a b Coleman, Maureen (14 August 2021). "Brian Desmond Hurst: Forgotten son of east Belfast who rose to top in Hollywood". Te Belfast Telegraph . Retrieved 18 December 2021.

Hurst died on 26 September 1986 at Delaware Nursing Home, off Harrow Road, London, England. [15] He was cremated and his ashes were scattered on his older brother Robert's grave in Dundonald Cemetery [16] Who are Israelites, to whom belongeth the adoption as of children, and the glory, and the testament, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises:And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient… Brian Desmond Hurst (12 February 1895 – 26 September 1986) was an Irish film director. With over thirty films in his filmography, Hurst was hailed as Northern Ireland's best film director by BBC film critic Mike Catto. [1] He is perhaps best known for the 1951 A Christmas Carol adaptation Scrooge. The absence of any description of a defect, damage, modification or restoration in any description or report does not imply that there are none.It is the responsibility of the bidder to assess the condition of auction lots prior to bidding. Hurst was born at 23 Ribble Street, Belfast, into a working-class family. He attended the New Road School, a public elementary school in East Belfast. [2] who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises,

By 1933, Hurst was ready to return to the UK and settled in Belgravia, where he lived from the 1930s to his death in 1986, although he often returned to Ulster to visit relatives for "a spiritual bath". [5] Strong's 5206: From a presumed compound of huios and a derivative of tithemi; the placing as a son, i.e. Adoption.They are Israelites, God's adopted children. They have the Lord's glory, the pledges, Moses' Teachings, the true worship, and the promises.

The premiere of Theirs is the Glory was on the second anniversary of the battle in September 1946 and was attended by the Prime Minister. King George VI commanded a private screening at Balmoral Castle. Theirs is the Glory and A Bridge Too Far were compared in the battlefields magazine Against All Odds and the comparison is stark and revealing " A Bridge Too Far is a slow moving epic, well worth a viewing with some authentic scenes, but is unconvincing in its portrayal of the battle of Oosterbeek... Theirs is the Glory is the only feature film currently released that accurately portrays the events at Oosterbeek in atmospheric and chronological terms, despite its jerky portrayal of events. This is a film to watch.". [12] people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Hurst was interviewed by Punch magazine in 1969. The article includes Hurst's statement that "I would fight for England against anybody except Ireland" and it continues: "Why for England? 'Because an Englishman is worth twenty foreigners.' Why not against Ireland? 'Because an Irishman is worth fifty Englishmen.'" [5]

who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and daughters, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the Law, the temple service, and the promises; A detailed article on the making of the film is contained in After the Battle Magazine, Issue Number 58. Pulpit Commentary Verses 4, 5. - Who ( οἵτινες, with its usual sense of quippe qui) are Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the Law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Here "the adoption" ( ὑιοθεσία) means the selection of Israel to be God's peculiar people (cf. Exodus 4:22, "Israel is my son, even my firstborn;" Deuteronomy 14:1, "Ye are the children of the Lord your God;" Hosea 11:1, "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt;" also Exodus 19:5. Cf. also τέκνατοῦΘεοῦ in ver. 8 below). It is, of course, a different idea from that of the spiritual υἱοθεσία of believers (at present as in Romans 8:15, or to come as in Romans 8:23), though it might be typical of it. "The glory" ( ἡδόξα) seems best explained by reference to 2 Corinthians 3:7-18, where the visible glory, said to have rested on the mercy-seat and to have illuminated for a time the face of Moses, is regarded as expressing the glory, in a higher sense, of the old dispensation, which, however, was destined to fade away in the greater glory of the revelation of God in Christ. The word may be thus taken to denote, not simply the Sheehinab, or the glory on Mount Sinai, but rather what was signified by these manifestations. It was probably a recognized term in use with reference to the giving of the Law. "The covenants" ( αἱδιαθῆκαι), and "the promises" ( αἱἐπαγγελίαι), both in the plural, include those made with and given to Abraham and the other patriarchs, as well as the Mosaic ones. The former word is wrongly taken by some as denoting the tables of the covenant. Ἡλατρεία is obviously the divinely appointed ceremonial worship, the typical significance of which is explained at length in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the same word is used. "The fathers" ( οἱπατέρες) are the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the original recipients of the promises, descent from whom was made such account of by the Jews, as being the foundation of their privileges (cf. Matthew 3:9; Luke 3:8; Luke 13:28; John 8:39; and, for the use of πατέρες in this sense, cf. Acts 3:22; Acts 13:32; Romans 15:8; Hebrews 1:1). The last and crowning distinction of the Jewish race is mentioned last, viz. the fleshly descent therefrom of Christ, even of him who in his higher nature is "over all, God blessed for ever." This is certainly the most obvious meaning of the conclusion of ver. 5, as far as the language is concerned, and the one understood by all ancient commentators. Some moderns, however, as is well known, have raised objections to this interpretation of the clause, based solely on the supposed improbability that St. Paul would have so designated Christ. Some would, therefore, get over this imagined difficulty by putting a full stop after κατὰσάρκα, and taking what follows as a doxology to God the Father, thus: "God, who is over all, be blessed for ever." The apostle is supposed, according to this interpretation, to have been moved to this parenthetical utterance by his contemplation of the Divine favours to Israel, which he had been recounting. Some have suggested the full stop being put after πάντων, so as to refer ὁω}νἐπὶπάντων to Christ, and take only what follows as a doxology, or, as some would have it, as a statement. But, in either case, the idea of so unlikely a breaking up of the sentence may be dismissed as untenable. Others, without thus breaking up the sentence, take the whole of it, beginning with ὁω}ν, to be, not a doxology, but a statement, thus at- tempting to meet the objection to its being a doxology (to be noticed presently), arising from the collocation of the words. But a mere assertion that God is blessed for ever would seem peculiarly uncalled for and purposeless here. Meyer, being a critic of deserved repute, and an upholder of the modern interpretation of the clause, taking the whole of it together as a doxology to the Father, it may suffice to state his arguments.