Podcasts about proponents

Do you think children should be sorted into classes based on academic ability? A recent study from the UK says streaming is beneficial - but with some big caveats. Proponents say it's great for pushing the kids in high classes, but objectors say it means kids in the lower levels don't get the chance to reach their potential. Joining us to talk through the pros and cons is University of Canterbury's senior lecturer David Pomeroy.

A big part of the court are the actual court nobles, so this episode we are taking a look at some of the ones mentioned in the Chronicles for this reign. For more, check out https://sengokudaimyo.com/podcast/episode-150 Rough Transcript Welcome to Sengoku Daimyo's Chronicles of Japan.  My name is Joshua and this is episode 150: Nobles of Jitou Tennou's Court   Maro donned his light blue robes and made his way to the court.  As he arrived, the sun was just peaking over the horizon, and as it bathed the court in the golden morning light the dark shadows were dispelled, leaving in their wake a colorful scene, as various court officials headed this way and that, gathering in their offices to pick up on the work that they had left unfinished the day before. As an ohotoneri, Maro was often sent to and fro between the offices of the different departments. As such, he was able to see how they worked, and he wondered to himself which department would have the best opportunity for advancement.  His family had connections over at the Department of Prisons, and it was definitely a place he could make a name for himself, especially if he attached himself to one of the newly minted magistrates.  On the other hand, the Jingikan, the Ministry for Kami Matters, had some of the most important and sought after positions.  After all, no matter what the secular administration did, when there was no rain for the fields, it was the kami to whom the court turned.  And the members of the Jingikan who helped make those ceremonies happen were known to be well rewarded for their troubles. Perhaps he would be better off taking a more modest position, such as with the Jibu-sho, the Department of Civil Administration.  It was mostly focused on the maintenance and execution of the bureaucracy, and wasn't necessarily a place to seek the limelight, but perhaps that also offered some opportunity.  Do well in one position, and who knows what that could open up to you in the long run?  Maybe one day Maro could make it up to become a Nagon, a Counsellor, or even one of the Daijin, the great ministers at the very head of the council of state.Maro almost laughed at the thought, but he didn't put it aside entirely.  After all, as impossible as it might seem now, the world was still changing, and who knew what opportunities might be waiting just around the corner?   This episode continues our look at the reign of Uno no Sarara, aka Jitou Tennou.  I would note that we have now reached the last chapter of the Nihon Shoki, which ends with the end of Uno no Sarara's reign in 697.  In this chapter, we have not quite 11 years to cover, and we've already talked about the first three of those years, which featured succession issues and a long mourning time for Uno's husband Ohoama, aka Temmu Tennou, culminating in the sudden death of her only son, the Crown Prince and heir apparent, Prince Kusakabe, in 689.  We also went over what was happening on the continent, with powerful women like Uno no Sarara either on or behind the throne in Silla and the Tang dynasty.  To quickly recap the succession issues: When Kusakabe died, tthat left the throne in a somewhat tenuous position.  There were two other male heirs that would seem to have a claim on the throne as well.  The first was Prince Takechi, who was technically Ohoama's eldest son, but the Chroniclers claim that his late mother was not sufficiently royal for him to have a serious claim.  Then there was Prince Karu, the only known son of the late Crown Prince Kusakabe, and had been born 6 years earlier, in 683, to the Crown Prince and his wife, Princess Abe.  Princess Abe was a daughter of Naka no Oe, and a half-sister to Uno no Sarara.  She was actually a year older than Kusakabe, and would continue to look after the young Prince Karu.  So, Prince Karu was only about 7 years old when his father passed away: much too young to be taking the throne, let alone a firm hand in the politics of the time.  And given the mortality statistics of the time, there is so much that could happen to him before he reached the age of majority.  And remember, there were already some questions about legitimacy, and we already discussed the fact that about 30 nobles had gathered in support of Prince Ohotsu right after Ohoama's death.  Uno no Sarara had that whole issue quashed and Prince Ohotsu had died, but it was nonetheless a stark reminder that things could change quickly. So at this point in Uno no Sarara's reign, there is a great deal of uncertainty afoot, and there are quite a few individuals named in the Chronicles who stand to benefit from sticking their fingers into politics in one way or another.  This episode, we're going to look at some of those individuals, their roles in the court, and the effect they had on Yamato.  Some of those people named are particularly interesting in that they were involved in the conspiracy with Prince Ohotsu, and would continue to be highly influential in the government.  For example, Iki no Hakatoko, Nakatomi no Omimaro, and Kose no Tayasu, and Yakuchi no Wotokashi are all name-dropped, which we'll get into more later.  It feels significant, however, that there were some 30 nobles all told, and beyond these four and the apparent ringleaders, we don't learn anyone else's names.   The importance of prominent individuals in the court has been a constant theme in the Chronicles and in this podcast, so getting to know the court is definitely important. Moreover, during this time period as we get more and more written sources from which to work from we will see more and more information on individuals.  Some of that will come from the Nihon Shoki and the records that come after—the Shoku Nihongi.  Others, however, are from sources like the Man'yoshu, where bits of biographical data are found about the authors that they mention.  There are also family diaries and later genealogies.  Some of these sources are a bit more trusted than others, especially when they were compiled centuries later and we don't exactly know what sources they, themselves, were working on.  Still, even if it isn't 100% accurate, it does give us a picture of what was going on beyond just the royal family. I think it is also helpful to understand some of the overall court dynamics.  If you are familiar with the Heian period, especially around the time of things like the Tale of Genji, you are probably well acquainted with the Fujiwara family—I'll probably need to do an entire episode just on them at some point.  Essentially, there would come a time where almost the entire court was made up either of royals or of members of the Fujiwara clan, or uji.  In fact, even that distinction wasn't really accurate as the Fujiwara family had so intermarried with the Royal family that every sovereign—every Tennou and even most of their consorts—were directly related to members of the Fujiwara.  Not only that, but members of the Fujiwara family held the position of regent—whether the sovereign was of age or not—and effectively ruled the country, with the Tennou being largely relegated to a mouthpiece with ceremonial duties.  It would get so bad that we would see the splitting of the Fujiwara uji into smaller households, and the political fights were often between members of the different households of the same family.  There is a reason that a good portion of the Heian period is sometimes called the Fujiwara period. However, now during the late Asuka period, we see something a little different.  The marriage politics of the Soga had been violently suppressed about a half century earlier, and a lot of different names flourished in the Yamato court, as youmay have noticed any time I've rattled off a bunch of names and your eyes started crossing because of it.  But that's the reality we see: there were a lot of different families, and individuals, all jockeying for influence.  And they were in a period of disruption, where lots of change was happening.  That change meant there was also a lot of potential. And I hope you don't mind if I take a quick time-out here, but so often we read history and we forget to learn lessons from it, and one overarching lesson is:  if you are a part of an organization—a company, a club, government, school, or anything like that—one thing you are going to have to deal with is change.  It comes in many forms and happens whether or not you personally agree with it. It can be destructive and it can be frightening, because we often don't know what is on the other side of it, but it also presents opportunities.  After all, if you don't know what comes next it probably means other people don't, either.  And if you can be the one to provide direction you can have a huge influence on what comes next.  And change has been a constant theme in this period of Yamato history, in so many ways.  Take the reorganization of the government as one example: they had introduced these 8 departments, which had names and were set up in various ways, but it wasn't like you had experienced people to run them as they had been on the continent.  So you had names and the forms of things, but there were a lot of people figuring out just how to actually put this new structure into practice, and leverage them to do what they were supposed to do.  In the process, there were a lot of opportunities to innovate and figure out how to do it within the cultural milieu of the archipelago.  So all of these individuals, from these various families, all had opportunities staring them in the face.  They just had to figure out how to make the best of it. Now, don't get me wrong:  Those with the money, the connections, and the influence still had a leg up, and this was still a hierarchical society, where your family dictated, to some extent, your position in society.  The introduction of individual court rank, as opposed to just the kabane that ranked uji, was pushing against that, and had already caused a reformation that flattened a lot of the previous kabane into just eight distinctions, but those distinctions still existed.  Even had they not, simple matters of inherited wealth and the value of goods produced in a family's home territory would still have provided tremendous advantages.  But there isn't an indication of the kind of large-scale consolidation of resources that we will see in later periods, such as the Fujiwara example that we were just discussing.  Oh, sure, we aren't going to see a farmer suddenly make it big at court in some kind of rags-to-riches story, but at the upper end of society we still have a lot of apparent diversity. And so, let's get to know some of these individuals that the Chronicles tell us about.  Before we do that, though, let's recap a little bit about how the court worked. Every member of the court was effectively employed by the State.  They had an official job with duties they were supposed to oversee.  In the case of lower level functionaries, they were likely expected to actually do most of the work, while at the top of the hierarchy you had nobles who were more likely decision-makers, who would approve or disapprove of the work and direct strategic resources. Those working in the court had official uniforms—the round-necked garments of the continent.  What would be called a "caftan" farther west.  These were based on the foreign garments popular in the Tang court and elsewhere. The color and pattern of official clothing appears to be something that goes back to early in this new continental style government, and we see suggestions of color schemes from a relatively early age.  However, in 690 we see the clearest such outline of just what everyone was wearing. As a reminder, the court rank system of the day was made up of a Princely and a Commoner system.  Princely ranks originally included two ranks of the Myo class, and four of the Jou class, each rank divided into either "Great" or "Broad", for twelve Princely ranks, though honestly we only ever really see the four Jou class of ranks in use. Below that were the ranks for the common nobles—those with family names who did not have any kind of royal claim.    For them there were six classes of rank—Shou, Jiki, Gon, Mu, Tsui, and Shin, in that order.  Each class was made up of four ranks, which were further divided into upper and broad categories, creating 48 total ranks. Your rank determined your precedence at court—where you were sat, what jobs you were allowed to take on and, most importantly, the amount of money that you could expect to receive as part of a stipend.  Naka no Oe had previously consolidated the land-holdings and asserted claim over all of it.  The taxes from the households on the land went to the government to pay the stipends of the nobles in the court, who were, ostensibly, employees of that same government.  Your rank determined what you were owed, though this could also be augmented by various edicts. So there you go: rank in the court was tied to many of the things that the elites wanted, from wealth to status and access to various opportunities. The color of official clothing followed the rank system.  So Princes of the first two ranks of the Jou class were given robes of dark purple, and the third and four ranks were given robes of bright purple, which they shared with highest class of rank of the common nobles, the Shou rank class. Below that, nobles of the Jiki class would wear robes of dark red, and those of Gon would wear dark green.  The Mu rank class, the next down, was Light Green, and then Tsui was Deep Blue and Shin was Light blue. So in order you would see robes of Dark Purple, Bright Purple, Dark Red, Dark Green, Light Green, Deep Blue, and Light Blue.  The color gave you a certain indication of where the person sat in the overall hierarchy of the court, and provided you clues as to how you should address them, who would give deference, etc.  In later centuries, we are even told that deference was given in meetings, which is to say that once a person of higher rank provided input on a topic, nobody of lower rank was able to contradict them for fear of the consequences.  So it also told you who got the last word. This then was the world that the nobles of the court inhabited.  As we've seen in previous episodes it wasn't just bureaucratic work, but also banquets, archery contests, and Buddhist congregations and sutra readings.  There were rituals, dances, and diplomatic embassies—not to mention all of the ceremonies around the death or ascension of the sovereign.  In this world, one's reputation was everything.  You wanted to be seen as good at your job, but also, just like today, people were more likely to promote and support those they knew, and so it helped to have friends.  However, there were also a limited number of top spots, and so every promotion would have likewise meant plenty of disappointed nobles who didn't get the job.  But that is enough background.  Let's take a look at some of the nobles themselves, starting with the four from the Prince Ohotsu conspiracy.   The first name in the list is perhaps the least interesting.  His name is Yakuchi no Wotokashi.  Although he was the highest ranking of the four, he is also the least mentioned in the Chronicles and elsewhere, and we know very little about him.  So we'll talk about him later on, for completeness, but for now it may be best to skip him until we have a better handle on others in the court. In contrast, we know a bit more about his co-conspirators.  In fact, we've already talked about one of them at length:  Iki no Hakatoko.  We first heard about Iki no Hakatoko when talking about the Tang dynasty, and discussed him at length in Episode 123.  He was one of the members of the embassy to the Tang dynasty back in the early 660s that got delayed on account of Tang Gaozong initiating the war against Yamato's ally Baekje.  The fact that the Nihon Shoki directly pulls from Hakatoko's work, known to us, today, as the Iki no Hakatoko Sho, makes it one of the few early named written works that we know about.  Unfortunately, it is no longer extant except for what is preserved in the Chronicles, but it is still incredible that we have essentially an eyewitness account of what happened.  He would later be one of the escort envoys for one of the Tang embassies during the reign of Naka no Oe.  That he was then embroiled in the conspiracy with Prince Ohotsu would seem to be at odds with his standing, and yet after his pardon he eventually got back into the court's good graces.  In 695, about 9 years after the incident, he was assigned as an assistant envoy to Silla.  By that point he was of Mudaini rank, which was only about 35th in the overall scheme of things.  Later on we know he would work on the famous Taiho code, which was published in 701, and enacted a couple of years later.  It was here that he worked with the famous Fujiwara no Fubito—about whom we will discuss more, later—and although he would pass away in 703, this may be how his own writings came to find their way into the Chronicles, since Fubito is said to have had a large influence on them—as he had on many of the court's projects. Overall, Iki no Hakatoko may not have been the one in charge, but we see in his life an incredible career, much of it spent on multiple voyages across the ocean, whether on an embassy or as an escort.  He likely was highly proficient in the language of the Tang court—what we typically refer to, broadly, as Middle Chinese.  He also had direct experience with the Tang court and system, and so it makes sense that he was one of those helping to build an administrative state based on that system. If we were to imagine Hakatoko in the court of the day, at least in 695, he would have likely had light green colored robes, indicating that he was of the "Mu" class of ranks.  He would have worn the black gauze cap of the court and worn white hakama, or trousers, underneath.  His long, continental style, round-necked robes—likely relatively slim, with overly long, but narrow, sleeves—would have been tied closed in the front with a braided silk cord.  He likely worn black leather boots, covered in a light lacquer to protect them from the elements, with cloth insoles and perhaps a hint of brocade along the top.  He likely kept with him a ruler, and perhaps a few slips of paper or even just wood on which to take occasional notes.  A mid-level functionary of the court. We can compare and contrast Hakatoko to two other co-conspirators:  Nakatomi no Omimaro and Kose no Tayasu. We are given neither Omimaro's rank nor Tayasu's at this time.  It is interesting that they listed after Hakatoko, who is actually listed as having "Lower Shousen" rank—an older rank that was no longer in use at this point in time.  Also, both Nakatomi and Kose were Ason level families while Iki no Hakatoko is listed as being merely "Muraji".  So it seems that the Chroniclers were probably pulling from what they could find elsewhere, although where they found that Wotokashi had Jikikwoshi rank I have no idea, as we don't have any other record for him.  And it is possible that deference to Wotokashi and Hakatoko are as much a nod to their age as anything else, though probably not by much. Of four co-conspirators mentioned here—and I'm leaving out the two who were exiled or banished, as they were clearly not hanging around the court later—Nakatomi no Omimaro and Kose no Tayasu were probably from the most established families.  Indeed, we see both of their names show up multiple times in the record, giving us a better idea of who they might have been. Of the two, the name Nakatomi probably is more likely to ring a bell, as that as the surname of the famous Nakatomi no Kamatari—as well as the later Nakatomi no Kane.   Nakatomi no Kamatari was the head of court ritual when he and Naka no Oe kicked things off with the Isshi Incident and the Taika reforms, at which point he became the "Inner Prime Minister", or Naidaijin. Much of what we know of Omimaro comes from outside of the Chronicles themselves.  For instance, we are told that he was the son of Nakatomi no Kunitari, a cousin to the famous Kamatari, at least according to the 10th century Engi Shiki.  However, we have no other records of Kunitari, and so there is more than a little doubt cast as to whether or not that was actually the case.  Similarly, we are told that Omimaro married one of Kamatari's daughters, and was eventually adopted by Kamatari. Once again, the evidence for this is pretty thin, and it is unclear to me just how adoption worked at this point.  Certainly in later periods, adoption was often a way to ensure that a family had a male heir to ensure the family's continuity, and marrying someone's daughter and being adopted into the family is an age old tradition in the archipelago and Japan more generally.  At the same time, give some thought to what we know about this period: male primogeniture was not exactly the norm, although Confucian values had definitely made inroads into court.   The family headship often went to the eldest—or most prominent—family member.  This wasn't necessarily a son and often was a brother, a nephew, or even a cousin.  We have a few famous Nakatomi at this point in time, and all I can say for certain is that they were part of the same family.  Later traditions would make things a bit more clear. Whatever his parentage, our first encounter with Omimaro appears to be in the Ohotsu conspiracy, when he was arrested and then pardoned.  He shows up again in the record just three years later, along with Kose no Tayasu, as both were made judges, along with Fujiwara no Fubito—Nakatomi no Kamatari's biological son and eventual heir. In fact, there were nine judges, or magistrates, made that year, and they are listed in rank order.  The first is Prince Takeda, said to be a great-grandson of Nunakura, aka Bidatsu Tennou.  He was Joukwoshi rank, meaning he wore bright purple court robes, sitting in the lower half of the princely ranks.  He had been quite prolific ever since 681, when he was one of the Princes called to help bring together the Chronicles.  After being made a judge, he would continue in that position, it seems, and by 708 he would become the head of the Ministry of Prisons. After him we have Haji no Nemaro, in the dark red robes of the Jiki rank class.  Though someone of rank, less is known about Nemaro.  His father is said to be Haji no Mi, who was part of the forces that set out to Yamada-dera to capture—and likely kill—Soga no Kurayamadera.  Haji no Nemaro's son is Haji no Oi, who was sent to the Tang court but returned in 684, along with several repatriated soldiers.  Oi would assist with the Taihou code, but little more is said about him or his father. Other judges were Ohoyake no Maro, Fujiwara no Fubito—also of the Jiki class rank. Maro would go on to take a job as a jusenshi, responsible for minting coins, and Fubito would go on to reach the highest levels of government. Then there was Tahema no Sakurawi, Hodzumi no Yamamori, Nakatomi no Omimaro, Kose no Tayasu, and Ohomiwa no Yasumaro.  They were all Mudaishi rank at this point, wearing dark green.  Sakurai would go on to become the governor of Ise in 705, and then the governor of Musashi in 708.  Hodzumi no Yamamori we don't have as much information on, other than that he kept climbing the ranks, by 704 he had made Junior 5th rank, lower grade in the system that replaced the cap-ranks, and by 712 he made it to the senior fifth rank, lower grade. Ohomiwa no Yasumaro, on the other hand, would make it to the Senior 5th rank, lower grade by 707, and the upper grade by 708, when he was made the Dayu—the high minister in charge—of Settsu.  He would eventually make it into the Junior Fourth rank, upper grade, as the Minister of the Military Department, or Hyobu-sho. So this gives you an idea of the people with whom Nakatomi no Omimaro and Kose no Tayasu were rubbing elbows.  That they were made judges, responsible for justice, seems to say something as that would seem to be a powerful position.  At the same time, they are both lower ranked than the much younger Fujiwara no Fubito—but once again, he was the direct son of Nakatomi no Kamatari.  He also seems to have avoided any unpleasantness from the Jinshin no Ran as he was only 14 at the time, and though it does seem that the Nakatomi were generally knocked down a peg or two in court—thanks in large part  to the fact that Nakatomi no Kane had been one of the leaders of the Afumi court.  That and the whole thing with Prince Ohotsu may be why Omimaro was not exactly in the top ranks, but his appointments weren't nothing, either.  By 693, Omimaro would be granted the rank of Jikikwoshi, the lower fourth rank of the Jiki class.  In that entry he is recorded as Fujiwara no Omimaro.  I believe we discussed this a few episodes back, but the Fujiwara name was still new.  It had been granted to Nakatomi no Kamatari on his deathbed—or possibly even posthumously—by Naka no Oe, and to his family.  So technically that would seem to extend to the entire Nakatomi family.  And with Nakatomi no Kane having been one of the main figures on the losing side of the Jinshin no Ran, it was no doubt a savvy political move for Nakatomi courtiers to lean into the Fujiwara name, and they seem to have done just that.  It wouldn't be until later, in the reign just following this, that a new decree would straighten everything out, such that only the actual descendants of Fujiwara no Kamatari, such as Fujiwara no Fubito, would be allowed to use the Fujiwara name. Throughout this, I have focused mostly on Omimaro, but Kose no Tayasu was in the mix as well.  He, too, was made a judge and in 693 he would also be awarded the same Jikikwoshi rank.  In addition, in 689, he was made a "commissioner of good words", along with the Royal Prince Shiki and others.  This seems to be a singular position, and Aston suggests that it was their job to figure out the kind of auspicious language that should be used in the court.  What kind of language should be used by the sovereign and the courtiers in drawing up official edicts.  I imagine that they were figuring out the form to give to formal court documents as well as the kinds of titles and honorifics to use for the sovereign and the state more generally.  Of course, that is just an assumption based on Aston's understanding of what is, ultimately, a single line.  Still, it is clear that Tayasu was helping to make things happen. Tayasu would eventually go on to become the Minister of the Department of Ceremonies, the Shikibu-sho, and would later serve as a secretary to the Viceroy in Tsukushi—the Dazai Daini.  He would pass away in 710, one year before Omimaro. Before leaving Tayasu behind completely, I would like to point out his family name:  Kose.  The Kose family were one of the families granted the kabane of Ason, or Asaomi.  They had previously been known as the Kose no Omi, and had a long history in the court, claiming descent from the famous Takeuchi no Sukune, legendarily known as the first Oho-omi of Yamato.  Kose no Tokuda had been a supporter of Soga no Iruka, but after the Isshi Incident he supported Naka no Oe and eventually replace Abe no Uchimaro as Sadaijin—Minister of the Left.  Another Kose, Kose no Hito, would also rise in the government, becoming one of two Goshi-daibu made when Prince Ohotomo was appointed Dajodaijin.  The other was Ki no Ushi.  They were both in attendance and counted among the six who swore to protect and support Ohotomo, along with Nakatomi no Kane and others.  So they, too, found themselves on the wrong side of the Jinshin no Ran. In this case, however, it is unclear how much Tayasu was impacted by that.  He may have been the son of Kose no Shitano, brother to Kose no Hito, but the Kose were prolific in the court, with many people of the name.  The family would continue going through the Heian period.  Their fortunes ebbed and flowed, as did so many families, but they would eventually find themselves as Hatamoto to the Tokugawa shogun, so they never actually disappeared. Finally, let's talk about Yakuchi no Wotokashi.  As I mentioned earlier, he is actually one of the first names mentioned in the list of co-conspirators with Prince Ohotsu, suggesting that he outranked others in the group.  Indeed, he is noted as being of Jikikwoshi rank—fourth lower Jiki rank.  The bottom of the Jiki class, but that was still the third class from the top.  However, despite this, very little is actually said about him.  In fact, this is the only instance I could find of the name Yakuchi in the Nihon Shoki, at least in that spelling—there is also a Yakuchi no Uneme, but it is spelled differently and is probably not related.  It is also the only evidence of the name Wotokashi.  That means we don't even see him in the list of names being granted Ason in the first place. It is quite possible that Yakuchi was a name he took later and that he was from another family.  Indeed, there are a couple of traditions around Wotokashi that suggest he was the founder of the Yakuchi family in Shinano.  Indeed, there is a Yakuchi family that comes out of Shinano, near Adzumino.  And Shinano was one of the places that Ohoama had sent people to examine as another site for an alternative capital, and Prince Mino and others had gone to check it out.  So maybe Wotokashi headed out there—or his descendants, anyway—and decided to try and make a go of it.  Proponents of this theory also connect Wotokashi to a line descended from the Soga family, which would certainly explain his prominence.  There are others, however, who claim that the Yakuchi family out of Shinano is actually descended from the Otomo, suggesting that the similarities in the name are just coincidental, which is also possible.  Ultimately, our sources fail us here, and so we just have speculation.  It is possible that even with the pardon, Wotokashi was just never able to regain the trust of the sovereign or his position in court, and so whether he took a hike for the hinterlands or just faded from the picture it is hard to say. With that, let's take a look at just two more courtiers, and what kinds of lives and careers they had at court, at least from what we can see.  These two we've also mentioned in passing:  Fuse no Miushi—whom Aston transliterates as Miaruji—and Ohotomo no Miyuki. Fuse no Miushi and Ohotomo no Miyuki were both mentioned as performing eulogies for Ohoama, though there is more to them than just that.  We'll start with Fuse no Miushi, who is said to have been the son of none other than the Taika era Sadaijin, or Minister of the Left, Abe no Uchimaro.  You may recall that Abe no Uchimaro was the Sadaijin under Karu no Ohokimi, aka Koutoku Tennou, along with the Udaijin, Soga no Kurayamadera.  They were both supporters of Naka no Oe, though much of the Chronicles focus appeared to be more on Kurayamadera than on Uchimaro. We don't know when Miushi was born, nor when he received the name "Fuse", the name by which he is known when we first meet him in the Chronicles.  That family name only shows up two other times in the Chronicles.  Based on other sources, it seems that the Abe family was divided at some point into the Fuse and the Hikida, likely because it became too large and they needed to distinguish the different parts of the family.  It is said that Fuse no Miushi served as a retainer to Ohoama during the Jinshin no Ran.  That, along with his family connections, helped secure him a good place in the government.  By 686, we see him pronouncing the eulogy for Ohoama's funeral on behalf of the Dajokan, the Counil of State.  He was already Jikidaishi, one rank above the standard Jikikwoshi, but still clothed in the same dark red robes.  In 687, he is again pronouncing the eulogy, but this time we are told that his a Nagon, or councilor, a rather prestigious posting that would later get broken up into three different levels:  Dainagon, Chunagon, and Shonagon.  For my Heian fans out there, that last is the same Shonagon as in the name of the famous poet, author, diary-keeper, and all around queen of snark, Sei Shonagon.  By 688, pronouncing the Eulogy seems to have become an annual event for Miushi, only this time he teamed up with Ohotomo no Miyuki.  The two of them seem to have had similar careers, and would, for a time, come up together through the ranks. Ohotomo no Miyuki is said to have been born in 646, though that isn't recorded in the Nihon Shoki and comes from other sources.  The Ohotomo family goes back quite a ways, and we are told that his father was Ohotomo no Nagatoko, who served as Minister of the Right under Naka no Oe.  However, in 672, the Ohotomo, including Miyuki, sided with Ohoama in the Jinshin no ran.  In 675 he was made Tayu while Prince Kurikuma was made Director of Military Affairs.  He then drops out of the narrative until 688, when he is pronouncing the eulogy with Fuse no Miushi. Miushi would go on, two years later, to present the formal congratulations from the court to the Queen upon her ascencion to the throne, and then the following year, 691, both Miushi and Miyuki were granted the rank of Jikidaiichi, the highest rank in the Jiki class, along with 80 households to support them and their families.  This brought both of their stipends up to roughly 300 households each.  Then, in 694, they were both raised in rank again, this time to Shoukwoushi.  Only one rank up, yet they went from the top of the Jiki class to the bottom of the Shou class.  They would have gotten new robes of Bright Purple to indicate their new status, and they each had their stipends increased by the taxes of 200 households each.  At the same time, they were also acknowledged as senior members of their houses.  That means that Miushi was considered the head of the Fuse branch of the Abe family and Miyuki was now acknowledged as the head of the entire Ohotomo family. Two years after that, in 696, they were each given 80 retainers to support them.  Fuse no Miushi is actually mentioned at that time as Abe no Miushi.  That same year, we again see Fujiwara no Fubito show up, but with only 50 retainers.  Fubito would eventually rise to the top of the court food chain, but at this point, it was still in the hands of courtiers like Fuse no Abe no Miushi and Ohotomo no Miyuki. Fuse no Miushi would go on to have an incredible career.  He would become Dainagon and eventually he would become the Udaijin, the Minister of the Right, one of the highest positions anyone could hope to achieve at court. Ohotomo no Miyuki would not make it quite so far.  Like Miushi, he made it to Dainagon, but he died in the first month of 701, just 55 years old.  He had made it to the third rank, and he was posthumously granted the title of Udaijin—the position was vacant at the time—and granted second rank.  His colleague, Abe no Miushi, would go on to take the position only four months later and serve for a couple of years before passing away himself. These two would have worked closely together throughout their careers, and the fact that they were raised in rank and position on similar timelines suggests to me that they ran together in very close circles.  They would have been working in similar positions, at the same levels of the government.  They would have been going to the same parties and partaking in the same banquets and entertainments.   They were no doubt rivals, in a sense, but also equals.  Both families would go on, even as the Fujiwara clan came to dominate the politics of the era, the Ohotomo and Abe would continue to hold power in the court during the Nara period, though eventually it would decline.  The Ohotomo would eventually become just the Tomo, to avoid conflicting with the name of a slater sovereign, and the main house would eventually decline, though branch families would continue to claim descent from the Ohotomo into to the Edo period. The Abe would continue, similarly pushing against the Fujiwara.  The most famous Abe was probably Abe no Seimei, who became known for his skills as an Onmyouji, or master of Yin-yang divination and magic.  The Tsuchimikado branch of the Abe family would continue that tradition, and it would come to largely define the main branch of the family. I hope that gives a bit of an idea of what was going on in the court and the kinds of careers that people were looking at and what was happening.  We cannot get into every single person, but I'm going to try and note some of the more prominent courtiers and what they were doing.  It isn't always clear from the Chronicles what was going on between the various houses, but one can largely assume that the court was highly political.  Different factions were vying for power and position.  Sitting atop all of it, Uno no Sarara would have to perform her own kind of balancing act, doling out rewards and punishments as necessary, and ensuring to place the right people in positions of power and authority.  On the one hand, that ambition was a motivating factor, keeping the people of the court focused on the tasks at hand and ensuring that the court was running smoothly.  On the other hand, too much power in the hands of any one individual could cause them to get ideas that they should have even more.  The main bulwark against this was everyone else in the system—the checks and balances were literally the other court nobles, who weren't going to just let someone  take power unless there was something in it for them as well.  More on that as we watch this reign unfold. But for now, thank you so much for listening and downloading the podcast.  If you like what we are doing, please tell your friends and feel free to rate us wherever you listen to podcasts.  If you feel the need to do more, and want to help us keep this going, we have information about how you can donate on Patreon or through our KoFi site, ko-fi.com/sengokudaimyo, or find the links over at our main website,  SengokuDaimyo.com/Podcast, where we will have some more discussion on topics from this episode. Also, feel free to reach out to our Sengoku Daimyo Facebook page.  You can also email us at the.sengoku.daimyo@gmail.com.  Thank you, also, to Ellen for their work editing the podcast. And that's all for now.  Thank you again, and I'll see you next episode on Sengoku Daimyo's Chronicles of Japan.

January 31st. Scottsdale, Arizona. Two teenagers in fake FedEx uniforms force their way into a home, restrain two adults, and demand access to $66 million in cryptocurrency on instructions from anonymous handlers they'd never met. Investigators log it as the first verified U.S. "wrench attack" of 2026. That same night, roughly ninety minutes south in the Catalina Foothills, Nancy Guthrie is seen alive for the last time.The timing has fueled a theory now backed by former FBI agents and a major blockchain security firm — that Nancy's disappearance is connected to the same organized crypto crime networks carrying out violent home invasions across the globe. The model uses overseas handlers, encrypted communications, and expendable recruits to target wealthy individuals or their family members. Proponents argue Nancy fits the proxy-target pattern and that the operative on her porch looks exactly like the kind of disposable recruit these networks deploy.Tony Brueski walks through the theory with the seriousness it deserves and then puts it through the filter of what the evidence actually shows. The crypto connection that doesn't exist. The camera improvisation that doesn't match a handler briefing. The CertiK classification built on ransom demands already separated from the crime. A theory can sound right and still not hold up — this episode is the difference between the two.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#NancyGuthrie #WrenchAttack #CryptoCrime #Scottsdale #TrueCrimeToday #SavannahGuthrie #FBI #CertiK #TucsonMissing #HomeInvasion

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

This Deep Dive podcast outlines Newtown Township's strategic efforts to modernize its emergency services infrastructure by evaluating the need for new fire and police facilities. The township commissioned professional studies to address significant deficiencies, including hazardous conditions at the current fire station and inadequate space for modern law enforcement operations. Proponents argue that existing buildings, some of which are decades old and repurposed, no longer meet safety standards or the requirements of a growing professional staff. While the Board of Supervisors has moved forward with architectural evaluations and site analysis proposals, the projects have sparked debate regarding budgetary impact and the timing of such large capital investments. Ultimately, the records highlight a critical tension between the necessity for updated public safety hubs and the fiscal concerns of local leadership and residents.

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Co-operative enterprises, which are democratically owned and governed by their workers, customers, or suppliers, have long captured the imagination of activists and social scientists alike. In centering economic democracy and a collectivist-democratic logic, and in embodying a "third way" alternative to profit-maximizing corporations and state-owned enterprises, co-operatives offer the promise of a more sustainable and equitable economy. Despite extensive study of co-operatives' real and imagined benefits, we know little about the conditions under which they achieve the lasting scale needed to be a viable alternative and transform the economy. Under what conditions can co-operatives achieve such scale? And are such conditions present in the United States, where, despite repeated organizing efforts, co-operatives remain exceptionally rare at scale? Through a rigorous comparative-historical analysis of co-operative enterprises in different national contexts, Co-operative Enterprise in Comparative Perspective: Exceptionally Un-American? (Oxford University Press, 2024) by Dr. Jason Spicer seeks to answer these questions. Deploying two different variants of the new institutionalism, Dr. Spicer treats the United States as a central case of comparative failure, as contrasted to three rich democracies where the co-operative business model has been more successful: Finland, France, and New Zealand. The cause of co-operatives' comparative weakness in the United States is identified as reflecting the joint effect of economic liberalism and structural racism. Only in the United States did the co-operative face, in its initial development, two well-entrenched incumbents operating with competing ownership models: the investor-owned firm and the race-based chattel slavery system of ownership of people. Proponents of these two models acted to deprive the co-operative movement of resources, and undermined the solidarity at the co-operative business model's heart, splintering the American co-operative movement in the process. In subsequent waves of co-operative organizing, advocates have never fully succeeded in overcoming these initial obstacles, resulting in a different outcome in the United States, consistent with broader conceptions of the United States as a perennial outlier (i.e., ""American exceptionalism""). In contrast, in the successful cases, advocates were better able to leverage resources to animate a national solidarity and procure the necessary political and economic resources to achieve scale. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. You can find Miranda's interviews on New Books with Miranda Melcher, wherever you get your podcasts.

Influencers, billionaires, even the US health secretary. Proponents of testosterone — as a hormonal therapy or barometer of "masculinity" — are causing men to self-medicate. With nasty consequences.

Title: God's Perfect Justice Text: 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 FCF: We often struggle believing that God's justice is perfect when we suffer for His name. Prop: Because God's justice will punish the guilty and reward the righteous, we must trust in His perfect justice. Scripture Intro: ESV [Slide 1] Turn in your bible to 2 Thessalonians chapter 1. In a moment we'll begin reading from the English Standard Version starting in verse 5. You can follow along in the pew bible or whatever version you prefer. After greeting them and thanking the Lord for their growth and endurance in suffering, Paul wants to attack a couple topics all at once. First, he wants to comfort them in the midst of their persecution and second, he wants to clear up some teaching on the Day of the Lord. For the next two chapters, this will be his objective. This passage is riddled with interpretational difficulties, which could keep us from seeing it's comforting and impactful application. But this gives me a chance to teach a lesson alongside the message of this text. When we come to passages that are difficult to interpret, there are two dangers that we could run into. First, is the danger of ignorance. When you only read 1 study bible or only have one commentary, or only rely on what you think the passage says – then you'll never even know the interpretational options that have been posited down through the church age. The danger here is that the interpretation that you arrived at may be poorly attested for several reasons, or as you engage with others on the passage you might be overcome with pride and dismiss any other option than what you've seen. The second danger is the danger of getting bogged down in the details. We might even get discouraged when we see that there is really no clear-cut way to understand the passage. But it has been my experience that even passages that have no settled interpretation down through the church age – ultimately the basic meaning of the text… what bible interpreters call the telos… remains the same. For the purposes of this sermon, I intend to present a focused interpretation driving to the telos of the passage so we can apply it to our lives today. That is my goal. I will mention options of interpretation and briefly defend why I am interpreting the text in a specific way. But I do not intend to provide the full argument of each view. Now if you are one of those people who just has to know the details, I've done my homework. I've spent hours researching this and most of what I found is not going to make it into this sermon. But I promise, if you ask or come to prayer group and bible study Thursday – We'll talk about it. That being said, we have… A LOT to get to. So please stand with me to give honor to and focus on the Word of God as it is read. Invocation: Perfectly Just God, You are perfect in all your ways. We do not have any trouble appreciating Your delay in justice when it is applied to our account. For had You not been merciful to us while we were yet sinners, we would have been cast from Your presence long ago. Yet when we see Your mercy applied to those who hate us, those who harm us, those who abuse us, those who slander us, or even those who spit on your laws and abuse others, we often are tempted to doubt that Your justice is perfect. Forgive us this treachery Lord. May we believe that Your justice is perfect. May we hope and trust in it. And if there are those who are not Your children here today, may You give them a new heart to fear Your justice and repent and believe on Your Son. Meet with us today Lord, and assure us of Your perfect justice. We pray this In Jesus' name, amen. Transition: [Slide 2] “Without justice, what are kingdoms but great banditries?” Augustine of Hippo “Justice always makes mercy dumb when sin has made the sinner deaf.” Thomas Brooks “The bible insists that God is entirely just, and that therefore ultimately justice will be done and will be seen to be done.” D.A. Carson “Belief in a just God is not optional.” Jay Poppinga “Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.” Thomas Jefferson Let these thoughts prepare you for the exposition of the text this morning. I.) God will repay those who harm us and give us rest when Christ is revealed, so we must trust His righteous justice. (5-7) a. [Slide 4] 5 - This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, i. Right off the bat we have an interpretational issue. ii. Paul begins this sentence with the word “evidence.” The words, “this is” have been added by the ESV primarily to help it feel more natural in English. iii. So, what is the evidence of the righteous judgement of God? iv. Well, before we address that, we should probably try to understand what God's righteous judgment is, since figuring that out will help us determine what could be the evidence for it. v. Even a cursory reading of this text forces us to see God's righteous judgment as His holy and right application of justice, both in meting out judgment to the wicked and in rewarding the righteous. vi. But perhaps even more correctly, we might say that Paul is talking about God's delayed but assured righting and reordering of the world to the way it should be. vii. So now that we understand what God's righteous judgment is… let's look at the options for what the evidence of it could be… viii. There are two different interpretations. 1. The biggest category is that the evidence is something that the apostle has already said. This actually divides into four different views, really debating on how far we go backward. 2. The second option is that Paul is not referring to something that has been said but is about to present the evidence of God's reordering of the world to the way it should be. 3. In my opinion, the only real option that actually gives evidence that God is reordering the world to be as it should is that the Thessalonians, former pagans and idol worshippers, are growing abundantly and enduring suffering. This proves that God is in the process of reordering the world. ix. But what will be the end of that process for the Thessalonians? They might be wondering this because they are currently enduring a lot of persecution for their faith. What is God's plan for justice for them? b. [Slide 5] that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, i. God's reordering of the world to reward the righteous and to punish the wicked has the outcome of the Thessalonians being counted worthy of the Kingdom of God. ii. God has begun a process which He will complete. He has not forgotten them just because He is delaying justice upon those who are afflicting them. iii. God doesn't begin people on the road to Christlikeness whom He does not intend to finish. He will perfect them and transfer them into His Kingdom. A Kingdom… c. [Slide 6] for which you are also suffering— i. They are enduring suffering primarily because they have declared their loyalty to Christ and His Kingdom. ii. Paul recognizes this and wants to assure the Thessalonians that God's justice is not doubtful because they are suffering. iii. The Day of the Lord has not already happened, and those opposing them won't get away with it. iv. No, they haven't yet gotten their reward for following Him. v. But their growth and endurance is the evidence they should look to that God who began a good work in them, will complete it. vi. Jesus Himself said that those who endure suffering for His sake are blessed indeed. vii. And Paul assures the Thessalonians that they are indeed blessed. So blessed, that they will be counted worthy of the Kingdom of God for which they suffer. d. [Slide 7] 6 - since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, i. Paul begins this next verse with the word “Since.” ii. This poses a challenge for us because it is the beginning of an “if…then” statement but Paul never actually gives us the “then.” iii. I would encourage us to think that the then has already been stated. iv. Paul's “then” is the fact that God is in the process of reordering the world with the assured outcome that the Thessalonians will be counted worthy of the kingdom they are suffering for, which is evidenced by their growth and endurance in faith and love. So, what must be true for all this to be the case? v. Paul points to the Old Testament teaching of retribution. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. vi. Now we've seen, even in Paul's last letter, that it is inappropriate for the church to have this philosophy. We must return good for evil. We must forgive. We must love our enemy. We must turn the other cheek. vii. But God… God is a different story. viii. God is the ultimate keeper of the teaching of retribution. He will take what has been taken. He will give what has been given. He will punish and reward exactly what has been earned. No more and no less. And He alone is in a position to do this perfectly. ix. Since God sees justice this way – His justice is perfect, and He won't ignore the fact that they suffer for His Kingdom. x. But what else is true that assures the outcome of verse 5? e. [Slide 8] 7 - and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels i. In the law of retribution God also rewards what has been earned. ii. The reward for the Thessalonians is that they are counted worthy of the Kingdom. Which is the outcome of God setting things right as evidenced by their lives being transformed. iii. And Paul actually lumps himself and Silas and Timothy in this too. They too will get relief. They will be given rest by God. iv. But we see the timetable for this, clearly spelled out. v. When? When will God finally afflict those who are afflicting His people and give rest to the afflicted? When? vi. When the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels. vii. When Jesus returns, that will be when the world is finally put to order. That will be when all things will be set right. viii. This then, is clear indication that the Day of the Lord… has not happened yet. Which is Paul's thrust all the way through chapters 1 and 2. ix. The reason they are still experiencing this affliction and persecution… is not because the Day of the Lord has come… instead it is because the Day of the Lord has not yet come. f. [Slide 9] Summary of the Point: Paul's point here is really to provide encouragement and assurances to the Thessalonian church. He wants them to understand that their suffering is not something that slipped by the Lord, it isn't something the Lord can do nothing about, and it isn't something the Lord is ambivalent toward. God's justice is right, holy, multifaceted, and executed in His perfect timing. He will repay those who harm His people and He will give His people rest when Christ is revealed. Why? Because His justice is right and good. Indeed, God has already begun His reordering of the world and the evidence is in our hearts growing to be more like Him and enduring through suffering for His name. So, we must trust His perfect justice. Its extent and its timing. He is good and He is just. Transition: [Slide 10 (blank)] Paul begins with the Thessalonians personally as a church, but he wishes to zoom out and show the greater principle of the Lord's Justice and reordering the whole world. II.) God will punish the wicked and reward the righteous when Christ is revealed, so we must trust His righteous justice. (8-10) a. [Slide 11] 8 - in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. i. Here we see our second and third interpretational issue in the first three words of verse 8. ii. Since there are Old Testament prophesies concerning the Day of the Lord which suggest that the vengeance of Yahweh comes in flaming fire, I see the fire as part of His vengeance. This actually solves both the interpretational issues in one fell swoop. iii. So, what is Paul saying? iv. Paul now is addressing all of humanity under the law of retribution. All the wicked and all the righteous will be judged at the coming of Christ. v. First, Paul focuses on the wicked. Jesus will come with a flaming fire to repay and punish a certain group of people. vi. Some commentators see two groups of people here, but really there is just one. vii. Over the next three verses Paul will have a triad of couplets which are designed in parallelism to explain who or what is happening. viii. The group whom the Lord will inflict vengeance on and repay for their wickedness is those who do not know God and those who have not obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ. ix. Jesus said that there is no way to the Father but through Him. He also said that if you have seen Him, you have seen the Father. Jesus' words are very clear and we noticed this in Acts as well. The chokepoint for knowing Yahweh… is through believing on Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. x. But what do we do with this phrase, obey the gospel? Isn't the gospel by grace, through faith, in Christ and not of works? If we are obeying the gospel, doesn't that mean we are earning it somehow? xi. [Slide 12] Paul addresses this in Romans 10:16. xii. Paul, speaking of the hope for salvation for the Jews, says this… “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord who has believed what he has heard from us?” So, faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” xiii. So, we see here very clearly that to not obey the gospel is to not believe the word of Christ as communicated from Christ to His apostles. xiv. And the gospel does demand belief or unbelief from every single man, woman, and child. You cannot hear the gospel and leave undecided. Why? Because even faith is a gift of God. The gospel is either embraced or it is rejected. There is no third option. xv. All who do not believe the gospel and submit to Christ as their Savior and their Lord, do not know God, and all will fall to the flaming fire of Christ's vengeance. xvi. But what will be the outcome of the flaming fire punishment? Is this just speaking of physical death? b. [Slide 13] 9 - They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, i. This verse is incredibly important to a proper understanding of the fate of the unbeliever. IT IS HUGE! ii. To help us I've broken the verse in to two parts so we can get everything out of it we need to. iii. There is a movement growing in Christendom, affecting even those in our circles of theology. iv. It is the belief in annihilationism. This belief is that the punishment that God gives to unbelievers is designed to burn away their sin debt to the extent that when it is finally paid, they would be consumed and cease to exist. v. They cite God's love and mercy and show how many passages that refer to this judgment reference fires burning for eternity but not necessarily those who are in those fires being consumed eternally. vi. This verse is an absolute wrecking ball to that belief. vii. Let's break this down word by word. 1. They – This is the subject of the sentence. Those who do not know God because they have not obeyed the gospel. 2. Will suffer – This is a future active indicative verb, there is no suggestion of conditionality here, meaning it isn't uncertain or possible only when certain conditions are met. To suffer means to pay, to experience, to atone for or to endure. 3. destruction – This is not the next word in the English sentence but this is the direct object. This is what they will suffer or endure. Destruction here means ruin, corruption, or death. I do grant that ruin, corruption, and death, at least as we know it, all end. A think cannot be in the process of ruining forever. Eventually it comes to ruin. I grant this… but let's keep going. 4. The punishment – This is an adverbial accusative. Meaning it modifies the verb to suffer while also applying to the direct object. What are they suffering? A certain kind of destruction. What kind? Punishment means: Penalty, or the consequences of their actions. A corruption, ruin, or death that is just or right. It is fitting. They suffer what they have earned. 5. Eternal – This is an adjective, meaning it modifies a noun. Eternal modifies the direct object, destruction in this sentence. Eternal means without end, perpetual, everlasting, or for an age. 6. Proponents of the annihilationist view suggest that the meaning “for an age” should be taken here and this supports their view. However, nothing in scripture indicates to us that the next age ever ends. In fact, the scripture seems to tell us that the next age is forever. Which doesn't actually help prove their case. 7. So, the ruin they suffer, the death they experience, the corruption they endure… is everlasting or perpetual or for the entire duration of the next age which is unending. 8. Meaning what? 9. Those who do not obey the gospel and know God, will endure everlasting death as the righteous consequence of their unbelief. Even though we see death as an end… the adjective “everlasting” means by definition that it does not end. 10. Therefore, they will not be annihilated. 11. When we've been there 10,000 years bright shining as the sun… they will have been there 10,000 years no closer to paying for what they've done. 12. And remember how Paul said that God considers the teaching of retribution to be just… if indeed God requires eternal death from those who are unbelievers, that means that sin in general, especially the sin of rejecting Christ, is a sin that cannot ever be paid by humans. Even if they were given an eternal age to do so. 13. This should sharpen our understanding of God's perspective of sin. viii. But now Paul adds another phrase that is just as important for us to dissect. And it is still in verse 9. ix. I told ya – HUGE VERSE. c. [Slide 14] away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, i. First, observe that this is another couplet. The presence of the Lord and the glory of His might are parallel in their structure. The glory of His might is necessarily part of and an expression of His presence. ii. But again, we see another interpretational difficulty. iii. What is meant by “away from.” iv. There are three basic options but in a sense all of these say essentially the same thing. v. In my opinion what makes the most sense given the rest of the context of the New Testament, is that eternal death and being separated eternally from the presence of God are in essence the same thing. vi. However, arriving at this conclusion poses a small dilemma for us. vii. We often confess that God is omnipresent. What does that mean? viii. Well, the prefix omni means all and the suffix, present, means at a particular place. When we combine those thoughts, we get the idea that God is everywhere. And this also includes that God is not only every place but every place at every time. God is everywhere and everywhen. ix. God's presence then is not able to be limited by any created limitation. Time, Space, Matter- were all created by God and cannot limit His presence. x. This is all well and good – but what do we make of this verse? xi. If unbelievers suffer the penalty of eternal destruction which is being “away” from the presence of the Lord and the glory of His might, where and when in creation is God not present? xii. Does this mean that God is not truly omnipresent? xiii. No. It doesn't. There are two clues in this verse that help us here. xiv. First, and less obvious, is the parallel phrase “and from the glory of His strength,” 1. Paul's inclusion of this phrase requires us to think of God in parts and pieces. He is a unified God and is One, but the unbeliever is specifically away from an aspect of God's character. Specifically, His glorious strength. 2. Meaning what? 3. He won't rescue them. God will never choose to use His strength to save them. 4. Well, how could He if He isn't present with them? 5. Exactly… xv. [Slide 15] But the best clue is actually the word translated here “presence.” xvi. But this word is not merely being in the same place. Instead, this word is, being in front of or face-presence. 1. Consider this, if you walk in the break room at your job and 1 person is facing the coffee machine getting coffee and another person is staring at some posters on the wall, and another is playing on their phone – would you conclude as you walked in that these co-workers were enjoying each other's company? 2. No. Of course not. Its possible they hate each other and are trying hard to ignore each other. 3. If you walked in and they were all sitting around a circle table looking at each other… before you even knew if they were talking to each other, you'd assume some level of closeness or comradery. xvii. Paul is not saying that the unbeliever will be cast away from the spatial presence of God. For God is everywhere. As David says, if I make my bed in hell, you are there. xviii. Instead, Paul is saying that the KIND of God's presence is radically different than the presence He gives to His elect. More on that in a moment. xix. His presence to them is also now, tragically, different than the kind of presence He had for them on earth. xx. God sends rain upon the just and the unjust. He causes the sun to shine on the wicked and the righteous. God's presence in the lives of the unbeliever in this life is one of relative closeness. Paul told the Athenians at the Areopagus that the Lord is not far off. xxi. But after the Lord Jesus returns, part of the flaming fire, part of the eternal destruction, is being cast away from the benevolent and powerful presence of God. xxii. In other words, God is still present. But He limits His presence there. It is not a merciful presence. It is not a saving presence. It is, instead, only a presence of justice and wrath. xxiii. So, we've seen the fate of the wicked. What about the fate of the righteous? What is their rest? d. [Slide 16] 10 - when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed. i. This is the third couplet Paul introduces in as many verses. Therefore, we should not assume that the saints and the believers are two different groups but just like those who disobey the gospel are the same as those who do not know God, and just as the glory of God's might is an expression of His presence, so also saying “all who have believed” is another way of describing Christ's holy ones. ii. Notice too here that eternal death is to be cast away from the face-presence of God and His saving power… while eternal life is… what? What is the “rest” of the believer? iii. John 17:3 says that eternal life is to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. iv. Can you know Christ and God better than when you see Him face to face? So, what is eternal life? v. It is Christ. It is seeing Christ face to face. vi. Indeed, the glory of Christ is on display in the very presence of His saints. They glorify Him. All those who believed on Him will marvel at Him on that day. vii. And in that glory and marveling, they will know eternal life. They will know eternal rest in His presence. And as Paul said in the previous letter, they will never be apart from Him ever again. viii. Then notice that Paul returns to the Thessalonians. He's been speaking in broad terms since verse 8. But He brings it all the way back to them… ix. Paul actually interrupts his thought to tell them “and that is you! You believed! You will join us there too!” When? x. On that day. On the day of the Lord when Jesus is revealed from heaven. e. [Slide 17] Summary of the Point: So, Paul's second point is an expansion of His first point. God will punish the wicked and reward the righteous when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven. And if this is true, then God's judgments are indeed just and he will count the Thessalonians worthy of that kingdom because they are showing the evidence that He is already reordering their lives by their growth in faith and love and endurance through suffering for His kingdom. So, what must we do? We must trust that the justice of the Lord is right. We must comfort, hope, and even fear that He will give to every man what they have earned on that great and terrible Day of the Lord. Conclusion: So, what have we learned today CBC that refines our beliefs and guides how we live? Basics of Faith and Practice: [Slide 18] Paul expresses his pastoral care for the Thessalonian church who though growing leaps and bounds in their faith, are experiencing increased persecution because of it. In his desire to comfort them and address their concerns about the Day of the Lord, he explains to them that their growth is evidence that God is reordering the world and will count them worthy of His kingdom. Afterall, if God considers the law of retribution to be right, he will repay those who afflict them and give them rest. In fact, God considers the law of retribution right to such a degree, that He will judge all men and rightly reward them for what they have done whether punishment for wickedness or reward for righteousness. He will do this at the Day of the Lord and the revelation of Christ from heaven. In that sense then, Paul challenges the Thessalonians to trust in the perfect justice of God. Not just in who He gives what, but also in His timing of that justice. We too must trust in the perfect justice of God. But what does it mean to trust in His justice? What does this passage mean for us? 1.) [Slide 19] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm that the justice of God is perfect. a. As I mentioned in the opening prayer, we usually have no complaints about God's justice when it is delayed in mercy for us. b. Isn't that interesting? c. When I am the sinner who has wronged another… when I am the wretch who has fallen into sin again and must repent and turn back to the Lord… d. I have no complaints about the mercy of God to delay justice for me. e. When we were first converted to Christ, we had no complaints about the delayed merciful justice of God so that He could lavish grace upon us to call us to Himself through faith in Christ. f. Typically, the only time we have complaints about the justice of God, is when we are the ones being abused and harmed by others. When we are being afflicted or persecuted – that is when we wonder if God is ever going to do something. g. In this regard, we are like little children. Trust me I know. h. I know what it is like to be the one who is the judge and who is responsible to dole out justice and attempt to set things in order the way they should be. i. But I also have two little sinners in my home who are constantly complaining about how I implement justice. j. Of course, my justice is NOT perfect. So, maybe they have something to complain about. k. But God's justice… l. Oh friends. m. His Justice is perfect. Not only in its timing but also in its extent. God will not punish the righteous to the same extent as the wicked. n. And don't forget that on the other side of mercy is wrath. God mercifully permitting others to afflict us or persecute us is also storing up wrath for themselves on the day of judgement. o. Though God defers justice, He never cancels it. Though God transfers justice, He never skips it. p. Even our sins were not canceled or skipped. Our sins were paid for. The suffering of eternal death… was paid for at the cross by Christ. Christ could pay the eternal death for His people because He was God. And God only accepted His payment because He was human. q. God is always Just. And His Justice is always perfect. 2.) [Slide 20] Mind Transformation: “What truth must we believe from this text?” or “What might we not naturally believe that we must believe because of what this text has said?” We must affirm our growth in faith, love and endurance through suffering are evidences of God's reordering of the world. a. God's justice is also a long game. b. If we take the idea of Justice and keep ourselves from defining it too narrowly as only punishment, we can see that God's justice is actually the reordering and righting of a world gone topsy turvey. c. In that sense, when the Lord grows us in His grace to deepen our faith and knowledge of Christ and expand our love for one another, and produce steadfastness and endurance through trials, afflictions, and persecutions… d. When God does this in us and we see genuine spiritual growth in our lives – this is the evidence that God is truly and perfectly just. e. Why? f. Because He is reordering… you. g. How are we described prior to conversion? h. We are described as dead in sin, lost, lame and blind. i. But now we are not only alive but growing, we have been found, we are walking in a new life, and we have seen the light. j. God brings order to our chaos. k. God's justice is really nothing more than this. l. God will have His creation ordered, one way or another. m. One way or another all people will kneel before Christ and confess that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father. n. But my friend, if He is not doing this in your life today… If he is not reordering you… today… o. If God is, for now, showing you mercy and allowing you to sin and to reject Him… 3.) [Slide 21] Refutation: “What lies must we cast down” or “What do we naturally believe, or have been taught to believe, that this passage shows is false?” We must deny that God's delay in justice implies His approval. a. Be warned friends. b. Be warned straying Christian. Be warned Christian in name only. Be warned unbeliever. c. God's permittance of your sin… is not approval. It is mercy. d. Mercy is when you do not get what you have earned. e. What have we earned by sinning against a holy God? f. What is sin? g. Sin is any lack of conformity to or breaking of the law of God. Sin is also idolatry which is rejecting or ignoring God in the world He created and instead worshipping something He created. h. How should sin be dealt with? i. If I created a pot for holding water and it no longer held water… If I designed an app to calculate tips and it always calculated it wrong… If I wrote a book about fixing toilets that was completely false and outdated – what should I do with the things I created? j. Since they aren't good for anything … They are only good for garbage. k. The rightful reaction God should have toward us in sin is to immediately and eternally punish us with death. l. God's mercy is allowing people to sin and even endure in sin without immediately casting them into the lake of fire. m. He withholds that justice – not because He approves of what we are doing, but because He is merciful. n. Don't be fooled that what you can get away with is somehow ok with God. o. We have a culture built on the delusion that God permits things BECAUSE He is loving and accepting. This is a lie. God permits things in mercy, and also in wrath. p. God did not destroy the Amorites until what… until their sins earned their destruction. q. Sometimes God, mercifully, allows us to sin, so that we EARN our destruction. r. That is why I say mercy and wrath are a two-sided coin. They go hand in hand. s. Sometimes, especially for God's people, mercy is NOT letting us get away with something sinful. t. The point is… God's delay in Justice isn't always what it seems. We don't know the mind of God. u. So, what should we do? 4.) [Slide 22] Exhortation: “What actions should we take?” or “What is this passage specifically commanding us to do that we don't naturally do or aren't currently doing?” As believers, we must trust every aspect of God's perfect justice. a. God has given us explicit promises and commands that we should trust and follow – regardless of what is happening around us or in us. b. We are commanded to walk worthy of the calling we've been given. c. My friends… God's justice is always perfect. So, we should trust that HE WILL SORT IT OUT. d. Let's not worry about who is getting away with something or who is hiding something. e. This is a general caution to all those conspiracy theorists out there. f. Listen, I don't really care if you believe in conspiracies. I don't really care if you think that there is a secret world government steeped in devil worship and paganism. Because you know what – you might be right! g. But don't spend a lot of time worrying, fretting, or mobilizing to fight against it. Why? h. God's justice is perfect. How are YOU going to improve on it? Exactly? i. What DOES God require of you? Live righteously, humbly, and be merciful. Grow in faith, in love for one another, and endure trials and hardships with dependance on Christ. j. And then couple this holy living with gospel witness. Make disciples. k. This job description of the church as a whole is able to be applied both in a society built on the bible and a society that worships Satan and everything in between. l. God is reordering YOU. He is executing His justice on YOU. And that is all the evidence you need to trust that He will reorder the whole world when the Lord Jesus returns. m. Be what God has called you to be and trust that God will sort out who gets what… at the end of the age. n. But remember genuine Christ follower… 5.) [Slide 23] Comfort: “What comfort can we find here?” or “What peace does the Lord promise us in light of this passage of scripture?” God will reward His people with eternal life, seeing Christ face to face and knowing Him. a. Eternal life is knowing God and His Son. b. In many ways that begins today. For today you can know God and His Son through the gospel and His revealed Word. c. But in another way, real and true knowledge of God and His Christ happens especially, and fully when we see Him face to face. d. John says that when we see Him, we will be like Him. e. Paul says when we see Him He will be glorified in us as we marvel at His splendor. And we will always be with Him from that day forward. f. Oh Christian… one day, you will know justice. All will be right. And because of what Christ has done, you will be rewarded with His glorious and wonderful presence. g. That is what that New Kingdom is all about. God living among His people… forever. h. What a comfort. Just a few more weary days… i. But what if you are a Christian in name only? What if you are an unbeliever? It is just a few more empty days… until what? 6.) [Slide 24] Evangelism: “What about this text points us to Jesus Christ, the gospel, and how we are restored?” God will punish unbelievers with eternal death away from His merciful and saving presence. a. Friends, I don't want you to suffer eternal punishment. Why? b. Not because God is a big meanie who will dole it out. Not because God is unjust to require eternal punishment for sin. Not because God sacrifices Love in order to punish. c. God is merciful, just, and love and will still punish unbelievers with eternal death. And His doing so is still merciful, loving, and just. d. Why don't I want you to suffer eternal punishment? e. Because that was my fate too. f. I was on my way to destruction too. With each sin, I ran hastily and greedily to the fires of hell, tripping over God's mercy and correction, until finally His grace stopped me in my tracks and showed me His love for me. g. God will punish unbelievers with eternal death. h. Every human being's life has been filled, whether they recognize it or not, with the mercy and saving power of God all around them. God gives common grace to all men and allows them to live in His creation – even if they reject or ignore Him. i. But one day He will remove that merciful and saving presence and will only surround the wicked with His Just and wrathful presence. j. My friends, let today be the day of your salvation. If your heart is stirred to fear and shame… If you are afraid of the just punishment of God and ashamed of your sin against Him… If you recognize all that Christ did for you by taking your punishment and providing your righteousness… then I implore you to cry out to Him in faith. k. Confess that He is Lord, believe He is the risen Savior, appeal to Him in trust and dependance… And you will know the justice of God as He begins to reorder your life to fit His Kingdom. l. It is not too late. m. Talk to an Elder after the service, even before I am finished. Talk to an Elder if you need to obey the gospel. [Slide 25 (end)] Let me close in a prayer by the reformer Myles Coverdale. An English reformer who helped William Tyndale translate the bible into English and actually produced the first printed and complete English translation of the bible called, The Coverdale Bible. O merciful God, preserve our hearts from pride, conceit, and shameful covetousness. Give us grace to abide in your holy work assignment, and to be thankful for your grace. As we keep in mind how easy it is to fall, help us to walk in your fear before you. For if we stand, we must be careful not to fall, and not look down on those who as yet do not stand. Help us to continue in your grace, for we have nothing that we did not receive from you. And if, in weakness, we do fall, put your hand under us, Lord. Do not let us despair in sin, but cause us with repentance and sorrow for our offense to turn back to you. Keep us from despair and from betraying your dearly beloved Son. You send him to us through your gospel. And without him we have no safeguard, but only eternal death and damnation. Keep us from that, good Lord! For your mercies' sake. We pray this in Jesus' name, Amen. Benediction: May He Who is your light, your strength, your song and cornerstone, Prepare you for the fiercest drought and storm; Quiet your fears and cease your strivings; That you may know the heights of His love And the depths of His peace. Until we meet again, Grace and Peace to you.

11. The Rise and Philosophical Roots of Post-Liberalism Guest: Thomas Howes Summary: This Catholic-led movement critiques modern constitutional democracy and advocates for a strong executive to enforce social conservatism. Proponents seek to empower personal sovereigns and loyalist bureaucracies, drawing inspiration from pre-revolutionary European governance models. 111866

Imagine a blueprint unfolding in Washington, not on paper, but through executive orders reshaping America's government. Project 2025, spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, aimed to dismantle the administrative state and restore family-centered policies, as stated in its Mandate for Leadership: "go to work on Day One to deconstruct the administrative state."[3][8]Fast forward to February 2026, and the Center for Progressive Reform reports the Trump administration has initiated or completed 53 percent of its domestic agenda—283 out of 532 actions across 20 agencies.[2] This isn't theory; it's action. Take health care: Project 2025 proposes redefining the Department of Health and Human Services as the "Department of Life," rejecting abortion as healthcare and directing the FDA to revoke mifepristone approval while urging the DOJ to prosecute doctors and women, even in miscarriages.[1] Echoing this, a November 2025 executive order, "Fostering the Future for American Children and Families," tasks HHS with modernizing child welfare using AI for caregiver recruitment and partnering with faith-based groups.[6]Education faces upheaval too. The plan calls for eliminating the Department of Education, privatizing student loans—potentially hiking costs for working families—and axing Head Start, which serves 833,000 low-income kids.[3] It also ends Public Service Loan Forgiveness and income-driven repayment.[3] Labor proposals strike harder, banning public sector unions and repealing Davis-Bacon wage rules to ease union decertification.[3]Immigration? Mass deportations loom, shifting immigrant children from HHS to enforcement-focused DHS, ending birthright citizenship, and deploying military for border ops.[1][4] A March 2026 order removes housing barriers by slashing EPA permitting and energy mandates, prioritizing affordability but critics say at environmental cost.[6]Experts warn of authoritarian drift. The ACLU highlights risks to voting access, surveillance, and protests, while LULAC notes state tests like Texas abortion laws preview national criminalization.[1][4][7] Proponents see sovereignty restored; detractors, civil rights eroded.As midterms approach, trackers like Project2025.observer signal more milestones ahead.[9] Will Congress curb or codify these shifts? The story's just beginning.Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AIThis episode includes AI-generated content.

Imagine a blueprint so ambitious it aims to reshape America's government from the ground up, drawn by conservative architects dreaming of a bolder executive branch. That's Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's 920-page Mandate for Leadership, unveiled in 2023 as a roadmap for a potential Republican presidency. According to the Heritage Foundation's own document, it rests on four pillars: restoring the family as society's centerpiece, dismantling the administrative state, defending sovereignty and borders, and securing individual rights.Fast forward to 2026, and the plan is no longer theory. The Center for Progressive Reform's February 2026 tracker reveals the Trump administration has initiated or completed 53 percent of its domestic policy agenda—283 out of 532 actions across 20 agencies. Wall Street Journal analysis notes over half of Trump's executive orders on immigration and DEI align with Project 2025, despite his campaign disavowals, with key contributors now in his orbit.At its core, the project seeks to consolidate presidential power by purging civil service protections and firing independent agency heads. Concrete examples abound: It calls for abolishing the Department of Education to boost school choice, eliminating Head Start for 833,000 low-income kids, and privatizing student loans, as detailed in the Mandate. Health reforms target Medicare, pushing privatization via Medicare Advantage defaults and repealing insulin caps, per the American Progress FAQ. Environmentally, it proposes disbanding the EPA, slashing climate research, and selling public lands.Proponents argue this "deconstructs the administrative state" for efficiency, quoting the Mandate's vow to eliminate "critical race theory and other radical ideologies." Critics, like the ACLU, warn of eroded checks and balances, mass deportations ending birthright citizenship, and attacks on unions by scrapping overtime and public sector protections.These threads weave a tapestry of ambition: from border walls and military-led raids, per LULAC's update, to global ripples undermining gender equality, as RFSU reports. Experts at the Center for Progressive Reform highlight risks to democracy, yet backers see liberation from bureaucracy.Looking ahead, trackers from NAACP LDF and Project 2025 Observer signal intensifying scrutiny through 2026 midterms. Will implementation accelerate or face court pushback? The coming months hold pivotal tests.Thanks for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AIThis episode includes AI-generated content.

Imagine a blueprint so ambitious it aims to reshape America's government from the ground up. That's Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's comprehensive plan, as detailed in its 900-page Mandate for Leadership, to dismantle what it calls the administrative state and restore family-centered policies on day one of a conservative presidency.[9]Launched before the 2024 election, the project distanced itself from candidate Trump, but his second term has brought striking alignments. According to the Wall Street Journal, more than half of Trump's early executive orders on immigration and DEI match Project 2025 recommendations, with key architects now in his administration.[1] The Center for Progressive Reform's February 2026 tracker reveals the administration has initiated or completed 53 percent of its domestic agenda—283 of 532 actions across 20 agencies.[3]Core goals shine through concrete proposals. Project 2025 urges redefining the Department of Health and Human Services as the Department of Life, rejecting abortion as healthcare and directing the FDA to revoke mifepristone approval while tasking the DOJ with prosecuting violators, even in miscarriages.[2] In education, it calls for dismantling the Department of Education to boost school choice, privatizing student loans—which the League of United Latin American Citizens warns would hike costs and widen economic gaps—and eliminating Head Start for 833,000 low-income kids.[2][4]Immigration reforms propose mass deportations, shifting immigrant children from HHS welfare to DHS enforcement, ending birthright citizenship, and deploying military for border ops, per the ACLU's analysis.[5] Labor faces attacks too: ending card-check unions, repealing Davis-Bacon wages, and defunding overtime for 4.3 million workers, as Democracy Forward outlines.[4][7]Experts like the NAACP Legal Defense Fund highlight civil rights rollbacks, from surveilling protesters to censoring classroom discussions on race and gender.[8] Proponents frame it as defending sovereignty; critics, including LULAC, see state-level tests in Texas paving an authoritarian path.[2]These threads weave a vision of centralized presidential power, slashing agencies like Homeland Security and privatizing Medicare via vouchers.[6] As midterms loom, watch congressional battles over unions and grants—pivotal decision points ahead.Thanks for tuning in, listeners. Come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AIThis episode includes AI-generated content.

Taylor talks with featured advocate Bronwyn Brightener and Director Ben Wolf of the documentary Changing Lanes about the contested Road Diet on McGuiness Boulevard in Greenpoint, Brooklyn https://www.changinglanesdoc.com/about (2:15). Eric Brightwell, host of the Nobody Drives in LA podcast, at the Changing Lanes screening https://ericbrightwell.com/nobody-drives-in-la/ (7:19). A concerned listener and bike safety designer/advocate, Abe a.k.a. Sundance, offers his “lane saber,” a light-up safety flag/space bar, for Taylor's May trip up Highway 1 https://bsky.app/profile/sundance.bikesky.social (9:18). The second installment of a series on Gloria Ines getting a bike. Taylor and Gloria decide that Taylor will give her a bike to fix up at a bike co-op, the Los Angeles Bike Oven https://bike-oven.com (15:38). Listener Email: Solidarity for Taylor's ride through Minneapolis from Brett McGraw, and two from Bluesky: another biker who wears backpacks, Nietifa Van Suiker, and another vote for more ebike power from BirdmanStevens (18:38). News: Cycling Data is now available on Google Earth https://medium.com/@googleearth/now-available-cycling-data-on-google-earth-1c12955d6f94, Prague has built a bridge just for cyclists, pedestrians, trams and buses https://www.ebikemag.eu/prague-opens-dvorecky-bridge-the-first-new-vltava-crossing-in-twelve-years/, Cologne will also rebuild a bridge just for bicycles and trams https://www.ksta.de/koeln/muelheimer-bruecke-koelner-ob-entmachtet-verkehrsdezernenten-5-1194350, and NYC Mayor Mamdani announces an immediate overhaul for cyclists and pedestrians on the Brooklyn Bridge https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2026/03/27/mamdani-will-upgrade-brooklyn-bridge-manhattan-side-entrance-by-june(20:51). In Northampton, Massachusetts, complete streets opponents are claiming that fixing the unsafe downtown streets will hurt the town's kids by taking money from schools. Proponents of the Picture Main Street redesign say most of the money comes from a Department of Transportation grant, not the city. Also, where are kids supposed to go after school? Math teacher Ray Paquette, a bike rider who's an active member of the Northampton teacher's union, NASE, along with Northampton Strong Towns members Jen Nery and Benjamin Spencer (22:38). New York City's Upper West Side will get a two-way protected bike lane, converting four lanes of traffic to two, thanks to Mayor Mamdani's Department of Transportation https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2026/04/14/east-side-west-side-mamdanis-dot-will-transform-72nd-street-with-protected-bike-lane-bus-improvements. Taylor talks to Carl Mahaney, Director of Streetopia Upper West Side https://www.streetopia.city/reimagining-w72 (39:38). Why is CicLAvia, Los Angeles' open streets event, so great? CicLAvia Chief Strategist Tafarai Bayne contextualizes the next event, on LA's West Side April 26 https://www.ciclavia.org/ciclavia_west_la26 (54:14).

The President's pick to lead the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, faces the Senate Banking Committee today. A former Fed Governor and Morgan Stanley VP, Warsh is expected to signal a shift toward rate cuts and structural reform. However, his path to confirmation is not yet certain. FOX Business White House Correspondent Edward Lawrence joins the Rundown from the front lawn of the White House to break down the political firestorm surrounding the hearing, including why some are threatening to block the nomination until the DOJ drops its investigation into current Chair Jerome Powell. Plus, an update on the Trump administration's strategy for "legal" tariffs and whether the U.S. can avoid long-term economic damage from Middle East supply disruptions. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act remains a focal point of intense debate within Congress, as lawmakers have until the end of the month to extend the provision, which was put in place after the 9/11 terror attacks. Proponents argue that FISA is necessary to prevent future attacks, but critics contend that its allowance of warrantless surveillance violates Americans' privacy. Michael Allen, who served as a special assistant to President George W. Bush, joins us to discuss why this tool is essential for thwarting global terrorist plots and evolving cyber threats. PLUS, commentary by David Marcus, columnist for FOX News Digital.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The President's pick to lead the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, faces the Senate Banking Committee today. A former Fed Governor and Morgan Stanley VP, Warsh is expected to signal a shift toward rate cuts and structural reform. However, his path to confirmation is not yet certain. FOX Business White House Correspondent Edward Lawrence joins the Rundown from the front lawn of the White House to break down the political firestorm surrounding the hearing, including why some are threatening to block the nomination until the DOJ drops its investigation into current Chair Jerome Powell. Plus, an update on the Trump administration's strategy for "legal" tariffs and whether the U.S. can avoid long-term economic damage from Middle East supply disruptions. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act remains a focal point of intense debate within Congress, as lawmakers have until the end of the month to extend the provision, which was put in place after the 9/11 terror attacks. Proponents argue that FISA is necessary to prevent future attacks, but critics contend that its allowance of warrantless surveillance violates Americans' privacy. Michael Allen, who served as a special assistant to President George W. Bush, joins us to discuss why this tool is essential for thwarting global terrorist plots and evolving cyber threats. PLUS, commentary by David Marcus, columnist for FOX News Digital.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The President's pick to lead the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, faces the Senate Banking Committee today. A former Fed Governor and Morgan Stanley VP, Warsh is expected to signal a shift toward rate cuts and structural reform. However, his path to confirmation is not yet certain. FOX Business White House Correspondent Edward Lawrence joins the Rundown from the front lawn of the White House to break down the political firestorm surrounding the hearing, including why some are threatening to block the nomination until the DOJ drops its investigation into current Chair Jerome Powell. Plus, an update on the Trump administration's strategy for "legal" tariffs and whether the U.S. can avoid long-term economic damage from Middle East supply disruptions. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act remains a focal point of intense debate within Congress, as lawmakers have until the end of the month to extend the provision, which was put in place after the 9/11 terror attacks. Proponents argue that FISA is necessary to prevent future attacks, but critics contend that its allowance of warrantless surveillance violates Americans' privacy. Michael Allen, who served as a special assistant to President George W. Bush, joins us to discuss why this tool is essential for thwarting global terrorist plots and evolving cyber threats. PLUS, commentary by David Marcus, columnist for FOX News Digital.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

California lets interest groups propose measures for the state ballot. Anyone who gathers enough signatures (currently 874,641) can put their hare-brained plans before voters during the next election year. This year, the big story is the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, a 5% wealth tax on California's billionaires. Your views on this will mostly be shaped by whether or not you like taxing the rich, but opponents have argued that it's an especially poorly written proposal: It includes a tax on "unrealized gains", like a founder's share of a private company which hasn't been sold yet. This could be an existential threat to the Silicon Valley model of building startups that are worth billions on paper before their founders see any cash. Since most billionaires keep most of their wealth in stocks, any wealth tax will need some way to reach these (cf. complaints about the "buy, borrow, die" strategy for avoiding taxation). But there are better ways to do this (for example, taxing at liquidation and treating death as a virtual liquidation event), other wealth tax proposals have included these, and the California proposal doesn't. It appears to value company stakes by voting rights rather than ownership, so a typical founder who maintains control of their company despite dilution might see themselves taxed for more than they have. Garry Tan explains the math here with reference to Google. However, Current Affairs has a good article (?!) that pushes back, saying the proposal exempts public companies like Google. Although private companies would still be affected, this would be so obviously unfair that founders would easily win an exemption based on a provision allowing them to appeal nonsensical results. Still, some might counterobject that proposed legislation is generally supposed to be good, rather than so bad that its victims will easily win on appeal. It's retroactive, applying to billionaires who lived in California in January, even though it won't come to a vote until November. Proponents argue that this is necessary to prevent billionaire flight; opponents point out that alternatively, billionaires could flee before the tax even passes (as some have already done). One plausible result is that the tax fails (either at the ballot box or the courts), but only after spurring California's richest taxpayers to flee, leading to a net decrease in revenue. Some people propose that it could decrease state revenues overall even if it passed, if it drove out enough billionaires, though others disagree. Pro-tech-industry newsletter Pirate Wires finds that 20 out of 21 California tech billionaires interviewed were "developing an exit plan" and quotes an insider saying that "if this tax actually passes, I think the technology industry kind of has to leave the state". Even Gavin Newsom, hardly known for being an anti-tax conservative, has argued that it "makes no sense" and "would be really damaging". The ACX legal and economic analysis team (Claude, GPT, and Gemini) doubt the direst warnings, but agree that the tax is of dubious value and its provisions poorly suited to Silicon Valley. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/seiu-delenda-est

Is your food real or is it plastic? "Fake food" typically falls into three categories: incorrect labeling, adulteration, or manipulation. There are also products that simply fail to meet the legal standards of their category, such as certain "cheese foods" or frozen desserts. Recently, however, a more extreme conspiracy has emerged claiming that food is literally "plastic" or "unreal." Proponents point to bending, tasteless, or fizzing fruit as evidence. Yet, food science offers simple explanations for these phenomena, such as specific ripeness levels, preservation techniques, or natural fermentation. This confusion has peaked with viral videos of "plastic shrimp" being manufactured. In reality, these videos depict shokuhin sampuru, the traditional Japanese art of creating hyper-realistic food models for display. Distinguishing fact from fiction is difficult when even food labels are confusing and legitimate concerns—like the presence of microplastics—are mixed with "plastic food" myths. Ultimately, this wave of misinformation may be a strategic distraction. By fueling sensationalist conspiracies, biotechnology firms and major food corporations may be shifting the focus away from valid public backlash against genetic engineering and ultra-processed ingredients. In the case of Pepsi, Mountain Dew has emerged as the centerpiece of a conspiracy, too, though one that is nothing than mere marketing. *The is the FREE archive, which includes advertisements. If you want an ad-free experience, you can subscribe below underneath the show description.

The claim that Democrats "openly do not care" when undocumented immigrants commit violent crimes has become a central point of contention, particularly following high-profile cases like the murder of Laken Riley in Georgia or the recent stabbing of Stephanie Minter in Virginia. Critics argue that "sanctuary city" policies and executive orders—such as those signed by Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger—prioritize the legal protections of non-citizens over public safety by limiting cooperation with ICE and federal authorities. Proponents of these policies, however, contend they are designed to build trust within immigrant communities to encourage reporting of other crimes, though this often leads to accusations of a "no response" stance or apathy when a preventable tragedy occurs. This political divide has turned every such incident into a flashpoint for broader debates over border security, the rule of law, and the perceived human cost of current immigration enforcement strategies.

On The Tara Show, this segment highlights a dramatic shift in demographic trends, claiming that under President Trump's intensified enforcement and border closures, the United States has achieved negative net migration. This development suggests that for the first time in decades, the number of individuals departing the country—whether through voluntary returns or increased deportations—is exceeding the number of new arrivals. Proponents of these policies argue that this reversal is essential for stabilizing the national labor market and reducing the strain on public resources, marking a significant departure from previous years of record-high border encounters.

From battlefield strategy to political endgames—this episode covers it all. Tara dives into the explosive debate over targeting Iran's power grid, the terrifying reality of EMP threats against America, and a rising push to prosecute Donald Trump at International Criminal Court. Is this about national security—or political warfare? And what happens if the next election decides who faces prison? ⚡ SUMMARY This episode opens with a high-stakes military debate: should the U.S. target Iran's civilian energy infrastructure to destabilize the regime? Proponents argue that shutting down power could spark internal unrest and accelerate collapse, while critics warn of humanitarian fallout and global backlash. The conversation expands into long-standing fears of an EMP attack on the U.S. grid—warnings echoed by former intelligence officials—and the catastrophic consequences of losing national power infrastructure. From there, Tara explores the global economic angle, including tensions around the Strait of Hormuz and a potential Iran-China strategy to undermine the U.S. dollar through alternative energy trade systems. The second half shifts dramatically into domestic politics, focusing on claims that a future administration could pursue legal action against Donald Trump and former officials through international courts. The discussion raises questions about U.S. sovereignty, the legitimacy of global tribunals, and the escalating rhetoric surrounding political accountability. The episode closes by revisiting past foreign policy decisions, including U.S. involvement in Libya under Barack Obama and the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, drawing comparisons about how war crimes are defined—and who gets held accountable.

How did America manage to rescue two airmen after their plane was shot down over Iran?In this bonus bank holiday episode, Venetia Rainey is joined by Jack Murphy, ex-US special forces who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, including as a Green Beret. He is now a journalist and military commentator and hosts The Team House national security podcast. He broke the story that the weapons systems officer (WSO) from the downed F-15E had been rescued alive after 36 hours stranded behind enemy lines.Jack provides a unique insight into the dramatic double rescue mission - already being described as the most complex in American military history. He explains the initial search and rescue (CSAR) efforts, what the WSO would have been doing to survive on the ground, and why the US abandoned and blew up two multimillion-dollar aircraft at a remote desert airstrip.Plus: what role is AI playing in the Iran war and beyond, in battlefields from Ukraine to Gaza? The US military increasingly relies on an AI decision support system called Maven to help with targeting, intelligence assessments and troop deployments. Israel and Ukraine use similar technology. Proponents of artificial intelligence argue it makes warfare faster and more efficient - giving the West a key battlefield advantage in a time of rising conflict. But critics say there are concerns over safety and low accuracy, and worry humans are increasingly being left out of the loop. Some of these concerns come from industry insiders such as AI company Anthropic, which is in a dispute with the Pentagon over the use of its system Claude for autonomous weapons. Venetia Rainey is joined by Adam Wishart, the filmmaker behind new Channel 4 documentary, Click to Kill: the AI War Machine, and Heidy Khlaaf, chief AI scientist at the AI Now Institute and previously at OpenAI. CONTRIBUTORS:Venetia Rainey, co-host @venetiaraineyJack Murphy, ex-special forces and host The Team House @JackMurphyRGRHeidy Khlaaf, chief AI scientist AI Now Institute @HeidyKhlaafAdam Wishart, director Click to Kill: the AI War Machine @adam_wishartCONTENT REFERENCED:Click to Kill: the AI War Machine on Channel 4 Producer: Rachel PorterExecutive Producer: Louisa Wells► Sign up to our most popular newsletter, From the Editor. Look forward to receiving free-thinking comment and the day's biggest stories, every morning. telegraph.co.uk/fromtheeditor► EMAIL US: Contact the team on battlelines@telegraph.co.uk ► GET THE LATEST HEADLINES: Find all our latest Iran coverage here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/iran-war/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The debate over birthright citizenship centers on the interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." While legal precedent has long held that this applies to nearly everyone born on U.S. soil, critics argue the "jurisdiction" clause should exclude children of undocumented or temporary residents. Proponents of this shift believe citizenship should require at least one parent to be a citizen or legal resident, while opponents maintain that the amendment's plain language provides an ironclad guarantee that cannot be altered by executive order or simple legislation.

Welcome to The Turf Zone Podcast. This episode features the article “VTC Blows Away Leaf Blower Ban” by Beck Stanley, VTC Executive Director. The Virginia General Assembly once again heard multiple bills seeking to allow localities to ban gas powered leaf blowers and other equipment essential to our industry. This bill has become what we call a “perennial bill” as it returns every January like clockwork. Thanks to the support of membership and partner organizations, we have been able to delay and significantly reduce the impacts of this bill over the last several years. I found myself overjoyed, at times even breaking into grins at the outcome this year, when the legislature tabled the measure until 2027 in the House and outright killed the bill in the Senate. The bill blew away when we pointed out that electric blowers require batteries that must be charged…by gas powered generators. Proponents of leaf blower bans will be back with more aggressive legislation in the future, and we must stay in the fight, pointing out the many environmental benefits of managed turf: erosion control, water filtration, and in the case of leaf removal, important mold prevention that protects the health of children and pets. As you discuss this issue in your home communities, please keep such details in mind. Currently, the only locality in Virginia that has successfully enacted a ban is Alexandria, and it was upheld by a Republican controlled Attorney General's office in a 2025 opinion. Like many other issues we lobby, this is another where we must educate members from all sides of the political sphere. While the day is coming when these bans reach other places, there is much we can do to prepare in the meantime. After all, many other states watch Virginia's early legislative session each year and get ideas for new laws in their states. We must keep in mind: the stakes are high in Virginia, and our success or failure here can have ripple effects for our partners across the country. What made this year's bill different is how it was originally written: it can only offer the option to ban to localities with a population density of 2500 residents per square mile. But I'd like to take this opportunity to explain to readers how legislators, in this case Delegate Rip Sullivan, set negotiating markers in bills with the intent to later change, alter, delay, or amend the legislation. I do not know if this is what Delegate Sullivan is trying to do, but it sure seems like it. He is a skilled legislator well familiar with these tactics. Thankfully, we are, too. As the bill comes back next year to blow its way through the lengthy process – committees, subcommittees, floor votes, crossover to the Senate, and plenty of scrutiny along the way – the patron could decide to adjust this population density criteria, add new language, or strike the bill altogether. The latter would provide our members with the time needed to prepare for the coming electric equipment migration. We have pointed out to his staff that, unfortunately, premature implementation of gas-powered bans impacts our smallest members the most. These are members who often have the least resources on hand to afford expensive new electric blowers, batteries, charging infrastructure, and repairs. I believe he is sympathetic to that reality and has good intentions, so I won't be posting up outside his office charging my batteries with a loud gas-powered generator anytime soon. In conclusion, we have to be realistic about evolving laws and plan accordingly. The reality today is that battery life is not yet advanced enough to meet the needs of the industry. As those batteries improve, costs come down and run times increase, the transition to electric blowers begins to make more sense. In the meantime, enjoy the grins – and this small victory on your behalf. You have been listening to The Turf Zone Podcast. Follow The Turf Zone on X, Facebook and LinkedIn for all things turfgrass, featuring podcasts, magazines, events and more. Visit www.theturfzone.com for more. The post VTC Blows Away Leaf Blower Ban appeared first on The Turf Zone.

In this episode I talk with Christopher Chen, author of the brand-new book Evil Empire? Government Officials as Proponents of the Gospel in Luke-Acts and Beyond, out now on Wipf and Stock, where he argues that there is a place for believers to hold positions of power even in hostile governments. In this conversation Christopher explains how God's people often attained positions of power in the Old Testament, how the original recipient of Luke-Acts, Theophilus, is likely a government official, the prominent role centurions and government officials play in Luke's writings, and the New Testament evidence for government officials advancing the gospel. He then reviews the varying perspectives held by leaders in the early church about Christians in government service, how this has played out in Chinese history, and how Christians who find themselves as government officials today can navigate the complex relationship between their faith and their position in government.  Media Referenced:Evil Empire?: https://a.co/d/04y1sz9GChris on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/csychenBrother Kevin Chen on Messiah in the OT: https://libertarianchristians.com/episode/ep-152-the-old-testament-and-the-messiah-with-kevin-chen/ The Protestant Libertarian Podcast is a project of the Libertarian Christian Institute and a part of the Christians For Liberty Network. The Libertarian Christian Institute can be found at www.libertarianchristians.com.Questions, comments, suggestions? Please reach out to me at theprotestantlibertarian@gmail.com.  You can also follow the podcast on Twitter: @prolibertypod, and YouTube, @ProLibertyPod, where you will get shorts and other exclusive video content. For more about the show, you can go to theprotestantlibertarianpodcast.com. If you like the show and want to support it, you can! Go to libertarianchristians.com, where you can donate to LCI and buy The Protestant Libertarian Podcast Merch! Also, please consider giving me a star rating and leaving me a review, it really helps expand the show's profile! Thanks!

Today on AOTA Shorts: The State of Oregon is one of just a few in the country that doesn't mandate a specific number of school days each year, and over ⅓ of their school districts have gone down to a 4 day school week. Proponents of mandating more school for Oregon youth argue this is the driving force behind Oregon's dismal performance on the most recent NAEP.  And, they argue, that the aggregate effect of the shorter school weeks and shorter school years, can mean students miss out on a full year of instruction by the time they graduate. But, not all school days are created equal. Most states text in April or May, weeks before the end of the school year, so does a week or two less school in Oregon really make a difference? It just might. Manuel and Jeff discuss!MAXIMUM WOKENESS ALERT -- get your All of the Above swag, including your own “Teach the Truth” shirt! In this moment of relentless attacks on teaching truth in the classroom, we got you covered. https://all-of-the-above-store.creator-spring.com Watch, listen and subscribe to make sure you don't miss our latest content!Listen on Apple Podcast and Spotify Website: https://AOTAshow.com

Is consciousness the exclusive domain of human beings? Proponents of a view known as integrative information theory argue that AI will eventually achieve that same level of consciousness as systems build up and integrate more knowledge in the future. On this archive episode of Mind Matters News, guest host Pat Flynn welcomes Dr. Selmer Bringsjord to discuss some of the flaws in this theory as well as a possible alternative. Source

ID The Future listeners now get to enjoy a new episode each month (as well as a bingecast archive episode) from our sister podcast Mind Matters News, a production of the Discovery Institute's Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence. The Mind Matters News podcast brings you interviews and insight from computer scientists, engineers, inventors, neurosurgeons, and other experts who bring sanity to the conversation about natural and artificial intelligence, going beyond the hype to explore the undercurrents of these important ideas. And although the Mind Matters News podcast will not often explicitly discuss intelligent design, it regularly explores the nature of intelligence, the origin of information, and the things that make us uniquely human, concepts that are central to the theory of intelligent design. Is consciousness the exclusive domain of human beings? Proponents of a view known as integrative information theory argue that AI will eventually achieve that same level of consciousness as systems build up and integrate more knowledge in the future. On this archive episode, Mind Matters guest host Pat Flynn welcomes Dr. Selmer Bringsjord to discuss some of the flaws in this theory as well as a possible alternative. Source

With the war in Iran leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, preventing or restricting oil and gas being exported from many of the Gulf states, the UK's energy policy has come to the fore once more. Proponents of renewables claim that a rapid shift to homegrown wind and solar power will spare us from the volatility of international supplies of fossil fuels. Critics argue the UK will need oil and gas for decades to come, but we can produce more, either in the North Sea or by fracking on land. This debate from the Battle of Ideas festival 2025 is, therefore, highly topical. Where should future energy policy go? ORIGINAL FESTIVAL INTRODUCTION In June 2019, the Conservative government amended the Climate Change Act to insert a target of ‘net zero' emissions by 2050. At the 2024 General Election, all the major political parties, with the exception of Reform, promised to back the goal, with any differences being about when to implement various policies, such as gas-boiler and petrol-car bans. Reform is well ahead in the opinion polls, and calling for the end of Net Zero and the resumption of fracking. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has said: ‘We've got to stop pretending to the next generation… Net Zero by 2050 is impossible.' Is Net Zero gradually being ditched? For proponents of the policy, climate change remains a clear and present danger. The energy and climate change secretary, Ed Miliband declared in May that Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are still backing Net Zero: ‘It's absolutely central to their economic growth and energy security, as well as climate agenda … So as far as I'm concerned, they are 100% committed to this agenda.' Labour has stopped new licences for gas and oil production in the North Sea and is committed to expanding renewable energy, with Miliband claiming: ‘People recognise that cheap, clean renewables beat expensive, insecure fossil fuels.' But fuel bills haven't fallen as the gas-price crisis of 2022 has faded. UK energy prices remain high by international standards, despite (or because of) the expansion of renewables, something highlighted by the need to rescue Scunthorpe steelworks. In June, it was reported that the government was planning to subsidise energy costs for energy-intensive industries. Sky News reported that in 2023, British businesses paid £258 per megawatt-hour for electricity compared to £178 in France and £177 in Germany, according to International Energy Agency data. Will the Net Zero consensus break down further – and should it? At a time when China's greenhouse gas emissions dwarf those of the UK and are still rising, does it make economic or environmental sense to decarbonise? Or does the threat of climate change demand that the UK takes a lead and we accept lower living standards to save the planet? SPEAKERS Jonny Ball contributing editor, UnHerd Dr Caspar Hewett lecturer, School of Engineering, Newcastle University; co-director, NERC FLOOD-CDT; director, The Great Debate Ruari McCallion freelance writer Ali Miraj broadcaster; founder, the Contrarian Prize; infrastructure financier; DJ Kathryn Porter consultant, Watt-Logic CHAIR Austin Williams director, Future Cities Project; honorary research fellow, XJTLU, Suzhou, China; author, China's Urban Revolution

States are struggling to make up for revenue gaps in the wake of federal cuts and President Donald Trump's tax-and-spending law. In Washington state, lawmakers have answered the challenge with a novel tax on millionaires. The legislature recently sent a bill (S.B. 6346) to Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) that would create the state's first income tax. If Ferguson signs it, which he is expected to do, individuals and households in Washington making more than $1 million a year will be subject to a 9.9% income tax. But things won't change in Washington right away. The tax will likely be challenged both in court and at the ballot box, where 10 previous attempts at an income tax have failed. Proponents of the bill say the measure helps correct the state's regressive tax structure that is heavily reliant on sales tax, while opponents say the tax will make the state less competitive. On this episode of Talking Tax, Correspondent Casey Murray discusses the politics and long path ahead for the tax. Do you have feedback on this episode of Talking Tax? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Prosecutors in South Dakota have dismissed charges against an Indigenous rights advocate. South Dakota Public Broadcasting’s CJ Keene reports. Charges stemming from a 2022 incident against Nick Tilsen, CEO and founder of NDN Collective, were dropped. In a statement, Tilsen said, “my freedom wasn't granted by a judge, a jury, or the settler colonial court system. My freedom was won by the people, the movement, and the ancestors.” Tilsen faced more than 25 years in prison, originally facing charges of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer and obstruction. Ultimately, the trial resulted in a hung jury. Tilsen maintained his innocence throughout, saying the incident was an effort to watch an interaction between police and an Indigenous member of the Rapid City, S.D. community. NDN Collective spokespeople had contended the charges were excessive. In the same statement, representatives describe them as, “blatantly politically motivated effort to silence a movement leader by criminalizing his actions.” In response, Pennington County State's Attorney said, “the decision to dismiss this case was made after careful review and thoughtful consideration.” The office adds they stand by the charging decision. “While we believe the case was properly charged and presented, the jury's inability to reach a verdict was an important factor in evaluating whether further prosecution would serve the interest of justice.” A nearly empty critical care unit at Bartlett Hospital on April 7, 2020, in Juneau, Alaska. (Photo: Rashah McChesney / KTOO) Alaska will receive about $1 billion from the federal government over the next few years to improve healthcare, but millions of that depends on the legislature passing several bills aligning Alaska with best practices for rural healthcare. Alaska Native people are much more likely to live in rural areas than other Alaskans. As Alaska Public Media's Rachel Cassandra reports, a proposal to make it easier for out-of-state nurses to practice in Alaska is facing fierce pushback. When you boil it down, Alaska Hospital and Healthcare Association head Jared Kosin says joining a so-called license compact is pretty simple. He says there would be a set of criteria nurses would demonstrate. “And if they do, then they are issued a license and then they can practice in any states that use those same standards.” Proponents say joining a compact would help ease a nurse shortage across the state that is projected to worsen. Kosin says it may be simple to explain, but actually getting a bill passed to join the nurse licensure compact has been anything but. “It’s just so snagged up in politics.” The last version of the bill was introduced in 2023. It was supported by most healthcare organizations in the state, but it was opposed by nursing unions. He says that created a toxic dynamic. And this year there is new pressure on the legislature thanks to the Rural Health Transformation Program. When the Alaska Department of Health (DOH) applied for the money, it told the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) the state would join the compact. The state has been directed by CMS to create compacts for other health care positions too: physicians, emergency medical services, psychologists, and physician assistants. The DOH does not know exactly how much money would be clawed back if Alaska does not pass all the required legislation, but a DOH official wrote over email that a ballpark estimate is that millions of dollars is at stake annually and tens of millions of dollars over the five years of rural funding. Shannon Davenport is a union leader and a nurse. She says there are many problems with the nursing field right now, especially workplace safety, and she doesn't think the nursing compact is the solution to them. “It’s not the golden goose. It’s not the answer to everything.” Even so, most nurses support a compact — almost 90% of nurses living in Alaska, according to a 2023 survey. The federal deadline to join the compact is at the end of 2027. Get National Native News delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up for our daily newsletter today. Download our NV1 Android or iOs App for breaking news alerts. Check out today’s Native America Calling episode Tuesday, March 17, 2026 – Re-enactors help bring Native American perspective of the Revolutionary War to life

Congress is introducing bipartisan bills to expedite Medicare coverage for breakthrough medical technologies, addressing delays in patient access caused by the current complex process. The 21st Century Cures Act aimed to prioritize FDA review of new medical devices, but FDA approval does not ensure Medicare coverage. Critics express concerns about potential cost increases, yet data shows only a small percentage of devices would qualify for coverage, with minimal cost impact on the CMS budget. Proponents highlight the clinical benefits and cost savings from improved patient outcomes. The legislative efforts seek to maintain U.S. leadership in medical technology innovation by reducing barriers to adopting breakthrough devices.Learn more on this news by visiting us at: https://greyjournal.net/news/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Proponents of a statewide program that addresses home-related health concerns say they are worried about the initiative's future. The Healthy Neighborhood Program reaches 500 families in Monroe County each year. It helps residents avoid fires and carbon dioxide poisoning, reduce tobacco use and lead exposure, and improve homes at lost costs. The New York State Assembly restored funding for the program, but the Senate did not. What does that mean for its future, as lawmakers make decisions about the final state budget? Our guests discuss it: Katrina Korfmacher, Ph.D., professor of environmental medicine and public health sciences at the University of Rochester Elizabeth McDade, director of Rochester ENergy Efficiency and Weatherization (RENEW) Amanda Reddy, executive director of the National Center for Healthy Housing Marielena Vélez de Brown, M.D., commissioner of the Monroe County Department of Public Health ---Connections is supported by listeners like you. Head to our donation page to become a WXXI member today, support the show, and help us close the gap created by the rescission of federal funding.---Connections airs every weekday from noon-2 p.m. Join the conversation with questions or comments by phone at 1-844-295-TALK (8255) or 585-263-9994, email, Facebook or Twitter.Connections is also livestreamed on the WXXI News YouTube channel each day. You can watch live or access previous episodes here.---Do you have a story that needs to be shared? Pitch your story to Connections.

Artificial intelligence is about to be scaled up in a big way in health care. Is the medical field ready? Are we?Ohio is one of six states in a pilot program using AI to help decide whether certain medical procedures should be approved for Medicare.Across the U.S., healthcare systems are tapping into the technology by using AI to help with charting, diagnosing, surgeries, even caregiving.Proponents say AI is a necessary game changer, perhaps leading to lower costs.Others are more cautious, pointing to AI-related lawsuits and questions about how it will be regulated.Today on All Sides, an AI primer in medicine: from application to implementation to regulation.Guests:Todd Baker, CEO, Ohio State Medical AssociationAmy Andres, senior vice president of health strategy, Ohio Hospital AssociationBill Balderaz, CEO, FuturetyIf you have a disability and would like a transcript or other accommodation, you can request an alternative format.(Photo: Song About Summer / Adobe Stock)

Artificial intelligence is about to be scaled up in a big way in health care. Is the medical field ready? Are we?Ohio is one of six states in a pilot program using AI to help decide whether certain medical procedures should be approved for Medicare.Across the U.S., healthcare systems are tapping into the technology by using AI to help with charting, diagnosing, surgeries, even caregiving.Proponents say AI is a necessary game changer, perhaps leading to lower costs.Others are more cautious, pointing to AI-related lawsuits and questions about how it will be regulated.Today on All Sides, an AI primer in medicine: from application to implementation to regulation.Guests:Todd Baker, CEO, Ohio State Medical AssociationAmy Andres, senior vice president of health strategy, Ohio Hospital AssociationBill Balderaz, CEO, FuturetyIf you have a disability and would like a transcript or other accommodation, you can request an alternative format.(Photo: Song About Summer / Adobe Stock)

Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson is pushing for a revised millionaires tax bill. This proposal aims to impose a tax on the state's wealthiest residents. Proponents argue it will generate revenue for essential services and address income inequality. Critics, however, warn it could drive high-income earners and businesses out of Washington, harming the state's economy. Concerns are rising about the potential impact on Washington's competitiveness and overall financial health. The debate continues as lawmakers weigh the potential benefits against the risks of such a tax policy. Ferguson's support has reignited the discussion, making it a key issue in Washington's political landscape. Will this tax help or hurt the Evergreen State?

Central Otago is sitting on a gold mine that may be worth billions, but the decision of whether to dig has tensions simmering A proposed gold mine is on the fast-track list. Proponents says it will bring jobs and money to the region, but opponents say it will be an economic 'short-term sugar hit ... with long-term consequences'.Find The Detail on Newsroom or RNZGo to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Washington State Senate has passed a bill imposing a 9.9% tax on income exceeding $1 million, a move sparking heated debate across the state. Proponents argue the tax will generate crucial revenue for public services like education and infrastructure, while opponents decry it as a disincentive for wealth creation and investment. This legislation now heads to the House, where its fate remains uncertain. This new tax has the potential to drive high-income earners and businesses out of Washington, impacting the state's overall economic health. Will this tax solve budget issues, or will it cripple the Washington economy? We delve into the details, exploring the potential consequences for Washington residents and businesses alike.

The Minneapolis City Council passed a proposal to provide rental assistance to people impacted by the surge of federal agents. Proponents say too many residents face eviction and other hardships because they feel like they can't leave their homes and work their jobs. Cari Spencer watched the council's discussion about the proposal and joined MPR News guest host Kelly Gordon.

A severe bomb cyclone is targeting the East Coast, threatening to freeze supply chains just days after a similar crisis left trucks stranded in Louisiana. Drivers and fleets are urged to prioritize safety and understand their rights regarding coercion as winter weather intensifies along critical corridors like I-95. While the physical world battles ice, Wall Street celebrates C.H. Robinson's surging stock price following reports of impressive profit margins. The company credits its "lean AI" strategy for decoupling volume growth from headcount, signaling a fundamental shift in how brokerages manage efficiency. The autonomous sector also sees massive investment as Waabi secures $750 million to expand its "physical AI" technology for both trucking and robotaxis. This funding round supports a major partnership with Uber to deploy thousands of autonomous vehicles, aiming for commercialization by 2027. In the courts, major business groups are backing freight brokers in a Supreme Court case that could redefine liability for trucking accidents. Proponents argue that federal law should shield brokers from state-level negligent hiring claims to prevent a costly patchwork of regulations. On the legislative front, a new bill offers a lifeline for heavy-duty towing operators by addressing restrictive length regulations during recovery operations. The proposed Towing Safety Act aims to clear accident scenes faster and improve roadside safety for first responders. Legal troubles continue for the R&R Family of Companies as new lawsuits allege the firm continued operations and accumulated debt while insolvent. Meanwhile, legacy carrier Schneider prepares for a leadership transition with Jim Filter set to take the helm as CEO this summer. Follow the FreightWaves NOW Podcast Other FreightWaves Shows Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast, we examine one of the most closely watched and increasingly controversial developments in consumer finance: earned wage access (EWA) products. EWA products allow workers to access a portion of wages they have already earned before their scheduled payday. Proponents describe these products as a valuable financial tool that helps consumers manage cash-flow shortfalls without resorting to traditional payday loans. Critics, including the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), argue that EWA products function as high-cost credit, often involving opaque fees that can trap consumers in cycles of debt. Our panel brings together industry and advocacy perspectives to explore the research, legal arguments, and regulatory uncertainty surrounding EWA, a market that has grown rapidly but remains unevenly regulated. Meet the Speakers ·        Alan Kaplinsky – Host and moderator. Founder and former Practice Group Leader of Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group; now Senior Counsel. ·        Lucia Constantine – Senior Researcher at the Center for Responsible Lending, focusing on mortgage lending and predatory debt practices. ·        Yasmin Farahi – Deputy Director of State Policy and Senior Policy Counsel at CRL, specializing in small-dollar lending and state consumer protection initiatives. ·        Joseph Schuster – Partner in Consumer Financial Services Group at Ballard Spahr, with extensive experience advising on earned wage access products and their legal and regulatory treatment. Key Topics Covered in the Episode ·        What Is Earned Wage Access? An overview of EWA products, how they operate, and why they have become a focal point for regulators and consumer advocates. ·        Consumer Protection vs. Industry InnovationCRL presents research suggesting that EWA products operate as high-cost credit and may contribute to debt accumulation, while industry participants argue the products provide needed liquidity and differ fundamentally from traditional loans. ·        Fees, Tips, and Consumer Understanding A discussion of common pricing models, including expedited access fees and voluntary "tips," and whether consumers fully understand the true cost of using EWA services. ·        Research Findings CRL reviews studies conducted by it based on anonymized transaction data indicating frequent repeat usage, escalating fees, and increased overdraft activity among some users. ·        The Regulatory and Legal Landscape An examination of ongoing litigation, divergent state approaches, and federal regulatory ambiguity. While some states regulate EWA as credit, others have carved out exemptions. Courts are increasingly being asked to determine whether EWA products constitute "loans" under existing law. ·        Industry Responses and SafeguardsDiscussion of non-recourse structures, voluntary fee models, and industry-led efforts to mitigate consumer harm. ·        Policy Outlook Consideration of congressional interest, state-level reform efforts, and the likelihood of future regulatory intervention. Why This Episode Matters The debate over earned wage access is still in its early stages, but the outcome will have significant implications for fintech providers, employers, consumers, and regulators. This episode provides essential context and analysis for financial services professionals seeking to understand how EWA fits within existing consumer credit frameworks, and how that framework may change. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr and founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We invite you to subscribe on your preferred podcast platform for weekly insights into key developments in consumer financial services law and regulation. Since its recording, there have been a few developments relevant to this episode. For instance, on December 22, 2025, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued an advisory opinion that states the Truth In Lending Act (TILA) does not apply to certain "earned wage access (EWA) products," and it rescinds a proposed interpretive rule issued under former CFPB Director Chopra that classified these products as credit subject to TILA with their fees considered finance charges. The Center for Responsible Lending expressed opposition to this latest advisory opinion. On January 13, 2025, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on financial technology that included consideration of draft legislation on "Earned Wage Access," which CRL refers to as "payday loan apps." Around 200 nonprofits have written to Congress about their opposition to the version of this bill as introduced last session of congress.

Anyone with an interest in any and all evidence related to alien species, non-human intelligence, or UFO/UAP is likely familiar with claims of mummified alien remains. Proponents say the remains have been buried in South America for hundreds of years and have been conclusively examined and studied by scientists and medical experts - and are legit. But many of the claims made are muddled at best, and persons involved in bringing the mummies forward have been caught fabricating evidence. For the last few years, WEAPONIZED co-hosts Jeremy Corbell and George Knapp have followed the controversy, as reported in various news reports, but decided to leave the topic to those who have the expertise needed to formally investigate the claims and the mummies themselves. If the three-fingered mummies turned out to be non-human or even extraterrestrial in origin, it would be a massively important finding that would boost the credibility of those who argue that non-human intelligence has been present on Earth for hundreds of years - maybe thousands. So, bottom line: Are these mummies the real deal, or have the proponents engaged in ghoulish grave robbing and the surgical manipulation of long-dead, but very human, corpses? An explorer and YouTube creator turned UFO investigator traveled to Brazil to take a deep dive into the claims and was, for a time, a believer, not a debunker. His YouTube site, “Incredible History,” included a previous video entitled “Show Me the Mummies,” and his explosive new video, released just days ago, appears to blow the lid off of the mummy claims and the people who have promoted what some believe is a money-making scam - one linked to South American drug cartels. Two esteemed academics have joined the conversation, and both make strong arguments that the two best-known mummies show clear evidence of tampering. In this episode of WEAPONIZED, we speak with Will Brown who created the “Incredible History” YouTube channel, along with Dr. Dan Proctor, a biological anthropologist, and Michele Adams, a highly experienced radiologist who says she is an experiencer herself. Both of these professionals are openly interested in ETs and non-human intelligence, but their precise criticisms of the mummy evidence made public so far have subjected the two PhDs to personal attacks and allegations that they are designated debunkers working on behalf of the deep state to muddy the waters. Is there an assembly line somewhere in Peru where long-dead humans are being carved up and then re-arranged to look like three-fingered aliens? And is there a flourishing black market where private collectors pay huge sums in order to obtain their very own “alien” mummy? This WEAPONIZED episode includes a spirited discussion about where the mummy debate stands now and what it would take to confirm that the two most prominent mummy specimens are the real deal. FOLLOW WILL'S EXCELLENT WORK AT https://www.youtube.com/@incredhistory GOT A TIP? Reach out to us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠WeaponizedPodcast@Proton.me⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• Check out Will Brown's awesome YouTube channel INCREDIBLE HISTORY here https://www.youtube.com/@incredhistory ••• Watch Corbell's six-part UFO docuseries titled UFO REVOLUTION on TUBI here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://tubitv.com/series/300002259/tmz-presents-ufo-revolution/season-2⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Watch Knapp's six-part UFO docuseries titled INVESTIGATION ALIEN on NETFLIX here : ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://netflix.com/title/81674441⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ••• You can now watch all of Corbell's movies for free on YouTube here : BOB LAZAR : AREA 51 & FLYING SAUCERS https://youtu.be/sZaE5rIavVA HUNT FOR THE SKINWALKER https://youtu.be/TczkJ6UAQ8A PATIENT SEVENTEEN https://youtu.be/gDVX0kRqXxE ••• For breaking news, follow Corbell & Knapp on all social media. Extras and bonuses from the episode can be found at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠WeaponizedPodcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Are near-death experiences proof of an afterlife — or just the brain's final fireworks? Michael Regilio goes into the light to find out on Skeptical Sunday!Welcome to Skeptical Sunday, a special edition of The Jordan Harbinger Show where Jordan and a guest break down a topic that you may have never thought about, open things up, and debunk common misconceptions. This time around, we're joined by skeptic, comedian, and podcaster Michael Regilio!Full show notes and resources can be found here: jordanharbinger.com/1263On This Week's Skeptical Sunday:Near-death experiences are real experiences — but that doesn't make them supernatural. NDEs happen to ordinary people during medical crises, and while skeptics question the metaphysical claims, no one disputes the profound personal impact. These aren't grifts or delusions — they're genuine neurological events that often leave people calmer, kinder, and less afraid of death.The "tunnel of light" isn't universal — it's cultural. Western NDEs feature tunnels and beings of light, but Buddhist and Hindu experiencers often describe rivers, bridges, or ancestors. This cultural filtering suggests NDEs are brain-based events shaped by personal beliefs — not visits to a one-size-fits-all afterlife waiting room."Clinically dead" doesn't mean the brain has completely shut down. Proponents argue NDEs prove consciousness survives death because brains were "flatlining" — but neuroscientists note that minimal brain activity can still occur undetected, and memories may be reconstructed after the fact as the brain "reboots."Dying might actually be a psychedelic experience. When the brain faces extreme stress, it releases a cocktail of DMT, endorphins, and dopamine while electrical hyperexcitation fires neurons en masse — creating vivid, dreamlike experiences that may explain the transcendent feelings people report.You don't need a near-death experience to live like you've had one. People who've had NDEs often return less materialistic, more focused on love, and at peace with mortality. The takeaway? You can adopt that perspective right now — prioritize connection over accumulation, presence over panic — without the terrifying trip to death's door.Connect with Jordan on Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. If you have something you'd like us to tackle here on Skeptical Sunday, drop Jordan a line at jordan@jordanharbinger.com and let him know!Connect with Michael Regilio at Twitter, Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, and YouTube, and check out War Bar, his new comedy special!And if you're still game to support us, please leave a review here — even one sentence helps! Sign up for Six-Minute Networking — our free networking and relationship development mini course — at jordanharbinger.com/course!Subscribe to our once-a-week Wee Bit Wiser newsletter today and start filling your Wednesdays with wisdom!Do you even Reddit, bro? Join us at r/JordanHarbinger!This Episode Is Brought To You By Our Fine Sponsors: Northwest Registered Agent: Get more at northwestregisteredagent.com/jordanNutrafol: $10 off 1st month: nutrafol.com, code JORDANShopify: 3 months @ $1/month (select plans): shopify.com/jordanApretude: Learn more: Apretude.com or call 1-888-240-0340Homes.com: Find your home: homes.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This episode originally aired November 17, 2025 on Patreon — we're unlocking it as a holiday treat. If there's a Trump-era topic that manages to fascinate without being entirely depressing, it's probably the ongoing arguments about architecture that his ascension has occasioned. Proponents of a RETVRN to the architectural ideals of ancient Greece and Rome are prominent in MAGA circles; partisans of a neo-classical revival populate government commissions, and their prescriptions find expression in various executive orders again. To understand who these people are, what their movement wants, and the kernel of truth in their grievances, we talked to architectural critic and proprietor of McMansion Hell Kate Wagner. We start by analyzing Trump's ballroom and the demolishing the East Wing of the White House — the perfect way into MAGA architecture and the mind of their Beautiful Builder himself, Donald J. Trump.Sources:Kate Wagner, "Duncing About Architecture," New Republic, Feb 8, 2020— "Trump Will Not Make Architecture Great Again," The Nation, Jan 7, 2025— "The Real Problem With Trump's Cheesy Neoclassical Building Fetish," Feb 12, 2025— "what the fuck are we doing anymore," The Late Review, Jan 9, 2025.— "Wrecking Ballroom," The New York Review of Architecture, Dec 17, 2025.Charlie Nash, "Trump Admits He Could've Built Ballroom Without Destroying the East Wing, But 'It Looked Like Hell,'" Mediate, Nov 10, 2025Jonathan Edwards & Dan Diamond, "Trump hires new White House ballroom architect," WaPo, Dec 4, 2025. ...and don't forget to subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon for access to all of our bonus episodes!

PREVIEW — Kevin Fraser — Regulating the AI Frontier vs. Focusing on Practical User Experience. Fraser examines the central dilemma in AI regulation, observing that proponents prioritize regulating sophisticated frontier AI developed internally by major labs including OpenAI, Anthropic, and XAI. Fraser contends that regulatory focus should instead prioritize real-world user experiences when AI is deployed in practical settings such as hospitals and educational institutions, ensuring policymakers develop a comprehensive understanding of both risks and benefits.