Raf

Hey, cc, happy birthday! Hope you're reading this.

Pick another one.

Off topic Here's the article, Oaks.

Got it. Good one. :)

Well, I guess that settles it, then. Tea, anyone?

I think that's part of the risk of posting on a public message board. People who disagree with you will say so, and posts that are intended to be taken seriously will be mocked. I don't want a PFAL poster, but I once hunted for a copy of ROA tapes from an ROA I detested, just to have it. In fact, I think I'll give some of it a listen this morning! :)

Yyyyyyup.

Oaks, did you catch that alumni magazine article they did on me a few months back?

No, Jonny, but it is a place where people with those feelings exist in large number and have no hesitation expressing those feelings. You wouldn't be shocked to go into a bar and find drinking, even though people who don't drink are welcome there, would you?

Hint: The lyrics to the song I listed give a MAJOR clue to the title of the song Word Wolf is looking for. Heh heh heh.

There are five places in Acts where people are specifically said to have received the holy spirit. In Acts 2, they show this by speaking in tongues. In Acts 10, the house of Cornelius shows this by speaking in tongues. In Acts 19, the disciples of Apollos show this by speaking in tongues. That leaves two that are less clear: Acts 8 does not say that anyone spoke in tongues, but it does say that "Simon SAW that through the laying on of hands the Holy Ghost was given..." Simon had to see something that could only be interpreted as evidence that the holy spirit was received. SIT is a reasonable assumption. The final record is the conversion of Saul. Acts 9:17-19 give no indication that Saul spoke in tongues. However, I Corinthians makes clear that Saul (aka Paul) spoke in tongues more than anyone. Five "receivings" of holy spirit, five incidents of speaking in tongues.

Yeah, this one's a piece of cake.

Gotta be Space Oddity Dang! Right idea, wrong song.

Alas, neither resolved nor alleviated. Just being dealt with.

I always thought the "Five to Nothing" scorekeeping was pretty good, though I never looked at it critically. I think three of them mention SIT outright, while the other two imply it fairly strongly. Wait, one of them was the "Simon saw" verse, which meant that Simon had to see (or witness) something considered proof that "the Holy Spirit fell on them" or however it's phrased in that verse. I think SIT is as safe a bet as any on that one. The other was Saul's conversion, and on that one you may have a point. There's nothing in the Acts record to suggest or hint that Saul spoke in tongues at that particular point in time. There's plenty of evidence he did so later.

I just talked to some friends about this, and apparently the consensus is that if you've seen it live, don't see the movie. But if you HAVEN'T seen it live, the movie's a riot.

Finally! A better analogy than David or Paul! Solomon's writings, if I am not mistaken, preceded his reprehensible behavior. But it is a much better analogy.

I agree with you, Oldiesman. We're not the ones fooling you.

I suspect my initial review was not understood. I was trying to say the movie was flat. More detailed: I like the fact that the musical was put on film, but I thought a lot of the jokes that made my ribs ache on stage were just not funny on screen. I didn't like the fact that they cut Nathan Lane's opening song, which established his character. Matthew Broderick was not very good at all. The chemistry between Lane and Broderick was just about gone. Gary Beach, on the other hand, was very good.

Yes, that is correct. 500 karaoke nights confirm it.

The Man From Snowy River?

Annie Fair Two Ream Amber An Affair to Remember, yes, that's the movie with Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr. They talk about that movie a lot in Sleepless In Seattle. Excellent work, Rhino.

stumped again

Often in the very same words. :)