WordWolf

I Corinthians 2:6-9 (NASB) 6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; 7 but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; 9 but just as it is written, “Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, And which have not entered the heart of man, All that God has prepared for those who love Him.” ===================================== Short explanation: What God Almighty has prepared for us in the future is mind-blowing and don't even try to figure all of it out. It's a surprise- for us and for everyone else. ====================================== Romans 8:16-25 (NASB) 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. 24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it. =============================================== Short explanation: As a result of our identification in Christ, just as Christ was foretold to suffer and then be glorified later, and then suffered and was glorified later, we suffer now and will be glorified in the future. At the appointed time, just as Jesus was transformed and glorified, we'll be transformed and-at long last, like the end of labor pains, this current suffering will be over and our unveiled selves will be revealed. That is our Hope (part of it, at least.) That's as short and simple as I can make this concept and this passage. I had to include surrounding verses for context.

In this movie, a man keeps reliving the first 24 hours of the Earth's invasion by flesh-eating plants.

AFAIK, TECHNICALLY, that is correct. I am not aware of vpw using the words "I am a prophet". However, he worked very hard to INSINUATE it. In fact, if you go over all the definitions he used/made up of the "gift ministries", he phrased them so as to make them applicable to himself. -teacher He called himself "THE TEACHER" long before any of us ever heard of him, and continued that until his death. -evangelist He said an evangelist didn't go out and win souls. He said an evangelist inspired the flock and got them excited so that THEY would go out and win souls. How CONVENIENT. -pastor All his talk of "my people" convinced others that he cared like a shepherd cares for his flock, rather than how the farmer cares for the Thanksgiving turkey. -apostle The word means "sent one." He claimed it was "someone who brings 'new light' to his generation. It may be old light, but to his generation, it's 'new light.' " -prophet "One who speaks for God." vpw expected his every utterance to be treated like it came directly from God Almighty. He certainly expected to be treated as if he spoke for God. So, he claimed ONE of those titles openly- and that as the definitive one, THE Teacher, not A Teacher. Me, I think vpw wanted to call himself all 5, but was either too cowardly or too clever to make an open claim. So, he INSINUATED it and let the young and naive fill in the blanks. Sounds about right.

I'm young for this board, but that's relative. On another board, I'm really old by comparison. I definitely don't feel young chasing after my kid.

If it was aired in syndication during my lifetime, then I had a chance to see it. Otherwise, it would need to have been aired in SOME form during my lifetime. In this case, it DID air, but by the name I mentioned.

Small wonder I missed the question. It aired from 1967 to 1968. I was unable to watch television at that time, being nonexistent and all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Superman/Aquaman_Hour_of_Adventure "Subsequently in 1968, the series became The Batman/Superman Hour, with new Superman/Superboy and Batman segments."

There's been a number of permutations across syndication. "The Superman/Batman Adventure Hour"??????

The other day I read some trivia about the comic book "THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD" and how that team-up comic would foreshadow the next guest. I'd be shocked if the cartoon of the comic was the correct answer. However, I have to get past that to think about this.

vpw was very experienced with "do as I say and not as I do", and a complete stranger at LEADING BY EXAMPLE. When it came to instructing, vpw took the easy way, the "I'll tell you what you should do", rather than the more instructive "I'll show you what you should do." Hypocrites in general are very good at the former, and very poor at the latter. "Quit smoking and give the money to twi", vpw told some of the corps, while continuing to support a smoking addiction. etc, etc.

I'm giving the others a few more hours just in case someone new wants to chime in...

You don't know any clues that would help? It's the only game show that a town was named after! If you're stuck, look up a show online. Either IMdB, Wikipedia, or both will have a page on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_or_Consequences Are you turning it over to George for a partial answer, posting another, or making it a Free Post?

"Coming Home Alone"???

"A Hard Day's Night"?

If I understand how we got to this thread, Ehrman read the account, and the "anothen doesn't mean 'again', it means 'from above'" thing, realized that was in Greek when this conversation would have been in an Aramaic dialect (or whatever language he thought but not Greek), and concluded that the misunderstanding of Nicodemus was due to misunderstanding a word that had more than one meaning. Taking that as a conclusion and a given, he further concluded that the conversation could not have happened, since the confusion would have been dependent upon it being written in Greek, which would have meant the conversation couldn't have pre-dated Greek versions of the Gospels, which would mean the account wasn't in any original, which would mean it was made-up. The original poster read that, and wanted to know what we thought about all that, presumably, specifically if we thought he was correct or incorrect, and why in either case. My response was to show that the original conclusion was premature, and that there's a much simpler explanation than Ehrman thought, and that it wasn't dependent upon any definitions of words. Maybe during the week, I'll go grab my books again and check if "anothen" should be translated "again" AT ALL- my thinking until now was that it never should have been and should have been "from above" all along. IIRC, I studied that out in 1989 and came to that conclusion.

People like that, besides being clueless, are PREDICTABLE. They rarely know the entire Bible. They know a specific technique with specific verses, AND THAT'S IT. That's where the fun begins-if you know more Bible. Furthermore, any martial artist can tell you, in a fight, the PREDICTABLE fighter is the LOSER. During their Vice-Presidential debate, Lloyd Bentsen waited for Dan Quayle to make his USUAL comment about JFK. "I have as much experience as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the Presidency." If you look closely, you can see Bentsen give a tiny smile, since he was waiting with the counter. "Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy. I worked with Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy." The audience went bananas, Quayle lost control of the debate. "......................That was highly uncalled-for, Senator." "Well, you were the one who was making the comparison, Senator." After that, nothing Quayle said could make the debate about anything other than that exchange. For the record, there's no evidence that Bentsen knew, worked with, or was friends with Jack Kennedy. However, bringing that up wouldn't have made a difference unless it was brought up IMMEDIATELY, in reply. If Quayle had been using the line as a lure, he could have responded to "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" with a clever riposte about JFK's many failings, which Quayle may lack (Quayle's never been accused publicly of infidelity, for example.) However, he was NOT using it as a lure, he was just being predictable. So, when someone will certainly approach with a variation on "Would you like to know The Truth?" or "Why don't you want to know The Truth?" you have months to prepare your response for that day. Me, I just listened to their approaches and tailored my response to go from there to other verses they'd never read, but were on the same subject. They'd brought it up, after all. Most of the time, I was pretty nice about it. I saved my pitiless response for the man who insulted my by insinuation. He said they were going around to exhort people to read their Bible. I thanked him and said I was reading it daily. He replied that many people CLAIMED that... (Someone in earshot asked me later "Was he calling you a liar?" which, he was INSINUATING without having the courage to say outright.) At the time, I caught that, and decided to interpret that as a challenge, so I quickly took him all over the Bible on subjects he brought up, deliberately making him flounder every time he brought up something by taking him to verses he'd never seen. Repeatedly. If he had apologized at any point or acknowledged I actually read the thing, I would have stopped. Since he didn't, I gave him an ordeal. Eventually, he excused himself.

That's it, of course.

"Now is there anybody, got a sweet little woman like mine? There got to be somebody, got a, got a sweet little woman like mine? Yeah! Can I get a witness? Can I get a witness?"

It IS "Saturday Night Fever." Fran Drescher was in "Hollywood Nights" in 1980, but "Saturday Night Fever" in 1977. The producer of SNF was Robert Stigwood. When I saw that the other day, I realized why the Mad Magazine spoof named the paint so oddly. The soundtrack sold 20 million copies, which was the record until "Thriller" took the title. In "Dog Day Afternoon", someone suggested that Al Pacino improvise the line "Attica! Attica!" and in SNL, Tony Manero dreams people confuse him with Pacino. He starts chanting to himself "Al Pacino, Al Pacino, Attica, Attica." (He does this in his underwear, and his Grandma's scandalized he's walking around in his briefs. In the Mad spoof, he does this specifically to scare her and approaches her with spooky hands raised. "Al Pacino, Al Pacino, Attica, Attica!" Angry, she points the way out of the room. "Horny pervert, horny pervert, Bellevue, Bellevue!" In Rio de Janeiro, they sometimes call a cool guy a "maneiro."

This famous '70s movie included a quote of another famous '70s movie's even more famous quote. (The quote is remembered more than the movie it came from, I believe.) Funny how an unscripted line can become the best-remembered line of a movie, and even show up in other movies filmed later-complete with the name of the actor who said it. This film included the film premiere of Fran Drescher. In the real city of Rio de Janeiro, the cariocas have adapted the last name of the main character of this movie as a slang word meaning "cool." Filming of this movie ran afoul of "some local Italian businessmen in a consortium" *wink wink* and some Hasidic Jews, at different points of the filming. The Mad Magazine spoof of this movie showed the main character carrying a can of "Stigwood Paint." The soundtrack to this movie was a big success commercially.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0EpeX8tSoA

This is garbage, stupid girl. Ow! OW! *covers his head* I was giving the TITLE and the ARTIST! The band is "GARBAGE", and their first big hit was "STUPID GIRL"! No hit!

This famous '70s movie included a quote of another famous '70s movie's even more famous quote. (The quote is remembered more than the movie it came from, I believe.) Funny how an unscripted line can become the best-remembered line of a movie, and even show up in other movies filmed later-complete with the name of the actor who said it. This film included the film premiere of Fran Drescher. In the real city of Rio de Janeiro, the cariocas have adapted the last name of the main character of this movie as a slang word meaning "cool." Filming of this movie ran afoul of "some local Italian businessmen in a consortium" *wink wink* and some Hasidic Jews, at different points of the filming.

Haven't seen "No Way Out." I wish you had used Bridges instead.

Almost nobody watched the Tortellis. I think some of us would have tuned in for Norm and Cliff at least for a little just because we liked Norm and Cliff.

Given the zeitgeist of twi when vpw was alive, my first guess (not knowing the context) would be that he was INSINUATING (hinting without actually saying) that The Lord Jesus Christ was going to return shortly. It certainly was believed TLJC would return while vpw was alive, at least until vpw died. (twi was hardly alone in this- crackpot religious fringes tend to add that sort of thing. If their leader isn't the Messiah, then the Messiah will show up and shake his hand or something.)