My father abandoned me when I was a child and Ive only seen him twice in my life as an adult when he went to my cousin's graduation and my grandmothers funeral.

I do not like calling him "Dad" or "Father" as he never filled that role for me, it makes me cringe to call him that even in this thread. My father is in heaven. To this day I have abandonment issues, though I will credit him that he has made me the best father I know as I am the Dad I wish I had.

I pray for him nightly and thank God for him and his family using his first name. Ive been wondering if this is dishonoring him and have asked the holy spirit for guidance on this and while I do not feel convicted of it as I do other sins I feel uncertain. So just wanted to see what other people's thoughts are if it is not honoring your father by praying for them with their first name.

Funny story, when I was young I held alot of hate for him. I would say childish things like "If I ever see him again ill knock him out." When I was 19 I was visiting my grandmother and we were watching home movies and he was in some of them. That night I prayed and forgave him, felt like a huge weight off my shoulders. The next day I went to my other grandmother's home and they were like "come on in we have a surprise for you" and there he was for the first time in 10 years... Awesome how God works isnt it? "Oh you forgive him huh? Lets see!"

It is only in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ that we have truth fully brought out. I will learn truth through the Holy Spirit, and He is the only power of my knowing the truth, and is therefore called “Truth” in 1 John 5:6 (and is “the Spirit of Truth; Jhn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13; 1Jo 4:6).

When you speak of the truth, you do not mean merely either the divine nature in its perfectness, or His person “from whom cometh down every good gift” (Jas 1:17). But why is it that the Lord Jesus should be emphatically the Truth (Jhn 14:6)? He is the One who objectively has presented to me that which shows me the bearing and relationship of everything to God as well as to man.

If I want to test any one thing, I never can arrive at its full character till I view it in connection with the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit is the truth subjectively (Jhn 14:17—NC), because no man can behold the Lord Jesus or find the truth in Him without the Spirit’s ministry. He is the revealer of the Lord Jesus; our own mind cannot see Him. Even the new man cannot of itself understand Him, or enter into the things of God (The Holy Spirit is the Creator of our new birth - Jhn 3:5, 6, 8 and the Author and Teacher of the Word of God (2Pe 1:21; 1Co 2:13—NC).

You will observe how strikingly this was shown when the disciples themselves had to wait till the Lord Jesus opened their minds to “understand the Scriptures” (Luk 24:45), and after that, for power to act on them. After they were converted, they needed the ministry of the Spirit to utilize the Scriptures. Beside, again they must wait for power to testify the truth from the Scriptures to others. They required to have the ministry of the Spirit, distinct from the new nature for the purpose of entering into the things of God.

Mere human nature never understands the things of God, but the new nature does. In order to do it, the Spirit’s ministry is requisite. The new nature is characterized by dependence. The Holy Spirit acts in His own power. So that we do not merely need dependence upon God, but enablement from the Spirit to enter into truth. It is not a matter of being converted merely, but of the practical entering into the mind of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the way of the Father as brought out in the ways of His Son (“practical entering” is in the doing of God’s guidance—NC).

To gather evidence of God’s being is one thing; to know Him is another. It may come down to the Law, but does this give me truth (all of God’s mind for us—NC)? Its design was more for making the discovery of man than of God (revealing sinful state of man—NC). Its operation was that man might thereby learn what he is in himself. It runs like a ploughshare, when directed by the Spirit into the heart, and lays bare many furrows, and discovers what man never knew was there before.

But the Law was never meant to show what the Father is to man in grace. At best is declares what a man ought to be as well as do; but this is not the truth (entire truth—NC). What I ought to be is not God’s truth but my duty. Law was the standard for a man in the flesh; and hence it never was given till man was a sinful man. “The Law was given by Moses,” not to or by Adam. The commandment laid upon Adam was never called the law, although it was, of course, a law (Gen 2:16, 17).

You will never find truth, even in the Bible, if you sever it from the Lord Jesus Christ! But the moment the same blessed One, who has shown me in His own life and death what man is, has also shown me in the very same what the Father is, then all the clouds break and the difficulties vanish. Now I know my Father, beholding Him in the Lord Jesus Christ.


—William Kelly (1821-1906)






MJS daily devotional for January 25

“The day we were saved, total war was declared between sinful self and the Holy Spirit. Lasting peace will come when we rest in Calvary’s conquest of sin and self, and allow that victory to be applied by the faithful Spirit of God.”—MJS

“The Holy Spirit does not reason from what man is for God, but from what God is to man. Souls reason from what they are in themselves as to whether God can accept them. He does not accept you thus; you are looking for righteousness in yourself as a ground of acceptance with Him. You cannot get peace in this way. ‘But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us’ (Rom 5:8).

“The Holy Spirit always reasons down from what God is, and this produces a total change in my soul. It is not that I abhor my sins; indeed I may have been walking very well; but it is ‘I abhor myself.’ The Holy Spirit shows us what we are, and that is one reason why He often seems to be very hard and does not give peace to the soul, as we are not relieved until we frankly, from our hearts, acknowledge what we are. Until the soul comes to that point He does not give it peace—He could not; it would be healing the wound slightly. The soul has to go on until it finds there is nothing to rest on but the Cross-proved goodness of God; and then if God be for us, who can be against us?”—John Nelson Darby (1800-1882 – father of dispensationalism)

In fantasy fiction, the dragon is one of the most common mythical beasts, but these giant flying lizards defy the reality that flying lizards have actually been found on Earth through many once upon a times—they were just really small.

Case and point is this small fry from 200 million years ago, a Kuehneosaur, a flying reptile that used a membrane of skin that stretched out along a set of fantastically elongated rib bones that allowed them to glide from tree to tree.

The discovery was made by University of Bristol masters student Mike Cawthorne, and the university press reports that he has been researching numerous reptile fossils from limestone quarries which formed Mendip Palaeo-island—the biggest sub-tropical island at a time when Great Britain was an archipelago.

Continued below.

Matthew 6:33 (NASB20)
“But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided to you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is a lot of talk these days about a certain segment of society having a privilege, which is true, scripture speaks of this segment as those that are striving after righteousness…. Which can be called the privileges of righteousness, which is for all people equal, matters not who one is or what one looks like, only whether that one is pursuing righteousness in their daily walk… For if they are, no power on earth can keep God’s blessing from that one, for God does make a distinction from those that are walking towards Him and those that aren’t…..

For the privileges of righteousness sets one apart, that one cares not what others think of them, they only care what God thinks of them, and are trying above all things to be pleasing to Him and put a smile on His face…. For that one knows that if they do righteousness to the degree they understand it, blessings, honor, success will be their daily portion… Not that they won’t have trials and tribulations but will sail over and through them to the chagrin of those that look upon that one’s striving after righteousness as a lost or bad cause….. Not knowing the One who is behind supporting and watching over that one to pour blessings upon blessings provided to that one….

Be blessed in His blessings as one who is to receive the privileges of righteousness by the doing of….


A fellow follower of His, Not me

Hey you might want to have a look at this- I found this little church in New York City on YouTube, this place is amazing! If I am ever in NYC I might want to pay them a visit! Link to their video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kjux_dt9xVc

Eisenhower did this in Arkansas.


The real question is why Biden hasn't done so. Election year is one answer, but is there a fear Texas national guard units would refuse?

Having trouble explaining this parable to my non SDA friends

All I can come up with is 'it's a parable'

Need a little help


22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

This is something I see so often repeated in some varying form of argument:

"Oh, there's evidence for micro-evolution, but there's no evidence for macro-evolution."

This is so often touted as evidence of evolution being false, but no one has ever explained why the former excludes the latter. Why micro-evolution does not lead to macro-evolution.

So why? Why can't micro-evolution lead to macro-evolution? Why can't large amounts of small changes lead to a singular big change?

I get the impression that in Joyce Meyer's "Battlefield of the Mind" it talks about Satan having a presence in many people's minds at once. I thought Satan was an angel that would only have one location/focus at a time.... and in the Old Testament in Job and in the Garden of Eden story it seems Satan only has one location/focus. Same with the temptation of Jesus. It talks about Satan ruling the world - I got the impression that maybe Satan is controlling things indirectly through his minions.
Joyce Meyer's book about Satan's semi-omnipresence only reminds me of God's abilities - I haven't heard of any other similar beings. Also in the Bible it seems angels only have a singular presence.

Also on the topic of Satan:

Four out of ten Christians (40%) strongly agreed that Satan “is not a living being but is a symbol of evil.” An additional two out of ten Christians (19%) said they “agree somewhat” with that perspective. A minority of Christians indicated that they believe Satan is real by disagreeing with the statement: one-quarter (26%) disagreed strongly and about one-tenth (9%) disagreed somewhat. The remaining 8% were not sure what they believe about the existence of Satan.

Click to expand...

I am certain that how each one of y'all answers this question will determine who you vote for on November 2024.

Habakkuk 1:5 Look around you among the nations, see there a sight that will utterly astound you, you will not believe it when you are told of what is being done in your days.
Habakkuk 1:6-11 goes on to say how the Babylonians were appointed to execute judgement against the House of Judah, but the preceding verses in Habakkuk 1:1-4 are a general indictment onto peoples and nations whose ‘laws are ineffective and where justice is overruled’. Therefore this threat of action by the Lord applies to our times, as well.

Acts 13:40-41 Beware, then lest you bring down upon yourselves the doom proclaimed by the prophets. Look, you who fail to grasp the truth, be surprised and perish. I am doing a work in your days, something that you will not believe, even though it has been pointed out to you.

Pauls quote of Habakkuk 1:8, the parallel passage from the New Testament, has nothing to do with Jesus, His message of Salvation is not ‘doom’.
It applies to the end times: ‘your days’, not his days, but our days.

The ‘Doom proclaimed by the prophets’, will be the great and terrible Day of the Lord’s vengeance and wrath. All the prophets and Jesus make it clear that this ‘Day of doom’, is the next prophesied event that we can expect to happen. Jesus quoted the first and half of the second verse of Isaiah 61:1-2, at the commencement of His ministry. The worldwide Day of vengeance of our God’, is the next prophesied event, still not yet happened. It will be the Sixth Seal; a worldwide disaster of similar magnitude as what happened in the days of Noah, which commences all the prophesied end times events, leading up to the glorious Return of Jesus.

More than 100 prophecies throughout the Bible describe in vivid detail this forthcoming punishment onto the whole world by devastating fire, earthquakes, storms and tsunamis. This sudden and shocking event will take most people unawares and we are told by Paul, that those who are ‘surprised’; that is unaware and unprepared, then: they may perish.. Ezekiel 21:3-4

Isaiah 30:26 tells us what it is that causes this worldwide devastation and also that it will be ‘the Day the Lord saves His people’. who are all faithful Christians, who truly believe in Jesus and a few Messianic Jews who are protected in Jerusalem. Isaiah 6:13



Therefore it is up to us to take heed of the warnings, Isaiah 24:1, Isaiah 26:20-21 and to be prepared for all the effects of a massive explosion on the suns surface, that will kill about 1/3 of the world’s population and will destroy all of our modern infrastructure. Jeremiah 9:22, Ezekiel 30:1-8, Isaiah 13:12

Then; for all who love the Lord and keep His Commandments, the Lord is ‘waiting to show His favour’, Isaiah 30:18-20 Bruce McKerras August 2012

8 hours of sleep but the same movie scene kept repeating over and over. The movie scene is the one below and it's been many years since I last watched the movie. However in my dream, I was the one laying down in the 'operating' table and it was interactive.

I could ask the narrator questions like how the codes grouped themselves together. The narrator would explain the codes does not group themselves in a way as people would in a physical manner like the physical distancing. How the codes group together is determined by the level or ease of access to one another. The physical distance is irrelevant nor how they appear relative to each other in the screen interface.

And then it keeps on repeating, in fact, I kept repeating the same questions over and over.

Even crazier is that I woke up couple of times from sleep. Each time I got back to sleep, its the same dream again repeating and me asking the same questions over and over. I don't know what to make of it. What my dream is trying to say that I'm not a real person?

Login to view embedded media

Peace. Δόξα Ιησού Χριστό!, שלום עליכם! Laudétur Iesus Christus!

What follows is a genuine, sincere attempt on my part – both for my own benefit, but hopefully also for other Catholic Christians, East or West – to discuss the nuances of Catholic dogma & doctrine regarding the issues surrounding the Pope of Old Rome, Successor of St. Peter, Supreme & Ecumenical Pontiff, and Servant of the servants of God.

Recently, I proposed to the best of my ability a view of what might be described as Papal maximalism (for lack of a better term). I would define it as the following:

To quote St. Robert Bellarmine to start off:

“It can be believed probably and piously that the supreme Pontiff is not only not able to err as Pontiff but that even as a particular person he is not able to be heretical, by pertinaciously believing something contrary to the faith." (c.f., Book IV, Chapter VI” [in "On the Roman Pontiff"].

I would also add the following clarifications, at least from my view and the Papal maximalists I know:

I. The Pope's power is limited by natural law & Divine Law in general. As Vatican I noted, the Pope is not the master nor creator of the Apostolic Deposit of Faith. Quite the contrary, the Pope serves & guards Divine Revelation!
II. A Pope may err out of simple ignorance of fact. Even Ecumenical Councils can err this way too.
III. A Pope could teach heresy in his capacity as a private theologian or in writings not intended as authentic Magisterium.
IV. A Pope may hold privately to material heresy, but he can't formally, nor bind the Church to a heretical or immoral proposition in his ordinary Magisterium.
V. In general, the Pope is indefectible (although not necessarily infallible) in his ordinary Magisterium, and not simply when speaking ex cathedra.

Now, I am far less versed in a Papal minimalist position, but I will try to do justice to it as best I may (others please feel free to correct me or add more):

Here too I think quoting St. Robert Bellarmine is a good way to start:

"n a certain measure, whether the Pope can be a heretic or not, he cannot define a heretical proposition that must be believed by the whole Church in any way. This is a very common opinion of all Catholics." (c.f., Ibid. Book IV, Chapter II).

Thus, we might list some clarifying points also:

I. As with the maximalists, this point is the same as above; albeit perhaps stressed more.
II. It is possible for a Pope to be both a material heretic, but also a formal one as well. The latter case would result in automatically losing Papal office.
III. The above (II) only applies to the ordinary Magisterium which, while always helped by God, nevertheless isn't infallible as it would be if ex cathedra.
IV. There is a kind of real distinction between the Indefectibility of the Church & the Papacy.
V. There is likewise a distinction between the See of St. Peter as such and the Pope as office-bearer.
VI. The Indefectibility of the Church is not compromised by a formally heretical Pope.

I'd like to provide an explanation of a Via Mediális ("middle way") – that is, a sort of "in-between" that mixes orthodox positions from both the above into a harmonious whole of some kind. Unfortunately, I am not erudite nor (possibly, in all honesty) intelligent enough to lay out what that may look like. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the Magisterial statements of recent decades suggest that the Church aligns more with a Via Mediális of some kind; yet she hasn't fully clarified it (as far as I know). So, defining that is beyond me.

Thus, I would deeply appreciate a sharing of opinions, articles, Magisterial documents, etc. on this topic of Papal authority & power. While I probably hold to a "maximalist" position, I am growing suspicious of it. At the same time, I don't know that I can accept a Pope being a formal heretic. Hence, I am inclined to some sort of Via Mediális; but, as I said, I'm not entirely sure what that looks like (and, if possible, I'd like to learn what it might be).

Lastly, this is not just important to me on a merely personal level. I am an instituted Lector in the Latin Church of Rome, and I also serve as an ordained Reader (kind of an assistant from the West) in a Melkite Greek Catholic parish. Part of the role of the Lector/Reader is to teach basic catechesis & nurture the faith of God's People. As it is written in the Roman Pontifical (translation mine):

"[Y]ou shall assume a distinctive office among the People of God, dedicated to the service of the Faith, firmly rooted in the Word of God. In the liturgical assembly, you shall proclaim the Divine Word, nurturing the faith of both young and old, guiding them in the dignified reception of the Sacraments, and proclaiming the tidings of salvation to those as yet unenlightened." [Pontificale Romanum, Institutio Lectorum].

Given that the pontificate of Pope Francis has created a great deal of confusion, and given this is a topic that I require more learning in order to help in basic catechesis & nurturing faith (OCIA/Catechumenate/Parish Teaching), I am making this post hoping those more erudite on the topic than I can help me – as well as others – better understand. As an autodidact, I'd prefer to try to find an answer by my own study, but I have many duties in two parishes, and must study Scripture assiduously each day (if I can). I'm also in training to become a Roman Rite "Master of Ceremonies"! Hence, I'm hoping that this thread can open avenues to new areas of study or general knowledge for all. I have also added a poll, since these are sometimes useful for gathering information. I will try to make it anonymous as I can, as I have no interest in delving into others' views unless they wish to share.

Of course, I hope the very same knowledge may be gained for anyone who reads this thread. To anyone and everyone I humbly offer my Lector's blessing, which I have composed from ancient sources, mainly the "Apostolic Tradition" of St. Hippolytus. It is an invocative, lay blessing; thus not constitutive as a blessing of the ordained. Yet, I offer this very feeble blessing with a spirit of charity & hope it may help someone, as well as bless this thread in some way.


So without further ado, let us learn together!

Arizona G.O.P. Chairman Resigns After Tape Suggests Attempt to Bribe Kari Lake

The chairman of Arizona’s Republican Party resigned abruptly on Wednesday, a day after the publication of a 10-minute recording of a conversation between himself and Kari Lake, a former nominee for governor, in which he appeared to offer a bribe to persuade Ms. Lake to drop her 2024 Senate campaign.

In the recording, which was published by The Daily Mail, Jeff DeWit, the chairman, tells Ms. Lake that there are “very powerful people that want to keep you out” of the race, and suggests he is passing on a message from them. He says he had been told to ask her: “Is there any companies out there or something that could just put her on the payroll and give her — to keep her out?”

Hello there,

I'm MeekOne, and I have been absent a very long time. I can't even remember the last time I was here, but thanks to a message that I received from a friend (thanks Russ), I'm back. I used to take care of these threads oh so many years ago. I will start with one of my most favorite verses:

Isaiah 41:10-13
So do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with my righteous right hand. For I am the LORD, your God, who takes hold of your right hand and says to you, Do not fear; I will help you.

Your turn ✝️

Why does the Lord let so many people perish from cancer? There is nothing redeeming about it. Yet over the course of humanity all the dictators seem to have ample opportunity to accomplish their task.

NASB 1977, Psalm 69:

21 They also gave me gall for my food, And for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.

Click to expand...

How did Jesus fulfill the above?

It is a bit puzzling/tricky.

At the beginning of the crucifixion, Mark 15:

23 they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it.

Click to expand...

Matthew offered a bit more detail, 27:

34 they offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall, but when he tasted it, he would not drink it.

Click to expand...

It was a mixed or drugged wine to numb the senses. Jesus detected the gall/myrrh and refused it so that he could keep clear-minded on the cross.

Later, NIV, Luke 23:

36 The soldiers also came up and mocked him. They offered him wine vinegar.

Click to expand...

Jesus probably refused to drink this time also.

However, near the end of the crucifixion, Matthew 27:

47 some of the bystanders, hearing it, said, “This man is calling Elijah.” 48 And one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink.

Click to expand...

Mark 15:

36 And someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, saying, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down.” 37 And Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last.

Click to expand...

John was more clear, 19:

28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), “I thirst.” 29 A jar full of sour wine stood there, so they put a sponge full of the sour wine on a hyssop branch and held it to his mouth. 30 When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Click to expand...

Ellicott:

This vessel of the ordinary sour wine drunk by the Roman soldiers, was placed near in order to be given to those who were crucified. Thirst was always an accompaniment of death by crucifixion.

Click to expand...

From some bystander's offering, Jesus took just enough liquid to water his mouth and throat so that he could utter his final words with a loud cry: "It is finished."

How did Jesus fulfill Psalm 69:21 at the crucifixion?

Initially, he refused the gall-wine. In the end, when he accepted some regular vinegar wine, he died right away. It was fulfilled, done, and finished.

WASHINGTON (NewsNation) — As the war in Ukraine enters its 700th day and the U.S. border crisis continues, Senate negotiators continue to labor to win support for a deal on border policy and Ukraine aid. They’ve reported progress, however, a vote on a measure allocating billions of dollars for both issues may still be days away.

Republicans and Democrats remain hopeful a deal can be reached, but some issues remain unresolved.
Amid the ongoing war in Ukraine, President Joe Biden and fellow Democrats want to release around $60 billion in aid for troops. However, this week, the Biden administration stated that the U.S. can no longer provide ammunition and some weapons after money dried up in December.

Republicans are seeking significant changes to address the border crisis in exchange for providing aid to Ukraine, including making it harder to claim asylum in the U.S. and reducing the number of migrants allowed to enter for emergency reasons.

This week, both sides stressed the importance of what they want in the final deal.

“Reports suggest that on some days, Ukraine is firing one-quarter to one-half the number of rounds that the Russian military is,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut. “That is a recipe for disaster. That is a recipe for Kyiv to be a Russian city sometime soon

"Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on Wednesday reiterated the right of the state of Texas to defend itself amid an unprecedented surge in illegal border crossings, insisting that the Biden administration had failed in its duties and forced Austin's hand.
Abbott and the federal government have, for months, quarreled over the state's unilateral effort to secure the border amid perceived federal apathy: Operation Lone Star. The effort has prompted multiple legal battles, including a dispute over the state's deployment of a razor wire fence along the Rio Grande that saw the Supreme Court this week permit federal agents to cut through the fence.
In a statement posted to X on Wednesday, Abbot excoriated the Biden administration, saying that Biden had "violated his oath to faithfully execute immigration laws enacted by Congress."

Matthew 26:

62 And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?”

63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God:

Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”

64 Jesus said to him, “It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man

sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

65 Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need

do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy!

66 What do you think?”

They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.”



The Sanhedrin ruled Christ deserving of death for blasphemy.

In the Gospel of John, according to the ruling elders,

the blasphemy was to declare Himself the Son of God.

John 19:7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die,

because he made himself the Son of God.



But what about the claim that they would see the Son of Man seated at the right

hand of power, and coming in clouds of glory?

Would that not have been a provocation to them?
It would seem to be on a par with:

Matthew 22:

41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,

42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose Son is He?”

They said to Him, “The Son of David.”

43 He said to them,

“How then does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying:

44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool” ’?

45 If David then calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his Son?”

46 And no one was able to answer Him a word, nor from that

day on did anyone dare question Him anymore.

Crown him the Lord of love; Behold his hands and side, those wounds yet visible above, in beauty glorified.
No angels in the sky can fully bear that sight, but downward bends their burning eye at mysteries so bright.

Okay, so this looks strange:


Basically, customers are using multi-use bags only a few times or even only once,