." They fizzled out. A few of them were quietly killed off here and there much later once they were supposedly forgotten.

*checks* Dr Helga Jace first appeared in the first episode I missed chronologically. I had no idea she'd appeared. In the comics, Dr Jace gave Terra and Geo-Force their powers. (She was also one of the infiltrators in "Millenium" but I think everyone's trying to forget that except me. You may remember one week with Dr Jace and a bunch of other, minor characters announcing "I'm a Manhunter." )

But- are they different time periods because they're required to be- as in "this period ended and this other one began at the same time", or because different people are under different rules because that's what was asked of them? Jesus told a parable about the workers in the field, with some angry because others got a better deal even though theirs was good. Right now, if we're "under grace", is "the law" just as effective as it was before, even if it's outmoded and obsolete? If the answer is "yes", then the critical difference is not the TIME, it is the RULES. IF that is so, then it's not "time periods" as much as the relationships or covenants or sets of rules someone is under, and 2 or more sets can be in effect and work at the same time. If it's time-periods, then that can't be true- just as there's only one president of a nation at a time, only one government can legally rule a nation at a time (Obama's term ended and Trump's began, etc.)

BTW, my posting for the rest of the year might be somewhat erratic. My internet has been going up and down (we're going to install a different provider within the week.) I'm stepping out of town for about a week before Thanksgiving. My PC may drop dead before it can be replaced (I hope to replace it in 2019.) So, don't rush to assume I'm in the trunk of someone's car with duct tape over my mouth or something.

Ok, way back in Arrow season 1, episode 13- "Betrayal", we had a character named "George Wolfman." Now, the latest Flash (season 6, episode 4, "Dead Man Running") we had a character named "Marv Perez." (Ralph Dibny mentioned him as an ex to DD.) So, Marv Wolfman and George Perez (the team who brought us the comic book "Crisis on Infinite Earths") were name-dropped. We also got Ted Kord mentioned in the same episode as having just done something- so Ted Kord is alive (in the comics, he's the Blue Beetle.) That got me curious about the first issue of CoIE, and who was in the first motley crew The Monitor (back then, exactly ONE Monitor in the multiverse) assembled, and how many were introduced into the Arrowverse so far, even if we have to go across Earths and timelines to get them all. Ok, those in the comic were: King Solovar, Dawnstar, Firebrand, Blue Beetle, Arion, Psycho-Pirate, Firestorm and Killer Frost, Psimon, Cyborg, Geo Force, Obsidian, Green Lantern (John Stewart), Dr Polaris, Superman Earth-2, Ok, let's go over who's appeared. King Solovar of Gorilla City has definitely appeared in Gorilla City during the Gorilla Grodd stories on "Flash. Dawnstar has not appeared- but the Legion of Super Heroes has, and her planet Starhaven has, both in "Supergirl." Firebrand has not appeared. Ted Kord/ Blue Beetle was just name-dropped on "Flash". We know he's alive and a scientist, at least. Arion has not appeared. Psycho-Pirate appeared in "Elseworlds Part 2" and "Elseworlds Part 3"- he's in Arkham Asylum in Gotham City on Earth-1. Firestorm of Earth-1 appeared in "Flash" and "Legends of Tomorrow" as a regular, but died...at least the Earth-1 version did, there might be others on other Earths. (Earth-2's "Deathstorm" is also dead.) Killer Frost is a regular on "Flash". Psimon has not appeared. Cyborg/Victor Stone has not appeared in the Arrowverse- but in "Smallville", he appeared, and "Smallville" is about to cross over in CoIE, so that counts. Geo-Force has not appeared- but Markovia's earthquake technology appeared in Arrow, and was used in their "Undertaking" for the Glades. Obsidian appeared in the JSA when the Legends of Tomorrow met them. Elseworlds Part 2 implied that John Diggle's Earth-90 counterpart is named John Stewart and wears a (Green Lantern) ring (whereabouts unknown, most of Earth-90s inhabitants were killed. Doctor Polaris does not appear. we have Superman appear on "Supergirl", and there's more Supermen coming in the crossover. Checking if anyone else appeared in "Smallville" to help close the list, let's see, Ted Kord appeared there. Dawnstar appeared in a flashback to the Legion that Kara had. Firebrand has not appeared. Arion has not. Psimon appeared in the comic book version, but not in the TV series of "Smallville." John Stewart did not appear in the show, only the comic book. Dr Polaris did not appear. That's a considerable number of characters who were in the comic and have been introduced. Mrs Wolf already speculated Ollie accidentally recruiting a multiversal team including Black Siren.

Jim Carrey?????

Ok, since I can look it up now..... Child's Play Chris Sarandon Fright Ni the Princess Bride

"Bugsy Malone" was correct. The first movie WAS 'Dawn of the Dead." George Romero's famous for being the father of the zombie movie (not the very first director of any, but his movies spawned the genre, whereas older movies were forgotten quickly.) Romero poked some fun at consumerism by putting a lot of the movie at a mall and adding zombies to the mall. "Dawn of the Dead" was the sequel to "Night of the Living Dead."

For the record, Mrs Wolf knows SOME ABBA stuff, but she didn't recognize it, and then she looked it up so she was ineligible to guess it. It's funny that I knew NOTHING about the song, but was able to piece together part of the missing rhyme based on other songs and experience. Then again, it's not like most pop songs come out of NOWHERE.

I forget which comedian explained the stages of drinking and drunkenness at a bar. Early stages had the person keeping track of how much sleep they could get before work tomorrow morning, and arguing against artificial turf in stadiums and so on. Later stages had him arguing for artificial turf, and later deciding that he might as well stay up all night before work, since he was still up. He staggered out of the bar, and was struck by the sunlight- smashing into him like God's Flashlight. He got home, and said a prayer. "Lord, if you get me through this, I'll never go out drinking again..."- say it with me guys- "...AS LONG AS I LIVE"- and some of us add the coda at the end- "...and this time, I MEAN it." Ok, we have twi leaders who consented to the corruption, reaped its benefits, turned a blind eye to suffering, and so on. They left twi one day, then started up their own WHOLESOME ministry- and a few years later, the legalism started, the rules came down, the doctrine was locked, discussion and dissent were banned, and the money was solicited. Then the next set of leaders did the exact same steps. Then the NEXT set of leaders did the exact same steps. As did the NEXT set of leaders. But this time, now the CURRENT leaders who jumped ship, THESE are going to get it RIGHT and do the right thing and NOT make their own money-making venture, because these will succeed where all the others failed before them. Which poster's signature was "The lessons repeat until they are learned"?

It's interesting- when one thinks about what was SAID about the military. Breakthrough dd a song, "Military Man", and vpw often cozied up to the idea of the military like he cozied up quietly to the big money. Did vpw like the military? Yes and no. When it was time for vpw to serve, he went into ministry, which got him an exemption, IIRC. vpw talked up how good it was that the military were LOYAL- that an order was given and carried out without question. Since he had no experience with the military- no time himself, no family members in the military, all he knew was what was in the movies and/or television. What stuck with him was a system where people got to give orders that were obeyed without question. Compare that to the REAL military, and you see a different picture. Unlawful orders can be questioned and refused (uncommon, but not impossible.) Officers giving inappropriate orders may be followed NOW but the higher-ups will look into this. (There's always someone higher-up.) Finally, officers are ACCOUNTABLE and can end up serving hard time in Leavenworth if they just flatly decide to do whatever they want and issue whatever orders they want. vpw knew none of this. He saw officers bark orders and be obeyed, and that impressed him. That was the movies. Me? I was impressed when I saw Christopher Reeve fly in the movies with the big 'S' on his chest, but the reality never quite matched the movies. The sad part? Even as a kid, I knew the difference between the movies and the reality.

Ok, here's 2 movies, both of which had pie fights in them. Name either movie. A) This horror movie, somewhat famous, from a somewhat famous director, includes several scenes in a shopping mall. It picked up not long after the previous movie left off. B) This family comedy, somewhat obscure, is a gangster movie done with kids playing all the roles, and no real violence (a lot of pies gave their lives for this movie.) Scott Baio and Jodie Foster were 2 of the actors. All of the actors were 16 or younger at the time of filming. Paul Williams wrote the songs for this movie, which explains why I remember the theme song better than the movie. All the cars were pedal-cars custom made for this film. In 2015, the producer permitted a London production of a play based on this movie. It was a success, and the film's producer liked it better than the movie. (Yes, I could name either movie from those hints. No, I have not seen either movie start to finish.)

I lean more in that direction than to dispensationalism, since I think it works on paper. I haven't done a lot of research on it, and it hasn't come up except in discussions here. So, it's not exactly a high priority. I've more important issues I'm currently neglecting. :) As I see it, God's told different people what He expects of them, and what He offers them in return. (Jesus told a parable about this, IIRC.) We see different people co-existing, with different expectations, Call those covenants if you want, or don't. I think they're more relevant as subsets of a discussion of Final Judgement, but we're not having that discussion in this thread.

A gum resin used in burials. Exodus 30 says it formed the basis of an anointing oil. It was later used as an ingredient of the consecrating incense in the Temple at Jerusalem, at least according to Wikipedia (which cites the Talmud.)

You'll probably want someone who's pushing that POV to chime in. I'm not pushing dispensationalism, but I can explain it- and answered a question about that. You had a GENERAL question about "covenantal", so I answered that. I'm more open to answering on things on which I've done my due diligence, and I don't consider this to be one of them.

It sounds funny and clever. As soon as I read it, I thought of getting 2 friends and going as the gold, frankincense and myrrh (back then, at least.)

Galatians 3 compares and contrasts the law and faith, the law and "the promise". and says that the faith part was a "covenant." It says we're "heirs according to the promise", and "Abraham's seed". Galatians 3 (KJV) 2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? 4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. 5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. 8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. 9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. 19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. 21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. So, Jew and Greek no more- child of God by faith in Christ Jesus,. and Abraham's seed, therefore heir according to the promise. The contrast is stronger in Galatians 4. Galatians 4 (KJV) 21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. 29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. So, we're separate from the Jews, who keep the law. We are "the children of promise." Hebrews 8 gets into this "covenant" business again. Hebrews 8 (KJV) 6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. Jesus is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Hebrews 11, after the entire run of the Hall of Fame, concluded thusly: Hebrews 11 (KJV) 39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. For those unsure, that "without" is Elizabethan English again- it's the antonym of "within." "Without" meaning, in this instance, "those external to us." We saw in Galatians that we're not folded into the Law, nor are those who keep the Law folded into us. (I once heard someone claim that, based only on reading the archaic English, that this meant that they would "be made perfect" when they're with us, so they're not "without us." A look at a more modern version should clear that one up.) Hebrews 12 (KJV) 22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. Hebrews 13 (KJV) 20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, 21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. The other chapters get into the yearly sacrifices under the law, which were not sufficient to fully expunge sin, and contrast them with Jesus' sacrifice ONCE for all (men and time.) I think that's off-topic for discussing covenants, although relevant for what Jesus did and why. So, I see "covenants" discussed here, based on the usage of the word "covenant" and how it's used in these instances.

I was ready to disagree with you, but I think we got to the exact same answer by the end- that God works with us DESPITE, that God plans DESPITE (despite our disobedience, despite our bad decisions, despite the bad decisions of others....) That can LOOK like God wanted us in that place, but it's not quite the same, even if he blesses us there and meets us there.

Bolshevik, that was a serious question. ACCORDING TO TWI, you need to give them all your money or God won't help you. It's a system of paying protection money to a "God-Father" out of self-preservation and fear rather than giving cheerfully to a loving Father who loves you either way. God is Good Always. Outside of twi, there's many happy Christians who aren't cowering in fear of God smiting them, or cowering in fear that God will let someone else smite them- all because they didn't donate enough money, or donate enough time, and so on. There's never an exact amount for "arriving" because twi has to keep moving the goalposts. Gave them all your time and money, and bad things STILL happened? Well, it's your fault still, so ANOTHER excuse is made up. The sun and the rain are for all people, and bad things happen to good even as good things happen to bad people. twi's system benefits twi and not the people. I've seen some miraculous healing for people who never tithed to anyone, from people who don't tithe. So, healing is not dependent upon tithing. Taxidev addressed the tithe quite neatly above, so I won't get into specifics because I'll just repeat what he already said. Tithing was for Israel for a specific reason and specific circumstances (none of which apply now even to Israel.) Tithing was never mentioned in the Epistles as something we needed to do, and references in the Gospel were Jesus saying that people were doing it- it wasn't something Jesus went around teaching we had to do. He addressed it when it came up.

Was this "the Great Race"? If so, I'm shocked I don't remember the pie fight.

Judges? Well, technically, you didn't give the right answer, but I'll give it to you anyway. The show was "YOUNG SHELDON." The ended series was BBT. Season 2 ended with Sheldon feeling like he'd be forever alone, without people. Then we saw a brief montage of the BBT gang at that moment in their lives- Leonard awake and following the Nobel broadcast also ("Leonard, dear, you should be in bed.") Penny asleep with the softball gear in her room and "Penny" on the wall for the slow people, Raj awake with a telescope, reading, Howard in his old room, with a magic set in one corner, playing a SNES ("Howard, turn off that **** game and go to sleep!") Bernadette asleep with her pageant trophies and microscope, Amy reading "Little House on the Prairie" by flashlight. It was a nice way to end the season. This series does reshuffle some minor characters' names. Also, in BBT, Sheldon claimed once that he was sick in Germany (or Austria?) when his Mom returned home because the house had fallen off the wheels and she had to help Dad fix it- but in "Young Sheldon", they definitely lived in a house.

They will probably START there, then migrate to other formats. First, they soak the public for the streaming service. Then, they license it to cable channels for a price, for those of us who won't pay for that, probably.