Deadworm

The Holy Spirit doesn't jump just because we creack our whip! "The wind blows where it chooses, and no body knows where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit (John 3:8)." Paul said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you became believers (Acts 19:2)?" Paul's question assumes that mere profession of faith in Christ is no automatic guarantee that they received the Spirit at that very moment. He is asking them what their experience was upon professing faith in Christ.

Peter had a mother-in-law and was therefore married (Mark 1:30-31). The early tradition that Peter had biological children is therefore probably true (Clement Stromata 3:52). Peter (Cephas) took his wife with him on his missionary tours (1 Corinthians 9:5) and was martyred together with her in Rome (Clement, Stromata 7:11). So it seems probable that Peter took his children with him on his missionary travels. Indeed, Peter's “son” (Greek: “huios”) Mark traveled with him on his tours (1 Peter 5:13). Paul uses “teknon” rather than “huios” when he calls his young missionary companions his “child.” So there is no reason to believe that Peter means “son” in a figurative sense. Paul never refers to young male believers as his “son” (Greek : “huios).” Though Paul does call both Timothy and Titus his “child” (”teknon”), he makes it clear that he is speaking figuratively of his “loyal child in the faith” (1 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4). Papias (c. 60-130 AD) prefers “the living voice” of eyewitnesses to Jesus to written traditions and hears what 2 of Jesus' disciples, John and Aristion, are currently saying. Neither disciple is one of the Twelve, but both may well be included in the 70 other disciples (Luke 10:1). He refers to these 2 disciples as “the Elders” and quotes one of them on the origin of Mark's Gospel: “The Elder [John or Aristion] said this: Mark, having become Peter's interpreter, wrote down accurately what he recalled. However, it was not in he exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ...He accompanied Peter, who accomodated his instructions to the necessities of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Therefore, Mark made no mistake in writing some things as he recalled them (Eusebius HE 3:39).” Note 2 implications of what Papias reports: (1) Mark is providing Peter's eyewitness testimony to Jesus' words and deeds. (2) Eyewitnesses were still alive to correct the sequence of Mark's Gospel, which is based on Peter's catechetical notes rather than on a sequential biography. So Mark's Gospel is basically Mark's record of his Dad's teaching about Jesus' words and deeds!

I will list just 10 first and 2nd century examples. (1) Paul (but only specific "Words of the Lord") (2) John the seer, but only the 7 prophetic oracles known as the letters to the 7 churches, not the Apocalypse as a whole. Apocalyptic and prophecy can overlap, but they are 2 different phenimena. (3) The evangelist Philip's 4 prophet daughters (1st century) (4) In Acts "the prophets and teachers" named in 13:1; later Agabus (5) Unnamed wandering furst century prophets cited in the Didache (6) Peregrinus, a Jerusalem Christian prophet ridiculed by the pagan Lucian of Samosata (7) Late second century bishop prophet Melito of Sardis (8) Late 2nd century female prophets, Priscilla, Maximilla, and Quintilla ("the New Prophecy") (9) Montanus (10) Sybilline Orackes II (mid-2ns century) Since the early church of the first 3 centuries generally embraced the prophethood of all believers, there must have been innumberable unnamed othersl

Leah, My Spirit baptism at age 16 at a camp meeting was by far the highlight of my life. At the time I had all but lost my faith and was convinced that most charismatic manifestations were of the flesh. I saw many encouraged and even manipulated into speaking in tongues and was determined not succumb to the power of suggestion and wishful thinking. So I went for a 7 mile walk in the country, confessing my disillusionment with God and pleading for an inner assurance that Christ and God were real. When I returned, I did something I had never done before--I put the money I planned to spend on dinner in the offering plate and thus fasted. At the end of the service I went forward to kneel at the altar, but my heart felt like stone. Soon I was the only one left in the amphitheater. Suddenly I felt a strong breeze and assumed it came off the nearby Pelican Lake. But it was the wind of the Holy Spirit! The Spirit gently possessed me and forced me to speak in tongues at the top of my voice. Wave after wave of liquid love surged through my being, each wave more powerful than the last. I can only say the experience was 100 times more intense an experience of pure unconditional love, power, and exquisite sweetness than I have ever experienced before or since. At one point I was afraid that I'd die withy my puny ego being absorbed into God's awesome mind! A couple of curiosity seekers reentered the amphitheater to see what was happening. One lady say and stared, later telling me that my face was radiantly glowing in the darkening building. A Lutheran pastor approached my when I was silent and said he didn't believe in tongues and was only there as an interested observer, but he could tell that God was doing a special work in me. I didn't argue with him; I just gently touched him on the forehead and he exploded in other tongues! With the experience came other spiritual gifts. I strangely knew that I would receive the highest GPA in the province of Manitoba in my senior high school year, this despite the fact that I wasn't doing that well in school. The scholarships I received as a result allowed me to finance many years of college and grad school to study theology and Scripture. But I also received the gift of "the word of knowledge." Many times I "knew" that someone was going to die shortly. Once I tried to convince a friend not to go on a hunting trip because of my death premonition. He ignored my warning and was killed when his rifle accidentally discharged into his shoulder. I could post a long thread on these experiences. I am very skeptical by nature and would probably have abandoned my faith were it not for that magical life-changing experience. H

Well, George. we don't really know each other, but I think even a casual survey of the posted videos will show you that they are the best available online on the subject of great historic revivals. I'll begin to post one such video to get your reaction.

I want to start a new thread related to this topic on why "the Enemy" often wins over devout Christians who seem to be doing everything right. I have in mind a spiritual warfare group at a local evangelical Free Methodist church which contained 2 of the finest Christians I have never met. The pastor was a godly man, who encouraged this group of 12+ prayer warriors, but their prayer vigils were used to drive out all but 2 of the 12 members and also the pastor in what seems to have been a victory for a supernatural display of evil. Only 2 of the 12 (both of whom attend my weekly prayer group) even still attend church! The other area where Satan often seems to achieve victory is the murky distinction between mental illness and demonic possession and oppression. I have seen well meaning Christians try to exorcise Christian schizophrenics, only to fail and make the disorder far worse. In my own efforts to minister to the mentally ill, one guy knew the Bible as well as many ministers, read it regularly, and prayed regularly. But his suffering from voices calling him "Satan" robbed his faith of all comfort and prevented him from believing that God really loved him anyway. I have tried everything to help him restore his faith--in vain. Now he is at the brink of death from congestive heart failure and I despair of how to help his family beyond simply praying for him and for them. Another schizophrenic was shot by local police before I could get him the help (meds, etc.) he needed. I'm hoping that those of you with mental illness and others experienced in dealing with the mentally ill can offer helpful insights on how the situations I'll describe might have been handled differently. Stay tuned for that thread.

I want to start a new thread related to this topic on why "the Enemy" often wins over devout Christians who seem to be doing everything right. I have in mind a spiritual warfare group at a local evangelical Free Methodist church which contained 2 of the finest Christians I have never met. The pastor was a godly man, who encouraged this group of 12+ prayer warriors, but their prayer vigils were used to drive out all but 2 of the 12 members and also the pastor in what seems to have been a victory for a supernatural display of evil. Only 2 of the 12 (both of whom attend my weekly prayer group) even still attend church! The other area where Satan often seems to achieve victory is the murky distinction between mental illness and demonic possession and oppression. I have seen well meaning Christians try to exorcise Christian schizophrenics, only to fail and make the disorder far worse. In my own efforts to minister to the mentally ill, one guy knew the Bible as well as many ministers, read it regularly, and prayed regularly. But his suffering from voices calling him "Satan" robbed his faith of all comfort and prevented him from believing that God really loved him anyway. I have tried everything to help him restore his faith--in vain. Now he is at the brink of death from congestive heart failure and I despair of how to help his family beyond simply praying for him and for them. Another schizophrenic was shot by local police before I could get him the help (meds, etc.) he needed. I'm hoping that those of you with mental illness and others experienced in dealing with the mentally ill can offer helpful insights on how the situations I'll describe might have been handled differently. Stay tuned for that thread.

Is it permissible to post the title of YouTube videos as opposed to the URL itself, so that readers can look up and watch the videos for themselves? What I have in mind are videos on the greatest historic revivals, which often exceed the site's 20 minute time limit. No sermons or online videos have inspired my faith more than the revival videos I would post for discussion, specifically on the Welsh Revival (1904-06), the Azusa Street Revival (1906-08), and the Hebrides Revival (1949-54). The titles would include documentaries, testimonies, and lectures and would eventually extend to the First and Second Great Awakenings. The focus would be on how each revival was catalyzed and how they were eventually sabotaged as opposed to simply petering out.

Fundamentalists on this site and in general lack the intellectual integrity to investigate evolution as presented by acknowledged secular experts like Dr. Kenneth Miller, who is featured on several YouTube lectures. So my hunch proved to be true that my brief video (4 minutes+ at the end of p. 37 on this thread) cut from a longer masterful lecture on a powerful new piece of evidence for primate evolution would be too threatening to be viewed here. I guess you people need to stay within the myopic sheltered confines of the evangelical Ghetto for all your reading (Creationist, Intelligent Design groupies, etc.). As for me, I feel compelled to swim the troubled waters of honest and open intellectual inquiry, regardless of its impact of my previously sheltered, but passionately devout Evangelical faith. God deserves HONEST seekers and the company of those who love Him enough to endure the doubt and pain of an honest spiritual quest that needs to consider opposing perspectives from their most articulate and well-informed spokesmen!

Fundamentalists generally live in their carefully insulated thought Ghetto, where they are protected from the most articulate expressions of opposing theories like evolution because they retrict their exposure to Funamentalist apologists were are poorly informed about the case for evolution. As a result, (1) Fundamentalists don't even realize that evolutionary theory has nothing to do with the origin of life. (2) They studiously avoid honest and open intellectual inquiry by refusing to read or watch informed defenses of evolution by acknowledged experts like Dr. Kenneth Miller, who has written acclaimed high school and college text books on the subject. I challenge Fundamentalists here to take the blinders off and google lengthy YouTube videos of Miller's acclaimed lectures. btw, Miller is a highly respected evolutionist, despite the fact that he is also a devout Roman Catholic.

First century Jews and Christians agree on one point--that Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus. After Jesus begins his spectacular ministry, He returns to his home town to a hostile reaction. The locals in Nazareth remember Him as "the carpenter, the son of Mary" and are "scandalized" by Him and His later claims (Mark 6:4). In that patriarchal culture men were identified as the son of their named father. So the reference to Jesus as "the son of Mary" seems to imply His illegitimate birth. Indeed, first century rabbis ultimately identify a Roman soldier named Panthera as Jesus' true father! How they came up with that name is an interesting question that I will take up in a future post. For now, my point is that first-century Jews and Christians agree on one point- that Joseph is not the natural father of Jesus. This agreement rules out a common claim of anti-supernatural skeptics--that Jesus was born in the customary way to married human parents. The portrait of Mary in our Gospels depicts a very humble and devout young Jewish woman, a woman who is hardly likely to be sexually promiscuous. For that very reason, the ancient Jewish and Christian consensus that Joseph is not Jesus' true father serves apologetic interests as another reason to accept the Gospel tradition of Jesus' virgin birth. The anti-Gospel's claim that Jesus' mother was a "spinner" is not attested in our Gospels, but may well reflect accurate oral tradition. Archaeologists have found remnants of spinning equipment in a first-century Nazareth home that that has for good reason been identified as the house of Mary and Joseph. Google "archaeology and Jesus' house in Nazareth for detailed information about this case. In the first century poor Jewish women often had to weave their family's clothes, and so, Mary's status as a "spinner" seems quite plausible. The Jewish claim that Jesus studied magic in Egypt is a slander that takes as its starting point the Matthean tradition that Mary and Joseph took the baby Jesus to Egypt to escape Herod's persecution. Of course, Jesus' family only stayed in Egypt until Herod's death om 4 BC and then went to Nazareth, while Jesus was still a small child (2:13-23). So the rabbinic view that Jesus studied magic in Egypt is absurd perversion of Matthew's Christmas story. More commentary on the unintended apologetic value of the Jewish anti-Gospel to follow.

Jesus' Jewish enemies and later Jews in the Diaspora persecuted Jesus and then His followers and converts in an effort to stamp out our faith. To pursue this goal they promoted their own anti-Gospel, a version of Jesus' life that portrayed Him as a magician. This version twisted factual material with misunderstandings, distortions, and outright lies and was apparently effective anti-Christian propaganda in the first and second centuries. In this thread I want to document this anti-Gospel to demonstrate what early Christian apologists were up against, and then I want to show hoe the tables can be turned on this lying portrait to the advantage of effective Christian witness. Here, then, is the hostile ancient Jewish caricature of Jesus' life that was used by Jews to counter early Christian missionary activities: "Jesus was the illegitimate son of a spinner named Mary and Panthera, a Roman soldier (so ancient rabbinic sources and Celsus). In his earlier life he went to Egypt to study magic and even had his arms tattooed with magical spells (Celsus). His so-called healings were not real and the cures didn't last (Quadratus). On the contrary,, his miracles were either magically produced hallucinations or demonically inspired. His disciples were sailors of the worst sort and he traveled around Galilee with them, making his living shamefully as a beggar. He taught Jews to violate the Law of Moses authorized by God and he taught his followers magical rites in which they ate the body and drank the blood of babies! He was crucified for practicing magic and promoting sedition (Celsus, again). The gardener at the tomb where he was buried removed his corpse to prevent Christian sightseers from stepping on his cabbage (a Jewish view reported by Tertullian). His disciples exploited his missing body to claim that he rose from dead and used this lie to justify the continuation of his cult." Morton Smith, a Columbia University professor, collected the evidence for this early Jewish portrait of Jesus in his book, "Jesus the Magician." As an ex-Theology professor, I used this portrait as a pretext to teach an apologetic defense of the Gospel. Professors are not supposed to proselytize the students at universities; so this Jewish portrait was a blessing in disguise because it gave me historical cover to justify my counter-arguments against skepticism about the historicity of Jesus' incarnation, miracles, and resurrection. J will demonstrate how in this thread in the hope that it will give Christian readers new ways to defend the Gospel.

Ah, but a well respected Columbia University professor, Morten Smith, wrote a well -respected book entitled "Jesus the Magician," in which he demonstrates how Jesus and Paul used techniques borrowed from contemporary Greco-Roman magic. Have you read his evidence or are you content with the disingenuous evangelical ploy of creating a weak straw man to avoid the hard work or honest and open inquiry? [Don't worry I ask this question not as a debunker, but as a devout evangelical who deplores the typical evangelical unwillingness to consider the evidence marshalled from intellectuals against the Christian faith.]

Before there were modern praise choruses, there was Southern Gospel quartet music. The best of these was the version of the Statesmen that featured Denver Crumpler as the lead tenor. Denver died at age 44 of diabetic shock misdiagnosed as a heart attack. In the 1950s the Statesmen even had their own TV show. Here is Denver singing "I'll Tell It," the best old Gospel song that you've never heard of: httpOn this s://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=i'll+tell+it+crumpler+youtube&view=detail&mid=462A7682CCA20BAC55FD462A7682CCA20BAC55FD&FORM=VIRE In this thread I'll post some of my favorute old quartet numbers that I recall from my youth.

I checked and was amazed to see that you are still in high school (age 17). You sound like a Philosophy major. As a college undergrad, I was a Philosophy major and a Teaching Fellow in Logic. Then I got my MDiv (Princeton) and my Doctorate in New Testament, Judaism, and Greco-Roman backgrounds (Harvard). I was a Theology Professor for 12 years and then became a United Methodist pastor until my recent retirement. I share all this simply to let you know where my answers are coming from. You strike me as a prime candidate for seminary training. Your burning question would best be discussed under a new thread "The Mind-Body Problem." I suggest you google search under that heading, looking for perspectives from Philosophy, Carl Jung's Collective Unconscious, and neurology. An interesting place to start is to google "Larry Dossey One Mind YouTube and watch one or more of his video interviews, preferably the 51+ minute interview. Then start a post or new thread based on the fruits of this research, and I will of course reply. Let me know what you decide.

.Let's hear your questions.

"You are to hand this man [sleeping with his father's wife] over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord (1 Corinthians 5:5)."

Why don't you give us a chance to respond to your issues? Are you afraid our answers will be too complicated for you to understand?

I grew up in the most historically important large Pentecostal church in Canada. When I reached my teans, my faith was poisoned by faith crippling doubts about the Bible and the reality of God's intervention in our lives. My pastor and adult layman took personal interest in me and my problems--except one, Gordon Edmunds. Gordon wanted to encourage me in my walk by recommending good devotional Christian books he had read. I confessed that I didn't know any Christian adults who like to read books. Gordon sensed by faith crisis and replied with words that greatly impacted my life: "You don't have to be stupid to be a Christian, but sometimes I think it sure helps!" That rather crude comment made realize this paradox: On the one hand, we are commanded to love God with all our mind as well as all our heart. On the other hand, despite the deceptive character of some feelings, it is still easier to feel your way to God than to think your way to God. In other words, "Theological understanding is the booby prize because it gives you just enough spirituality to inoculate you against the real thing--iife changing spiritual experiences.

The Lord's Prayer is a model ("Pray then like this") and as such invites the question, "In what ways are its components normative?" The pcholarly consesnsus is that the petition in question should be translated "Give us today are bread for the coming day ("epiousia"). Remember. the prayer was originally uttered in Aramaic, not Greek. As a model this petition is not urging us to pray for nutritional bread as opposed to fish or vegetables; it is urging us the pray that our basic needs be met. But more subtly, it is warning us that our prayers have a very short warrantee! I don' get to ask for my basic needs to be met for an entire year; I need to renew my petition daily because I can't count on it being effective for more than tomorrow. This is one of many reasons why Jesus urges not "Ask and you shall receive, seek and you will find," etc., but rather "Keep on asking and you will receive, keep on seeking and you will find," etc. (The Greek imperatives require the nuance of continual action.).

Maryjayne: "I see. Well, I dont speak in tongues, so I am not saved. Never have, not even at the moment I was saved/" So are you saying that the Word of God is wrong when Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14, "I want you all to speak in tongues" and "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you?" Paul often instructs his reader to imitate him and follow his example. Ttue, Paul adds that he'd rather we all prophesy, but most Christians neither understand nor exercise that gift either. btw. the tongues I spoke during my Spirit baptism at age 16 were by far the spiritual, emotional, and most life-changing experience of my life. I experienced God's love in an indescribably powerful, intimate, and oh so sweet way than I have experienced before or since and now, decades later, I regularly draw nourishment form the sheer memory of that experience in times of doubt and disappointment.

John D: "Baptism of the Holy Spirit is salvation. Matthew 3:11 " That claim implies that Jesus' disciples weren't "saved" prior to their Spirit baptism on the Day of Pentecost.

JustPassingThru:"If we correctly divide the Word we find gift of tongues were given in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and finally Ephesus, ...the uttermost part of the earth at that time". But I'm afraid you are not "correctly dividing the Word" in 3 respects: (1) Through the travels of traders Mediterranean peoples were aware of residents of the Far East. Indeed, the conquests of Alexander the Great extended as far a s India. Paul's mission extended way beyond Ephesus to Greece and Rome, and he hoped the Romans could send him on to Spain (Romans 15:24, 28). JPT: "We don't find the gift given in Berea, Corinth, Derbe, Joppa, Lystra, Miletus, Philippi, Rome, and many more." (2) You are fallaciously arguing from silence. We are told nothing about the initial bestowal of the Spirit in the locales you mention--except one, Corinth; and we know that the Corinthians loved to speak in tongues (read 1 Corinthans 12 and 14). (3) Most importantly, you overlook the decisive importance of Peter's promise in Acts 2:38-39 for the intended extent of speaking in tongues: ...you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you, for your children, and for all who are far away, everYone whom the Lord calls to Him." Peter's point is that the promise of the Holy Spirit applies to everyone everywhere throughout history. In the context Peter is promising more of the same, i. e. more Spirit baptisms that include speaking in tongues. Indeed, Luke's pattern of Spirit reception with the initial evidence of tongues confirms this interpretation. What anti-Pentecostals don't get is this: The Book of Acts makes no mention of the regenerating work of the Spirit in the conversion process! That shocking omission implies at least that Luke envisages speaking in tongues as a part of the promise of the Spirit to future generations everywhere. On these grounds, you can stick a fork in cessationism. JPT: "Unfortunately many over look the real intention of Jesus saying the disciples would receive power from and by the Holy Spirit, ...after they had waited, ...this power only comes to those that wait and have relinquished to the Holy Spirit the authority to rule, reign and guide their lives, ..some find it, but many don't." But don't be s0 judgmental towards Pentecostals in general. I have been exposed to Pentecostalism all my life and I assure you that their quest for the baptism in the Spirit is typically soaked in extended periods of prayer, intercession, and praise.

What is the baptism of the Holy Spirit? We must begin by noting what it is not--it is not the reception of the Spirit automatically received upon profession of faith in Christ. 1 Corinthians 12:13 is often misinterpreted to have this meaning: "For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body...and were made to drink of one Spirit." As Hans Conzelmann is no charismatic or Pentecostal and is well respected in the academic community of biblical studies. In his magisterial Commentary on 1 Corinthians, he rightly notes: "The expression ["in the Spirit we were all baptized into one body"] appears to mean that the body [of Christ] is already there when we are taken up into it by [water] baptism (p.212)." Otherwise, Paul would be contradicting Luke, for whom Spirit baptism is a second work of grace after salvation. Consider these 5 points: (1) "John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now(1:4).""But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be witnesses (1:8)..." "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them ability (2:4)." (2) Luke identifies 2 characteristics of Spirit baptism: an experience of power and speaking in tongues. Spirit power enables them to witness effectively, aided by their healings through the power of the Spirit. (3) In 3 of the 4 cases in Acts when believers are baptized in the Spirit, we are told that they speak in tongues. In the 4th case (in Samaria) an eruption of tongues seems implied by the demonstration of "power" impressive enough to prompt Simon the Magician to offer money for this "power." The Samaritans believe the Gospel and are baptized in water and are thus saved (8:12). They presumably received the regenerating Holy Spirit. It is important to note that Luke nowhere acknowledges the redemptive work of the Spirit upon initial profession of faith in Christ. So these new Samaritan Christians now need to be baptized with the Holy Spirit as a second work of grace: "The 2 [Peter and John] went down to pray for them; for as yet the Spirit had not come upon any of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (8:15-16)." (4) Note the question that Paul asks the Ephesian "disciples:" "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you became believers (19:2)?" The question assumes that these disciples first became Christians and now need the baptism of the Holy Spirit. And what is the sign of that baptism? An experience of divine power evidenced by speaking on tongues and prophesying (19:6). (5) Jesus' disciples receive Spirit baptism as a second work of grace after having already received the Spirit from Jesus (John 20:22-23). Only after receiving the Holy Spirit do the disciples have the power and discernment to "forgive" or "retain" sins. Of course, by doing so, they are making real the forgiveness offered by God Himself.

When I was a new United Methodist pastor in western New York, neither I nor my 2 congregations knew much about contemporary praise choruses. I soon felt the need to expand our congregational singing beyond our hymnal. I went on a long contemplative walk in the hilly countryside to meditate on this question. Suddenly the lyrics of 2 lively old hymns played sequentially in my mind: "Lily of the Valley" and "Dwelling in Beulah Land." I think I had only heard them once each decades ago in my childhood. So it astounded me that I was now accurately hearing the lyrics of both hymns in my head after all these years! I asked me music directors at both churches in my 2-church charge to introduce them the next Sunday. In one church they were well received, but in the other church the effect was electrifying, partly because the pianist in that church was an accomplished jazz pianist with his own professional band. Particularly electrifying was his accompaniment of "Dwelling in Beulah Land," which sounded something like this: https://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=0FBCBJNU Notice how joyfully the young children react to this song. For some reason, the Holy Spirit was so palpable during the singing of that hymn in one of the 2 churches that miracles rivaling any in the Book of Acts happened shortly thereafter! Now I'm well versed in contemporary praise music and have grown to love it. But no praise chorus has even remotely sparked a mass reaction like the singing of "Dwelling in Beulah Land" that fateful epic Sunday.