Raf

WordWolf, let us know when you're caught up with the "Who Is Harrison Wells" episode.

I think it belongs here for now. Jim was one of the pioneers of using the Internet to stand up to The Way. Gonna miss that rascal.

It is.

Giveaway: I said a hip hop, Hippie to the hippie, The hip, hip a hop, and you don't stop, a rock it To the bang bang boogie, say, up jump the boogie, To the rhythm of the boogie, the beat.

"That you, sugar bumps?... Who the hell are you?" "It's me, Sugar bumps." "Jack? Oh, oh, thank God you're alive! I heard you'd been..." "Fried? Is that what you heard? You set me up over a woman. A woman! You must be insane."

I don't mind discussing different beliefs as long as everyone agrees that's what we're doing. And sometimes that discussion can be quite challenging (and emotional). The key is, you have to want to participate in such a discussion. Otherwise, it's just arguing and it benefits no one. It doesn't bother me that anyone believes in the Trinity. It doesn't bother me that anyone believes in God. I hope it doesn't bother anyone that I believe in neither. However, your reasons for believing, and my reasons for not believing, are (in and of themselves) interesting topics of conversation for some people. I'm game to discuss them with anyone, in the proper setting (which, in the context of this site, is in doctrinal, which I subdivided even further so that anyone not desiring to discuss doubts can avoid such conversations easily). I look at it this way: you can enjoy drinking alcohol without advocating drunkenness. A sip of wine at home? Cool. Hanging out at a bar with friends? Cool. Going to that same bar at 1:30 a.m.? Look, you're going to encounter drunkenness there. If you want to avoid it, don't go there. It's the same with difficult and challenging conversations. If you want to avoid them, don't go where they're taking place. It's not hard.

Nancy Travis Internal Affairs Richard Gere

Actually, Diary of a Very Tired Mechanic triggered the answer even before the cast did. Something about the imagery. It's Tucker: A Man and His Dream.

And one more answer-you're-not-looking-for, this time from an atheist: People can believe in the Trinity because there is Biblical support for the notion that Jesus existed prior to his birth. It was (and remains) my belief that Hebrews rules out Jesus being an angel, so if he existed prior to his birth and he's not an angel, that really only leaves you with God. It should be noted that Jehovah's Witnesses DO believe Jesus was an angel, and they (obviously) interpret Hebrews differently than I do. And then there's TWI, which contends Jesus did not exist until he was conceived and later born. In order to adopt any of these positions, in my opinion, you need to do two things: first, summon the support from the scriptures that agree with you (or appear to), and second, explain those verses that seem to conflict with your position. If Jesus is God, why does he say "My Father is greater than I am"? If Jesus is not God, what does John 1 mean? If Jesus is not an angel, how can he both pre-exist and be lesser than the Father at the same time? If Jesus is an angel, why does Hebrews go to so much trouble refuting his identity as an angel? That's just a small sample of the questions raised by each position. Here's the least invited part of my observation: These questions are only substantial if you hold that the Bible has a uniform message about who Jesus is. There is an alternative answer, one I feel fits the facts better than any of those proposed: The writers of the Bible disagreed with each other about who and what Jesus was. Passionately. No wonder Christians today can't reach a consensus! There never was a consensus. Here endeth uninvited response number three.

The song is summer nights, but whatever. Lyrics are ok too

I tried to make the clues increasingly easy. Blame Canada was supposed to be the giveaway. You're up, WordWolf.

John Travolta Grease Stockard Channing

No What Would Brian Boitano Do Kyle's Mom is a B*tch

Blame Canada

Meh. I figured anyone who cared would have come across it independently anyway

Dogma Chris Rock Head of State

Silence of the Lambs pork bellies. Used to make bacon, which may be found in the bacon lettuce and tomato sandwich

Mountain Town Shut your ****ING face, uncle ****er

Spoiler Alert: I WILL reveal the answer in this post, so stop reading when I say stop if you'd prefer to figure it out on your own. The riddle: Albert and Bernard just met Cheryl. “When’s your birthday?” Albert asked Cheryl. Cheryl thought a second and said, “I’m not going to tell you, but I’ll give you some clues.” She wrote down a list of 10 dates: May 15 — May 16 — May 19 June 17 — June 18 July 14 — July 16 August 14 — August 15 — August 17 “My birthday is one of these,” she said. Then Cheryl whispered in Albert’s ear the month — and only the month — of her birthday. To Bernard, she whispered the day, and only the day. “Can you figure it out now?” she asked Albert. Albert: I don’t know when your birthday is, but I know Bernard doesn’t know, either. Bernard: I didn’t know originally, but now I do. Albert: Well, now I know, too! When is Cheryl’s birthday? Answer below: No, seriously, stop reading. I mean it. Look, here's a line indicating where you should stop: ============================================================================================= Ok, so the answer is ... 42. Sorry, wrong question. Ok, here it goes. The key to solving this riddle is remembering that you are NOT one of the characters here. The characters both know something. You don't. And the basic logic behind this is "in order for A to be true, B must be true." You just have to figure out what B is. Hit each clue with the above in mind. Albert knows the month. So when he says "I don't know her birthday," your reaction should be "no duh." The month is not enough information. But he also says "I KNOW Bernard doesn't know it either." In order for that to be true, Albert must have been given a month where all the available dates repeat somewhere. For example, if Bernard were given the number 19, that would be enough to know the date (May 19). How does Albert know Bernard was NOT given the number 19? Because he was not given a month with the number 19 in it. Same logic applies to June 18. Albert had to have been given a month without an 18. So Albert was given either July or August. All the dates in those months repeat elsewhere. Bernard just figured out what you and I just figured out. It's not May or June. It must be July or August. Suddenly, Bernard knows the date! In order for Bernard to know the date, he had to have been given a number that does not repeat in July and August. That rules out the 14th. Now, here's where it gets tricky: You and I have just narrowed down the answer to July 16, August 15 and August 17. And we have no way of narrowing that down. But then Albert helps us by saying he knows the answer, too. How? In order for Albert to know the answer (July 16, August 15 or August 17), he would have to have ruled out two possibilities. How could he? Because Albert already knows the month. The FACT that it's July rules out the possibility that it's either date in August. If Albert were given August, he still would not know the answer. It's July 16. Knowing it's July 16, you can look back at the problem and it makes a little bit more sense. Albert knows that Bernard doesn't have enough information. All Albert needs is for Bernard to reveal whether he had a 14 or a 16 (the July numbers). If Bernard had not known the answer, Albert would have deduced it was July 14. But since Bernard DID know the answer, Albert could deduce it was July 16. The end.

Right. I forgot about V (as did everyone who watched it)

Up There I Can Change La Resistance I'm Super

Oops. Sorry. This is Sweeney Todd

The same character over 20 years later in a show that has a different continuity. Rare indeed.

Close enough. "The New Batch."

You're up