#all scriptures are profitable

[igate777]

Scripture of the day. August 1/8/2023

[tom4jc]

2 Timothy 3:16 Only Book Needed

All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 2 Timothy 3:16 Bookstores and libraries are packed with books to help a person in nearly everything and anything desired. Rows upon rows of self-help books fill the stores. People are always searching for answers on how to do something or deal with some…

[fidius]

You know how sometimes the stupidest shit will be happening and you'll suddenly understand something people have been telling you for years?

So yeah (because I have this theory that Cyndi Lauper is awesome enough to redeem even obvious mistakes) I was watching Life with Mikey and this line (and a great read my MJF doing some heavy lifting in a waste of film even Nathan Lane is kinda phoning in) came out and I had to pause the movie and tell you about it. Because that's it, right? That's the other side of the glass that rescues us all from

[a-godman]

The Bible is Profitable for Teaching, Conviction, Correction, Instruction in Righteousness

 On God’s side, the Bible is God’s breathing; on our side, the Bible is for us to receive the breath of God as our profit in teaching, conviction, correction, and instruction in righteousness; the Bible is profitable for teaching, conviction, correction, and instruction in righteousness, so that we may be men of God fully equipped for every good work. Amen! The majority of believers in Christ…

[lightfromthelighthouse]

Before all else fails, go to the Book of Books!

[lightfromthelighthouse]

Good Morning!☀

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. John 14:26

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2 Timothy 3:16

Jesus had spent approximately three years preparing his disciples for the work he called them to. He first gave them a foundation through teaching. He combined this with instruction and demonstration. Now on his last night with them before the cross, he let them know that there was one more asset they would need to complete the task ahead of them: the Holy Spirit.

Jesus knew that we are prone to forget what we are taught if it is not reinforced by repetition. He also knew that we would need the power to stand for him in a sin-laden world and understand his word.

The disciples were told they would be given the Holy Spirit upon Jesus's departure. He would enable them to remember all they were taught, lead them in all truth, and give them the power to be witnesses for him under all circumstances. (John 15:26-27, John 16:13-16, Acts 1:8)

So that we might continue to learn what God expects of us, he left us his word, written by men but inspired or breathed by the Spirit for "doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness". (2 Timothy 3:16) With this potent combination of His Spirit and his word we have all we need to be who he wants us to be!

[leahnardo-da-veggie]

why do all the publicly available copies of the Arcanic Scriptures have Chapter 2 missing?

For context: I'm answering other people's lore questions! Drop me an ask about your lore and watch me get it comically wrong!

Alright, let's begin!

The Arcanic Scriptures are named after Bob Arcanic, a famous woodworker. He wrote the widely renowned manual, which were called scriptures for the reverence with which other woodworkers treated it, for free and distributed it widely to make woodworking a more easily accessible trade <3

Chapter 2 contained a special secret technique called woodbending, which entailed turning wood liquid so it could fit any form and didn't have to be sanded smooth.

Unfortunately, Bob's greatest competitor, Meanie MacFuckFace, didn't want such a precious secret to be spread, because it would lead to a decrease in his and other master woodworkers' profits. So he hired the world's greatest assassin and thief to kill Bob and destroy all copies of Chapter 2:

Fluffypaws. *Gasp*

Fluffypaws demanded all the fish in the Great Lake as compensation for her services, and Meanie agreed. She snuck into printing presses and homes in the dead of night by sitting at people's front porches and meowing piteously until they let her in for warmth, before clawing the pages of Chapter 2 to shreds and disappearing.

Before she could get to Bob, however, he caught wind of the contract. In what would come to be spoken in awed whispers for aeons to come, he performed a great act of woodworking. Using his wood-bending, he took all the trees surrounding the Great Lake and bent it to become a massive sieve. Then, as Fluffypaws descended on him, he used the sieve to fish up every single fish in the Great Lake and handed it to her.

Fluffypaws, delighted, agreed to forsake her contract and protect him instead. Though he could not afford to pay her to protect every copy of the Arcanist Scriptures, he kept her by his side to protect his life and his personal copies of chapter 2. And though Meanie MacFuckFace's new hired goons could destroy publically circulated copies of Chapter 2, none could get past the magnificent Fluffypaws, long may her white fur be luscious and easy may the blood wash off it.

Tagging the list for this work of art <3

Taglist: @coffeeangelinabox, @dorky-pals, @calliecwrites, @kaylinalexanderbooks, @shukei-jiwa

@thewingedbaron, @pluppsauthor, @cowboybrunch, @wylloblr, @possiblyeldritch

@tragedycoded, @finickyfelix, @urnumber1star, @ratedn, @ramwritblr

@vampirelover890, @possiblylisle, @illarian-rambling, @the-ellia-west, @differentnighttale

@evilgabe29, @glitched-dawn, @rivenantiqnerd, @dragonhoardesfandoms, @xenascribbles

@drchenquill, @everythingismadeofchaos, @owldwagitoutofyou, @dimitrakies, @beloveddawn-blog

@riveriafalll, @the-golden-comet, @rascaronii, @trippingpossum, @real-fragments

@unrepentantcheeseaddict, @the-inkwell-variable, @paeliae-occasionally, @an-indecisive-nerd, @thecomfywriter

@seastarblue, @wyked-ao3

(Anyone else who wants to get added can tell me in the comments, pm me, or send me an ask about it!)

[evaglass]

Speculation about Mizu's parents pt. 1

I don't like usually posting much online, but I do enjoy this series very much, and I would like to discuss possible directions it could go

I think about this moment a lot

A decent amount, actually

Mizu has had to hide her entire life of being a mixed-race girl for her safety, but there's an implication that it's not just because of that reason alone

There's a big assumption that one of the four white men put the bounty on Mizu, and as terrible as they are, there's reasons they probably aren't the ones that placed the bounty on Mizu. I don't think the four white men really care about any bastards they could have produced; I will explain.

Yes, Fowler neglected his offsprings to the point of starvation, but I don't think he was actively hunting them down, and here are the reasons why:

Fowler doesn't really seem to care to put too much effort into caring if the children he profduced in Japan lived or not. It just seemed more like he didn't want to be bothered with any children he had fathered.

If Fowler really cared about having all his children dead, he wouldn't have let Heiji Shindo give Mizu the option to be a Lord in order to leave Fowler alone in exchange

He just really didn't seem too bothered to deal with the situation. He didn't understand why Mizu went through all the effort to killing him (probably because he's not responsible for the bounty).

Also, Violet is already very much dead. I assume Routley and Skeffington have been away from Japan for a few years now, so why would they still keep the bounty up? It feels like it would be a bit counterproductive.

So why is there a bounty specifically for Mizu?

Is it for the "selling the unwanted daughters of Japan" aspect that Fowler pointed towards Routley and Skeffington of being responsible for? Do they want to sell Mizu abroad for profit? No, I don't think that's the reason.

When Mizu asked the bounty hunters, "Which white devil do you work for?" They respond by saying she's the only white devil they see, and then call to kill her.

When Mizu asked who told them where she was, they responded with "the bounty is a sum few could resist."

This says a lot:

The bounty is for sure specifically for her (a mixed-raced girl with blue eyes)

They're looking to only kill Mizu, as if to erase her from existence

The bounty is a high bounty

And the bounty hunters are probably not being sent by any of the four white men

So, who is responsible for putting a bounty on Mizu's head? Well, I want to dive into Mizu's parentage for this because I don't think any of the four white men are Mizu's father. I don't think her father was white at all.

I think there might be subtle evidence to suggest the contrary; that Mizu's mother was European, while her father was Japanese.

I'll dive into this. Remember the play about the Ronin and the Bride in episode 5?

Remember how people pointed out how both the Ronin and Bride represent Mizu, which I agree with. However, I think they're also supposed to represent her parents, and the child is also supposed to represent Mizu.

Before I keep talking about the Ronin and the Bride, I want to talk about the show's influences. I promise this has a point.

Two of the biggest influences are Kill Bill and Yentl. I'm not gonna get into Yentl too much, I have never seen it. I'm just gonna loosely retell a synopsis I found; Yentl is about a woman who dresses as a male in order to study religious scripture forbidden to women to learn. You can see some of the connections there.

I want to focus on Kill Bill more. Specifically more in pt. 2 as tumblr is only letting me use ten pictures per post.

Part 1/Part 2/Part 3/Part 4/Part 5/Part 6

[artist-issues]

Was wondering what your take on this was. I have a Christian friend who's very anti-media, like he never listens to non-Christian music (even then enacting limits on the artists) and he believes all films are evil and stuff like that.

I believe his rationale is that it's all anti-Christian, making arguments like "Thanos is a representation of God in the book of Revelation and the film is therefore about killing God" or "Superman isn't a Christ-like figure; he's an antichrist figure because he points people's attention away from Jesus, the real Christ," and stuff like that.

Speaking as a Christian myself, I feel like that's a very extreme take to have when stories can always have Christian values to identify and distinguish and that even if he was right, it does no good to isolate yourself from those stories or to assume the worst faith interpretation of them.

Anyway, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the subject. I know well from some of your posts especially that there are stories with very unhelpful or anti-Christian messages baked into them, but should we not still give those stories a chance? And is there not a much more forgiving line to draw before that point? If a story isn't directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ, does it have any value?

Well. I had a friend who was kind of like that, too, and over the years he’s softened up on that a lot. Sometimes people get really zealous and have these extreme convictions and it’s okay, if they’re really doing it because they genuinely read Scripture with a heart to do what God wants, not a heart to find a set of rules they can follow and find self-righteousness.

I think there’s two separate ways to answer this ask. One is:

How to Treat Your Brother in Christ Over This

which is the most important part, for you, like it was for me with my friend, personally.

In 2 Corinthians 10 Paul is talking about this with meat sacrificed to idols. Technically, you’re free to eat that, even though to non-believers it means something else. Because to you, a Christian, you’re not under the old Law, so it’s not a condemnable thing to take what non-believers are using for evil and just…eat it. For what good there is in it. Because it’s meat. So there is some good in it, and you’re technically free to enjoy that good. But this is what the Word of God says:

1 Corinthians 10:19–33 - What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. And I do not want you to become sharers in demons.

You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?

All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but that of the other person. Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions for conscience’ sake. For the earth is the Lord’s, as well as its fullness.

If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions for conscience’ sake. But if anyone says to you, “This is meat consecrated to idols,” do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience’ sake. I do not mean your own conscience, but the other person’s. For why is my freedom judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I partake with gratefulness, why am I slandered concerning that for which I give thanks?

Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.

Paul also says, in Romans, “But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

(emphasis added)

The idea is, your convictions should be in place because of faith. So if, in Scripture, your friend is finding something that makes him feel convicted that watching these movies is sinful or distracting from Christ, and he really believes that’s how Scripture should be applied—this is one of those areas where you just shrug and be gracious and say, “he’s trying to act in faith.” It would be different if Scripture clearly taught about movies or even characters. You could point to a verse and say, “dude, you’re misinterpreting Scripture,” but this is one of those areas where God left it up to our convictions. So we have to respond in grace, even if what bothers another believer doesn’t bother us, because it’s not a “hill to die on.”

You can only control you. So obey God in how to respond to him, even if you don’t agree, and put him before you. If he won’t watch a Superman movie and it bothers him, don’t talk about Superman around him. Don’t invite him to movies like that. Consider him more important than yourself. If he can’t be convinced from Scripture that he’s free to watch that stuff and enjoy that stuff, don’t try and convince him. Just put his conscience in front of your preference for movies, on your list of priorities.

Maybe he is turning a grey-area into an area for self-righteousness. Or, maybe he is trying to live out his faith, even if it’s “extreme.” But the point is, you don’t know, and you don’t get to know. Only God knows. You just get to decide how to treat him.

BUT! I bet you’re already doing all that. I bet you already knew all that. And what you asked me was “And is there not a much more forgiving line to draw before that point? If a story isn't directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ, does it have any value?”

So Part 2:

What I Think/My Convictions on the Gray Area of Valuable Stories

Stories can have Christian values if there is anything “Good” represented in them. It can also have Christian values if there is anything “Evil” in them. There is no such thing as “good” or “evil” in a movie like The Joker. So that movie I would say has zero Christian values. They don’t call what is evil “evil,” and they don’t call what is good “good” in that story. So I’m just agreeing with you that not every story or every piece of media has a “nugget of something Christian” that you can pull out. Only in one sense do all stories have a grain of God in them, and that sense is, “it’s a story.” The same way you can speak blasphemies, because God created the tongue and invented language and communication—that doesn’t mean He’s in any way reflected or has anything to do with your blasphemies. But you wouldn’t say, “we should at least let the blaspheming guy keep talking, because God invented talking.” God invented stories and storytelling. That doesn’t make all stories worth a chance. If that makes sense.

Anyway.

That being said, I do think it is rare for you to be able to decide that’s worth giving a chance… until you give it a chance. ^^ Like, I watched The Joker. Now I know it’s godless. So I won’t be seeing the sequel.

The main answer to this is: yes. I believe there is value in a story that is not directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ. And here’s why, are you ready, here’s the reason I’m convinced, here’s the best card to play:

JESUS TOLD STORIES THAT WERE NOT DIRECTLY OR EXPLICITLY ABOUT HIS DIRECT AND EXPLICIT SELF.

The parable of the Good Samaritan is not about Jesus. You could make an argument that it’s got some Jesus-imagery mixed into the Samaritan character because of how selflessly and thoroughly he cares for others even though Jesus specifically framed the story like it was the answer to the question “who is my neighbor?” and it’s about “what a good neighbor is.” But hey, if you’re arguing, then guess what, it’s not very direct or explicit, is it?

Because that’s how stories work.

If I weren’t advocating for treating your brother in Christ with grace, if I were in my flesh right now, I’d say, “ask your friend if every conversation he has is directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ. Is every single word “Jesus?” Is every single sentence about Jesus? Would you say all your communication is focused on Jesus 100% explicitly & directly? No? Then why does a storyteller’s communication have to be?”

Because that’s what a story is. It’s a uniquely compelling medium of communication. But it’s communication, that’s it.

I mean you know my understanding of stories. Stories are meant to be signposts that point you back to truth when you’ve wandered. Stories are meant to be a way for you to escape the specific imprisonment of bad ideas and lost wanderings, and you’re specifically escaping TO HOME: which is truth. Good ideas, and truth.

Well guess what? Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Every good and perfect thing is from above, coming down from the Father of Lights. If there is anything good, anything worthy of praise, anything excellent—we’re supposed to be thinking on those things, and associating them with Christ.

It’s almost short-changing Jesus or His relevance to say, “yeah there can be truth in stories but that truth doesn’t have anything to do with Jesus so it’s not worth my time.” What are you saying? He is the embodiment of Truth. If it’s true, then it’s His. In that sense. If it’s Loving, then it’s His. The idea of self-sacrifice, love, good triumphing over evil, truth triumphing over twisted-truth, is to do with Christ, because He invented those things and He’s their source.

My pastor likes to call this “plundering the Egyptians,” or “the world is tripping and stumbling into Biblical truths all the time.” They might not believe in Jesus but their story wouldn’t have anything worthwhile in it without Him. The writer of Beauty & the Beast might not be connecting self-sacrificial love to Jesus when she characterizes Belle, but guess what, she can’t escape it. Just because she didn’t make the connection doesn’t mean it’s not connected. You can’t say that all good and true things, even coming out of the foul mouths of humans, are no longer good and true simply because of the state of the mouths they come out of. Goodness and Truth is goodness and truth, and our brokenness can’t blot it out or stain it or ruin it. If it’s in the story, and it’s good and true, it’s good and true. Regardless of who we are or whether or not we attribute it to it’s proper Source.

Also, look at all of History. Jesus is woven symbolically throughout all of it, but He doesn’t “directly and explicitly” write Himself into the story of the world until the First Century.

But He was telling stories that had pieces of Himself and the truth before that. And He’s been telling them after that.

The Global Flood? Mankind is so wicked that God utterly destroys them—but He saves a small handful of righteous with a Vessel that only has ONE DOOR that they CANNOT SHUT THEMSELVES? That’s a story about Jesus. It’s not “direct or explicit.” God wrote it, that’s called “reality.”

The lamb in the Garden? Adam and Eve have something perfect and wonderful, and they can be exactly who they are and who they were made to be, but then they ruin it with sin, so God makes a way for them to be covered and protected—but it’s with the sacrifice of a Lamb? That’s a story about Jesus. It’s not “direct or explicit.” But God wrote it into reality.

Caterpillars? Into butterflies?? God invented a creature that starts out as a low worm in the dirt, then it goes into a tomb-like, death-like sleep and emerges a new creation that is beautiful and flies? That’s a story about Jesus, I don’t care, it’s not “direct or explicit” but it’s what God wrote into reality.

If it’s true and good, then the good and the true parts are connected to Christ. And it would be cheating myself of more ways to consider where goodness and truth and beauty come from to say that His direct and explicit incarnation in human flesh 2000 years ago was the only way I’m allowed to be reminded of Him.

I would never say any of this to your friend unless they asked. Because it’s not gracious to slam your friend over something that Scripture is not directly commanding, one way or the other, about.

[boyjumps]

“Everything that exists in the whole universe has the highest value" - Zen Teachings, Buddha

Buddha's measure or human’s measure

We live our lives in this world using the 'society's measure' and the 'humans' measure'. This is, in a sense, the 'measure of profit and loss'. Modern people seem to be living by this one "measure of gain and loss" at some point.

But, in fact, there is also other 'Buddha's measure'.

Buddha's measure is a measure without a scale. There is no scale, but because there is no scale, when measured by that instrument, everyone is the same. In other words, the smart kid is great, the not-so-studious kid is also great, both are the same. 

Beautiful people are good, ugly people are great, hard-working people are ok, lazy people are ok. The rich and the poor are both good. Healthy people are good, sick people are good. Not only that, living people are good, dead people are good. That is the Buddha's Measure.

Thus, the Buddha's measure can be based on the 'value of existence'. Everything that exists has value. In contrast, the humans' measure is based on 'functional value'. The difference in value is based on whether the person is useful or not. And the scale of this measure is getting finer and finer.

The Buddha said in the Nirvana Sutra: 'All sentient beings have the potential to become Buddhas’. 

Sentient beings are not just human beings. Even flies and cockroaches could have 'Buddha-nature'. This, 'that everything that exists has value', the Mahayana Buddhist scripture, the Lotus Sutra, by any means that 'everything in the whole universe is true'.

“Everything that exists in the whole universe has the highest value," says the Buddha.

[propheticeve]

In the shadows of a brutal era in American history, where oppression and cruelty reigned, a powerful form of resistance took root: the Praise House. For enslaved black individuals in the Antebellum South, the Praise House stood as a sacred sanctuary, a place where they could defy the oppressive Christian views imposed upon them by their slave masters.

In a world where the power structures dictated every aspect of an enslaved person's existence, the Praise House emerged as a symbol of defiance and strength. It became a space where faith, culture, and the indomitable spirit of the African diaspora could thrive despite the dehumanizing conditions of slavery.

Meetings in the Praise House were not confined to the familiar rhythms of Sunday mornings. Instead, these gatherings typically took place on weeknights, a subtle act of rebellion in itself. The slave masters preferred their human property to attend white-dominated churches, where carefully curated sermons served as a reinforcement of the slave system, often using scripture as a tool of control.

Within the walls of the Praise House, the enslaved black community found solace in the absence of opulent Christian symbols and trappings. There, empty space was favored over altars, kneelers, pulpits, and even chairs and pews. This minimalism provided the space needed for the powerful and spiritually charged "ring shouts," an integral part of the all-night sessions of prayer and song. These gatherings were more than just expressions of faith; they were acts of resistance, defiance, and a testament to the resilience of the human spirit.

Even in the most degrading conditions, religious life and practice served as a source of strength and unity for the slave community. The Praise House became the focal point of their lives on the plantations, a place where their identity was preserved and their spirits were nurtured.

As time passed and the shackles of slavery fell away, the significance of Praise Houses remained unwavering. They continued to serve as the heart of the African community, a testament to the enduring strength of culture and faith.

Today, we at My Mind and Me Inc and the Temple of Living Word a 501c3 non profit based in Atlanta are on a mission to rekindle the traditions of the past and return to our Southern hoodoo roots. Our goal is to open our own Praise House in Atlanta, where hoodoos, practitioners of African Traditional Religions (ATRs), and individuals of all backgrounds can practice openly, without judgment. In this sacred space, we will offer open altars, prayer sessions, spaces for practitioners to teach, and, of course, the continuation of the cherished tradition of ring shouts.

To make this vision a reality, we need your support. Be a part of a bigger picture, a story of resistance and resilience. Donate today and help us build a Praise House that stands as a testament to the enduring strength of culture, faith, and unity. Together, we can create a space where souls find solace, healing, and renewal.

Join us on this sacred journey, and be a part of history.

Please SHARE! SHARE! SHARE!

Atlanta family TAP IN

@mymindandmeinc @realconjuhwoeman

[blueiscoool]

Biblical Steps Where Jesus 'Healed a Blind Man' Unearthed by Archaeologists

In Jerusalem, a recent excavation effort uncovered stairs that had been hidden for more than 2,000 years near the spot where the New Testament says Jesus treated a blind man.

A new excavation project in Jerusalem has unearthed steps unseen in over 2,000 years at a place where the New Testament records Jesus as having healed a blind man.

The Israel Antiquities Authority, the Israel National Parks Authority and the City of David Foundation early this year announced that the Pool of Siloam, a biblical site cherished by Christians and Jews, will be open to the public for the first time in 2,000 years in the near future.

In recent weeks, archeologists achieved significant progress in the excavation, unearthing some eight steps descending into the Pool which had not been seen in 2,000 years — around the time when Jesus walked the Earth.

“The ongoing excavations within the City of David — the historic site of Biblical Jerusalem — particularly of the Pool of Siloam and the Pilgrimage Road, serve as one of the greatest affirmations of that heritage and the millennia-old bond Jews and Christians have with Jerusalem,” Ze’ev Orenstein, director of International Affairs – City of David Foundation said.

“Not simply as a matter of faith, but as a matter of fact,” he added.

The City of David Foundation is a non-profit organization established in 1986, “dedicated to the preservation and development of the City of David and its environs, and is committed to connecting people of all faiths and backgrounds to ancient Jerusalem.”

“The half-mile running through the City of David, from the Pool of Siloam in the south, continuing along the Pilgrimage Road, up to the footsteps of the Western Wall, Southern Steps and Temple Mount, represents the most significant half-mile on the planet,” Orenstein said.

“There is no half-mile anywhere on Earth which means more to more people – not to millions, but to billions — than the half-mile that is the City of David,” he added.

The pool was first built roughly 2,700 years ago as part of Jerusalem’s water system in the eighth century B.C.

The construction unfolded during the reign of King Hezekia as cited in the Bible in the Book of Kings II, 20:20, according to the two Israeli agencies and the City of David Foundation.

According to estimates, the Pool of Siloam passed through many stages of construction and reached the size of 1.25 acres.

According to a passage in the Gospel of John, Jesus restored the sight of a man born blind at the Pool of Siloam.

A small section of the pool, which has been fully excavated, has been accessible to the public for several years.

The vast majority of the pool is being excavated and will either be opened piecemeal or once the entire site is unearthed.

Rev. Johnnie Moore, president of the Congress of Christian Leaders, told Fox News Digital in January that, “In the Pool of Siloam, we find evidence of history preserved for us, revealed at just the right time.”

“Theologically, it affirms Scripture, geographically it affirms scripture, and politically it affirms Israel’s unquestionable and unrivaled link to Jerusalem. Some discoveries are theoretical. This one is an undeniable. It is proof of the story of the Bible and of its people, Israel,” he said.

A stroke of luck revealed the pool in 2004, when infrastructure work carried out by the Hagihon water company uncovered some of the pool’s steps.

The Israel Antiquities Authority, under supervision of professors Roni Reich and Eli Shukron, launched a survey.

As a result, the northern perimeter, as well as a small section of the eastern perimeter of the Pool of Siloam, were uncovered.

“Whether in the halls of the United Nations, ongoing efforts by Palestinian leadership, or on university campuses, Jerusalem’s Biblical heritage is under assault,” said Orenstein.

Orenstein noted that in few years time, visitors to the City of David will be able to witness the factual history for themselves and “see with their own eyes, touch with their own hands, and walk with their own feet upon the very stones their ancestors walked thousands of years ago, as they made their way to Jerusalem on pilgrimage.”

[accord-vn]

An Inside Look at Stauros' Sophic Church

Aria Wellings January 17, 2037

Across the world, all eyes have been on the Republic of Stauros and the first steps of its so-called "unbreakable" stride- a hopeful euphemism for what in fact amounts to the unlawful annexation of its southern neighbors- and yet despite this, few have been able to glimpse inside two of the largest gears in Stauros' war machine: Ascension and the Sophic Church of Stauros.

Last month, we covered Ascension's organizational structure and the way that it has fed off of the Stauronian military-industrial complex into a private extension of the state, and we touched on its role as a coffer for the Sophic Church. This month's piece, however, is more focused on the church itself.

The story of the Sophic Church begins with what is now being called Third Awakening: the gradual rise in spirituality, magical thinking and religiosity that followed the tumult of the 10s and 20s. To learn more about it, check out our partners over at Sects Sell, who have an excellent series on the subject.

In the mid 10s, several grassroots Gnostic revival movements came together to form a single ecclesiastical society, united in their desire to dismantle current institutions and build something new. In the original structure, each of the seven movements would have a delegate on a unified council to handle various organizational concerns. By 2019, the organization had matured to the point that they united as a single church, and while the different sects' beliefs would not be fully syncretized until the reformation, July 13 of 2019 saw the foundation of the Sophic Church.

This early iteration of the Church is very different from the Church we know today. In keeping with its grassroots movement, each pastor was responsible for their own messaging and interpretation of the scripture, with the corollary that it could not directly contradict the Church's common doctrine. There was no discrete stratification, no questionable history, and significantly less secrecy.

Like so many other religious organizations, the 20s saw the Sophic Church expand rapidly, and it was during that expansion that something about the Church changed. With an ever growing tithing base providing consistent low-yield high-longevity capital, expanding its various premises to accommodate the sheer amount of churchgoers meant that they looked to outside investment. This is where Eliza Watts comes in— the same Eliza Watts who we mentioned last month when discussing the origins of Ascension, the Stauronian behemoth that handles everything from defense contracts to mineral processing.

Watts got her start in the late aughts as a financial advisor, leading the companies that she worked with to great success in exchange for a portion of their holdings. After the Great Recession, however, Watts found herself with no stable employment but an abundance of wealth, which saw her take up the role of a venture capitalist.

Watts developed a history of what can generously be called questionable investments prior to her involvement with the Church, mostly in wellness startups that quickly generated a large amount of revenue before drying up at an unusual pace— typically no longer than 18 months after Watts had sold her shares. She had dodged a number of fraud allegations but developed a reputation, and as other potential investors began to question the real value of Watts' holdings, she saw a marked decrease in her ability to exit these startups profitably. This meant that when the Sophic Church began looking for investors, Watts had become very, very interested.

While Watts' reputation was not unknown to the Church's leadership, the risks that losing her support might impose were far less than a startup in a similar position, as their tithing base would be far more loyal than simple customers. Furthermore, with the influx of money that would come from their congregation, they found themselves in need of a skilled financial advisor.

At the same time, within the Church leadership there were stirrings of discontent. Aiden Zoe, named for his patron Aeon (essentially a gnostic deity— an expression of the godhead), led his branch to become far and away the most popular of any of the seven. This would be unilaterally good news for the Church, if his teachings had not begun to stray from official doctrine. Other leaders of the Church questioned his faith, but were not prepared to risk alienating the large congregation that he had assembled by denouncing him— particularly not when faced with the potential for Eliza Watt to drive them into the ground after she grew tired of them.

While the internal politics of the Church at this point were generally kept under wraps, the eventual solution came in the form of the Reformation. Aiden, Watts, and a few more shrewd of the council worked together to reform the Church's doctrine, structure, and even compile books of scriptures.

This would eventually lead to the Sophic Church, and to help paint us a picture of the Church as it exists now, I spoke with a former member, who has requested that their identity not be revealed. I've transcribed our interview as follows.

---

Aria Wellings: Good afternoon! Former Member: Afternoon to you, too.

AW: To start with, I was wondering if you could expound a bit more on what you mentioned when you first messaged me, about how the Church had changed since you joined it initially?

FM: See, you have to understand that in the earlier days of the Church, each of the seven branches tended to their own. Sure we agreed on parts of the Church's common doctrine, but we all drew from different scriptures, we had different internal organization, and we appealed to different kinds of folk. Aiden's branch, the one that the Church today was modeled after, was nothing like the others.

AW: How so?

FM: For one, a lot of what he preached didn't have any basis in history, in scripture, in anything really. He didn't call himself a prophet— no grifter worth their salt does— but others did, and so a prophet he became. Before he started running it, his branch was modeled after the Valentinians, but it was still a fairly tempered interpretation, you know? The thing about Aiden was that he had an eye for what people would latch onto. He was a performer, but he was more than just that. He could read people and give them exactly what. You didn't have to be a genius to pick up that there was a lot of animosity towards Christianity in those days, but he made good use of it by selling heresies.

AW: Sort of a modern day LaVey, then?

FM: He was certainly as charismatic, but I think that's a bad comparison if only because Satanism never had teeth. Unless you were really sold on the idea of Christians being persecuted, no one after the aughts really believed that the Satanists were sincere. It was all for show. You give someone raised Christian a bite of the Ophidians, now that's capital H heresy that'll send them reeling, and for Aiden that was something he could use.

AW: It sounds like you were against it? Aren't these just tenets of your faith?

FM: There's a difference between preaching something and using it as a selling point.

AW: That's definitely true— but how was his branch actually different besides him?

FM: Like I said, he incorporated everything that he could sensationalize, and part of that was the hierarchy. The Valentinians had it, sure, but he made himself an arbiter of it. He used it to make his people feel special, so they'd come back and get more affirmation. The people who might make a fuss, he used it as a basis to kick them out.

AW: I'm not familiar with this "hierarchy". Would you mind clarifying? The Church has become pretty famously opaque for non-members.

FM: Oh, I know. That was his and Watts' doing, writing the books, restricting access. They turned it into a cult, because what else could they do to reach the people who didn't want to be reached?

FM: To answer your question, though, the Valentinians say that there's three classes of people: the hylikoi, the psychikoi, and the pneumatikoi. The hylikoi are of the body, they have no hope of achieving gnosis. The psychikoi are of the mind, they are able to achieve gnosis, and with it salvation, while the pneumatikoi are the ones who are of the spirit, and are enlightened. What Aiden and Watts did, they took these categorizations and turned them into something like ranks, but I personally think of it as a caste.

AW: A caste system? Really?

FM: Really. See, Aiden wrote two books: the Blind Word, essentially just his "secret history of gnosticism", and the Light of Revelation, a cosmological treatise on the nature of the monad, the Aeons, the Archons, everything else.

FM: If you're hylikoi, a nonbeliever, an apostate, or anyone who hasn't taken the first sacrament, you can't read the Blind Word. It's not provided, and trying to get around the first sacrament will get you banned from the Church. You can have it taught to you, but that's it. That first sacrament is called the Grace of Salt, it's an annual thing where the leader judges your worthiness in front of the entire congregation. But here's the rub: the criteria are left to the congregation's leader, and they're under no obligation to explain themselves.

AW: So even if you're perfectly devout...

FM: If you're in any way undesirable, they'll never let you in further.

AW: Wow. So what happens if you get in?

FM: Then you become psychikoi. It's essentially letting you be a member of the Church, have access to the Blind Word, but not much else. I'd say that probably 75, 80 percent of people who attend services are psychikoi.

AW: That makes sense. But you said that psychikoi only have the potential for gnosis. what do you have to do to become pneumatikoi?

FM: Oh, that's a process. See, there's three types of pneumatikoi, according to the Church: the pneumatikoi syzygia, who are the highest, the garden variety pneumatikoi, and pneumatikoi orasika. You start by becoming an orasika, proving that you've memorized the entirety of the Blind Word as part of a three-day-long ritual called the Scales of Mercury. Once you've done that, a pneumatikos becomes your sponsor, who teaches you the Light of Revelation for a year, after which point you become baptized and choose a new name— they call this the Advent of Sulfur, and this ritual lasts for an entire week.

AW: So essentially, unless you devote years of your life to the Church, you're not going to heaven?

FM: Not quite heaven, but I'd rather not argue the finer points here.

AW: So what about the last one, the syzygia?

FM: That's where you draw your leaders for the Church from, where you get the most eager pastors and where the Heptarchy come from. For that, you undergo the nymphon sacrament— essentially a marriage bed shared with an Aeon, who's name you take as your surname.

AW: You don't mean the marriage bed in the literal sense I assume?

FM: I never participated in that ritual, and never saw it performed. It's one of the Church's most sacred rituals, and unlike the rest of Aiden's work, it's based on a historical practice.

AW: I see. Unfortunately, we're beginning to run out of time, but this was incredibly enlightening, and I'd love to perform another interview with you in the future!

FM: Of course. If I can get people to see that the Church isn't what it claims to be, then maybe we can have a chance for something more honest to come about. ---

And there you have it: an exclusive interview with a former Sophic with extensive knowledge of the Church's history and inner workings.

Questions? Comments? Leave them below and I'll be happy to answer to the best of my ability!

This is Aria Wellings with The Kea, a monthly digest serving Aoteroa and everywhere else

Like this article? Sponsor us on Skaldd for more interviews, exposes and more!

[frmartinshomiliesandreflections]

22nd November Fr. Martin's Reflections/Homilies on Today's Mass Readings for Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time (Inc. Luke 19:45-48): ‘The people as a whole hung on his words’.

Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

Gospel (Except USA) Luke 19:45-48 You have turned God's house into a robbers' den.

Jesus went into the Temple and began driving out those who were selling. ‘According to scripture,’ he said ‘my house will be a house of prayer. But you have turned it into a robbers’ den.’ He taught in the Temple every day. The chief priests and the scribes, with the support of the leading citizens, tried to do away with him, but they did not see how they could carry this out because the people as a whole hung on his words.

Gospel (USA) Luke 19:45-48 You have made it a den of thieves.

Jesus entered the temple area and proceeded to drive out those who were selling things, saying to them, “It is written, My house shall be a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves.” And every day he was teaching in the temple area. The chief priests, the scribes, and the leaders of the people, meanwhile, were seeking to put him to death, but they could find no way to accomplish their purpose because all the people were hanging on his words.

Reflections (11)

(i) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In Luke’s gospel, Jesus as a twelve year old teaches in the Temple in Jerusalem. On that occasion, he referred to the Temple as ‘my Father’s house’, declaring to his parents who had been frantically looking for him, ‘Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?’ If Jesus regarded the Temple as the house of God his Father, he would have a keen interest in what was going on there. In today’s gospel reading, the adult Jesus is not pleased with what is going on in the Temple. What God had intended to be a ‘house of prayer’ had become a ‘robbers’ den’. Those responsible for the Temple were more concerned with the profits to be made from the sale of animals for sacrifice and from the changing of money to a currency acceptable in the Temple than with the proper worship of God. Jesus could see that the priorities of the chief priests and scribes were at odds with God his Father’s priorities. When Jesus challenged their priorities by driving out those who were selling in the Temple, the chief priests and scribes, with the support of the leading citizens of Jerusalem, were determined to do away with Jesus. The religious authorities were not only out of step with God’s priorities, they were also out of step with the people as a whole, who hung upon every word that Jesus spoke. The people were more attuned to God speaking and acting through Jesus than their leaders were. Sometimes what we value and prioritize doesn’t correspond to what God values and prioritizes. Like the people, we need to hang on every word that Jesus speaks if our values and priorities are to be in keeping with those of God. It is Jesus who reveals the mind of God, the vision of God for our own personal lives, the life of our church and of our world. It is to Jesus we have to keep turning if what is important to us is to correspond in some way to what is important to God, our heavenly Father.

And/Or

(ii) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In the gospel reading we have just heard, Jesus firstly drives all trade out of the Temple area and then he proceeds to teach there every day. According to our reading, the presence of Jesus in the Temple met with a divided response. The religious leaders, the chief priests and the leading citizens who were responsible for the running of the temple wanted to do away with Jesus. In contrast, the people as a whole hung on Jesus’ words. A few chapters further on in his gospel Luke describes the crucifixion of Jesus and once again he makes the same distinction between the religious leaders and the people. He tells us that as Jesus hung from the cross the leaders scoffed at him, whereas the people simple stood by watching and after Jesus died they returned home, beating their breasts as a sign of sorrow and repentance. Luke makes it clear that the religious leaders were much more hostile to Jesus than the people as a whole because Jesus was perceived by them as threatening their vested interests. They had something to defend against Jesus whereas the people as a whole knew they had much to receive from Jesus. They somehow recognized that God was visiting them in a special way through Jesus. They had nothing to lose and everything to receive from Jesus. This morning we are invited to stand with the people in hanging on the words of Jesus, and, like them, we too beat our breasts as we look upon the cross of Jesus, recognizing that we have not always lived by his word or walked in his way.

And/Or

(iii) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In the gospel reading this morning, Jesus drives all trade out of the temple, so as to purify it for the worship of God alone. The temple was to be a place of worship and prayer but it had become something else. The buying and selling of the market place had intruded into the temple and had undermined the temple’s primary purpose as a house of prayer. The temple no longer exists but there are still houses of prayer. Our church buildings are houses of prayer. We all feel that we have a very special house of prayer in our own parish church. It is a place of worship, a space into which people can enter to pray and to worship God. Everything in the church is to serve that purpose, the art work, the lighting, the decor, the furniture. I have always felt coming into this church that it is a place where people have been praying for a very long time, as indeed they have. The bulk of the church goes back to the late 1830s. People’s prayer over the generations leaves its mark on a building and makes it easier for us to pray. Our prayerful presence here, in turn, leaves its mark on the building and makes it easier of others to enter into prayer, including those of the generations to come.

And/Or

(iv) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In this morning’s gospel reading Jesus shows his displeasure at what is happening in the Temple in Jerusalem. Instead of serving its original purpose as a house of prayer for everyone, it had come to serve the interests of a few. Every human institution needs ongoing reform and renewal, and that includes religious institutions, like the church. The Lord is always prompting us to reform and renew our institutions so that they serve God’s purposes more fully, rather than our own purposes. No human institution, no matter how revered, is perfect; it will always be in need of renewal, because it will always be shaped by people who are tainted by sin. What is important is to acknowledge this in an ongoing way and to be open to the Lord’s call to repentance and renewal. This was not the case with those responsible for the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. After Jesus’ actions in the temple, the gospel reading says that the chief priests and the scribes tried to do away with Jesus. To resist ongoing renewal is to resist the Lord. Our journey towards God, both as individuals and as communities, will always involve repentance, a willing to keep on turning more fully towards what God wants for our lives.

And/Or

(v) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In today’s gospel reading Jesus refers to the Temple in Jerusalem as a ‘house of prayer’. The primary activity of the Temple was to be the activity of prayer. However, other activities had taken over and become more important than they should have been, such as the selling of animals for sacrifice, the exchange of coins, all of which could have been done outside the temple precinct. Jesus’ identification of the Temple as a ‘house of prayer’ is appropriate for every Christian church building. The primary activity of this parish church, and of buildings like it, is the activity of prayer. Every other activity is secondary and should, in some way, be at the service of the primary activity of prayer. Everything in the building should be at the service of people’s prayer such as the lighting, the furniture, the art work, whether it be in the form of statues, paintings, mosaics or stained glass. Our purpose in coming into a church is to pray, and to pray in the whole variety of forms of prayer that have evolved over the centuries within the Jewish and the Christian tradition, the prayer of petition, of contrition, of praise and thanksgiving, of intercession, the quiet prayer of attentive listening. All those forms of prayer have their place within the great prayer of the Eucharist. If this parish church is a ‘house of prayer’, then its primary purpose is to help us to become a people of prayer, in the way that Jesus was a man of prayer. In becoming people of prayer we open ourselves more fully to God’s purpose for our lives and for our world.

And/Or

(vi) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In today’s gospel reading, Jesus, quoting one of the prophets, speaks of the Temple in Jerusalem as a ‘house of prayer’. Prayer was to be the primary activity of the Temple. However, in Jesus’ day certain economic activities had become so important that they had gotten in the way of the Temple being a house of prayer for everyone, including non-Jews. Jesus is suggesting that the Temple had lost its way; it was no longer serving God’s purpose but was at the service of various human purposes. We can all lose our way. We can all end up serving our own purpose rather than God’s purpose. This can happen not only with individuals but with institutions, even institutions as sacred as the Temple in Jerusalem. Every so often we need to hear a prophetic voice calling us back to God’s way. For us as Christians, the most authoritative prophetic voice is the voice of Jesus which we hear above all in the gospels. We need to keep returning to his voice, to his living word, as it comes to us through the Scriptures, so that we can live our lives in keeping with God’s purpose. Every parish church, like the Temple in Jerusalem, is a house of prayer. It is above all in that setting that we can prayerfully listen to the word of the Lord addressed to each of us individually and to all of us as members of God’s people, the church.

And/Or

(vii) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

According to our first reading, it was on the 25th day of the Jewish month of Chislev that Judas Maccabeus and his associates purified the Temple in Jerusalem which had become contaminated by pagan images and practices. This happened a little over 150 years before the birth of Jesus. The 25th of Chislev remains an important feast day for Jews today. It is usually celebrated in November/December, the Feast of the Rededication of the Temple. In the gospel reading Jesus is also portrayed as purifying the Temple in Jerusalem. On this occasion it wasn’t pagans, non-Jews, who were responsible for the unsatisfactory state of the Temple, but other Jews, in particular, the priests who were responsible for the Temple. They had allowed people to sell goods in one of the courts of the Temple, the court reserved for non-Jews. As a result, non-Jews could not pray in the area reserved for them. The Temple was meant to be a house of prayer for Jews and non-Jews. Jesus saw that the Temple was not conducting its business in accordance with God’s purpose. It had become, according to Jesus, a ‘robber’s den’ rather than a ‘house of prayer’. According to Luke, Jesus had referred to the Temple, when a twelve-year-old, as ‘my Father’s house’. Jesus, the Son of God, acted authoritatively to purify and renew his Father’s house.  Every institution stands in need of continuing renewal, including religious institutions, of which the most sacred in Jesus’ day was the Temple in Jerusalem. The church, likewise, is always in need of reform. We who comprise the church are always in need of the Lord’s reforming and renewing zeal. It is a seal that is born of love, because the Lord wants us to become all that God desires for us. Each day we try to open ourselves anew to the Lord’s continuing work of renewal in our lives.

And/Or

(viii) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

The prophet Malachi in the Jewish Scriptures had written, ‘the Lord whom you seek will suddenly enter his Temple’. The scene in today’s gospel reading where Jesus enters the Temple is the fulfilment of that prophecy. Earlier in Luke’s gospel, the twelve year old Jesus had spoken of the Temple as ‘my Father’s house’. At the beginning of today’s gospel reading, Jesus quotes God’s word as found in Isaiah, ‘my house will be a house of prayer’. The Temple, God’s house, was to be a place of prayer. Jesus, God’s Son, acts authoritatively in God his Father’s house, because far from being a house of prayer it had become a ‘robbers’ den’. Buying and selling, the making of money, had become a higher priority than prayer. Those responsible for the activities of the Temple saw it as a resource that could serve their own purposes, rather than a place that was to serve God’s purpose. It has been said that Jesus comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable. Those whose management of the Temple had left them comfortable were now experiencing the disturbing side of Jesus’ words and actions and, in response, Luke says that ‘they tried to do away with him’. Yet, the people as a whole, Luke tells us, ‘hung on his words’. We are invited to stand with the ordinary people in hanging on the Lord’s words. The Lord’s words bring light and life, love and mercy, into our lives, healing our wounds and restoring our spirit. Yet, there are times when we will also experience his words as disturbing our comfort zones. At such times too, we need to hang on his words, because, even then, the Lord’s words remain words of spirit and life for us.

And/Or

(ix) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

Religious buildings can be very significant for people. Parishioners have a great love for our parish church. A lot of work is being done at the moment to conserve and restore the fabric. The most important religious building for the Jews in the time of Jesus, and before his time, was the Temple in Jerusalem. It had been profaned by the pagan rulers of Judea about 150 years before the coming of Christ. Today’s first reading is the story of the Temple’s joyful rededication after the people of Israel regained control of it from the pagans. In the gospel reading, Jesus recognizes the value of the Temple, declaring it to be a house of prayer. Perhaps that is a good description of our own parish church, a ‘house of prayer’. However, Jesus could see that the focus of the Temple was no longer prayer but various commercial activities, and, so, he drove out from the Temple all who were selling. There is a little warning there to us also. We must be careful that prayer remains the focus of our own church building and not some commercial activity, no matter how well intentioned. This building is about the work of prayer, the prayer of the liturgy, the Eucharist and other sacraments, the prayer of the church, the praying of the rosary, the private prayers of people who come into the church, often expressed through the lighting of candles. When we are entering this church, we are entering a house of prayer and the focal point of that house is the presence of the Lord in the Eucharist calling us to prayer. In this place, we open ourselves to the Lord in prayer so as to be better able to bring the Lord to those we meet when we leave this house of prayer.

And/Or

(x) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In today’s gospel reading, Jesus refers to the Temple of Jerusalem as a ‘house of prayer’. He clearly felt that some of the other activities that were going on there were working against it being the house or place of prayer that God intended the Temple to be. Every parish church is a house of prayer. We gather in our own parish church, during normal times, to pray together as a community. People also come into the church during the day for their own personal prayer. I have been struck by the numbers of people who have been coming to our church to pray during the day in recent weeks and months. There is no other building that could be described as a house of prayer, a place whose primary role it is to support people in prayer. We need such spaces in our busy world with all its many activities. It is said in today’s gospel reading that ‘the people hung on the words of Jesus’ as he taught in the Temple. Our parish church is also a place where we hear the word of the Lord, whether listening with others as that word is proclaimed in the setting of the Eucharist and other liturgical settings, or whether we reflect on the Lord’s word to us quietly and alone. I sometimes see people with the Missalette for the following Sunday praying quietly on the word of God. We come into a house of prayer like this to pray and to hang on the Lord’s word, so that we can go out to witness to the Lord’s love and presence with greater energy and courage. That pattern of coming in and going out is at the heart of our lives as the Lord’s disciples, coming in to pray and going out to live what we have prayed. This parish church, this house of prayer, is at the service of this important pattern in our lives.

And/Or

(xi) Friday, Thirty Third Week in Ordinary Time

In today’s gospel reading, Jesus speaks of the Temple in Jerusalem as a ‘house of prayer’. We think of a house as a place where a family gathers. The Temple was the place where the family of God’s people gathered for prayer, whether it was the prayer of petition, of thanksgiving or of intercession. Every parish church could be described as a house of prayer. It is a place where the family of God’s people gather to pray. In our prayer, as Christians, we recognize the God to whom the Jewish people prayed in the Temple as the Father of Jesus and we recognize Jesus as God’s beloved Son. We pray to God our Father, through Jesus, in the power of the Holy Spirit, whom we recognize as the Spirit of both God the Father and God the Son. When we gather in this house of prayer, we do so as family, as the family of faith, recognizing ourselves and one another as sons and daughters of God, brothers and sisters of Jesus and temples of the Holy Spirit. Even when we come into the church on our own, we are always conscious of the other members of our family of faith and of the human family, and, indeed, the family of all God’s creatures, all God’s creation. In the house of prayer, which is our parish church, as in every house of prayer, we open ourselves up to God present to us through his Son and the Holy Spirit. As a result, we are strengthened in our identity as sons and daughters of God, brothers and sisters of Jesus and temples of the Holy Spirit. We leave this house of prayer empowered to live out of that identity more generously and courageously.

Fr. Martin Hogan.

[thewordfortheday]

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16).

Pause. Let this sink in. There is a book that is unlike every other book, because it is the very Word of God. You have this book. Or you have access to it. Many do not. But if you are reading this, you do. It is astonishing. You can hold in your hand a book whose words are the very words of God.

Yes, God wrote a book... It is the Bible. It is God's word. To obey it is to obey God. To reject it is to reject God. Believing the Bible is God's Word is important, but still inadequate unless coupled with obeying it , living by it every day, and allowing the teachings of His Son to mould us.

In the Bible, we see God — more surely and more clearly than anywhere else. This is what we were made for — to see God, and know Him, and love Him, and be changed by Him into radiant images of Him.

[pressforwardsaints]

"Pride is a very misunderstood sin, and many are sinning in ignorance. In the scriptures there is no such thing as righteous pride—it is always considered a sin. Therefore, no matter how the world uses the term, we must understand how God uses the term so we can understand the language of holy writ and profit thereby.

Most of us think of pride as self-centeredness, conceit, boastfulness, arrogance, or haughtiness. All of these are elements of the sin, but the heart, or core, is still missing.

The central feature of pride is enmity—enmity toward God and enmity toward our fellowmen. Enmity means 'hatred toward, hostility to, or a state of opposition.' It is the power by which Satan wishes to reign over us.

Pride is essentially competitive in nature. We pit our will against God’s. When we direct our pride toward God, it is in the spirit of 'my will and not thine be done.' As Paul said, they 'seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s.'"

— Ezra Taft Benson, Beware of Pride