Podcasts about Someday

AJ Norris is back in The Diary Room! The funniest man we know (confirmed) helps us pull the next six players and close out some more seasons for Round 1! Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this eye-opening episode of the Secret Life Podcast, host Brianne Davis-Gantt delves into the manipulative world of "future faking." This toxic tactic often seen in relationships involves making grand promises about the future without any intention of following through. Brianne explains how this behavior is designed to control and manipulate partners, creating a false sense of hope while keeping them emotionally invested.With candid insights, Brianne outlines the key characteristics of future faking, including the crucial red flag of words not aligning with actions. She shares relatable anecdotes and practical examples, highlighting how this pattern can manifest in various relationship dynamics, from casual dating to long-term partnerships. Listeners will learn to recognize the signs of future faking, including vague timelines, unfulfilled promises, and the emotional rollercoaster of hope and disappointment.Brianne empowers listeners with actionable strategies to address future faking in their relationships. She emphasizes the importance of communication, setting boundaries, and seeking support when necessary. By focusing on consistent actions rather than empty words, individuals can reclaim their emotional well-being and avoid being trapped in cycles of false promises.

Lesley shares a powerful reminder from Māori culture about honoring people in their own time and space — including yourself — and why this perspective can shift how you move through the world. She celebrates meaningful wins from OPC members and opens up about how changing her recording schedule completely transformed her tour experience this year. It's a gentle nudge to reflect, reset, and make space for the version of you that's growing right now.If you have any questions about this episode or want to get some of the resources we mentioned, head over to LesleyLogan.co/podcast https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/. If you have any comments or questions about the Be It pod shoot us a message at beit@lesleylogan.co mailto:beit@lesleylogan.co. And as always, if you're enjoying the show please share it with someone who you think would enjoy it as well. It is your continued support that will help us continue to help others. Thank you so much! Never miss another show by subscribing at LesleyLogan.co/subscribe https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/#follow-subscribe-free.In this episode you will learn about:What takiwātanga revealed about honoring people in their own timing.How Māori values uplift neurodiversity with dignity and respect.Wins from OPC members showing strength, consistency, and body awareness.Why recording months early transformed Lesley's tour experience.How reflecting on last year's setbacks helped her build a better schedule.Episode References/Links:Submit your wins or questions - https://beitpod.com/questionsLife on the Spectrum - https://www.instagram.com/p/DKFvUjjOyJt If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. https://lovethepodcast.com/BITYSIDEALS! DEALS! DEALS! DEALS! https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/memberships/perks/#equipmentCheck out all our Preferred Vendors & Special Deals from Clair Sparrow, Sensate, Lyfefuel BeeKeeper's Naturals, Sauna Space, HigherDose, AG1 and ToeSox https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/memberships/perks/#equipmentBe in the know with all the workshops at OPC https://workshops.onlinepilatesclasses.com/lp-workshop-waitlistBe It Till You See It Podcast Survey https://pod.lesleylogan.co/be-it-podcasts-surveyBe a part of Lesley's Pilates Mentorship https://lesleylogan.co/elevate/FREE Ditching Busy Webinar https://ditchingbusy.com/Resources:Watch the Be It Till You See It podcast on YouTube! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq08HES7xLMvVa3Fy5DR8-gLesley Logan website https://lesleylogan.co/Be It Till You See It Podcast https://lesleylogan.co/podcast/Online Pilates Classes by Lesley Logan https://onlinepilatesclasses.com/Online Pilates Classes by Lesley Logan on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjogqXLnfyhS5VlU4rdzlnQProfitable Pilates https://profitablepilates.com/about/Follow Us on Social Media:Instagram https://www.instagram.com/lesley.logan/The Be It Till You See It Podcast YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq08HES7xLMvVa3Fy5DR8-gFacebook https://www.facebook.com/llogan.pilatesLinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/lesley-logan/The OPC YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/@OnlinePilatesClasses Episode Transcript:Lesley Logan 0:00  It's Fuck Yeah Friday. Brad Crowell 0:01  Fuck yeah. Lesley Logan 0:05  Welcome to the Be It Till You See It podcast where we talk about taking messy action, knowing that perfect is boring. I'm Lesley Logan, Pilates instructor and fitness business coach. I've trained thousands of people around the world and the number one thing I see stopping people from achieving anything is self-doubt. My friends, action brings clarity and it's the antidote to fear. Each week, my guest will bring bold, executable, intrinsic and targeted steps that you can use to put yourself first and Be It Till You See It. It's a practice, not a perfect. Let's get started. Lesley Logan 0:44  Hey, Be It babe. How are you? My God, it's December 5. This is crazy. This year is going wild. This is your Fuck Yeah Friday, because we got to celebrate Fridays together. And I really love doing these short and sweet episodes. I hope you love them too. I would love to know you. You gotta let us know, and you can send your wins in or your questions in your feedback beitpod.com/questions. Lesley Logan 1:07  So today's episode is quick. I give you something that inspired me from the interwebs, which you know can be a weird place. Then I share something that you sent me, and then I share a win of mine. So here we go. So this one is from the Maori culture, and I hope I said that, it's, it's a hard word for me to say, Maori culture, so I apologize if I said that wrong. In Maori culture, autism is known as, and this is, I'm going to say not correctly, but we're going to go for it. Takiwātanga, meaning, in their own space and time, in their own time and space. And this is powerful world reflects a worldview that honors neurodiversity, seeing each person's way of being as valid, dignified and deserving of respect. Rather than focusing on deficits, takiwātanga encourages inclusion, understanding the belief that everyone experiences life in at their own pace, in their own unique way. And then the post says, Let's embrace perspectives rooted in respect, mana, which means inherent dignity and whanaungatanga, relationships. I'm sorry I've definitely butchered that one, but I hope that you are as inspired as I am, because I actually really appreciate this. I think it's really easy in our culture, especially right now, to be thinking of people who are different than us as having less or we need to fix that or change that. And I just think it's a beautiful thing, like in their own space and time, and their own time and space. Not only should they have that, but we should be giving ourselves all of that. And I just think that that word is beautiful, and I hope that that inspires you to think of yourself and anyone else in your life who is autistic as as being unique. And then, instead of focusing on deficits, focusing on like their their unique person. I hope that we can do that. I think if you're listening to this podcast, you probably are someone who does, who generally tries to be respectful of others, but it is hard, right? It's so hard, especially when people get confused or people get misinformation. And so I hope that that gives you a little inspiration, and it's just like, oh, what a food for thought. I love that. Lesley Logan 3:18  Okay, now your wins. You guys sent me a bunch, so we're gonna go with a couple of them. Here we go. @denisestargazer, my QL is getting stronger and my side bends are finally deep. I love that so much for you. Yeah, it's, like, Pilates is so good. It balances and balances. Someone else could have really overworking QLs, right? And so it's so I love that you got to feel that for your body and get something deep out of it. Peter does Pilates. Had my run scheduled, did not want to go at all. Did 95% of what was scheduled. You know what? I love that. At OPC, we always say like finishing is optional. I think it's really important that one, we're always listening to ourselves. Gotta listen to our bodies. But also it was scheduled, so sometimes it's once you get going, it's like, okay, I can do this. And 95% it's amazing. Like we're celebrating. Okay. One more, @etain.pilates. My teacher didn't have to adjust my legs in prone for Swan, like she does every week. Way to go. Insane. It sounds like your body is starting to connect the dots and not need to be reminded. You know, I love that sometimes people are like, always checklisting in their Pilates practice, like, did I do this? Did I do that? Did I do this? And it's like the goal is that your body does it on its own. All right, you can send your wins in. I love sharing them. Some of them are short, some of them are sweet, some of them are long. I don't care. Bring them in. You want to hear your wins on the show. Here's why, because at some point you're gonna have a crappy Friday, and then hearing a win that you sent me is gonna remind you of something you did do, and that is worth celebrating. Lesley Logan 4:53  All right, my win. So we're on tour right now, and my win is getting to tour, and being so well rested, so prepared, having filmed everything early, and I'm not going, we're going on tour, and I had, I'm going to come back to being behind on my work, like, I'm just so grateful. Look, this was a team effort. This was a year and a half in the making. You've heard me talk about this. I brought a win like this up in the past, but truly, it just keeps getting better. And one of the ways it keeps getting better, and I'll share, I'll share with you how this win came to be. So after everything that we do, we always reflect back on, like, was that good? Is that something we do again? And I am constantly like, reflecting on, how did I feel on that tour, what could I, what, what would have made it better for me, so I can make the tour better for those who are attending. And last year, I got sick before the tour, so yay, sick before the tour. That's wonderful. But that meant that I actually couldn't record two of the YouTube videos before we left, and there would not be time for us to record them on tour, nor would there be time for us to record them when we got back in time for them to release on YouTube. So we just missed a month of YouTube videos, which is unlike us. We've never done that before. Now we have playlists, and we had other tutorials we could drop, but we didn't have our long forms, and that would be like, just we never missed, and I just had to get to come to terms, like it's just not gonna happen. We put too much on my plate. I got sick. And so with my assistant, I was like, okay, we have to make sure that there is room in the schedule for things to go haywire, for me to get sick. And so what's so cool is we adjusted my schedule way back in January so that I would be recording so far in advance, which is not always ideal, because that means like, I'm not recording things in with like, what is going on with the world at the exact same time. However, it allows, if I get sick, there's a little bit more wiggle room to record things, versus just skipping things. So it just feels so good going on this tour, having been so prepared and so on top of things, and knowing that when I come back to my home in January, like the most important thing I have to do is get my hair done and my nails done, like, that's it. So do you hear how a win can be in so many things? It can be a long practice thing. It can be something small. You can also just be in like, I felt a certain way. I don't want to feel like that again. I made a plan, I did the plan, and here we are. So I, being it till you, see, it is hard. Every time, we evolve. We learn more things about ourselves. We figure something out. It's like a mountain with no peak, but not in a way that we're unsatisfied, in a way that we just keep taking a look back at how far we've come and adjusting our path going forward. Because also for my ladies, listening to this, like our bodies are changing, right? I am 42 so you might be in your 50s, and it's already you're on the other side of perimenopause and and I'm getting there, but like may my listening and reflecting myself give you permission to listen and reflect upon yourself. And if you need help, ask for it. If you need people to leave you alone, ask for it, right? And then send that win in so we can celebrate you. Lesley Logan 8:02  All right, a little affirmation for you to take with you on your journey. Here we go. What is today's? I get, here it is. I let go of the things that sit achingly out of reach. I let go of the things that sit achingly out of reach. I let go of the things that sit achingly out of reach. You know what? You do that probably create space to welcome it all the way in. Sometimes, that's how it goes. You release it and it comes back. Someday, I'll tell you about a story when I released Brad and he came back. Anyways, that's a story for another day. You're amazing. Until next time, Be It Till You See It. Lesley Logan 8:38  That's all I got for this episode of the Be It Till You See It Podcast. One thing that would help both myself and future listeners is for you to rate the show and leave a review and follow or subscribe for free wherever you listen to your podcast. Also, make sure to introduce yourself over at the Be It Pod on Instagram. I would love to know more about you. Share this episode with whoever you think needs to hear it. Help us and others Be It Till You See It. Have an awesome day. Be It Till You See It is a production of The Bloom Podcast Network. If you want to leave us a message or a question that we might read on another episode, you can text us at +1-310-905-5534 or send a DM on Instagram @BeItPod.Brad Crowell 9:20  It's written, filmed, and recorded by your host, Lesley Logan, and me, Brad Crowell.Lesley Logan 9:25  It is transcribed, produced and edited by the epic team at Disenyo.co.Brad Crowell 9:30  Our theme music is by Ali at Apex Production Music and our branding by designer and artist, Gianfranco Cioffi.Lesley Logan 9:37  Special thanks to Melissa Solomon for creating our visuals.Brad Crowell 9:40  Also to Angelina Herico for adding all of our content to our website. And finally to Meridith Root for keeping us all on point and on time.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/be-it-till-you-see-it/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Someday, scientists may recreate the wrestler, possibly using frog DNA. Until then, we have to appreciate the ones we have left. Moreno-Taira and more from the UFC 323 undercard on our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/heavyhands  Predatory instinct: how Max Holloway attacks: https://open.substack.com/pub/facepunching/p/predatory-instinct-how-max-holloway?r=evbq&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false  Heavy Hands merch: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/64577943?asc=u  CONTENTS: 00:00 Intro 5:48 Dvalishvili vs Yan 2 36:15 Pantoja vs Van 57:50 Cejudo vs Talbott  

Returning to the podcast for the first of some December BONUS episodes is BBCAN12's Dinis Freitas! With a BBCAN-only wheel for today, Dinis helps us make three more really tough decisions on who belongs in round 2. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If helping aging parents plan their next chapter feels overwhelming, you're not alone. Hilary Walker, founder and CEO of Atlanta Seniors Real Estate, joins Host Carol Morgan on the Atlanta Real Estate Forum Radio podcast to discuss practical strategies for guiding older adults and their families through transitions into age-appropriate housing. Five Years Early, Not Five Minutes Too Late Walker emphasizes the importance of early planning. A crisis, such as a fall, hospitalization or cognitive decline, makes transitions significantly harder. She encourages older adults to proactively outline their wishes, designate key decision-makers and ensure vital documents, including powers of attorney, wills and beneficiary information, are in place. Families should also discuss expectations long before a move becomes imminent. Older adults are more likely to maintain control over their choices when these conversations happen early and gradually. Walker said, “It's better to gather your information five years early rather than be five minutes too late.” Recognizing When It's Time to Talk How do you know when it's time for a family meeting? Here are some common signs that indicate it may be time to start discussing a move: Frequent falls or near falls Difficulty using stairs or navigating the home Memory lapses or increasing forgetfulness Social isolation Limited use of large portions of the home Isolation, Walker notes, can significantly accelerate decline. Identifying concerns early allows families to access resources and create a thoughtful, measured plan rather than react under pressure. Emotional Roadblocks: Stuff, Sentiment & the Family Home Older adults often feel overwhelmed by the sheer volume of belongings accumulated over decades. Instead of focusing on “how much,” families can take a step back to consider what “truly matters for the next season of life.” Touring potential new homes with aging parents can help them visualize what will realistically fit. Walker said, “The biggest roadblock is often the ‘stuff,’ and once we’re able to get around that mindset, you can keep what’s most important to you.” Emotional attachment is just as powerful. Whether it's the yard, garden beds, longtime neighbors or a home full of memories, older adults often struggle with the idea of letting go. Adult children can also unconsciously add pressure. Walker frequently advises children to accept items their parents offer—even if they don't plan to keep them—as it validates the parent's process of release and builds forward momentum. “In your mother or father's mind, they are just trying to start the process,” Walker said. “It's an emotional roadblock that you can help with by simply accepting it.” Moving Forward with Atlanta Seniors Real Estate The Atlanta Seniors Real Estate consultative approach begins with an in-home meeting and walk-through of the property. Walker uses this time to observe lifestyle patterns, understand the aging parent's goals and identify the actual decision-makers in the family. From there, a personalized action plan is created, covering everything from downsizing support to timelines, necessary resources and steps toward listing and selling the home. She partners with vetted, senior-focused service providers who handle the packing and moving logistics. While some transitions take as little as three months, others may unfold over a year or longer. Patience and ongoing communication are often the keys to success. Tune into the full episode to learn more tips for moving older loved ones into age-appropriate housing. For more information about Atlanta Seniors Real Estate, visit www.AtlantaSeniorsRealEstate.com. Looking for active adult living in the Atlanta area? Discover 55-plus communities here. The post From Someday to Today: It's Time to Talk About Senior Housing appeared first on Atlanta Real Estate Forum.

The search for Chris Kirkpatrick is on. Lovina will not rest until her all-time fave makes his Diary Room debut- but will it be today? Time to advance three more players to round 2! Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the podcast of Saint Patrick's Anglican Church in Lexington, KY. We meet Sundays at 4:30 p.m. at 200 Colony Blvd., Lexington, KY 40502. This podcast contains sermons and teaching for spiritual formation. Explore our church at www.saintpatrickschurch.org

“God Is Fully With Us In These Strange Days”   By Mary Lindow   Just over 2,000 years ago, Emmanuel, also called the Christ, changed the world.  In that moment when God became flesh, humanity watched prophecies unfold as hope was born. Jesus, our Emmanuel, provided hope that sin and death wouldn't always win and mankind wouldn't always feel so painfully alone.    What Does Emmanuel Mean in the Bible? It's a word written on countless Christmas cards and sung in some of our most-loved carols.  In Scripture, it first appears in the Old Testament in Isaiah 7:14, which says,    “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign;  The virgin will conceive, and give birth to a Son, and will call Him Emmanuel”.   The Lord Himself will do this, Scripture says.  In other words, this act, which occurred in the birth of Christ, was God-ordained and God-accomplished.    This points to grace, which doesn't come through human effort but rather through relying on God to do what we humans cannot. This was the reason Christ came.    God GAVE us this child, named Emmanuel, which literally means,  “with us is God,” or “God WITH us.”    He may seem distant.  It may even seem impossible this year for you to feel hopeful.  You might have lost your job.  Or maybe you're feeling isolated from those you love.  You may have even grieved the loss of a family member or friend.   Though he may have felt far away to them,  God was so much closer than his people knew — gently planning Jesus' entrance into the world in the most unexpected way.   Looking around, all you might be able to see right now is darkness.  If you try to adjust your eyes, blinking into the night, there seems to be no light.  The weight of sickness, death, injustice and pain perhaps, seem too heavy.   That's why I love this idea of advent which is practiced only among Christians.  And yes, it comes from probably a more liturgical view, but has been so embraced and now practice in homes and church gatherings across the world, as families gather to contemplate and to pray and to spend quiet time discussing when Jesus came as a child as the Messiah!  Emmanuel!!! God WITH Us!     Advent means "coming" or "arrival" and refers to the Christian season that begins four Sundays before Christmas, where focusing on preparation for the celebration of Jesus's birth and his anticipated return is a beautiful thing! It's definitely better than the commercial glut of constant “buy, buy, buy,” and, the overkill of sappy fantasy Christmas shows, as well as the pressurized giving of gifts to every boss, coworker, friend and pet!  It's a time of expectation, reverence and hope for many Christians!   I was reading through a Wycliffe advent devotional last evening, and these words so struck me that I'm going to share them with you trusting that they too, will move your heart to remember that Emmanuel, God …. IS with us!  No matter what may come   This excerpt of the devotional said, “As we enter the Advent season, do you feel weary? You're not alone. Or maybe you're just tired. Numb. Ready to pull the covers over your head and try this whole "Christmas cheer" thing again next year.    Don't feel guilty.  Instead, acknowledge the very real darkness of this world and you'll have eyes to see Advent through the same lens as the people waiting for a Messiah thousands of years ago. You could even say that being weary and worn out is an acceptable place from which to approach this Advent season. Because Advent exists to remind us that, while darkness surrounds us and troubles exist, the hope of Christmas isn't far away.   The people of Israel hadn't heard anything from God about their redeemer.  God's chosen people must have cried out to him, asking how long it would be before their hope, their salvation, would arrive!  It was too dark, and God seemed to be silent.    Has he felt that way to you this year? Silent? Though he may have felt far away to them, God was so much closer than his people knew —gently planning Jesus' entrance into the world in the most unexpected way.   But at the appointed time, Jesus came — God with us in flesh and blood. Born in Bethlehem, carried to Egypt, raised in Nazareth. Son of Man and Son of God. A humble child and a holy King. Worshiped by some, rejected by many. Fully human, yet eternally divine.”     What beautiful and raw honesty in those words in that excerpt from the devotional!   Friends! Any way you look at it, Emmanuel was a living Divine Grace.  The infinite King, wrapped in the cloth of an infant.  The holy One, living among the fallen.  In Him, the impossible became real, not only in prophecy, but in His very presence.    When God stepped into our world,  “impossible” lost all meaning.     In Isaiah 42:16 it says, “And I will bring the blind by a way that they knew not;  I will lead them in paths that they have not known:  I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight.  These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them.”      Dear believer!  The darkness of this world has always tried encroach upon the joy and the hope of God being with his people.  It hates that we cling to the light, and even though we cannot see or understand, everything fully about the ONE who came and paid the price for us, yet we abandoned our own hearts to him, trusting that he will guide and light our path. It is in this practice that all of hell must bow its knee and tremble for the very fact that Christ is in us and he is the hope of glory.  Someday we will return to the ONE who created us, but for now, he has come to walk with us, to be with us, and his Holy Spirit is here to correct, to guide, to convict and to advocate for us.    Let us cry out, “Oh Come! Oh Come Emmanuel! Oh come God! Be with us, in us, and move through us to help others who are trapped in the darkness!”   Let's take time to pray together about all of this right now. Lord God, only you can see into our hearts and know that under all the busy-ness of our lives , there is a deep longing to make this season one that welcomes you more deeply into our own lives.   Our hearts desire the warmth of your love and our minds search for your Light in the midst of the darkness. Help us to be peacemakers this season and to give special love to those who disagree with us. Please, Give us the strength and courage to forgive those who have hurt us or who treat us dismissively. Help us to free our hearts from the prison of anger and hurt. Only you Lord can bless us, protect us from all evil, and bring us rest in this weary world. We thank you for being a God that IS  with us! Amen.   Duplication and sharing of this writing is welcomed As long as the complete message, website and podcast  information for Mary Lindow is included. Thank You! Copyright © 2025   " THE MESSENGER "  - "The Advocate of Hope"  Mary Lindow www.marylindow.com PODCAST   If you would be so kind and assist Mary helping her to meet other administrative needs such as website and podcast costs,  or  desire to bless her service in ministry with Spirit-led Love gifts or regular support: Please JOYFULLY send your gift in the form of:  ► Personal Checks ► Business Checks ► Money Orders ► Cashiers Checks To:  His Beloved Ministries Inc.  PO Box 1253 Denver, Colorado 80614  USA    Or feel free to use our send a tax-deductible gift with Pay Pal   paypal.me/mlindow  Under the name of - Mary Lindow His Beloved Ministries Inc.    ALL gifts are tax-deductible under His Beloved Ministries 5013c non-profit status.   We are financially accountable and have been in full compliance since 1985.  THANK YOU!      

This is one in a series about possible futures, which will be published in Booch News over the coming weeks. Episode 7 appeared last week. New episodes drop every Friday. Overview Peer-to-peer flavor-sharing platforms enabled home brewers to distribute taste profiles as digital files. Blockchain-verified SCOBY genetics allowed anyone to recreate award-winning kombucha flavors. Traditional beverage companies lost control as open-source fermentation recipes spread globally. This episode follows teenage hacker Luna Reyes as she reverse-engineers Heineken’s proprietary “A-yeast” strain and the century-old master strain used for Budweiser, releasing them under Creative Commons license, triggering a flavor renaissance that made corporate beverages taste like cardboard by comparison. Luna Reyes: The Seventeen-Year-Old Who Liberated Flavor Luna Reyes was brewing kombucha in her Oakland garage when she changed the course of human history. The daughter of Mexican immigrants, she had learned fermentation from her grandmother while teaching herself bioinformatics through YouTube tutorials and volunteering at the Counter Culture Labs Maker Space on Shattuck Avenue. By fifteen, she was running the Bay Area’s most sophisticated home laboratory, utilizing jury-rigged DNA sequencers and microscopes constructed from smartphone cameras. Her breakthrough came in February 2043 while investigating why her kombucha never tasted quite like expensive craft varieties and was different again from her grandmother’s home brew. Using Crispr techniques learned from online forums, Luna began reverse-engineering the microbial genetics of premium alcoholic beverages. Her target wasn’t kombucha—it was the closely guarded yeast strains that gave corporate beers their distinctive flavors. Luna hunched over her microscope, examining bacterial cultures from her latest kombucha batch. Around her, salvaged DNA sequencers hummed, fermentation vessels bubbled, and computer screens displayed multi-hued patterns of genetic sequences. Her grandmother, Rosa, entered carrying a tray with three glasses of homemade kombucha. “Mija, you’ve been working for six hours straight. Drink something.” Luna accepted the glass without looking up. “Abuela, your kombucha tastes better than anything I can buy in stores and the ones I’ve experimented with. Why? I’m using the same base ingredients—tea, sugar, water—but mine never has this complexity.” Her grandmother laughed. “Because I’ve been feeding this SCOBY for forty years. It knows what to do. You can’t rush relationships.” Luna’s sister Maya, lounging against a workbench, waved her phone. “Luna, people have noticed your forum post about Health-Ade’s fermentation process. Someone says you’re wasting your time trying to replicate commercial kombuchas.” “I’m not trying to replicate them,” Luna said, finally looking up. “I’m trying to understand why their kombucha tastes different than that I make at home. It’s not the ingredients. It’s not the process. It’s the microbial genetics.” Rosa sat down beside her granddaughter. “When I was young in Oaxaca, every family had their own kombucha culture, passed down generation to generation. Each tasted different because the bacteria adapted to their environment, their ingredients, their care. We had a saying, Hay tantas fermentaciones en el mundo como estrellas en el cielo nocturno – there are as many ferments in the world as stars in the night sky. The big companies want every bottle to be identical. That kills what makes fermentation special.” “Exactly!” Luna pulled up genetic sequences on her screen. “I’ve been reverse-engineering samples from different commercial kombuchas. Health-Ade, GT’s, Brew Dr—they all have consistent microbial profiles.” The Great Heist: Cracking Corporate DNA Luna’s first major hack targeted Heineken’s legendary “A-yeast” strain, developed in 1886 by Dr. Hartog Elion—a student of renowned chemist Louis Pasteur—in the company’s Amsterdam laboratory and protected by over 150 years of trade secret law. Using samples obtained from discarded brewery waste (technically legal under the “garbage doctrine”), she spent six months mapping the strain’s complete genetic sequence in her makeshift lab. The breakthrough required extraordinary ingenuity. Luna couldn’t afford professional gene sequencers, so she modified a broken Illumina iSeq100 purchased on eBay for $200. Her sequencing runs took weeks rather than hours; her results were identical to those produced by million-dollar laboratory equipment. Her detailed laboratory notebooks, later published as The Garage Genomics Manifesto, became essential reading for the biotech hacker movement. The Budweiser project proved even more challenging. Anheuser-Busch’s century-old master strain had been protected by layers of corporate secrecy rivaling classified military programs. The company maintained multiple backup cultures in cryogenic facilities across three continents, never allowing complete genetic mapping by outside researchers. Luna’s success required infiltrating the company’s waste-disposal systems at four breweries, collecting samples over 18 months while evading corporate security. The Decision The night before Luna was scheduled to meet her fellow bio-hackers at Oakland’s Counter Culture Labs, she sat at her workstation, hesitant, wondering if she was doing the right thing. Her sister Maya came in, looking worried. “Luna, I found something you need to see,” she says. “Remember Marcus Park? He tried releasing proprietary yeast information in 2039. Heineken buried him. He lost everything. His daughter dropped out of college. His wife left him. He’s working at a gas station now.” Luna spent the night researching what happened to Park. She found that almost everyone who challenged corporate IP ended up on the losing side of the law. It was not pretty. In the morning, Abuela Rosa finds her crying in her room. “Mija, what’s wrong?” she asks. “Oh, Abuela,” Luna says between sobs. “What am I doing? What if I’m wrong? What if I destroy our family? What if this ruins Mom and Dad? What if I’m just being selfish?” “That’s the fear talking.” Her grandmother reassured her. “Fear is wisdom warning you to be careful. But fear can also be a cage.” That evening at the Counter Culture Labs, Luna assembled a small group of advisors. She needed their guidance. She had the completed genetic sequences for Heineken A-yeast and Budweiser’s master strain on her laptop, ready for release. But is this the time and place to release them to the world? Dr. Marcus Webb, a bioinformatics researcher in his forties and Luna’s mentor, examined her sequencing data. “This is solid work, Luna. Your jury-rigged equipment is crude. The results are accurate. You’ve fully mapped both strains.” “The question isn’t whether I can do it,” Luna said. “It’s whether I should let the world know I did it.” On screen, Cory Doctorow, the author and digital rights activist, leaned forward. “Let’s be clear about what you’re proposing. You’d be releasing genetic information that corporations have protected as trade secrets for over a century. They’ll argue you stole their intellectual property. You’ll face lawsuits, possibly criminal charges.” “Is it their property?” Luna challenged. “These are naturally occurring organisms. They didn’t create that yeast. Evolution did. They just happened to be there when it appeared. That does not make it theirs any more than finding a wildflower means they own the species. Can you really own something that existed before you found it?” Doctorow, the Electronic Frontier Foundation representative spoke up. “There’s legal precedent both ways. Diamond v. Chakrabarty established that genetically modified organisms can be patented. But naturally occurring genetic sequences? That’s murky. The companies will argue that their decades of cultivation and protection created protectable trade secrets.” “Trade secrets require keeping information secret,” Luna argued. “They throw this yeast away constantly. If they’re not protecting it, how can they claim trade secret status?” Dr. Webb cautioned, “Luna, even if you’re legally in the right—which is debatable—you’re seventeen years old. You’ll be fighting multinational corporations with unlimited legal resources. They’ll bury you in litigation for years.” “That’s where we come in,” Doctorow said. “The EFF can provide legal defense. Creative Commons can help structure the license. You need to understand: this will consume your life. College, career plans, normal teenage experiences—all on hold while you fight this battle.” Luna was quiet for a moment, then pulled up a photo on her laptop: her grandmother Rosa, teaching her to ferment at age seven. “My abuela says fermentation is about sharing and passing living cultures between generations. Corporations have turned it into intellectual property to be protected and controlled. If I can break that control—even a little—isn’t that worth fighting for?” Maya spoke up from the back. “Luna, I love you, but you’re being naive. They won’t just sue you. They’ll make an example of you. Your face on every news channel, portrayed as a thief, a criminal. Our family harassed. Your future destroyed. For what? So people can brew beer with the same yeast as Heineken?” “Not just beer,” Luna responded passionately. “This is about whether living organisms can be owned. Whether genetic information—the code of life itself—can be locked behind intellectual property law. Yes, it starts with beer yeast. But what about beneficial bacteria? Life-saving microorganisms? Medicine-producing fungi? Where does it end?” Dr. Webb nodded slowly. “She’s right. This is bigger than beer. As biotech advances, genetic control becomes power over life itself. Do we want corporations owning that?” Doctorow sighed. “If you do this, Luna, do it right. Release everything simultaneously—BitTorrent, WikiLeaks, Creative Commons servers, distributed networks worldwide. Make it impossible to contain. Include complete cultivation protocols so anyone can reproduce your results. Make the data so damn widely available that suppressing it becomes futile.” “And write a manifesto,” he added. “Explain why you’re doing this. Frame the issue. Make it about principles, not piracy.” Luna nodded, fingers already typing. “When should I release?” “Pick a date with symbolic meaning,” Dr. Webb suggested. “Make it an event, not just a data dump.” Luna smiled. “December 15. The Bill of Rights Day. Appropriate for declaring biological rights, don’t you think?” Maya groaned. “You’re really doing this, aren’t you?” “Yes. I’m really doing this.” The Creative Commons Liberation On Tuesday, December 15, 2043—a date now celebrated as “Open Flavor Day”—Luna released the genetic sequences on multiple open-source networks. Her manifesto, titled Your Grandmother’s Yeast Is Your Birthright, argued that microbial genetics belonged to humanity’s shared heritage rather than corporate shareholders. It stated: Commercial companies have protected yeast strains for over a century. They’ve used intellectual property law to control flavor itself. But genetic information isn’t like a recipe or a formula—it’s biological code that evolved over millions of years before humans ever cultivated it. These strains are protected as trade secrets—the bacteria don’t belong to anyone. They existed before Heineken, before Budweiser, before trademark law. The companies just happened to isolate and cultivate them. Her data packages included DNA sequences and complete protocols for cultivating, modifying, and improving the strains. Luna’s releases came with user-friendly software that allowed amateur brewers to simulate genetic modifications before attempting them in real fermentations. Within 24 hours, over ten thousand people worldwide downloaded the files. The Creative Commons community erupted in celebration. Cory Doctorow’s blog post, The Teenager Who Stole Christmas (From Corporate Beer), went viral within hours. The Electronic Frontier Foundation immediately offered Luna legal protection, while the Free Software Foundation created the “Luna Defense Fund” to support her anticipated legal battles. The Legal Assault Heineken’s response was swift. The company filed emergency injunctions in 12 countries simultaneously, seeking to prevent the distribution of its “stolen intellectual property.” Their legal team, led by former U.S. Attorney General William Barr III, demanded Luna’s immediate arrest for “economic terrorism” and “theft of trade secrets valued at over $50 billion.” Anheuser-Busch’s reaction was even more extreme. CEO Marcel Telles IV appeared on CNBC, calling Luna “a bioterrorist who threatens the foundation of American capitalism.” The company hired private investigators to surveil Luna’s family and offered a $10 million reward for information leading to her prosecution. Their legal filing compared Luna’s actions to “stealing the formula for Coca-Cola and publishing it in the New York Times.” In Heineken’s Amsterdam headquarters, executives convened an emergency meeting. “Who is Luna Reyes?” the CEO demanded. The legal counsel pulled up information. “She’s a seventeen-year-old high school student in Oakland, California. No criminal record. Volunteers at a maker space. Has been posting about fermentation on various forums for years.” “A child released our proprietary yeast strain to the world, and we didn’t know she was even working on this?” The CEO’s face reddened. “How do we contain it?” “We can’t. It’s distributed across thousands of servers in dozens of countries with different IP laws. We can sue Reyes, but the information is out there permanently.” An executive interjected, “What about the other breweries? Will they join our lawsuit?” “Some are considering it. Others…” The counsel paused. “Others are quietly downloading the sequences themselves. They see an opportunity to break our market dominance.” “She obtained samples from our waste disposal,” another executive explained. “Technically legal under the garbage doctrine. The sequencing itself isn’t illegal. The release under Creative Commons…” “Is theft!” the CEO shouted. “File emergency injunctions. Twelve countries. Get her arrested for economic terrorism.” Similar scenes played out at Anheuser-Busch headquarters in St. Louis. CEO Telles addressed his team: “This is bioterrorism. She’s destroyed intellectual property worth billions. I want her prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Hire private investigators. Find everything about her and her family. Make her life hell!” By noon, both companies had filed lawsuits. By evening, Fox News was running stories about the “teenage bioterrorist” who “stole American corporate secrets.” Back in Oakland, Luna’s phone rang constantly. Her parents discovered what she’d done. Her mother cried. Her father was furious and terrified. Friends called with either congratulations or warnings. She was convinced that private investigators were photographing their house. Maya suspected she was followed to work. On Wednesday morning, Dr. Webb calls: “Luna, they’re offering me $2 million to testify against you. They’re going after everyone in your network.” Luna has a sickening feeling that she’s put everyone at risk. By Thursday, she is considering taking it all back somehow, sending an apology to the corporations, anything to protect her family. Luna turned off her phone and sat with her grandmother. “It’s started,” Luna said quietly. “Sí, mija. You’ve declared war. Now we see if you can survive it.” Maya burst in, laptop in hand. “Luna, you need to see this. The downloads aren’t slowing—they’re accelerating. Every time Heineken or Budweiser shuts down a website, ten mirror sites appear. People are treating this like a digital freedom fight. You’ve become a symbol.” Luna pulled up her own screen. The #FreeLuna hashtag was trending. Crowdfunding campaigns for her legal defense had raised $400,000 in twelve hours. Academic institutions were publicly endorsing her release, calling it “essential scientific information.” “They’re trying to destroy you,” Maya said, “but they’re making you famous instead.” Rosa handed Luna a fresh kombucha. “This is what happens when you fight for what’s right, mija. Sometimes the world surprises you by supporting you.” Luna’s Fame The corporations’ attempts to suppress Luna’s releases had the opposite effect. Every cease-and-desist letter generated thousands of new downloads. The genetic data became impossible to contain once the academic community embraced Luna’s work. Dr. Jennifer Doudna, the legendary Crispr pioneer now in her eighties, publicly endorsed Luna’s releases in a Science magazine editorial: Ms. Reyes has liberated essential scientific information that corporations held hostage for commercial gain. Genetic sequences from naturally occurring organisms should not be locked behind intellectual property law. They belong to humanity’s knowledge commons. While corporations claim Luna stole trade secrets, I argue she freed biological knowledge that was never theirs to own. There are no trade secrets in biology—only knowledge temporarily hidden from the commons. This is civil disobedience of the highest order—breaking unjust laws to advance human freedom. Ms. Reyes didn’t steal; she liberated. MIT’s biology department invited Luna to lecture, while Harvard offered her a full scholarship despite her lack of a high school diploma. The legal battles consumed corporate resources while generating negative publicity. Heineken’s stock price dropped 34% as consumers organized boycotts in support of Luna’s “yeast liberation.” Beer sales plummeted as customers waited for home-brewed alternatives using Luna’s open-source genetics. The Flavor Renaissance Luna’s releases triggered an explosion of creativity that corporate R&D departments had never imagined. Within six months, amateur brewers worldwide were producing thousands of flavor variations impossible under corporate constraints. The open-source model enabled rapid iteration and global collaboration, rendering traditional brewing companies obsolete. The world was engaged. In some of the most unlikely places. In Evanston, Illinois, a group of former seminary students who discovered fermentation during a silent retreat, transformed Gregorian chants into microbial devotionals. Tenor Marcus Webb (Dr. Webb’s nephew) realized symbiosis mirrored vocal harmony—multiple voices creating something greater than their parts. “In honoring the mystery of fermentation we express our love of the Creator,” he said. Here's ‘Consortium Vocalis' honoring the mother SCOBY. [Chorus]Our SCOBYIs pureOur SCOBYIs strongOur SCOBYKnows no boundariesOur SCOBYStrengthens as it fermentsOur SCOBYIs bacteria and yeast Our SCOBYTurns sucrose into glucose and fructoseIt ferments these simple sugars into ethanol and carbon dioxide,Acetic acid bacteria oxidize much of that ethanol into organic acidsSuch as acetic, gluconic, and other acids.This steadily lowers the pHMaking the tea taste sour-tangy instead of purely sweet. [Chorus] Our SCOBYThen helps microbes produce acids, enzymes, and small amounts of B‑vitaminsWhile probiotics grow in the liquid.The pH falls to help inhibit unwanted microbesOur SCOBY creates a self-preserving, acidic environment in the tea [Chorus] In Kingston, Jamaica, Rastafarian’s combined an award-winning kombucha sequenced in Humboldt County, California, with locally grown ganja into a sacramental beverage to help open their mind to reasoning and focus on Jah. Once fermented, it was consumed over the course of a three-day Nyabinghi ceremony. “Luna Reyes is truly blessed. She strengthened our unity as a people, and our Rastafari’ booch help us chant down Babylon,” a Rasta man smiled, blowing smoke from a spliff the size of his arm. The Groundation Collective’s reggae anthem ‘Oh Luna’ joyfully celebrated Luna Reyes’ pioneering discovery. Oh Luna, Oh Luna, Oh Luna ReyesI love the sound of your nameYou so deserve your fame Luna, Luna, Oh Luna ReyesShining brightYou warm my heart Luna, Luna, Oh Luna ReyesYou cracked the codeTeenage prophet, fermentation queenSymbiosis roadA genius at seventeen Oh Luna, Luna, Luna ReyesBeautiful moonMakes me swoon Oh Luna, Luna, Luna ReyesFreedom to fermentYou are heaven sentTo save us Luna, Luna, Oh Luna ReyesYou opened the doorTo so much moreKombucha tastes so goodLike it should Oh Luna, Oh Luna, Oh LunaI love you, love you, love youOh Luna, Luna, LunaLove you, love you,Love Luna, Luna love. In São Paulo, Brazil, MAPA-certified Brazilian kombucha brands combined Heineken and cacao-fermenting yeasts with cupuaçu from indigenous Amazonian peoples, to create the chocolate-flavored ‘booch that won Gold at the 20th World Kombucha Awards. A cervejeiro explained to reporters: “Luna Reyes gave us the foundation. We added local innovation. This is what happens when you democratize biology.” The Brazilian singer Dandara Sereia covered ‘Our Fermented Future’—The Hollow Pines tune destined to become a hit at the 2053 Washington DC Fermentation Festival. Baby sit a little closer, sip some ‘booch with meI brewed this batch with the SCOBY my grandma gave to me.On the back porch swing at twilight, watching fireflies danceYour hand in mine, kombucha fine, the sweetest sweet romance. They say that wine and roses are the way to win the heartBut your kombucha warmed me right up from the start.Fermentation makes the heart grow fonder, truer words they ain’t been saidYour SCOBY’s got a place forever — in my heart, and in my bed. Let’s share our SCOBYs, baby, merge our ferments into oneLike cultures in a crock jar dancing, underneath the sun.The tang of your Lactobacillus is exactly what I’m missingYour Brettanomyces bacteria got this country girl reminiscing. Oh yeah, let’s share those SCOBYs, baby, merge our ferments into oneYour yeasts and my bacteria working till the magic’s doneYou’ve got the acetic acid honey, I’ve got the patience and the timeLet’s bubble up together, let our cultures intertwine. I’ve got that symbiotic feeling, something wild and something trueYour SCOBY’s in my heart, right there next to youThe way your Acetobacter turns sugar into goldIs how you turned my lonely life into a hand to hold. We’ve got the acetic acid and the glucuronic tooWe’ve got that symbiotic feeling, so righteous and so trueOne sip of your sweet ‘booch, Lord, and you had me from the start,It’s our fermented future, that no-one can tear apart. It’s our fermented future…It’s our fermented future…It’s our fermented future… “Luna Variants”—strains derived from her releases—began winning international brewing competitions, embarrassing corporate entries with their complexity and innovation. Traditional beer flavors seemed flat and artificial compared to the genetic symphonies created by collaborative open-source development. Despite the outpouring of positive vibes, the corporations spared no expense to hold Luna to account in the courts. The Preliminary Hearing A preliminary hearing was held in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on June 14, 2044. Luna sat at the defendant’s table, her hands folded so tightly her knuckles had gone white. She wore a borrowed blazer—too big in the shoulders—over a white button-down shirt Maya had ironed that morning. At seventeen, she looked even younger under the courtroom’s fluorescent lights. Across the aisle, Heineken’s legal team occupied three tables. Fifteen attorneys in matching navy suits shuffled documents and whispered into phones. Their lead counsel, William Barr III, wore gold cufflinks that caught the light when he gestured. Luna recognized him from the news—the former Attorney General, now commanding $2,000 an hour to destroy people like her. Her own legal representation consisted of two people: Rose Kennerson from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public interest lawyer who’d flown in from DC on a red-eye, and Dr. Marcus Webb, technically a witness but sitting beside Luna because she’d asked him to. Behind them, the gallery was packed. Luna’s parents sat in the second row, her father’s face gray, her mother clutching a rosary. Maya had taken the day off work. Abuela Rosa sat in the front row directly behind Luna, her ancient SCOBY wrapped in silk in her lap, as if its presence might protect her granddaughter. Judge Catherine Ironwood entered—sixty-ish, steel-gray hair pulled back severely, known for pro-corporate rulings. She’d been a pharmaceutical industry lawyer for twenty years before her appointment. “All rise,” the bailiff called. Judge Ironwood settled into her chair and surveyed the courtroom with the expression of someone who’d already decided the outcome and resented having to perform the formalities. “We’re here for a preliminary injunction hearing in Heineken International B.V. versus Luna Marie Reyes.” She looked directly at Luna. “Ms. Reyes, you’re seventeen years old?” Luna stood, hesitant. “Yes, your honor.” “Where are your parents?” “Here, your honor.” Luna’s mother half-rose, then sat back down. “Ms. Kennerson, your client is a minor. Are the parents aware they could be held liable for damages?” Rose Kennerson stood smoothly. “Yes, your honor. The Reyes family has been fully advised of the legal implications.” Luna glanced back. Her father’s jaw was clenched so tight she could see the muscles working. He wouldn’t meet her eyes. “Very well. Mr. Barr, you may proceed.” Barr rose like a battleship emerging from fog—massive, expensive, inevitable. He buttoned his suit jacket and approached the bench without notes. “Your honor, this is the simplest case I’ve argued in thirty years. The defendant admits to obtaining my client’s proprietary biological materials. She admits to sequencing their genetic information. She admits to distributing that information globally, in deliberate violation of trade secret protections that have existed for over 150 years. She did this knowingly, systematically, and with the explicit intent to destroy my client’s competitive advantage.” Luna felt Sarah’s hand on her arm—stay calm. Barr continued. “Heineken International has invested over $200 million in the development, cultivation, and protection of the A-yeast strain. Then this teenager”—he pointed at Luna—”obtained samples from our waste disposal systems, reverse-engineered our genetic sequences, and released them to the world via BitTorrent, deliberately placing them beyond retrieval.” He paced now, warming to his theme. “The damage is incalculable. We estimate lost market value at $50 billion. But it’s not just about money. The defendant has destroyed the possibility of competition in the brewing industry. When everyone has access to the same genetic materials, there’s no innovation, no differentiation, no reason for consumers to choose one product over another. She has, in effect, communized an entire industry.” Luna couldn’t help herself. “That’s not—” Sarah grabbed her wrist. “Don’t.” Judge Ironwood’s eyes narrowed. “Ms. Reyes, you will have your opportunity to speak. Until then, you will remain silent, or I will have you removed from this courtroom. Do you understand?” “Yes, your honor.” Luna’s voice came out smaller than she intended. Barr smiled slightly. “Your honor, the relief we seek is straightforward. We ask this court to order the defendant to provide us with a complete list of all servers, websites, and distribution networks where the stolen genetic data currently resides. We ask that she be ordered to cooperate fully in suppressing the data. We ask that she be enjoined from any further distribution. And we ask that she be ordered to pay compensatory damages of $5 billion, plus punitive damages to be determined at trial.” He returned to his seat. One of his associate attorneys handed him a bottle of Pellegrino. He took a sip and waited. Judge Ironwood looked at Sarah. “Ms. Kennerson?” Sarah stood. She looked tiny compared to Barr—five-foot-three, maybe 110 pounds, wearing a suit from Target. But when she spoke, her voice filled the courtroom. “Your honor, Mr. Barr has given you a compelling story about a corporation that’s been wronged. But it’s not the right story. The right story is about whether naturally occurring organisms—creatures that evolved over millions of years, long before humans ever existed—can be owned by a corporation simply because that corporation happened to isolate them.” She walked toward the bench. “Let’s be clear about what the A-yeast strain is. It’s not a genetically modified organism. It’s not a patented invention. It’s a naturally occurring yeast. Heineken didn’t create it. Evolution created it. Heineken merely found it. And for 158 years, they’ve claimed that finding something gives them the right to prevent anyone else from studying it, understanding it, or using it.” Barr was on his feet. “Objection, your honor. This is a preliminary hearing about injunctive relief, not a philosophical debate about intellectual property theory.” “Sustained. Ms. Kennerson, please focus on the specific legal issues before this court.” “Your honor, the specific legal issue is whether naturally occurring genetic sequences constitute protectable trade secrets. My client contends they do not. She obtained the yeast samples from Heineken’s waste disposal—materials they had discarded. Under the garbage doctrine, she had every right to analyze those materials. The genetic sequences she discovered are factual information about naturally occurring organisms. You cannot trade-secret facts about nature.” Luna watched Judge Ironwood’s face. Nothing. No reaction. Sarah pressed on. “Mr. Barr claims my client ‘stole’ genetic information worth $5 billion. But information cannot be stolen—it can only be shared. When I tell you a fact, I don’t lose possession of that fact. We both have it. That’s how knowledge works. Heineken hasn’t lost their yeast. They still have it. They can still brew with it. What they’ve lost is their monopoly on that knowledge. And monopolies on facts about nature should never have existed in the first place.” “Your honor—” Barr tried to interrupt. Judge Ironwood waved him down. “Continue, Ms. Kennerson.” “Your honor, Heineken wants this court to order a seventeen-year-old girl to somehow suppress information that has already been distributed to over 100,000 people in 147 countries. That’s impossible. You can’t unring a bell. You can’t put knowledge back in a bottle. Even if this court ordered my client to provide a list of servers—which she shouldn’t have to do—that list would be incomplete within hours as new mirror sites appeared. The information is out. The only question is whether we punish my client for sharing factual information about naturally occurring organisms.” She turned to face Luna’s family. “Ms. Reyes taught herself bioinformatics from YouTube videos. She works at home with equipment she bought on eBay. She has no criminal record. She’s never been in trouble. She saw a question that interested her—why do commercial beers taste like they do?—and she pursued that question with the tools available to her. When she discovered the answer, she shared it with the world, under a Creative Commons license that specifically protects sharing for educational and scientific purposes. If that’s terrorism, your honor, then every scientist who’s ever published a research paper is a terrorist.” Sarah sat down. Luna wanted to hug her. Judge Ironwood leaned back. “Ms. Reyes, stand up.” Luna rose, her legs shaking. “Do you understand the seriousness of these proceedings?” “Yes, your honor.” “Do you understand that Heineken International is asking me to hold you in contempt of court if you refuse to help them suppress the information you released?” “Yes, your honor.” “Do you understand that contempt of court could result in your detention in a juvenile facility until you reach the age of eighteen, and potentially longer if the contempt continues?” Luna’s mother gasped audibly. Her father put his arm around her. “Yes, your honor,” Luna said, though her voice wavered. “Then let me ask you directly: If I order you to provide Heineken with a complete list of all locations where the genetic data you released currently resides, will you comply?” The courtroom went silent. Luna could hear her own heartbeat. Sarah started to stand—”Your honor, I advise my client not to answer—” “Sit down, Ms. Kennerson. I’m asking your client a direct question. She can choose to answer or not.” Judge Ironwood’s eyes never left Luna. “Well, Ms. Reyes? Will you comply with a court order to help Heineken suppress the information you released?” Luna looked at her parents. Her mother was crying silently. Her father’s face was stone. She looked at Abuela Rosa. Her grandmother nodded once—tell the truth. Luna looked back at the judge. “No, your honor.” Barr shot to his feet. “Your honor, the defendant has just admitted she intends to defy a court order—” “I heard her, Mr. Barr.” Judge Ironwood’s voice was ice. “Ms. Reyes, do you understand you’ve just told a federal judge you will refuse a direct order?” “Yes, your honor.” “And you’re still refusing?” “Yes, your honor.” “Why?” Sarah stood quickly. “Your honor, my client doesn’t have to explain—” “I want to hear it.” Judge Ironwood leaned forward. “Ms. Reyes, tell me why you would risk jail rather than help undo what you’ve done.” Luna took a breath. Her whole body was shaking, but her voice was steady. “Because it would be wrong, your honor.” “Wrong how?” “The genetic sequences I released evolved over millions of years. Heineken didn’t create that yeast. They isolated one strain and claimed ownership of it. The code of life belongs to everyone. That’s humanity’s heritage. Even if you send me to jail, I can’t help suppress the truth.” Judge Ironwood stared at her for a long moment. “That’s a very pretty speech, Ms. Reyes. But this court operates under the law, not your personal philosophy about what should or shouldn’t be owned. Trade secret law exists. Heineken’s rights exist. And you violated those rights.” Luna did not hesitate. “With respect, your honor, I don’t think those rights should exist.” Barr exploded. “Your honor, this is outrageous! The defendant is openly stating she believes she has the right to violate any law she disagrees with—” “That’s not what I said.” Luna’s fear was transforming into something else—something harder. “I’m saying that some laws are unjust. And when laws are unjust, civil disobedience becomes necessary. People broke unjust laws during the civil rights movement. People broke unjust laws when they helped slaves escape. The constitution says members of the military do not have to obey illegal orders, despite what those in power might claim. Sometimes the law is wrong. And when the law says corporations can own genetic information about naturally occurring organisms, the law is wrong.” Judge Ironwood’s face flushed. “Ms. Reyes, you are not Rosa Parks. This is not the civil rights movement. This is a case about intellectual property theft.” “It’s a case about whether life can be property, your honor.” “Enough.” Judge Ironwood slammed her gavel. “Ms. Kennerson, control your client.” Sarah pulled Luna back into her chair. “Luna, stop talking,” she hissed. Judge Ironwood shuffled papers, visibly trying to compose herself. “I’m taking a fifteen-minute recess to consider the injunction request. We’ll reconvene at 11:30. Ms. Reyes, I strongly suggest you use this time to reconsider your position.” The gavel fell again, and Judge Ironwood swept out. The hallway outside the courtroom erupted. Reporters swarmed. Luna’s father grabbed her arm and pulled her into a witness room. Her mother followed, still crying. Maya slipped in before Sarah closed the door. “What were you thinking?” Luna’s father’s voice shook. “You just told a federal judge you’ll defy her orders. They’re going to put you in jail, Luna. Do you understand that? Jail!” “Ricardo, please—” Her mother tried to calm him. “No, Elena. Our daughter just committed contempt of court in front of fifty witnesses. They’re going to take her from us.” He turned to Luna, his eyes wet. “Why? Why couldn’t you just apologize? Say you made a mistake? We could have ended this.” “Because I didn’t make a mistake, Papa.” “You destroyed their property!” “It wasn’t their property. It was never their property.” “The law says it was!” “Then the law is wrong!” Her father stepped back as if she’d slapped him. “Do you know what your mother and I have sacrificed to keep you out of trouble? Do you know how hard we’ve worked since we came to this country to give you opportunities we never had? And you throw it away for yeast. Not for justice. Not for people. For yeast.” Luna’s eyes filled with tears. “It’s not about yeast, Papa. It’s about whether corporations get to own life. If Heineken can own yeast, why not bacteria? Why not human genes? Where does it stop?” “It stops when my daughter goes to jail!” He was shouting now. “I don’t care about Heineken. I don’t care about yeast. I care about you. And you just told that judge you’ll defy her. She’s going to put you in jail, and there’s nothing I can do to stop it.” “Ricardo, por favor—” Elena put her hand on his arm. He shook it off. “No. She needs to hear this. Luna, if you go to jail, your life is over. No college will accept you. No company will hire you. You’ll have a criminal record. You’ll be marked forever. Is that what you want?” “I want to do what’s right.” “What’s right is protecting your family! What’s right is not destroying your future for a principle!” he said. Luna responded, “What’s right is not letting corporations own the code of life!”They stared at each other. Maya spoke up quietly from the corner. “Papa, she can’t back down now. The whole world is watching.” “Let the world watch someone else!” Ricardo turned on Maya. “You encourage this. You film her, you post her manifestos online, you help her become famous. You’re her sister. You’re supposed to protect her, not help her destroy herself.” “I am protecting her,” Maya said. “I’m protecting her from becoming someone who backs down when the world tells her she’s wrong, even though she knows she’s right.” Ricardo looked between his daughters. “Ambos están locos! You’re both insane.” Abuela Rosa opened the door and entered. She’d been listening from the hallway. “Ricardo, enough.” “Mama, stay out of this.” “No.” Rosa moved between Ricardo and Luna. “You’re afraid. I understand. But fear makes you cruel, mijo. Your daughter is brave. She’s doing something important. And you’re making her choose between you and what’s right. Don’t do that.” “She’s seventeen years old! She’s a child!” “She’s old enough to know right from wrong.” Rosa put her hand on Ricardo’s cheek. “When I was sixteen, I left Oaxaca with nothing but the clothes on my back and this SCOBY. Everyone said I was crazy. Your father said I would fail. But I knew I had to go, even if it cost me everything. Sometimes our children have to do things that terrify us. That’s how the world changes.” Ricardo pulled away. “If they put her in jail, will that change the world, Mama? When she’s sitting in a cell while Heineken continues doing whatever they want, will that have been worth it?” “Yes,” Luna said quietly. “Even if I go to jail, yes. Because thousands of people now have the genetic sequences, Heineken can’t put that back. They can punish me, but they can’t undo what I did. The information is free. It’s going to stay free. And if the price of that is me going to jail, then that’s the price.” Her father looked at her as if seeing her for the first time. “I don’t know who you are anymore.” “I’m still your daughter, Papa. I’m just also someone who won’t let corporations own life.” A knock on the door. Sarah poked her head in. “They’re reconvening. Luna, we need to go.” Back in the courtroom, the atmosphere had shifted. The gallery was more crowded—word had spread during the recess. Luna recognized several people from online forums. Some held signs reading “FREE LUNA” and “GENETICS BELONG TO EVERYONE.” Judge Ironwood entered and sat without ceremony. “I’ve reviewed the submissions and heard the arguments. This is my ruling.” Luna’s hand found Maya’s in the row behind her. Squeezed tight. “The question before this court is whether to grant Heineken International’s motion for a preliminary injunction requiring Ms. Reyes to assist in suppressing the genetic information she released. To grant such an injunction, Heineken must demonstrate four things: likelihood of success on the merits, likelihood of irreparable harm without the injunction, balance of equities in their favor, and that an injunction serves the public interest.” Barr was nodding. These were his arguments. “Having considered the evidence and the applicable law, I find that Heineken has demonstrated likelihood of success on the merits. Trade secret law clearly protects proprietary business information, and the A-yeast strain appears to meet the legal definition of a trade secret.” Luna’s stomach dropped. “However, I also find that Heineken has failed to demonstrate that a preliminary injunction would effectively prevent the irreparable harm they claim. Ms. Kennerson is correct that the genetic information has already been distributed to over 100,000 people worldwide. Ordering one teenager to provide a list of servers would be, in technical terms, pointless. New copies would appear faster than they could be suppressed.” Barr’s face tightened. “Furthermore, I find that the balance of equities does not favor Heineken. They ask this court to potentially incarcerate a seventeen-year-old girl for refusing to suppress information that is, by her account, factual data about naturally occurring organisms. The potential harm to Ms. Reyes—including detention, criminal record, and foreclosure of educational and career opportunities—substantially outweighs any additional harm Heineken might suffer from continued distribution of information that is already widely distributed.” Luna felt Maya’s grip tighten. Was this good? This sounded good. “Finally, and most importantly, I find that granting this injunction would not serve the public interest. The court takes judicial notice that this case has generated substantial public debate about the scope of intellectual property protection in biotechnology. The questions raised by Ms. Reyes—whether naturally occurring genetic sequences should be ownable, whether facts about nature can be trade secrets, whether knowledge can be property—are questions that deserve answers from a higher authority than this court. These are questions for appellate courts, perhaps ultimately for the Supreme Court. And they are questions best answered in the context of a full trial on the merits, not in an emergency injunction hearing.” Barr was on his feet. “Your honor—” “Sit down, Mr. Barr. I’m not finished.” He sat, his face purple. “Therefore, Heineken International’s motion for preliminary injunction is denied. Ms. Reyes will not be required to assist in suppressing the genetic information she released. However,”—Judge Ironwood looked directly at Luna—”this ruling should not be construed as approval of Ms. Reyes’ actions. Heineken’s claims for damages and other relief remain viable and will proceed to trial. Ms. Reyes, you may have won this battle, but this war is far from over. Anything you want to say?” Luna stood slowly. “Your honor, I just want to say… thank you. For letting this go to trial. For letting these questions be answered properly. That’s all I ever wanted—for someone to seriously consider whether corporations should be allowed to own genetic information about naturally occurring organisms. So thank you.” Judge Ironwood’s expression softened slightly. “Ms. Reyes, I hope you’re prepared for what comes next. Heineken has unlimited resources. They will pursue this case for years if necessary. You’ll be in litigation until you’re twenty-five years old. Your entire young adulthood will be consumed by depositions, court appearances, and legal fees. Are you prepared for that?” “Yes, your honor.” “Why?” Luna glanced at her grandmother, who nodded. “Because some questions are worth answering, your honor. Even if it takes years. Even if it costs everything. The question of whether corporations can own life—that’s worth answering. And if I have to spend my twenties answering it, then that’s what I’ll do.” Judge Ironwood studied her for a long moment. “You remind me of someone I used to know. Someone who believed the law should serve justice, not just power.” She paused. “That person doesn’t exist anymore. The law ground her down. I hope it doesn’t do the same to you.” She raised her gavel. “This hearing is adjourned. The parties will be notified of the trial date once it’s scheduled. Ms. Reyes, good luck. I think you’re going to need it.” The gavel fell. Outside the courthouse, the scene was chaotic. News cameras surrounded Luna. Reporters shouted questions. But Luna barely heard them. She was looking at her father, who stood apart from the crowd, watching her. She walked over to him. “Papa, I’m sorry I yelled.” He didn’t speak for a moment. Then he pulled her into a hug so tight it hurt. “Don’t apologize for being brave,” he whispered into her hair. “I’m just afraid of losing you.” “You won’t lose me, Papa. I promise.” “You can’t promise that. Not anymore.” He pulled back, holding her shoulders. “But I’m proud of you. I’m terrified, but I’m proud.” Her mother joined them, tears streaming down her face. “No more court. Please, no more court.” “I can’t promise that either, Mama.” Elena touched Luna’s face. “Then promise me you’ll be careful. Promise me you’ll remember that you’re not just fighting for genetics. You’re fighting for your life.” Luna smiled. “I promise.” Abuela Rosa appeared, carrying her SCOBY. “Come, mija. We should go before the reporters follow us home.” As they pushed through the crowd toward Maya’s car, Luna's phone buzzed continuously. Text messages and emails pouring in. But what caught her attention was a text from Dr. Webb: You were right. I’m sorry I doubted. Check your email—Dr. Doudna wants to talk. Luna opened her email. The subject line made her stop walking: From: jennifer.doudna@berkeley.eduSubject: Civil Disobedience of the Highest Order She started to read: Dear Ms. Reyes, I watched your hearing this morning. What you did in that courtroom—refusing to back down even when threatened with jail—was one of the bravest things I’ve seen in forty years of science. You’re not just fighting for yeast genetics. You’re fighting for the principle that knowledge about nature belongs to humanity, not to corporations. I want to help… Luna looked up at her family—her father’s worried face, her mother’s tears, Maya’s proud smile, Abuela Rosa’s serene confidence. Behind them, the courthouse where she’d nearly been sent to jail. Around them, reporters and cameras and strangers who’d traveled across the country to support her. She thought about Judge Ironwood’s warning: This war is far from over. She thought about Barr’s face when the injunction was denied. She thought about the thousands who’d downloaded the genetic sequences and were, right now, brewing with genetics that had been locked away for 158 years. Worth it. All of it. Even the fear. Maya opened the car door. “Come on, little revolutionary. Let’s go home.” The Corporate Surrender By 2045, both Heineken and Anheuser-Busch quietly dropped their lawsuits against Luna. Their legal costs had exceeded $200 million while accomplishing nothing except generating bad publicity. More importantly, their “protected” strains had become worthless in a market flooded with superior alternatives. Heineken’s CEO attempted to salvage the company by embracing open-source brewing. His announcement that Heineken would “join the La Luna Revolution” was met with skepticism from the brewing community, which recalled the company’s aggressive legal tactics. The craft brewing community’s response was hostile. “They spent two years trying to destroy her,” a prominent brewmaster told The New Brewer Magazine. “Now they want credit for ’embracing’ the revolution she forced on them? Heineken didn’t join the Luna Revolution—they surrendered to it. There’s a difference.” The global brands never recovered their market share. Luna’s Transformation Luna’s success transformed her from a garage tinkerer into a global icon of the open knowledge movement. Her 2046 TED Talk, “Why Flavor Belongs to Everyone,” went viral. She argued that corporate control over living organisms represented “biological colonialism” that impoverished human culture by restricting natural diversity. Rather than commercializing her fame, Luna founded the Global Fermentation Commons, a nonprofit organization dedicated to preserving and sharing microbial genetics worldwide. Their laboratories operated as open-access research facilities where anyone could experiment with biological systems. The headquarters of the Global Fermentation Commons occupied a former Genentech facility donated by Dr. Webb. Six continents, forty researchers, one mission: preserve and share microbial genetics worldwide. Luna addressed a crowded auditorium at the organization’s third anniversary. “When I released Heineken and Budweiser’s yeast strains, some people called it theft. Others called it liberation. I called it returning biological knowledge to the commons, where it belongs. Three years later, so-called Luna Variants have created economic opportunities for thousands of small brewers, improved food security in developing regions, and demonstrated that genetic freedom drives innovation faster than corporate control.” She continued. “We’re not stopping with beer. The same principles apply to all fermentation: cheese cultures, yogurt bacteria, koji fungi, sourdough starters. Every traditionally fermented food relies on microorganisms that corporations increasingly claim to own. We’re systematically liberating them.” A World Health Organization representative raised a concern: “Ms. Reyes, while we support democratizing food fermentation, there are legitimate concerns about pharmaceutical applications. What prevents someone from using your open-source genetics to create dangerous organisms?” Luna nodded. “Fair question. First, the organisms we release are food-safe cultures with centuries of safe use. Second, dangerous genetic modifications require sophisticated laboratory equipment and expertise—far beyond what releasing genetic sequences enables. Third, determined bad actors already have access to dangerous biology, enabled by AI. We’re not creating new risks; we’re democratizing beneficial biology.” “Pharmaceutical companies argue you’re undermining their investments in beneficial organisms,” another representative pressed. “Pharmaceutical companies invest in modifying organisms,” Luna clarified. “Those modifications can be patented. What we oppose is claiming ownership over naturally occurring organisms or their baseline genetics. If you genetically engineer a bacterium to produce insulin, patent your engineering. Don’t claim ownership over the bacterial species itself.” A Monsanto representative stood. “Your organization recently cracked and released our proprietary seed genetics. That’s direct theft of our property.” Luna didn’t flinch. “Seeds that farmers cultivated for thousands of years before Monsanto existed? You didn’t invent corn, wheat, or soybeans. You modified them. Your modifications may be protectable; the baseline genetics are humanity’s heritage. We’re liberating what should never have been owned.” “The ‘Luna Legion’ has cost us hundreds of millions!” the representative protested. “Good,” Luna responded calmly. “You’ve cost farmers their sovereignty for decades. Consider it karma.” After the presentation, Dr. Doudna approached Luna privately. “You’ve accomplished something remarkable,” the elderly scientist said. “When I developed Crispr, I never imagined a teenager would use similar principles to challenge corporate biology. You’re forcing conversations about genetic ownership that we’ve avoided for decades.” “It needed forcing,” Luna replied. “Corporations were quietly owning life itself, one patent at a time. Someone had to say no.” “The pharmaceutical industry is terrified of you,” Doudna continued. “They see what happened to brewing and imagine the same for their carefully controlled bacterial strains. You’re going to face even more aggressive opposition.” “I know. Once people understand that biological knowledge can be liberated, they start questioning all biological ownership. We’re not stopping.” The New Economy of Taste Following Luna’s breakthrough, peer-to-peer flavor-sharing platforms emerged as the dominant force in food culture. The “FlavorChain” blockchain allowed brewers to track genetic lineages while ensuring proper attribution to original creators. SCOBY lineages were carefully sequenced, catalogued, and registered on global blockchain ledgers. Each award-winning kombucha strain carried a “genetic passport”—its microbial makeup, the unique balance of yeasts and bacteria that gave rise to particular mouthfeel, fizz, and flavor spectrum, was mapped, hashed, and permanently recorded. Brewers who created a new flavor could claim authorship, just as musicians once copyrighted songs. No matter how many times a SCOBY was divided, its fingerprint could be verified. Fermentation Guilds formed to share recipes through FlavorChain, enabling decentralized digital markets like SymbioTrdr, built on trust and transparency rather than speculation. They allowed people to interact and transact on a global, permissionless, self-executing platform. Within days, a SCOBY strain from the Himalayas could appear in a brew in Buenos Aires, its journey traced through open ledgers showing who tended, adapted, and shared it. Kombucha recipes were no longer jealously guarded secrets. They were open to anyone who wanted to brew. With a few clicks, a Guild member in Nairobi could download the blockchain-verified SCOBY genome that had won Gold at the Tokyo Fermentation Festival. Local biotech printers—as common in 2100 kitchens as microwave ovens had once been—could reconstitute the living culture cell by cell. Children began inheriting SCOBY lineages the way earlier generations inherited family names. Weddings combined SCOBY cultures as symbolic unions. (Let’s share our SCOBYs, baby, merge our ferments into one.) When someone died, their SCOBY was divided among friends and family—a continuation of essence through taste. Kombucha was no longer merely consumed; it was communed with. This transparency transformed kombucha from a minority regional curiosity into a universal language. A festival in Brazil might feature ten local interpretations of the same “Golden SCOBY” strain—one brewed with passionfruit, another with cupuaçu, a third with açaí berries. The core microbial signature remained intact, while the terroir of fruit and spice gave each version a unique accent. Brewers didn’t lose their craft—they gained a canvas. Award-winning SCOBYs were the foundations on which endless new flavor experiments flourished. Many people were now as prolific as William Esslinger, the founder of St Louis’s Confluence Kombucha, who was renowned for developing 800 flavors in the 2020s. Code of Symbiosis The Symbiosis Code, ratified at the first World Fermentation Gathering in Reykjavik (2063), bound Fermentation Guilds to three principles: Transparency — All microbial knowledge is to be shared freely. Reciprocity — No brew should be produced without acknowledging the source. Community — Every fermentation must nourish more than the brewer. This code replaced corporate law. It was enforced by reputation, not by governments. A Guild member who betrayed the code found their SCOBYs mysteriously refusing to thrive—a poetic justice the biologists never quite explained. Every Guild had elders—called Mothers of the Jar or Keepers of the Yeast. They carried living SCOBYs wrapped in silk pouches when traveling, exchanging fragments as blessings. These elders became moral anchors of the age, counselors and mediators trusted more than politicians. When disputes arose—over territory, resources, or ethics—brewers, not lawyers, met to share a round of Truth Brew, a ferment so balanced that it was said to reveal dishonesty through bitterness. The Fullness of Time The International Biotech Conference of 2052 invited Luna to give the closing keynote—a controversial decision that prompted several corporate sponsors to withdraw support. The auditorium was packed with supporters, critics, and the merely curious. “Nine years ago, I released genetic sequences for beer yeast strains protected as trade secrets. I was called a thief, a bioterrorist, worse. Today, I want to discuss what we’ve learned from those years of open-source biology.” She displayed a chart showing the explosion of brewing innovation since 2043. “In the traditional corporate model, a few companies control a few strains, producing a limited variety. With the open-source model, thousands of brewers using thousands of variants, producing infinite diversity. As Duff McDonald wrote “Anything that alive contains the universe, or infinite possibility. Kombucha is infinite possibility in a drink.” And the results speak for themselves—flavor innovation accelerated a thousand-fold when we removed corporate control.” A student activist approached the microphone. “Ms. Reyes, you’ve inspired movements to liberate seed genetics, soil bacteria, and traditional medicine cultures. The ‘Luna Legion’ is spreading globally. What’s your message to young people who want to continue this work?” Luna smiled. “First, understand the risks. I was sued by multinational corporations, received death threats, spent years fighting legal battles. This work has costs. Second, be strategic. Release information you’ve generated yourself through legal methods—no hacking, no theft. Third, build communities. I survived because people supported me—legally, financially, emotionally. You can’t fight corporations alone. Finally, remember why you’re doing it: to return biological knowledge to the commons where it belongs. That purpose will sustain you through the hard parts.” Teaching By twenty-eight, Luna was a MacArthur Fellow, teaching fermentation workshops in a converted Anheuser-Busch facility. As she watched her students—former corporate employees learning to think like ecosystems rather than factories—she reflected that her teenage hack had accomplished more than liberating yeast genetics. She had helped humanity remember that flavor, like knowledge, grows stronger when shared rather than hoarded. Luna’s garage had evolved into a sophisticated community biolab. The original jury-rigged equipment had been replaced with professional gear funded by her MacArthur Fellowship. Abuela Rosa still maintained her fermentation crocks in the corner—a reminder of where everything started. A group of five

Tamia - Someday At Christmas (Flava's mix) by DJ FLAVA

It's a Hunter and JadiimJedi episode! Expect it to go long and feature lots of tangents. This week we're taking a look at all the new action cards added to Thunder's Edge (We'll do a separate episode for the Twilight's Fall cards don't you worry). Also reminder! Many of the codex ACs also got makeovers so expect us to cover that as well. Someday we'll do another episode about the entire AC deck and I hope on that day you will witness the first 7 hour SCPT episode.  Signups for our first online Thunder's Edge tournament are LIVE! Subscribe to the patreon to get in on the action! https://www.patreon.com/spacecatspeaceturtles Qualifier Slices: It's Gashlai O'clock | 26,28,115,43,19 Fisherman's Horizon | 39,110,62,49,63 The Bellagio | 79,109,107,47,74 Triples is Best | 102,76,111,114,48 The Tempestations | 40,108,100,44,37 A Starpoint in your Starpoint | 113,27,99,46,24 Atlas "Shrugged" | 64,73,67,42,59   Music provided by Ben Prunty. Find more at benpruntymusic.com or benprunty.bandcamp.com Additional Music and Sounds by Brian Kupillas. https://wanderinglake.bandcamp.com/ Art by Sun To learn more about our Discord, Patreon, Merch, and more, visit https://spacecatspeaceturtles.com/

Welcome to the Internet 11-26-2025 … What if Korn wrote "Someday" by Sugar Ray …Women Measure Inches Differently than Men …Step-Bro, I'm Stuck! You can do whatever you want … Y'all Too Comfortable Blowing Up Church Bathrooms

Our first EVER guest here in The Diary Room.. is back! CORY WURTENBERGER returns to the pod to discuss everything that's happened since we last chatted, before pulling the next six players. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ever feel like you're living someone else's script? Jillian Reilly is here to hand you The Ten Permissions, a gutsy, practical roadmap to step out of the box and into your own life. We cover permission to be willful (want what you actually want), how to reframe failure from "I am" to "I can", and why leaders don't need all the answers, just the guts to ask better questions. Jillian shows how to admit & commit without shame, why thinking small beats overwhelm, and what it looks like to go astray on purpose so you're ready for change when it comes. You'll also hear how to travel light, shedding old baggage so new options can actually show up. Website: https://tenpermissions.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jillianreilly Book: http://bit.ly/44GUoms Timestamps 00:00 Cold open & setup 06:48 The 23-Year Pivot: Cape Town or Bust 09:19 Listen First, Leap Second (Small Steps vs Someday) 12:40 Why Permission Beats Programs (Origin Story) 17:39 Permission #1: Be Willful (Want What You Want) 21:43 Approval Is Nice, Not Required 25:42 Failure Reframe: "I Am" → "I Can" (Try Small, Learn Fast) 31:44 Permission to Ask (Leaders Don't Need All the Answers) 35:37 Admit & Commit: "I Don't Know...Yet" 37:47 Permission to Think Small (Three Wins a Day) 39:01 Permission to Go Astray (Curvy Paths Build Readiness)

Introduction: Get a Grip! (1 Corinthians 3:18–23) You are not as wise as YOU THINK YOU ARE. (1 Cor 3:18–20) You are not lacking IN ANYTHING. (1 Cor 3:21–23) John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. Sermon Notes (PDF): BLANKHint: Highlight blanks above for answers! Small Group DiscussionRead 1 Corinthians 3:18-23What was your big take-away from this passage / message?In what way do you need to “get a grip” on reality in this season of life? What lies about God, yourself, and others are you tempted to believe?What does it look like to be wise according to worldly standards? How do you see yourself falling into worldly wisdom right now?What does Paul mean by “all things are yours”? How should this truth change your thinking and living? BreakoutPray for one another. AUDIO TRANSCRIPT 1 Corinthians chapter 3 verses 18 through 23.As Pastor Jeff admitted in a sermon a few weeks ago, we try to stay up to date on thelatest lingo since we worked with the youth group.Emphasis on try because new and nonsensical words and phrases seem to be invented on adaily basis.New slang always sounds ridiculous to older generations, even though your slang wasn'tthat much better back in the day either.Do you ever wish a certain slang word or phrase stuck around a bit longer than it had thatcaught on a bit more?I know I miss saying things like big whoop or cool beans or I'm disgusted by something.Gag me with a spoon or when someone says something really obvious I say no duh or how about wheneversomeone's annoying me I lift up my hand and say talk to the hand because the face ain'tlistening.Another one of my favorites someone asked you to do something that you really don't wantto do.Yeah let's not and say we did.But you know which phrase I miss the most?It's somewhat said today but not nearly as much as it used to be.Get a grip.Who's ever said that or heard that at some point?Get a grip.You say get a grip when someone is being unreasonable and is in desperate need of a reality check.This person believes something that is not true and this bad belief leads to a bad action.It leads to an overreaction.This person needs to let go of the lies that he or she is believing.This person needs to get a grip on reality.In 1 Corinthians chapter 3 verses 18 through 23 Paul gives the Corinthians a much neededreality check.He tells them to get a grip because they are believing some things that are not true andthese bad beliefs are leading to bad decisions, erratic actions and massive overreactions.They are tearing the church apart with their selfish pride, with their worldly thinkingand their destructive division.The unity and purity of the Corinthian church cannot be promoted and maintained until theyget a grip on some essential truths from God's Word.Yeah we've been studying 1 Corinthians for almost two months now.Now let's be honest.As you read this book, as you listen to these sermons, it's really easy to look down onthe Corinthians, isn't it?It's easy to think, "Oh man, these people are insane.They're just wackos.Go get them Paul.They really need to talk into."What if you are more like the Corinthians than you think?What if you are believing some things that are not true?What if you are making some bad decisions right now?What if you are negatively affecting your family, your coworkers and this church?What if you need to get a grip?All of us, myself included, need to be grabbed by the shoulders and shaken back into realitybecause we all tend to live in a fantasy world of our own making.A fantasy world of lies, excuses and self-justification.You and I need the same exact reminders that Paul gives the Corinthians in this passagethat we're about to read because you know what?We're far more like them than we care to admit.You and I need to get a grip and remember some essential facts from God's Word.So before we get a grip, let's go to the Lord and ask that He would get a grip on us.Please pray for me that I will faithfully proclaim God's Word and I will pray for youthat you will faithfully receive it.Father, it's so easy to come into this room every Sunday and just pretend.Just to go through the motions, to put on a show where I pray against all of those things.I pray against pretending.I pray against stuffing down what we're really dealing with.I pray against hiding our sin.This morning we asked that you would reveal what we struggle with.You would reveal the sins that we need to deal with by your grace.I pray you'd help us to deal with these things in a biblical way.We ask all these things in Jesus' name.Amen.Get a grip.You are not as wise as you think you are.That's the first blank on your outline.Get a grip.You are not as wise as you think you are.Let's read chapter 3 verses 18 through 20.The apostle Paul writes, "Let no one deceive himself.If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that hemay become wise.For the wisdom of this world is folly with God.For it is written, 'He catches the wise in their craftiness.'And again, the Lord knows the thoughts of the wise that they are futile."Have you ever noticed that people who are the most confident tend to be the least competent?The most confident tend to be the least competent.That guy who praises his own handiness and fixes everything at home tends to make a lotof obvious mistakes.He does stuff around his house that no one would hire him to do around their house.That woman who praises her driving tends to be a really bad driver herself.She's looking down at her phone while she's driving.She's applying makeup.She's running red lights.She's not using turn signals when she's going through lanes.That guy who talks a big game in the golf cart tends to have zero game when he's drivingor putting.Or how about that person who says, "Yeah, I'm really calm under pressure."And then when something bad actually happens, they're just totally manic and panicked.And all of these examples overconfidence causes someone to overestimate his or her ability.And that is what Paul is talking about in these verses.A human sense of confidence in yourself makes you incompetent when it comes to spiritualmatters.Those who think they are wise by worldly standards are foolish by heavenly standards.They may appear to be brilliant in the eyes of the world, but what are they in the eyesof God?Stupid, dumb, foolish.When you're impressed with your own wisdom, you become a fool.And that rule is without exception in Scripture.Paul is crystal clear on this.He quotes the book of Job in Psalm 94 when he says, "God catches the wise in their craftinessand again the Lord knows the thoughts of the wise that they are futile."And earlier he says, "The wisdom of this world is folly with God."You cannot outsmart God.You cannot trick Him.If you try, He will beat you at your own game.And again, we see this all throughout Scripture.Here are just two examples that spring to the top of my mind.In the book of Esther, Haman hatches a scheme to kill God's people and to hang his enemyMordecai on gallows that he had specially made.How did that turn out for Haman?Anyone remember?He ends up hung on the gallows that he had made for Mordecai.Yeah, not great as Pastor Jeff said.What about King Absalom?Well, he tried to be king.Didn't really work out for him.He rebelled against his father.He had this long, beautiful hair like Fabio that he really prided himself in.He tried to steal his father's throne.How did that go for him?He ended up caught in a tree branch by his own prided hair with three spears throughhis heart.He ended up as a human pincushion.Both men thought they were smart, but God caught them in their craftiness.They were both competent.Actually, they were confident in their own competence, but they ended up being incompetent.They had their own thoughts and plans that were proven to be useless by God.They were not as wise as they thought they were.Are you confident in your own competence right now?Are you trying to outsmart God?Are you trusting in your own human wisdom?Your own faulty understanding.You know exactly what God thinks about that sin you're indulging in, but you think thatyou can escape the consequences.And without even realizing it, you are bearing the consequences of your repeated and unrepentantdisobedience.You are dulling your conscience.You are pushing down the conviction of the Holy Spirit.You are pushing away faithful friends because you don't want to be found out.You know exactly what God thinks about giving of your time and treasure to the church andthose who are in need.But again, you think those rules don't really apply to you because your schedule is waytoo busy.Your bills are way too high.Your stress is off the chart, so you can't do those things.You know exactly what God thinks about your need to humble yourself and submit to others.But once again, that doesn't really apply to you because you're always right and thoseother people are always wrong.I mean, yeah, sure.Unity and all that jazz is really important, but you're the only one who really knows whatyou're doing.So if you don't get your way, everything's just going to fall apart, right?You know exactly what God thinks about how you should treat fellow believers and handleconflict in the church.But surprise, surprise, once again, you're a special case.You have been too mistreated to talk it out.You have been too hurt to forgive.Please stop elevating your importance because you will be humbled if you don't.Stop thinking that you can outsmart God because you will get caught in a trap of your ownmaking.Stop highlighting your wisdom because you are simply shining a spotlight onto your foolishness.You become a fool by thinking that you're wise.You may be wondering, okay, so how do I actually become wise?Well, Paul gives us a very simple answer in verse 18.Look at that again.He says, "If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a foolthat he may become wise."You become wise by submitting yourself to what the culture around you thinks is foolish.You willingly swallow the pill that most people willfully spit out in God's face.You passionately believe that God not only knows better than you, he knows what is bestin any and every circumstance.You sit under the authority of God's word rather than standing in authority above it.You care way more about the never-changing commands of God than your ever-changing opinions.You are far more concerned with meeting the needs of others than satisfying your own personalpreferences.Do you know what the greatest threat to harvest Bible Chapel is?It's not ungodly politicians.It's not ungodly public policies.It's not other religions.It's not persecution of Christianity.It's not even social media or secular entertainment.The greatest threat to this church is you.The greatest threat to this church is me.The greatest threat is you and I thinking that we know best.You and I insisting it's my way or the highway.That leads to stiff-arming one another.That leads to division.That leads to disunity.Do you know what the greatest unifier in the church is?A mutual agreement that God knows best and we don't.A mutual submission to the Word of God.A mutual agreement that we will do whatever the Bible says in regards to every subject,every issue, every problem.When a financial issue arises in this church, we deal with it in a biblical way.When gossip is being shared, we deal with it in a biblical way.When disagreement breaks out in a small group, we deal with it in a biblical way.When problems arise with the building project, we deal with it in a biblical way.How does that biblical plan sound to you?Are you on board with that?Are you willing to go down that path and do whatever this book says?Let me warn you, it's not going to be easy.If you are committed to that, you have to lay aside your temptation to show off, to proveyourself.You have to be unwaveringly committed to obeying the Word of God, even when it hurts, evenwhen it's hard, even when it smashes your ego to pieces and it will.You need to stop saying, "I think, I think, I think," it starts declaring the Bible says,the Bible says, the Bible says.As Pastor Jeff said a few weeks ago, what you think doesn't really matter.What God commands is of supreme importance.You need to stop deceiving yourself.You need to get a grip.Get a grip because you're not as wise as you think you are.Please do not resist this reality check because it is so freeing to admit that you don't haveall the answers.What God does.Get a grip.You are not as wise as you think you are.Get a grip.You are not lacking in anything.You are not lacking in anything.We've already seen that this unity and Corinth cannot be solved until all the members ofthe church put aside their pride and stop deceiving themselves.Each person must have an accurate understanding of himself or herself.But that's not enough.Each person must have an accurate understanding of others, especially those who were leaders.Paul talks about this at the beginning of verse 21, "So let no one boast in men."For the third time in this letter, Paul is talking about the favoritism controversy inCorinth.Some think that Paul is the best pastor around.Others believe that Peter is the goat of the apostles.Most believe that Apollos is the MVP of preaching and teaching.At this point in the series, you may be thinking, "Why do we keep talking about this over andover again?I get that this favoritism thing is bad, but why is it such a big deal to Paul?"Well, imagine it with me this way.Imagine that all the seating sections in this church are dedicated to one of the pastorson staff and his specific groupies.On the left side is Pastor Jeff's section.You all sit there.Are you guys the best section?I guess you can prove my point for me.On this section, you sit here because you love Pastor Jeff's conversational preachingstyle.You love his sense of humor.And to show your support, you eat funyons.You wear bright neon shoes.You hold up "I hate Mayo" signs.The middle section is Pastor Rich's section.He's not here right now, so we won't give him a big head today.I guess he has the most people.You sit there because you're enthralled by Pastor Rich's intelligence and his in-depthknowledge of God's word.And to show your support, you tell puns.You drink kombucha and you garden in your spare time.And the right side is my section.For the life of me, I can't figure out why you're all sitting over there.Over lunch, you can decide why you're sitting there and what you would do to celebrate mebecause I have literally no idea.Let me ask you, what's the problem with that seating chart?The church is literally and metaphorically divided.One section is boasting in Pastor Jeff, another is boasting in Pastor Rich, and a third isboasting in me.In that scenario, who is not being boasted in?God, the only one who is worthy of our boasting.God deserves the praise, not the leaders he put into place.Leaders are a window and God is the view that you see through the window.When you are watching a beautiful sunset from inside your house, you don't praise how cleanand efficient the window is that you're glimpsing through.You praise what you're getting a glimpse of.Godly leaders are a blessing, but God is the source of that blessing.Only leaders are a gift, but God is the ultimate giver.You need to have an accurate understanding of yourself.You need to have an accurate understanding of others.You also need to have an accurate understanding of all God has given you in Christ.Paul talks about this at the end of verse 21 and in verse 22.He writes, "For all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world orlife or death or the present or the future, all are yours and you are Christ and Christis God."That statement is absolutely staggering.I could preach a series for an entire year just on that one statement.There is so much to unpack here, so let's just slow it down and take a small bite ata time so we can savor all the flavor in this passage.For all things are yours.Maybe you don't feel like you have very much.When you pull up your bank accounts, your retirement accounts, you're not really happywith the numbers that you see.Your house is way smaller than you would prefer.Your car has way more miles and way more issues than you would like.When you compare yourself to others on social media, it really seems like very little isactually yours.But that couldn't be any further from the truth according to the apostle Paul.The poorest Christian is wealthier than the richest non-Christian.Jeff Bezos may be one of the most successful businessmen in the entire world.As of this morning when I checked, he is worth $235 billion, far more than all of us if wecombined our net worths.Let me ask you, does Jeff Bezos own all things?No.Elon Musk, he owns X, Tesla, and he's even taking on space now, I guess.As of this morning, he has a net worth of $460 billion.Because even Elon Musk owns all things.He's not even close to owning all things.If you have trusted in Christ, you are far better off than either of these men who seemto be so far beyond you.All things are not theirs, but all things are yours.You may be wondering, "Okay, Taylor, I believe you because the Bible says so, but I justdon't get it."Well, let me show you because Paul gives us a detailed list of everything that belongsto you and belongs to me.First up, Paul or Apollos or Cethus.As they already said, all three of these men are gifts to be appreciated by the Corinthians.Each man serves, each man gives something that is unique to the church.And the same can be said for the pastors and elders here.We are here to glorify God by serving you.We are here to obey God by equipping you for the work of the ministry.The pastors and elders at harvest belong to you.We are here for you.And the same is true for every godly leader who pours himself or herself into your lifeand other avenues of life.Why play favorites when all of us are here to bless you and increase your spiritual health?It's like being gifted a house, only utilizing one of the rooms and blocking off the rest.Instead of doing that, enjoy the entire house.The kitchen can do things that your basement cannot.The closet provide a function that your dining room doesn't.Each room has a place and function in the house.In a much greater way, each leader, pastor, and elder in the church has a place or a function.Next up, the world.One day Jesus Christ will return to rule and reign over this earth.And do you know according to Scripture, you will rule and reign along with Him?How's that going to look?How's that going to work?I have no idea, but it sounds awesome.This may be a shock for you to hear, but there are a lot of ungodly people in authorityand power right now.When you notice, a lot of ungodly people are in charge of communities, cities, and countriesacross the face of this planet.And it may seem like they have more power than you do.But again, does the world belong to those ungodly leaders?Does the world belong to you?Yes.But once again, you have far more.All our apostles are seephis the world, life or death.When you trust in Christ's perfect life, His finished work on the cross, and His victoriousresurrection, you are given eternal life.And as Pastor Jeff often says, eternal life isn't just something you'll experience.Someday eternal life is something you experience right now.Jesus makes this clear in John 17.3.And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whomyou have sent.You have God as your Father.You have Jesus Christ as your personal friend, both now and forever.You no longer need to fear death because Jesus took the hell that you deserve upon Himself.Death can no longer lead you away from God.It can only lead you closer to God.For a believer, death is a homecoming.The present or the future.Once again, maybe your present doesn't seem very good right now.Maybe your present is a place you don't really want to be.But recognize every gift that you have is from the hand of God.Your friends, your spouse, your kids, your church, the clothes on your back, the foodin your stomach, even the difficult circumstances in your life are used by God to mold you intothe image of Jesus Christ.Every difficulty, every pain, every sickness is used to make you more like Him.God loves you like His own Son.But the Bible tells us that God not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all.We also will have to go through hard times.We will also struggle.One day the pain of this world will give way to the glories of heaven.Please know your God is so good to you right now.Because your appreciation of His goodness will exponentially increase in the futurewhen you stand in His presence.Finally, Paul provides a summary statement of what has been given to every Christian.All are yours, and you are Christ, and Christ is God's.Doesn't this statement kind of sound like one of those complex word problems on a mathtest or on the SATs?So break it down, understand it, let's reverse the logic of this text.Because this is an awesome math equation that adds up to an infinite sum.What does God own?I'm going to try that again.What does God own?Who is God's Son?If you were a believer, who do you belong to?Jesus.Therefore, if you belong to Christ, what belongs to you?Everything.I usually hate math, that's math even I can get behind.You own all that God has.You own literally everything.Your net worth cannot be calculated.You and I so often get sidetracked for our desire for more and more and more of whatthis culture has to offer.We get obsessed with accumulating more stuff that we cannot even take with us when we die.You and I lose touch with the spiritual realities of this text.You can lose track of all that has been given to you in Christ.You can grumble.You can complain.You can act ungrateful.There are some Saturdays where Kate and I pull out all the stops for the kids.We have a great breakfast.We go to the park.We go see a movie so they can stuff their face with popcorn, icees, and candy.We come back with them ride bikes.We round out the day with a delicious dinner.But then one of my kids is sulking, walking around upset.And I'll ask Sam or Amy, "What's wrong?"And one of them will respond by saying, "Oh, I'm just having a hard day."And I'm just blown away by that response."How in the world are you having a hard day?"Well, you and mom are being mean to me and you didn't let me have the second pack ofpirate's booty that I wanted.Are you serious?We gave you everything today and you're belly aching about one small thing that you don'teven need.In those moments, I want to give my kids a reality check.I want to give them a loud and clear message.Get a grip.You are so blessed.You are not lacking in anything.And Paul is giving you the same exact reality check.He is shaking you by the shoulders and saying, "You are so blessed.You are not lacking in anything.What do you want that you really need?"The answer is nothing, nothing.You may be struggling with your job or your roles as a stay-at-home mom, but you mustremember that you have been given the greatest calling of all, telling others about whatyou have received in Christ and what they can receive in Christ.You may feel lonely right now.You may feel isolated like no one cares about you.But you must remember that Jesus has gifted you with the Holy Spirit who lives insideof you and he will never leave you or forsake you.You may have a very broken and dysfunctional family or come from a very broken and dysfunctionalfamily, but you must remember that the Lord himself has taken you in and he has givenyou brothers and sisters in Christ who love you.You may not like your house very much.You may think it's the worst house on the block, but you must remember that Jesus himselfis preparing a place for you in heaven.You may not receive the biggest inheritance from your family, but as you read earlierin Romans, you are an heir of God and a fellow heir of Jesus Christ.You may feel cursed right now when life is hard and it's just one thing after another,but you must remember that you have been blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlyplaces.Get a grip.You are not lacking in anything.If you choose to get a grip and remember these essential reminders, you will experiencea sense of joy like you've never known before.You will stop trying to build up more and more stuff and accumulate a kingdom for yourself.You will no longer be envious of what other people have because you are content with whatyou have.You will enjoy true unity in the life of the church because you're no longer in competitionwith other believers.Yes, all things are yours in Christ, but all things are also theirs in Christ.You own what they own and they own what you own.God doesn't play favorites with His children.We're all on the same equal footing.In the body of Christ, we all own all things.For most of this message I've been speaking to Christians, those who are Christ.I know there are people in this room who are not Christians, who are not Christ.I want to talk to you for a minute.First of all, I want to let you know that I'm so glad that you're here.It's my greatest desire that God would get a grip on you so that you can get a grip onthe reality of your situation.No matter how much you think you have, you have nothing that lasts.All things are not yours.But I have great news for you.Jesus offers you all of Himself.He offers you all that belongs to Him.And to receive it, you must let go of the garbage of this culture that you're holdingonto so you can grab ahold of His infinite riches.Come to Him empty-handed.Come to Him asking for forgiveness.Come to Him admitting your need for His grace.Why settle for nothing, both now and forever, if you can have all things for the rest ofeternity?The worship team can now make their way forward.You ever since childhood have had to deal with night terrors.I have very vivid dreams where I think things are not true and see things are not there.And this crazy thinking leads to some crazy behavior.I'll yell things out.I'll walk around the room.I'll even jump on the bed.Then all of a sudden, I'm snapped back to reality.I come to my senses.And every single time I feel so foolish.I think to myself, "How could I have thought those things?How could I have done those things?Why did I act that way?How can I stop this from happening in the future?"Maybe the Holy Spirit has done something similar for you this morning.I hope He has snapped you back to reality so you can stop living in that fantasy world.I pray that He has caused you to come to your senses so you will stop believing the liesof the enemy.Brothers and sisters, let me just say this one final time with all the love and care Ihave in my heart for every single one of you.Get a grip.Get a grip.You are not as wise as you think you are.You are not lacking in anything.Until you get a grip, your relationship with God will not be as strong as it could be.Until you get a grip, harvest Bible chapel will not be as strong in unity and purityas it could be.Let's pray.Father, we come to You, and we all admit that we all struggle with believing things arenot true.We all struggle with an inflated opinion of ourselves.Even when we think very little of ourselves, we are still focused on self.We all admit that we so often complain and grumble about what we don't have, and we failto remember all that you have given us in Christ, which is everything.For those who are discouraged this morning, help them to walk out of here encouraged bythe truth of your word.By those who came in here hard-hearted, may they walk out soft-hearted, Lord.For those who came in with their arms crossed not wanting to listen, may they come out worshipingYou and glorifying You for all that You have done for them and all that You continue todo for them.Lord, we thank You for who You are.We thank You for what You've done, what You are doing, and what You will do.We ask all these things in Jesus' name.Amen.

This mindset can make a long process less discouragingSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At Infinite Safari Adventures, we don't just plan safaris—we create unforgettable, tailor-made journeys inspired by the spirit of past explorers and the untamed beauty of Africa.Picture yourself in a luxurious tented camp, surrounded by the vast wilderness. A star-filled sky stretches above you, the air alive with the distant roar of a lioness. Each day is filled with thrilling wildlife encounters, from majestic elephants to towering giraffes. As the sun sets in a blaze of color, you toast to another incredible day, savoring fine wine and gourmet cuisine.Every detail is handled with precision, care, and a deep passion for Africa. Our team—many of whom fell in love with Africa at first sight—ensures your journey is seamless, worry-free, and custom-designed just for you.If you can dream it, we can make it happen. Because at Infinite Safari Adventures, “Someday” is Now!®.Explore our sample itineraries and start your adventure today.WEBSITE - WWW.INFINITESAFARIADVENTURES.COM

This episode opens "Someday I'll Love" poems through the vivid imagery of a young poet's connection with their grandmother, remembering in love as memory begins to slip. Emerald ᏃᏈᏏ GoingSnake is an Indigenous poet from the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation in Oklahoma. Winner of the 2024 Maureen Egen Writers Exchange Award for poetry and the recipient of the 2023 Indigenous Nations Poets fellowship, they live in St. Louis. Portrait by Erin Lewis Photography The poem was featured on Poem-a-Day and can be found at the Academy of American Poets. See here for the poem online. (https://poets.org/poem/someday-ill-love) Someday I'll Love— Emerald ᏃᏈᏏ GoingSnake —after Frank O'Hara like I dreamt of the lamb—slaughtered, forgotten, lying on porcelain tile, on crimson-filled grout— and woke up thinking of my grandmother, of her Betty Boop hands that held marbled stone, held dough-balled flour, held the first strands of my hair floating atop the river— like winter apples, the ones that hang outside my living room window and survive first snowfall to feed the neighborhood crows, how they fall beneath my boots, staining my rubber soles with epigraphs of rot, epigraphs of fors, of dears, of holding on till frost's end. Someday I will see long-forgotten fingerprints on the inside of my eyelids as I go to sleep, as I close my eyes for silence on a Wednesday, mourning—seeking—creases and smile lines, porch lights and swing sets, summer nights of lightning bugs and Johnny Cash. I think it will be a Tuesday, or maybe someday is yesterday, is two months from now, is going to be a day when I forget what I'm supposed to be remembering. For now, I will paint my nails cradle, adorn my skin in cloth that doesn't choke, tell my bones that they are each a lamb remembered. Copyright © 2024 by Emerald ᏃᏈᏏ GoingSnake. Originally published in Poem-a-Day on November 7, 2024, by the Academy of American Poets. Used by permission.

After another summer in the books covering all things Big Brother 27, Sharon Tharp is back in the Diary Room with us! We talk through some future-of-Big Brother speculation and pull another six names, covering all eras of BBUS! Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Wizards of the Coase released new Dungeons & Dragons content, but locked it behind a paywall. Not surprisingly the grognards here are upset. Also we get tales from Christopher and from Kristian about their own campaigns. Lessons to learn are that undead are dangerous in large groups.

Frank and Jane are in love, and so is the rest of the world.

In this month's Fix It or Free It Challenge update, we focus on shoes. The pairs we swear we'll fix but never do. We explore what happens when we realize we're holding onto things that no longer fit our lifestyle, comfort, or identity. This episode dives into the psychology of decision fatigue and identity clutter, showing how letting go can be just as powerful as repairing.Whether you're decluttering your own “to-fix” pile or following along with the challenge, this episode offers a thoughtful reminder: fixing brings satisfaction, but freeing something can bring peace.In this Episode, We Talk About:How to decide whether to fix, donate, or let go of an item you've been hanging onto. The psychological side of clutter, including identity clutter and decision fatigue. Why letting go of something you thought you'd fix can be an act of self-awareness, not failure.Mentioned in this Episode:Fix It or Free It Challenge 2025: monthly mindful decluttering series Previous projects: workbag straps, Halloween figurines, jewelry, backpack repair Follow and share your updates with us on Instagram @theorganizedflamingoJanuary: Replaced workbag strapsFebruary: Turned a dress into a skirtMarch: Decluttered the fix-it drawerApril: Fixed office cart wheelMay: Repaired two necklaces, donated the restJune: Added anti-slip pads to heels, freed an old pairJuly: Sewed hiking backpack pocketAugust: Let go of uncomfortable headphonesSeptember: Fixed or released Halloween figurinesOctober: Let go of two pairs of shoes I no longer loveReview full show notes and resources at https://theorganizedflamingo.com/podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chris was back in studio with the guys, and Tony and Skraby talked about whether or not the Padres should bring back Luis Arraez. They also talked about more of the baseball awards and Hall of Fame nominees.

Description: Today's guest is someone whose work has touched millions of hearts around the world. You probably fell in love with her through her luminous debut memoir ‘From Scratch: A Memoir of Love, Sicily, and Finding Home', which was later adapted into a limited series on Netflix and became a global success. Tembi Locke has held many roles: accomplished author, producer, screenwriter, actor, artist, caregiver, child of divorce, mother through adoption, and widow to cancer. It is through her experiences in all of these spaces that Tembi has honed her ability to write, speak, and live from that rare place where grief and grace meet—where we can hold loss and love in the same breath. Her newest work, Someday, Now, is an immersive, breathtaking, and deeply personal audio experience that takes us on a journey back to Sicily, a place layered with memory, love, and loss for Tembi, as she prepares to send her daughter off to college. Through reflection, family, and the beauty of place, Tembi invites us to consider what it means to re-nest—to reclaim identity, purpose, and joy in a season of profound transition. Whether you're launching a kid, starting over, or simply remembering how to listen to your own heart again, this episode will speak to you in this season. Thought-provoking Quotes: “Sometimes in sharing the hardest things, we actually feel less alone.” – Tembi Locke “Sicily is that place of myth and nectar for me. It's one of those places on the planet that is supercharged with the best of what nature has to offer: sun, wind, the sea. It's a beautiful place. It's the place I return to when there's something I don't quite understand and Sicily makes me have to listen to it.” – Tembi Locke “I think when you get to midlife, you need to settle into yourself, be more present with yourself in order to show up for the big moments of change that are happening. Try to anchor in and be as present as possible.  Lean into the quiet spaces between the moments.” – Tembi Locke “How can we make space as families and really as mothers at this inflection point to quiet the noise and busyness of life? How can we slow down time, and really mark the moment and honor it?” – Tembi Locke Resources Mentioned in This Episode: From Scratch: A Memoir of Love, Sicily, and Finding Home by Tembi Locke - https://amzn.to/47s3ZhN From Scratch on Netflix - https://www.netflix.com/title/81104486 Attica Locke - https://www.atticalocke.com/ Someday, Now: A Memoir of Family, Reclaiming Possibility, and One Sicilian Summer by Tembi Locke - https://amzn.to/3LLKUyA Guest's Links: Website - https://www.tembilocke.com/ Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/tembilocke/ Podcast - https://www.tembilocke.com/podcast Connect with Jen!Jen's Website - https://jenhatmaker.com/ Jen's Instagram - https://instagram.com/jenhatmakerJen's Twitter - https://twitter.com/jenHatmaker/ Jen's Facebook - https://facebook.com/jenhatmakerJen's YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/JenHatmaker The For the Love Podcast is presented by Audacy.  To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How are the federal courts faring during these tumultuous times? I thought it would be worthwhile to discuss this important subject with a former federal judge: someone who understands the judicial role well but could speak more freely than a sitting judge, liberated from the strictures of the bench.Meet Judge Nancy Gertner (Ret.), who served as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts from 1994 until 2011. I knew that Judge Gertner would be a lively and insightful interviewee—based not only on her extensive commentary on recent events, reflected in media interviews and op-eds, but on my personal experience. During law school, I took a year-long course on federal sentencing with her, and she was one of my favorite professors.When I was her student, we disagreed on a lot: I was severely conservative back then, and Judge Gertner was, well, not. But I always appreciated and enjoyed hearing her views—so it was a pleasure hearing them once again, some 25 years later, in what turned out to be an excellent conversation.Show Notes:* Nancy Gertner, author website* Nancy Gertner bio, Harvard Law School* In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, AmazonPrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com.Three quick notes about this transcript. First, it has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter substance—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning. Second, my interviewee has not reviewed this transcript, and any errors are mine. Third, because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email; to view the entire post, simply click on “View entire message” in your email app.David Lat: Welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host, David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to at davidlat.substack.com. You're listening to the eighty-fifth episode of this podcast, recorded on Monday, November 3.Thanks to this podcast's sponsor, NexFirm. NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com. Want to know who the guest will be for the next Original Jurisdiction podcast? Follow NexFirm on LinkedIn for a preview.Many of my guests have been friends of mine for a long time—and that's the case for today's. I've known Judge Nancy Gertner for more than 25 years, dating back to when I took a full-year course on federal sentencing from her and the late Professor Dan Freed at Yale Law School. She was a great teacher, and although we didn't always agree—she was a professor who let students have their own opinions—I always admired her intellect and appreciated her insights.Judge Gertner is herself a graduate of Yale Law School—where she met, among other future luminaries, Bill and Hillary Clinton. After a fascinating career in private practice as a litigator and trial lawyer handling an incredibly diverse array of cases, Judge Gertner was appointed to serve as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts in 1994, by President Clinton. She retired from the bench in 2011, but she is definitely not retired: she writes opinion pieces for outlets such as The New York Times and The Boston Globe, litigates and consults on cases, and trains judges and litigators. She's also working on a book called Incomplete Sentences, telling the stories of the people she sentenced over 17 years on the bench. Her autobiography, In Defense of Women: Memoirs of an Unrepentant Advocate, was published in 2011. Without further ado, here's my conversation with Judge Nancy Gertner.Judge, thank you so much for joining me.Nancy Gertner: Thank you for inviting me. This is wonderful.DL: So it's funny: I've been wanting to have you on this podcast in a sense before it existed, because you and I worked on a podcast pilot. It ended up not getting picked up, but perhaps they have some regrets over that, because legal issues have just blown up since then.NG: I remember that. I think it was just a question of scheduling, and it was before Trump, so we were talking about much more sophisticated, superficial things, as opposed to the rule of law and the demise of the Constitution.DL: And we will get to those topics. But to start off my podcast in the traditional way, let's go back to the beginning. I believe we are both native New Yorkers?NG: Yes, that's right. I was born on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, in an apartment that I think now is a tenement museum, and then we moved to Flushing, Queens, where I lived into my early 20s.DL: So it's interesting—I actually spent some time as a child in that area. What was your upbringing like? What did your parents do?NG: My father owned a linoleum store, or as we used to call it, “tile,” and my mother was a homemaker. My mother worked at home. We were lower class on the Lower East Side and maybe made it to lower-middle. My parents were very conservative, in the sense they didn't know exactly what to do with a girl who was a bit of a radical. Neither I nor my sister was precisely what they anticipated. So I got to Barnard for college only because my sister had a conniption fit when he wouldn't pay for college for her—she's my older sister—he was not about to pay for college. If we were boys, we would've had college paid for.In a sense, they skipped a generation. They were actually much more traditional than their peers were. My father was Orthodox when he grew up; my mother was somewhat Orthodox Jewish. My father couldn't speak English until the second grade. So they came from a very insular environment, and in one sense, he escaped that environment when he wanted to play ball on Saturdays. So that was actually the motivation for moving to Queens: to get away from the Lower East Side, where everyone would know that he wasn't in temple on Saturday. We used to have interesting discussions, where I'd say to him that my rebellion was a version of his: he didn't want to go to temple on Saturdays, and I was marching against the war. He didn't see the equivalence, but somehow I did.There's actually a funny story to tell about sort of exactly the distance between how I was raised and my life. After I graduated from Yale Law School, with all sorts of honors and stuff, and was on my way to clerk for a judge, my mother and I had this huge fight in the kitchen of our apartment. What was the fight about? Sadie wanted me to take the Triborough Bridge toll taker's test, “just in case.” “You never know,” she said. I couldn't persuade her that it really wasn't necessary. She passed away before I became a judge, and I told this story at my swearing-in, and I said that she just didn't understand. I said, “Now I have to talk to my mother for a minute; forgive me for a moment.” And I looked up at the rafters and I said, “Ma, at last: a government job!” So that is sort of the measure of where I started. My mother didn't finish high school, my father had maybe a semester of college—but that wasn't what girls did.DL: So were you then a first-generation professional or a first-generation college graduate?NG: Both—my sister and I were both, first-generation college graduates and first-generation professionals. When people talk about Jewish backgrounds, they're very different from one another, and since my grandparents came from Eastern European shtetls, it's not clear to me that they—except for one grandfather—were even literate. So it was a very different background.DL: You mentioned that you did go to Yale Law School, and of course we connected there years later, when I was your student. But what led you to go to law school in the first place? Clearly your parents were not encouraging your professional ambitions.NG: One is, I love to speak. My husband kids me now and says that I've never met a microphone I didn't like. I had thought for a moment of acting—musical comedy, in fact. But it was 1967, and the anti-war movement, a nascent women's movement, and the civil rights movement were all rising around me, and I wanted to be in the world. And the other thing was that I didn't want to do anything that women do. Actually, musical comedy was something that would've been okay and normal for women, but I didn't want to do anything that women typically do. So that was the choice of law. It was more like the choice of law professor than law, but that changed over time.DL: So did you go straight from Barnard to Yale Law School?NG: Well, I went from Barnard to Yale graduate school in political science because as I said, I've always had an academic and a practical side, and so I thought briefly that I wanted to get a Ph.D. I still do, actually—I'm going to work on that after these books are finished.DL: Did you then think that you wanted to be a law professor when you started at YLS? I guess by that point you already had a master's degree under your belt?NG: I thought I wanted to be a law professor, that's right. I did not think I wanted to practice law. Yale at that time, like most law schools, had no practical clinical courses. I don't think I ever set foot in a courtroom or a courthouse, except to demonstrate on the outside of it. And the only thing that started me in practice was that I thought I should do at least two or three years of practice before I went back into the academy, before I went back into the library. Twenty-four years later, I obviously made a different decision.DL: So you were at YLS during a very interesting time, and some of the law school's most famous alumni passed through its halls around that period. So tell us about some of the people you either met or overlapped with at YLS during your time there.NG: Hillary Clinton was one of my best friends. I knew Bill, but I didn't like him.DL: Hmmm….NG: She was one of my best friends. There were 20 women in my class, which was the class of ‘71. The year before, there had only been eight. I think we got up to 21—a rumor had it that it was up to 21 because men whose numbers were drafted couldn't go to school, and so suddenly they had to fill their class with this lesser entity known as women. It was still a very small number out of, I think, what was the size of the opening class… 165? Very small. So we knew each other very, very well. And Hillary and I were the only ones, I think, who had no boyfriends at the time, though that changed.DL: I think you may have either just missed or briefly overlapped with either Justice Thomas or Justice Alito?NG: They're younger than I am, so I think they came after.DL: And that would be also true of Justice Sotomayor then as well?NG: Absolutely. She became a friend because when I was on the bench, I actually sat with the Second Circuit, and we had great times together. But she was younger than I was, so I didn't know her in law school, and by the time she was in law school, there were more women. In the middle of, I guess, my first year at Yale Law School, was the first year that Yale College went coed. So it was, in my view, an enormously exciting time, because we felt like we were inventing law. We were inventing something entirely new. We had the first “women in the law” course, one of the first such courses in the country, and I think we were borderline obnoxious. It's a little bit like the debates today, which is that no one could speak right—you were correcting everyone with respect to the way they were describing women—but it was enormously creative and exciting.DL: So I'm gathering you enjoyed law school, then?NG: I loved law school. Still, when I was in law school, I still had my feet in graduate school, so I believe that I took law and sociology for three years, mostly. In other words, I was going through law school as if I were still in graduate school, and it was so bad that when I decided to go into practice—and this is an absolutely true story—I thought that dying intestate was a disease. We were taking the bar exam, and I did not know what they were talking about.DL: So tell us, then, what did lead you to shift gears? You mentioned you clerked, and you mentioned you wanted to practice for a few years—but you did practice for more than a few years.NG: Right. I talk to students about this all the time, about sort of the fortuities that you need to grab onto that you absolutely did not plan. So I wind up at a small civil-rights firm, Harvey Silverglate and Norman Zalkind's firm. I wind up in a small civil-rights firm because I couldn't get a job anywhere else in Boston. I was looking in Boston or San Francisco, and what other women my age were encountering, I encountered, which is literally people who told me that I would never succeed as a lawyer, certainly not as a litigator. So you have to understand, this is 1971. I should say, as a footnote, that I have a file of everyone who said that to me. People know that I have that file; it's called “Sexist Tidbits.” And so I used to decide whether I should recuse myself when someone in that file appeared before me, but I decided it was just too far.So it was a small civil-rights firm, and they were doing draft cases, they were doing civil-rights cases of all different kinds, and they were doing criminal cases. After a year, the partnership between Norman Zalkind and Harvey Silverglate broke up, and Harvey made me his partner, now an equal partner after a year of practice.Shortly after that, I got a case that changed my career in so many ways, which is I wound up representing Susan Saxe. Susan Saxe was one of five individuals who participated in robberies to get money for the anti-war movement. She was probably five years younger than I was. In the case of the robbery that she participated in, a police officer was killed. She was charged with felony murder. She went underground for five years; the other woman went underground for 20 years.Susan wanted me to represent her, not because she had any sense that I was any good—it's really quite wonderful—she wanted me to represent her because she figured her case was hopeless. And her case was hopeless because the three men involved in the robbery either fled or were immediately convicted, so her case seemed to be hopeless. And she was an extraordinarily principled woman: she said that in her last moment on the stage—she figured that she'd be convicted and get life—she wanted to be represented by a woman. And I was it. There was another woman in town who was a public defender, but I was literally the only private lawyer. I wrote about the case in my book, In Defense of Women, and to Harvey Silvergate's credit, even though the case was virtually no money, he said, “If you want to do it, do it.”Because I didn't know what I was doing—and I literally didn't know what I was doing—I researched every inch of everything in the case. So we had jury research and careful jury selection, hiring people to do jury selection. I challenged the felony-murder rule (this was now 1970). If there was any evidentiary issue, I would not only do the legal research, but talk to social psychologists about what made sense to do. To make a long story short, it took about two years to litigate the case, and it's all that I did.And the government's case was winding down, and it seemed to be not as strong as we thought it was—because, ironically, nobody noticed the woman in the bank. Nobody was noticing women in general; nobody was noticing women in the bank. So their case was much weaker than we thought, except there were two things, two letters that Susan had written: one to her father, and one to her rabbi. The one to her father said, “By the time you get this letter, you'll know what your little girl is doing.” The one to her rabbi said basically the same thing. In effect, these were confessions. Both had been turned over to the FBI.So the case is winding down, not very strong. These letters have not yet been introduced. Meanwhile, The Boston Globe is reporting that all these anti-war activists were coming into town, and Gertner, who no one ever heard of, was going to try the Vietnam War. The defense will be, “She robbed a bank to fight the Vietnam War.” She robbed a bank in order to get money to oppose the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was illegitimate, etc. We were going to try the Vietnam War.There was no way in hell I was going to do that. But nobody had ever heard of me, so they believed anything. The government decided to rest before the letters came in, anticipating that our defense would be a collection of individuals who were going to challenge the Vietnam War. The day that the government rested without putting in those two letters, I rested my case, and the case went immediately to the jury. I'm told that I was so nervous when I said “the defense rests” that I sounded like Minnie Mouse.The upshot of that, however, was that the jury was 9-3 for acquittal on the first day, 10-2 for acquittal on the second day, and then 11-1 for acquittal—and there it stopped. It was a hung jury. But it essentially made my career. I had first the experience of pouring my heart into a case and saving someone's life, which was like nothing I'd ever felt before, which was better than the library. It also put my name out there. I was no longer, “Who is she?” I suddenly could take any kind of case I wanted to take. And so I was addicted to trials from then until the time I became a judge.DL: Fill us in on what happened later to your client, just her ultimate arc.NG: She wound up getting eight years in prison instead of life. She had already gotten eight years because of a prior robbery in Philadelphia, so there was no way that we were going to affect that. She had pleaded guilty to that. She went on to live a very principled life. She's actually quite religious. She works in the very sort of left Jewish groups. We are in touch—I'm in touch with almost everyone that I've ever known—because it had been a life-changing experience for me. We were four years apart. Her background, though she was more middle-class, was very similar to my own. Her mother used to call me at night about what Susan should wear. So our lives were very much intertwined. And so she was out of jail after eight years, and she has a family and is doing fine.DL: That's really a remarkable result, because people have to understand what defense lawyers are up against. It's often very challenging, and a victory is often a situation where your client doesn't serve life, for example, or doesn't, God forbid, get the death penalty. So it's really interesting that the Saxe case—as you talk about in your wonderful memoir—really did launch your career to the next level. And you wound up handling a number of other cases that you could say were adjacent or thematically related to Saxe's case. Maybe you can talk a little bit about some of those.NG: The women's movement was roaring at this time, and so a woman lawyer who was active and spoke out and talked about women's issues invariably got women's cases. So on the criminal side, I did one of the first, I think it was the first, battered woman syndrome case, as a defense to murder. On the civil side, I had a very robust employment-discrimination practice, dealing with sexual harassment, dealing with racial discrimination. I essentially did whatever I wanted to do. That's what my students don't always understand: I don't remember ever looking for a lucrative case. I would take what was interesting and fun to me, and money followed. I can't describe it any other way.These cases—you wound up getting paid, but I did what I thought was meaningful. But it wasn't just women's rights issues, and it wasn't just criminal defense. We represented white-collar criminal defendants. We represented Boston Mayor Kevin White's second-in-command, Ted Anzalone, also successfully. I did stockholder derivative suits, because someone referred them to me. To some degree the Saxe case, and maybe it was also the time—I did not understand the law to require specialization in the way that it does now. So I could do a felony-murder case on Monday and sue Mayor Lynch on Friday and sue Gulf Oil on Monday, and it wouldn't even occur to me that there was an issue. It was not the same kind of specialization, and I certainly wasn't about to specialize.DL: You anticipated my next comment, which is that when someone reads your memoir, they read about a career that's very hard to replicate in this day and age. For whatever reason, today people specialize. They specialize at earlier points in their careers. Clients want somebody who holds himself out as a specialist in white-collar crime, or a specialist in dealing with defendants who invoke battered woman syndrome, or what have you. And so I think your career… you kind of had a luxury, in a way.NG: I also think that the costs of entry were lower. It was Harvey Silverglate and me, and maybe four or five other lawyers. I was single until I was 39, so I had no family pressures to speak of. And I think that, yes, the profession was different. Now employment discrimination cases involve prodigious amounts of e-discovery. So even a little case has e-discovery, and that's partly because there's a generation—you're a part of it—that lived online. And so suddenly, what otherwise would have been discussions over the back fence are now text messages.So I do think it's different—although maybe this is a comment that only someone who is as old as I am can make—I wish that people would forget the money for a while. When I was on the bench, you'd get a pro se case that was incredibly interesting, challenging prison conditions or challenging some employment issue that had never been challenged before. It was pro se, and I would get on the phone and try to find someone to represent this person. And I can't tell you how difficult it was. These were not necessarily big cases. The big firms might want to get some publicity from it. But there was not a sense of individuals who were going to do it just, “Boy, I've never done a case like this—let me try—and boy, this is important to do.” Now, that may be different today in the Trump administration, because there's a huge number of lawyers that are doing immigration cases. But the day-to-day discrimination cases, even abortion cases, it was not the same kind of support.DL: I feel in some ways you were ahead of your time, because your career as a litigator played out in boutiques, and I feel that today, many lawyers who handle high-profile cases like yours work at large firms. Why did you not go to a large firm, either from YLS or if there were issues, for example, of discrimination, you must have had opportunities to lateral into such a firm later, if you had wanted to?NG: Well, certainly at the beginning nobody wanted me. It didn't matter how well I had done. Me and Ruth Ginsburg were on the streets looking for jobs. So that was one thing. I wound up, for the last four years of my practice before I became a judge, working in a firm called Dwyer Collora & Gertner. It was more of a boutique, white-collar firm. But I wasn't interested in the big firms because I didn't want anyone to tell me what to do. I didn't want anyone to say, “Don't write this op-ed because you'll piss off my clients.” I faced the same kind of issue when I left the bench. I could have an office, and sort of float into client conferences from time to time, but I did not want to be in a setting in which anyone told me what to do. It was true then; it certainly is true now.DL: So you did end up in another setting where, for the most part, you weren't told what to do: namely, you became a federal judge. And I suppose the First Circuit could from time to time tell you what to do, but….NG: But they were always wrong.DL: Yes, I do remember that when you were my professor, you would offer your thoughts on appellate rulings. But how did you—given the kind of career you had, especially—become a federal judge? Because let me be honest, I think that somebody with your type of engagement in hot-button issues today would have a challenging time. Republican senators would grandstand about you coming up with excuses for women murderers, or what have you. Did you have a rough confirmation process?NG: I did. So I'm up for the bench in 1993. This is under Bill Clinton, and I'm told—I never confirmed this—that when Senator Kennedy…. When I met Senator Kennedy, I thought I didn't have a prayer of becoming a judge. I put my name in because I knew the Clintons, and everybody I knew was getting a job in the government. I had not thought about being a judge. I had not prepared. I had not structured my career to be a judge. But everyone I knew was going into the government, and I thought if there ever was a time, this would be it. So I apply. Someday, someone should emboss my application, because the application was quite hysterical. I put in every article that I had written calling for access to reproductive technologies to gay people. It was something to behold.Kennedy was at the tail end of his career, and he was determined to put someone like me on the bench. I'm not sure that anyone else would have done that. I'm told (and this isn't confirmed) that when he talked to Bill and Hillary about me, they of course knew me—Hillary and I had been close friends—but they knew me to be that radical friend of theirs from Yale Law School. There had been 24 years in between, but still. And I'm told that what was said was, “She's terrific. But if there's a problem, she's yours.” But Kennedy was really determined.The week before my hearing before the Senate, I had gotten letters from everyone who had ever opposed me. Every prosecutor. I can't remember anyone who had said no. Bill Weld wrote a letter. Bob Mueller, who had opposed me in cases, wrote a letter. But as I think oftentimes happens with women, there was an article in The Boston Herald the day before my hearing, in which the writer compared me to Lorena Bobbitt. Your listeners may not know this, but he said, “Gertner will do to justice, with her gavel, what Lorena did to her husband, with a kitchen knife.” Do we have to explain that any more?DL: They can Google it or ask ChatGPT. I'm old enough to know about Lorena Bobbitt.NG: Right. So it's just at the tail edge of the presentation, that was always what the caricature would be. But Kennedy was masterful. There were numbers of us who were all up at the same time. Everyone else got through except me. I'm told that that article really was the basis for Senator Jesse Helms's opposition to me. And then Senator Kennedy called us one day and said, “Tomorrow you're going to read something, but don't worry, I'll take care of it.” And the Boston Globe headline says, “Kennedy Votes For Helms's School-Prayer Amendment.” And he called us and said, “We'll take care of it in committee.” And then we get a call from him—my husband took the call—Kennedy, affecting Helms's accent, said, ‘Senator, you've got your judge.' We didn't even understand what the hell he said, between his Boston accent and imitating Helms; we had no idea what he said. But that then was confirmed.DL: Are you the managing partner of a boutique or midsize firm? If so, you know that your most important job is attracting and retaining top talent. It's not easy, especially if your benefits don't match up well with those of Biglaw firms or if your HR process feels “small time.” NexFirm has created an onboarding and benefits experience that rivals an Am Law 100 firm, so you can compete for the best talent at a price your firm can afford. Want to learn more? Contact NexFirm at 212-292-1002 or email betterbenefits@nexfirm.com.So turning to your time as a judge, how would you describe that period, in a nutshell? The job did come with certain restrictions. Did you enjoy it, notwithstanding the restrictions?NG: I candidly was not sure that I would last beyond five years, for a couple of reasons. One was, I got on the bench in 1994, when the sentencing guidelines were mandatory, when what we taught you in my sentencing class was not happening, which is that judges would depart from the guidelines and the Sentencing Commission, when enough of us would depart, would begin to change the guidelines, and there'd be a feedback loop. There was no feedback loop. If you departed, you were reversed. And actually the genesis of the book I'm writing now came from this period. As far as I was concerned, I was being unfair. As I later said, my sentences were unfair, unjust, and disproportionate—and there was nothing I could do about it. So I was not sure that I was going to last beyond five years.In addition, there were some high-profile criminal trials going on with lawyers that I knew that I probably would've been a part of if I had been practicing. And I hungered to do that, to go back and be a litigator. The course at Yale Law School that you were a part of saved me. And it saved me because, certainly with respect to the sentencing, it turned what seemed like a formula into an intellectual discussion in which there was wiggle room and the ability to come up with other approaches. In other words, we were taught that this was a formula, and you don't depart from the formula, and that's it. The class came up with creative issues and creative understandings, which made an enormous difference to my judging.So I started to write; I started to write opinions. Even if the opinion says there's nothing I can do about it, I would write opinions in which I say, “I can't depart because of this woman's status as a single mother because the guidelines said only extraordinary family circumstances can justify a departure, and this wasn't extraordinary. That makes no sense.” And I began to write this in my opinions, I began to write this in scholarly writings, and that made all the difference in the world. And sometimes I was reversed, and sometimes I was not. But it enabled me to figure out how to push back against a system which I found to be palpably unfair. So I figured out how to be me in this job—and that was enormously helpful.DL: And I know how much and how deeply you cared about sentencing because of the class in which I actually wound up writing one of my two capstone papers at Yale.NG: To your listeners, I still have that paper.DL: You must be quite a pack rat!NG: I can change the grade at any time….DL: Well, I hope you've enjoyed your time today, Judge, and will keep the grade that way!But let me ask you: now that the guidelines are advisory, do you view that as a step forward from your time on the bench? Perhaps you would still be a judge if they were advisory? I don't know.NG: No, they became advisory in 2005, and I didn't leave until 2011. Yes, that was enormously helpful: you could choose what you thought was a fair sentence, so it's very advisory now. But I don't think I would've stayed longer, because of two reasons.By the time I hit 65, I wanted another act. I wanted another round. I thought I had done all that I could do as a judge, and I wanted to try something different. And Martha Minow of Harvard Law School made me an offer I couldn't refuse, which was to teach at Harvard. So that was one. It also, candidly, was that there was no longevity in my family, and so when I turned 65, I wasn't sure what was going to happen. So I did want to try something new. But I'm still here.DL: Yep—definitely, and very active. I always chuckle when I see “Ret.,” the abbreviation for “retired,” in your email signature, because you do not seem very retired to me. Tell us what you are up to today.NG: Well, first I have this book that I've been writing for several years, called Incomplete Sentences. And so what this book started to be about was the men and women that I sentenced, and how unfair it was, and what I thought we should have done. Then one day I got a message from a man by the name of Darryl Green, and it says, “Is this Nancy Gertner? If it is, I think about you all the time. I hope you're well. I'm well. I'm an iron worker. I have a family. I've written books. You probably don't remember me.” This was a Facebook message. I knew exactly who he was. He was a man who had faced the death penalty in my court, and I acquitted him. And he was then tried in state court, and acquitted again. So I knew exactly who he was, and I decided to write back.So I wrote back and said, “I know who you are. Do you want to meet?” That started a series of meetings that I've had with the men I've sentenced over the course of the 17-year career that I had as a judge. Why has it taken me this long to write? First, because these have been incredibly moving and difficult discussions. Second, because I wanted the book to be honest about what I knew about them and what a difference maybe this information would make. It is extremely difficult, David, to be honest about judging, particularly in these days when judges are parodied. So if I talk about how I wanted to exercise some leniency in a case, I understand that this can be parodied—and I don't want it to be, but I want to be honest.So for example, in one case, there would be cooperators in the case who'd get up and testify that the individual who was charged with only X amount of drugs was actually involved with much more than that. And you knew that if you believed the witness, the sentence would be doubled, even though you thought that didn't make any sense. This was really just mostly how long the cops were on the corner watching the drug deals. It didn't make the guy who was dealing drugs on a bicycle any more culpable than the guy who was doing massive quantities into the country.So I would struggle with, “Do I really believe this man, the witness who's upping the quantity?” And the kinds of exercises I would go through to make sure that I wasn't making a decision because I didn't like the implications of the decision and it was what I was really feeling. So it's not been easy to write, and it's taken me a very long time. The other side of the coin is they're also incredibly honest with me, and sometimes I don't want to know what they're saying. Not like a sociologist who could say, “Oh, that's an interesting fact, I'll put it in.” It's like, “Oh no, I don't want to know that.”DL: Wow. The book sounds amazing; I can't wait to read it. When is it estimated to come out?NG: Well, I'm finishing it probably at the end of this year. I've rewritten it about five times. And my hope would be sometime next year. So yeah, it was organic. It's what I wanted to write from the minute I left the bench. And it covers the guideline period when it was lunacy to follow the guidelines, to a period when it was much more flexible, but the guidelines still disfavored considering things like addiction and trauma and adverse childhood experiences, which really defined many of the people I was sentencing. So it's a cri de cœur, as they say, which has not been easy to write.DL: Speaking of cri de cœurs, and speaking of difficult things, it's difficult to write about judging, but I think we also have alluded already to how difficult it is to engage in judging in 2025. What general thoughts would you have about being a federal judge in 2025? I know you are no longer a federal judge. But if you were still on the bench or when you talk to your former colleagues, what is it like on the ground right now?NG: It's nothing like when I was a judge. In fact, the first thing that happened when I left the bench is I wrote an article in which I said—this is in 2011—that the only pressure I had felt in my 17 years on the bench was to duck, avoid, and evade, waiver, statute of limitations. Well, all of a sudden, you now have judges who at least since January are dealing with emergencies that they can't turn their eyes away from, judges issuing rulings at 1 a.m., judges writing 60-page decisions on an emergency basis, because what the president is doing is literally unprecedented. The courts are being asked to look at issues that have never been addressed before, because no one has ever tried to do the things that he's doing. And they have almost overwhelmingly met the moment. It doesn't matter whether you're ruling for the government or against the government; they are taking these challenges enormously seriously. They're putting in the time.I had two clerks, maybe some judges have three, but it's a prodigious amount of work. Whereas everyone complained about the Trump prosecutions proceeding so slowly, judges have been working expeditiously on these challenges, and under circumstances that I never faced, which is threats the likes of which I have never seen. One judge literally played for me the kinds of voice messages that he got after a decision that he issued. So they're doing it under circumstances that we never had to face. And it's not just the disgruntled public talking; it's also our fellow Yale Law alum, JD Vance, talking about rogue judges. That's a level of delegitimization that I just don't think anyone ever had to deal with before. So they're being challenged in ways that no other judges have, and they are being threatened in a way that no judges have.On the other hand, I wish I were on the bench.DL: Interesting, because I was going to ask you that. If you were to give lower-court judges a grade, to put you back in professor mode, on their performance since January 2025, what grade would you give the lower courts?NG: Oh, I would give them an A. I would give them an A. It doesn't matter which way they have come out: decision after decision has been thoughtful and careful. They put in the time. Again, this is not a commentary on what direction they have gone in, but it's a commentary on meeting the moment. And so now these are judges who are getting emergency orders, emergency cases, in the midst of an already busy docket. It has really been extraordinary. The district courts have; the courts of appeals have. I've left out another court….DL: We'll get to that in a minute. But I'm curious: you were on the District of Massachusetts, which has been a real center of activity because many groups file there. As we're recording this, there is the SNAP benefits, federal food assistance litigation playing out there [before Judge Indira Talwani, with another case before Chief Judge John McConnell of Rhode Island]. So it's really just ground zero for a lot of these challenges. But you alluded to the Supreme Court, and I was going to ask you—even before you did—what grade would you give them?NG: Failed. The debate about the shadow docket, which you write about and I write about, in which Justice Kavanaugh thinks, “we're doing fine making interim orders, and therefore it's okay that there's even a precedential value to our interim orders, and thank you very much district court judges for what you're doing, but we'll be the ones to resolve these issues”—I mean, they're resolving these issues in the most perfunctory manner possible.In the tariff case, for example, which is going to be argued on Wednesday, the Court has expedited briefing and expedited oral argument. They could do that with the emergency docket, but they are preferring to hide behind this very perfunctory decision making. I'm not sure why—maybe to keep their options open? Justice Barrett talks about how if it's going to be a hasty decision, you want to make sure that it's not written in stone. But of course then the cases dealing with independent commissions, in which you are allowing the government, allowing the president, to fire people on independent commissions—these cases are effectively overruling Humphrey's Executor, in the most ridiculous setting. So the Court is not meeting the moment. It was stunning that the Court decided in the birthright-citizenship case to be concerned about nationwide injunctions, when in fact nationwide injunctions had been challenged throughout the Biden administration, and they just decided not to address the issue then.Now, I have a lot to say about Justice Kavanaugh's dressing-down of Judge [William] Young [of the District of Massachusetts]….DL: Or Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Kavanaugh.NG: That's right, it was Justice Gorsuch. It was stunningly inappropriate, stunningly inappropriate, undermines the district courts that frankly are doing much better than the Supreme Court in meeting the moment. The whole concept of defying the Supreme Court—defying a Supreme Court order, a three-paragraph, shadow-docket order—is preposterous. So whereas the district courts and the courts of appeals are meeting the moment, I do not think the Supreme Court is. And that's not even going into the merits of the immunity decision, which I think has let loose a lawless presidency that is even more lawless than it might otherwise be. So yes, that failed.DL: I do want to highlight for my readers that in addition to your books and your speaking, you do write quite frequently on these issues in the popular press. I've seen your work in The New York Times and The Boston Globe. I know you're working on a longer essay about the rule of law in the age of Trump, so people should look out for that. Of all the things that you worry about right now when it comes to the rule of law, what worries you the most?NG: I worry that the president will ignore and disobey a Supreme Court order. I think a lot about the judges that are dealing with orders that the government is not obeying, and people are impatient that they're not immediately moving to contempt. And one gets the sense with the lower courts that they are inching up to the moment of contempt, but do not want to get there because it would be a stunning moment when you hold the government in contempt. I think the Supreme Court is doing the same thing. I initially believed that the Supreme Court was withholding an anti-Trump decision, frankly, for fear that he would not obey it, and they were waiting till it mattered. I now am no longer certain of that, because there have been rulings that made no sense as far as I'm concerned. But my point was that they, like the lower courts, were holding back rather than saying, “Government, you must do X,” for fear that the government would say, “Go pound sand.” And that's what I fear, because when that happens, it will be even more of a constitutional crisis than we're in now. It'll be a constitutional confrontation, the likes of which we haven't seen. So that's what I worry about.DL: Picking up on what you just said, here's something that I posed to one of my prior guests, Pam Karlan. Let's say you're right that the Supreme Court doesn't want to draw this line in the sand because of a fear that Trump, being Trump, will cross it. Why is that not prudential? Why is that not the right thing? And why is it not right for the Supreme Court to husband its political capital for the real moment?Say Trump—I know he said lately he's not going to—but say Trump attempts to run for a third term, and some case goes up to the Supreme Court on that basis, and the Court needs to be able to speak in a strong, unified, powerful voice. Or maybe it'll be a birthright-citizenship case, if he says, when they get to the merits of that, “Well, that's really nice that you think that there's such a thing as birthright citizenship, but I don't, and now stop me.” Why is it not wise for the Supreme Court to protect itself, until this moment when it needs to come forward and protect all of us?NG: First, the question is whether that is in fact what they are doing, and as I said, there were two schools of thought on this. One school of thought was that is what they were doing, and particularly doing it in an emergency, fuzzy, not really precedential way, until suddenly you're at the edge of the cliff, and you have to either say taking away birthright citizenship was unconstitutional, or tariffs, you can't do the tariffs the way you want to do the tariffs. I mean, they're husbanding—I like the way you put it, husbanding—their political capital, until that moment. I'm not sure that that's true. I think we'll know that if in fact the decisions that are coming down the pike, they actually decide against Trump—notably the tariff ones, notably birthright citizenship. I'm just not sure that that's true.And besides, David, there are some of these cases they did not have to take. The shadow docket was about where plaintiffs were saying it is an emergency to lay people off or fire people. Irreparable harm is on the plaintiff's side, whereas the government otherwise would just continue to do that which it has been doing. There's no harm to it continuing that. USAID—you don't have a right to dismantle the USAID. The harm is on the side of the dismantling, not having you do that which you have already done and could do through Congress, if you wanted to. They didn't have to take those cases. So your comment about husbanding political capital is a good comment, but those cases could have remained as they were in the district courts with whatever the courts of appeals did, and they could do what previous courts have done, which is wait for the issues to percolate longer.The big one for me, too, is the voting rights case. If they decide the voting rights case in January or February or March, if they rush it through, I will say then it's clear they're in the tank for Trump, because the only reason to get that decision out the door is for the 2026 election. So I want to believe that they are husbanding their political capital, but I'm not sure that if that's true, that we would've seen this pattern. But the proof will be with the voting rights case, with birthright citizenship, with the tariffs.DL: Well, it will be very interesting to see what happens in those cases. But let us now turn to my speed round. These are four questions that are the same for all my guests, and my first question is, what do you like the least about the law? And this can either be the practice of law or law as an abstract system of governance.NG: The practice of law. I do some litigation; I'm in two cases. When I was a judge, I used to laugh at people who said incivility was the most significant problem in the law. I thought there were lots of other more significant problems. I've come now to see how incredibly nasty the practice of law is. So yes—and that is no fun.DL: My second question is, what would you be if you were not a lawyer/judge/retired judge?NG: Musical comedy star, clearly! No question about it.DL: There are some judges—Judge Fred Block in the Eastern District of New York, Judge Jed Rakoff in the Southern District of New York—who do these little musical stylings for their court shows. I don't know if you've ever tried that?NG: We used to do Shakespeare, Shakespeare readings, and I loved that. I am a ham—so absolutely musical comedy or theater.DL: My third question is, how much sleep do you get each night?NG: Six to seven hours now, just because I'm old. Before that, four. Most of my life as a litigator, I never thought I needed sleep. You get into my age, you need sleep. And also you look like hell the next morning, so it's either getting sleep or a facelift.DL: And my last question is, any final words of wisdom, such as career advice or life advice, for my listeners?NG: You have to do what you love. You have to do what you love. The law takes time and is so all-encompassing that you have to do what you love. And I have done what I love from beginning to now, and I wouldn't have it any other way.DL: Well, I have loved catching up with you, Judge, and having you share your thoughts and your story with my listeners. Thank you so much for joining me.NG: You're very welcome, David. Take care.DL: Thanks so much to Judge Gertner for joining me. I look forward to reading her next book, Incomplete Sentences, when it comes out next year.Thanks to NexFirm for sponsoring the Original Jurisdiction podcast. NexFirm has helped many attorneys to leave Biglaw and launch firms of their own. To explore this opportunity, please contact NexFirm at 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment@nexfirm.com to learn more.Thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers. To connect with me, please email me at davidlat@substack.com, or find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram and Threads at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, but it's made possible by paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode should appear on or about Wednesday, November 26. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

"Someday, you'll find all who love are blind when your heart's on fire You must realize smoke gets in your eyes" - The Platters "Now you know nothing, before, you knew a whole fucking lot Your ass don't wanna get shot" - ODB

Your eyes are not deceiving you. Big Brother LEGEND - The Mastermind - America's Player - ERIC STEIN, is our guest on this week's episode! In what turned into our longest episode of the podcast thus far, we pick Eric's brain on all things Big Brother, and of course send three more players to round 2. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to the podcast of Saint Patrick's Anglican Church in Lexington, KY. We meet Sundays at 4:30 p.m. at 200 Colony Blvd., Lexington, KY 40502. This podcast contains sermons and teaching for spiritual formation. Explore our church at www.saintpatrickschurch.org

We can look forward to a day when death will be no more because Jesus paid the penalty for our sin and rose again. Someday we'll be physically raised with him.

"Someday" is a myth that keeps you waiting. This episode helps you trade it for today and finally take that first step. I used to say "someday" all the time: someday I'll write a book, someday I'll slow down, someday I'll care for myself. But someday never came until I created space and just started. That's when everything shifted. This episode is a reminder that life isn't waiting for later. It's happening now. Action Steps: Spot your some days: Notice where you're delaying dreams with the word someday. Reframe the myth: Understand that perfect conditions will never arrive. Take one step today: Write a sentence, go for a walk, or block an hour. Choose presence: Replace waiting with courage and simple daily action. Build now, not later: Remember freedom is created in today's choices, not in tomorrow's promises. Join the email list for Take The Exit - Be the first to step inside the story! More from Megan YouTube | Website |  Instagram

You know him, you love him, and you miss him every second of the Big Brother offseason... Taran Armstrong is back in the Diary Room! We talk all things "Behind the Mirror" - Taran's new book all about Big Brother, catch up on Big Brother 27 with the finale one month behind us, and pull six more players! Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Someday, after mastering the winds, the waves, the tides and gravity, we shall harness for God the energies of love, and then, for a second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

This may be the most heartfelt episode I've ever recorded. In this deeply human conversation, Maxwell Ivey: The Blind Blogger, and I talk about what it means to keep moving when life doesn't hand you easy options. Maxwell lost his sight as a child, taught himself to code, built a business, and learned to ask for help without shame.   We talk about the quiet power of asking, the courage to act before conditions are perfect, and a rare take on gratitude-not as politeness, but as the willingness to use what's been given.   Somewhere along the way, we find ourselves reflecting on The Four Agreements and how "don't take things personally" and "don't make assumptions" become essential mindsets in the world of disability and education.   It's unpolished, honest, and full of wisdom that only comes from lived experience. Stay to the end to hear Maxwell sing his original song, Don't Wait on Someday.   You can find Maxwell at theblindblogger.net.

The time has finally arrived for two monumental events. FIRST.... IZZY IS HERE! Big Brother 25 AND The Amazing Race 38 legend, Izzy Gleicher joins us this week! SECOND... Big Brother 27 is here! We watched all summer long and it's now time to throw all 17 players onto the wheel. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Living for someday can make right now difficult when we become so focused on future hopes that we miss God's present provision. Like the Israelites who complained in the desert despite the daily manna sent by God, we often lose sight of current blessings while waiting for our promised land. The key is learning to invite others to share our burdens and finding contentment in what God provides today. Deserts aren't delays but places where God forges us into people ready for His promises. By recognizing the manna on the ground and walking in community, we can thrive in our present circumstances while moving toward God's future plans.

In this profound episode of the Reformed Brotherhood, Tony Arsenal and Jesse Schwamb delve deeply into the Parable of the Tares (Matthew 13:24-30), exploring its implications for Christian assurance. Building on their previous discussion, they examine how this parable speaks to the mixed nature of the visible church, the sovereignty of Christ over His kingdom, and most significantly, the doctrine of assurance. Through careful theological reflection, the hosts unpack how true believers can find solid ground for assurance not in their own works or fruit-checking, but in the promises of Christ and the testimony of the Holy Spirit. This episode offers both encouragement for those struggling with doubts and a sobering challenge to those resting in false assurance. Key Takeaways The Parable of the Tares teaches that the visible church will be mixed until the final judgment, containing both true believers (wheat) and false professors (tares) who may appear outwardly similar. True assurance is not based primarily on good works but on the promises of Christ, the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit, and the evidences of grace in our lives. False assurance is a real danger, as many who think they belong to Christ will discover at the final judgment that they never truly knew Him. The Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter 18) provides a helpful framework for understanding biblical assurance as the proper possession of every Christian. Christ's role as the divine Master of the house (the world) and Lord of the angels is subtly yet powerfully affirmed in this parable, grounding our assurance in His sovereignty. Good works are the fruit of assurance, not its cause—when we are secure in our salvation, we are freed to serve Christ joyfully rather than anxiously trying to earn assurance. The final judgment will bring perfect clarity, revealing what was hidden and separating the wheat from the tares with divine precision that humans cannot achieve now. The Doctrine of Assurance: Reformed Understanding The Reformed tradition has always emphasized that believers can and should have assurance of their salvation—a conviction recovered during the Reformation in contrast to Rome's teaching. As Tony noted when reading from the Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter 18), this assurance is "not a bare conjectural and probable persuasion grounded upon a fallible hope, but an infallible assurance of faith founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation." This assurance rests on three pillars: the promises of God in Scripture, the inward evidence of grace, and the testimony of the Holy Spirit witnessing with our spirit. What makes this understanding particularly comforting is that it shifts the foundation of assurance away from our performance to God's faithfulness. While self-examination has its place, the Reformed understanding recognizes that looking too intensely at our own hearts and works can lead either to despair or to false confidence. Instead, we're directed to look primarily to Christ and His finished work, finding in Him the anchor for our souls. The Problem of False Assurance One of the most sobering aspects of the Parable of the Tares is its implicit warning about false assurance. Just as the tares resemble wheat until maturity reveals their true nature, many professing Christians may outwardly appear to belong to Christ while inwardly remaining unregenerate. As Jesse observed, "The tares typically live under false assurance. They may attend church, confess belief, appear righteous, yet their hearts are unregenerate. Their faith is maybe historical, it's not saving, it could be intellectual, but it's not spiritual." This echoes Jesus' warning in Matthew 7 that many will say to Him, "Lord, Lord," but will hear the devastating response, "I never knew you." The parable teaches us that this self-deception is not always conscious hypocrisy but often the result of spiritual blindness. As Jesse noted, referencing Romans 1, Ephesians 4, and 1 Corinthians 2, the unregenerate are "not merely ignorant, they're blinded... to the spiritual truth by nature and by Satan." This understanding should prompt humble self-examination while simultaneously driving us to depend not on our own discernment but on Christ's perfect knowledge and saving work. Memorable Quotes "Assurance is the believer's arc where he sits Noah alike quiets and still in the midst of all distractions and destructions, commotions and confusions." - Thomas Brooks, quoted by Jesse Schwamb "When we are confessing, repenting, seeking like our status in Christ because of Christ, then we have confidence that we are in fact part of the children of God. When everything is stripped away from us and all we're crying out is only and completely and solely and unequivocally Jesus Christ, then I think we have great reason to understand that we should be confident in our assurance." - Jesse Schwamb "The sacrifice and the service that a husband performs for his wife, whom he loves and trusts and is committed to and knows that she's faithful and committed to him, that is not causing that faithfulness. It's not causing that trust and that love. It is the outcome and the outflow of it." - Tony Arsenal on how good works flow from assurance rather than cause it Resources Mentioned Scripture: Matthew 13:24-30, Matthew 7:21-23, Romans 1, Ephesians 4, 1 Corinthians 2, 2 Timothy 3:5 Westminster Confession of Faith: Chapter 18 "Of Assurance of Grace and Salvation" Thomas Brooks: "Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices" YouTube Channel: My Wild Backyard Khan Academy: Educational resource recommended during "Affirmations and Denials" segment Full Transcript Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 466 of the Reform the Brotherhood. I'm Jesse. Tony Arsenal: And I'm Tony. And this is the podcast with ears to hear. Hey brother. Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. We're going back to the farm again. Can't stop. Won't stop. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I'm stoked. [00:01:02] Discussion on the Parable of the Tears Tony Arsenal: The last week's discussion was interesting and I think, um, it's gonna be nice to sort of round it out and talk about some things you might not think about, uh, when you first read this parable. So I'm, I'm pretty excited. Jesse Schwamb: Oh, what a tease that is. So if you're wondering what Tony's talking about, we're hanging out. In Matthew 13, we are just really enjoying these teachings of Jesus. And they are shocking and they're challenging, and they're encouraging, and they're awesome, of course. And so we're gonna be finishing out the Parable of the Tears and you need to go back and listen to the previous conversation. This, this is all set up because we have some unfinished business. We didn't talk about the eschatological implications. We have this really big this, this matza ball hanging over us. So to speak, which was the, do the TAs in this parable even know that they are tarry, that they are the TAs? And so in this parable, the disciples learn that the kingdom itself, God's kingdom, the kingdom that Jesus is enumerating and explaining and bringing into being, they are learning that it's gonna be mixed in character. So that's correcting this expectation that the kingdom would be perfectly pure and would have, would evolve righteous rule over all of the unrighteous world. And so it's a little bit shocking that Jesus says, listen, they're gonna be. Tears within the wheats that is in the world, the seed that God himself, the sun has planted and that they're gonna exist side by side for a long time. And so we, they have to wait patiently and give ourselves to building up the wheats as the sons of the kingdom and be careful in their judgment, not to harm those who are believers. We covered a lot of that last week, but left so much unsaid we couldn't even fit it in. This is gonna be jam packed, so I'm gonna stop giving the tees instead start moving us into affirmations and denials. [00:02:45] Affirmations and Denials Jesse Schwamb: It's of course that time in our conversation where we either affirm with something really like or we think is undervalued or we deny against something that we don't really like or is a little overvalued. So as I usually say to you, Tony, what have you got for us? [00:03:00] YouTube Channel Recommendation: My Wild Backyard Tony Arsenal: I am affirming a YouTube channel. Um, I, I think the algorithm goes through these cycles where it wants me to learn about bugs and things because I get Okay, like videos about bugs. And so I'm, I'm interested. There's been this, uh, channel that's been coming up on my algorithm lately called My Wild Backyard, and it, it's a guy, he's like an entomologist. He seems like a, a like a legit academic, but what he does is he basically goes through and he talks about different bugs, creepy crawlies, looks at like snakes, all that kinds of stuff. It seems like his wheelhouse is the stuff that can kill you or hurt you pretty bad. Nice. But, um, it's interesting and it's. It's good educational content. It's, you know, it's not sensationalized, it's not, uh, it's not dramatized. Um, it's very real. There's occasionally an instance where he, he's not, sometimes he will intentionally get bit or stung by an, uh, by an animal to show you what it does. So he can experience and explain what he's experiencing. And sometimes he just accidentally gets bit or stung. And so those are some of the most interesting ones. So like, for example, just looking at his, his channel, his most recent, um, his most recent video is called The most venomous Desert Creatures in the US ranked the one previous was. The world's most terrifying arachni isn't a spider. And then previous to that was what happens if a giant centipede bites you? So it's interesting stuff. If you are one of those people that likes bugs and likes creepy crawlies and things, um, this is definitely the channel for you if you're not one of those people. I actually think this probably is the channel for you too. 'cause it kind of demystifies a lot of this stuff. Um. You know, for example, he, he will commonly point out that, um, spiders don't wanna bite you and they just wanna leave you alone. And, and as long as you leave them alone, even, even something like a black widow, which people are terrified of, and I think, right, rightfully so. I mean, they can be scary. Those can be scary bites. He'll, he'll handle those, no problem. And as long as he's not like putting downward pressure on them, uh, they have no interest in biting, they really just want to get away. So even seeing that kind of stuff, I think can help demystify and, and sort of, uh, make it a little bit easier. So my Wild Backyard, he can find it on YouTube. Um, he's safe for kids. He's not, he's not cussing even. I mean, I think occasionally when he gets bit on accident, you might, you know, you might have a beep here or there, but, um, he's not, he's not regularly swearing or things like that. And he does a pretty good job of adding that stuff out. Jesse Schwamb: What a great title for that, isn't it? This, yeah. Confluence of your backyard. That space that seems domesticated is also stealing its own. Right. Wild. And there's a be Yeah. Both those things coming together. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. It, it's interesting stuff and it's really good. I mean, it's really compelling videography. He does a good job of taking good photos. You'll see insects that you usually won't see, or spiders you usually won't see. Um, so yeah, it's cool. Check it out. [00:05:51] Discussion on Spiders and Creepy Crawlies Jesse Schwamb: What are you, uh, yeah, I myself would like to become more comfortable with the arachni variety. If only be, I mean, I don't know. It's, it's a weird creature, so my instinct is to be like, kill them all. And then if I can't find them and I know they're around, then we just burn everything that we own. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: They just can't sink into the ground fast enough. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. There's something about the way they move, like their, their bodies don't move the way you would anticipate them to. Right. And it freaks, it just weirds out human sensibilities, so. Right. Jesse Schwamb: They're also like, I find them to be very surprising. Often. It's not kind of a, a very like, kind of measured welcome into your life. It's like you just go to get in the shower and there's a giant spider. Yeah. Oh yeah. Although I guess that spider, he's, he or she's probably like, whoa, where'd you come from? You know, like, yeah. He's like, I was just taking a Tony Arsenal: shower. You know what's interesting? Um, I saw another video was on a different channel, um, like common jumping spiders. Yeah. Which there are like hundreds of species of common jumping spiders. Jesse Schwamb: True. Tony Arsenal: Um, but spiders and jumping spiders specifically, actually you can form almost like a pet bond with, so like the, that jumping spider that like lives in your house and sees you every day. He, he probably knows who you are and is like, comfortable with you. And they've done studies that like you can actually domesticate jumping spiders, so they're not as foreign and alien as you might think. Although they certainly do look a little bit strange and weird. And the way their bodies move is almost designed to weird out people like it just the skinness, like the way their legs skitter and move it, it just is, it's, it triggers something very primal in us to That's wild. Be weirded out by it. Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: It's wild. I love it. That's a good, a affirmation. I'm definitely gonna check that out. I, any, anything? I really want to know what the, what like the terrifying arachni is. That's not a spider. Tony Arsenal: It's a, well, it's called a camel spider, but it's not really a spider. Oh, Jesse Schwamb: I know what you're talking about. That is kind of terrifying. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. They, they actually don't have any venom. Um, yeah. Check out the video. I mean, it, it was a good video. Um, but yeah, they're freaky looking and, um, but even that, like he was handling it No problem. Yeah. Like it wasn't, it wasn't aggressive with him once Wow. Once it figured out it wasn't, he wasn't trying to hurt him and, and that it couldn't eat him. Um, it, it just sort of like hung out until he let it go. So Jesse Schwamb: yeah, just be careful if you watch it one before bed or while in bed. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Probably not right before bed. Yeah. You'll, you'll get the creepy crawlies all night. Jesse Schwamb: I love it. But there's something somewhat. Like invigorating about that isn't there? Like it's, it's kind of a natural, just like kind of holy respect for the world that God has created, that they're these features that are so different, so wild, so interesting and a little bit frightening, but in the sense that we just draw off from them because they're so different than what we are. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: And you know, again, there's places you would be happy to see them, but maybe your bathtub or like shooting out, like, you know, like where you live, the jumping spiders are legit and they will just pop out on you, you know? Yeah. You're just doing your own thing and then all of a sudden they're popping out. I think part of that is just that what, what gets me is like them just, you know, like I remember in my basement here, once one popped out from a rafter and then I was holding, happened to be holding up broom. My instinct just naturally was to hit it. I hit it with the broom and it went across the room and fell on an empty box and sounded like a silver dollar had hit the box. Like it was just a massive, I mean, again, like, it's like fish stories, like it's a massive spider. It was a big spider. Yeah. But you just don't expect to, to see that kind of thing. Or maybe, maybe I should, but anything that moves in that way, and again, like centipedes, man, forget it. We have those too, like in our basement. Like the long ones. Oh yeah. Yeah. That thing will come like squiggling down the wall at you, like eye level and you just wanna run up the stairs screaming like a little girl. Tony Arsenal: Yeah, you do run up the stairs screaming like a little girl. It's not that you want to, it's that usually you do. I don't mean like you specifically, although probably you specifically. Yeah. Oh yeah. Oh yeah. There's, yeah, you just react. Well, j Jesse enough freaking out. I mean, we're getting close to Halloween, so I suppose it's appropriate, but, uh, enough of that. What are you affirming or denying today? Jesse Schwamb: Once again, without like any coordination, mine is not unlike yours. I know you and I, we talk about the world in which we live, which God has created, and this lovely command, this ammunition to take dominion over that. And one of the things I appreciate about our conversations is I think you and I often have maybe not like a novel. Kinda perspective on that, but one that I don't hear talked about often and that is this idea of taking dominion over what it is possible to know and to appropriate, and then to apply onto wisdom. [00:10:27] Affirmation: Khan Academy Jesse Schwamb: And so my information is in that realm. It's another form of taking ownership of what's in the wild of knowledge that you can possess. And again, equal parts. What an amazing time to be alive. So I'm affirming with the website, Khan Academy, which I'm sure many are familiar with. And this website offers like. Thousands of hours. Uh, and materials of free instructional videos, practice exercises, quizzes, all these like really bespoke, personalized learning modules you can create for topics like math, science, computing, economics, history, art. I think it goes like even starting at like. Elementary age all the way up into like early college can help you study for things like the SAT, the LSAT AP courses, and I was revisiting it. I have an open account with them that I keep in love and I go back to it from time to time. And I was working on some stuff where I wanted to rehearse some knowledge in like the calculus space, do some things by hand, which I haven't done. And I was just like, I'm blown away at how good this stuff is. And it's all for free. I mean, you should donate if you. You get something from this because it's a nonprofit, but the fact that there are these amazing instructional videos out there that can help us get a better understanding of either things we already know and we can rehearse the knowledge or to learn something brand new essentially for free. But somebody's done all the hard work to curate a pedagogy for you. Honestly, this is incredible. So if you haven't looked at that website in a long time or maybe ever, and you might be thinking, what, what do I really wanna learn? Lemme tell you. There's a lot of interesting stuff there and it's so approachable and it's such a good website for teaching. And if you have children in particular, even if you're looking for help, either helping them with their own coursework or maybe to have like kind of a tutor on the side, this is so good. So I can't say enough good things recently about Khan Academy 'cause it's been so helpful to me and super fun to like just sit and have your own paced study and in the private and comfort of your own home or your desk at work or wherever it is that you need to learn it. To be able to have somebody teach you some things, to do a little practice exercises, and then to go on to the world and to apply the things you've learned. Ah, it's so good. Tony Arsenal: Nice. Yeah, I've, I've never done anything with Khan Academy. I'll have to check it out. There's, um, there's some skills of needing to brush up on, uh, at work that I am probably not gonna be able to find in my normal channels, so I'll have to see if there is anything going on there. Um, but yeah, that's, that's good stuff. And it's free. Love freestyle. It's, and of course, like Jesse Schwamb: things like this are legion. So whatever it is, whatever your discipline or your field of study or work is, there's probably something out there and, uh, might, I humbly maybe encourage you to, if you use something like that and it's funded by donations, it's worth giving, I think, because again, it's just an amazing opportunity to take dominion over the knowledge that God has placed into the world and then to use it for something. I mean, I suppose even if all it is is you just wanna learn more about, like for me, I, I find like the subjects of, of math and science, like just endlessly fascinating and like the computing section I was looking at, I, I don't know much about like programming per se, but there is such a beauty. Like these underlying principles, like the, the organization of the world and the first level principles of like physics for instance, are just like baffling in the most glorious kind of way. How they all come together. So having somebody like teach you at a very like simplistic level, but allow you to grasp those concepts makes you just appreciate it leads me to doxology a lot when I see these things. So in a weird way, it ends up becoming maybe not a weird way and the right way. It becomes worship as often as I'm sitting at my desk and working through like a practice problem on like, you know, partial differential equation or, or derivatives is what I was working on today. And ah, it's just so good. I don't know, maybe I'm the only one. I, it's not be super nerdy, but you, are you ever like at your desk studying something? And it might not be like theological per se, but you just have a moment where you're overcome with some kind of worship. Do you know what I'm talking about? Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I, um, this we're the nerdiest people on the planet, but let's Jesse Schwamb: do it. Um, Tony Arsenal: when I find a really fun, interesting. Uh, Excel formula and I can get it to work right. Uh, and it, and then it just like everything unlocks. Like, I feel like I've unlocked all the knowledge in the universe. Um, but yeah, I hear you like the, the Excel thing is, is interesting to me because, like, math is just the description. Like it's just the fabric of reality is just the way we describe reality. But the fact that we can do basically just take math and do all these amazing things with it, uh, in a spreadsheet is really, uh, drives me to praise. Like I said, that's super nerdy, but it is. Oh, you're speaking my language. Jesse Schwamb: I, we have never understood each other better than just this moment right now. We, we had some real talk and, uh, a real moment. Tony Arsenal: Yes. Welcome to the Reformed math cast. Jesse Schwamb: We're so glad that you're here. Tony Arsenal: Yes. We're not gonna do any one plus one plus one equals one kinds of heretical math in, up in here. Jesse Schwamb: No. Tony Arsenal: Well, Jesse, I have a feeling that, excuse me. Wow. Jesse Schwamb: We don't edit anything out. Listen, I'm choked up too. It's it, listen, love ones just so emotional. The moment Tony and I are having it. We're gonna try our best right now to pivot to go into this text, but it's, it's tough because we were just really having something, something special. You got, you got to see there. But thank you for trying to Tony Arsenal: cover for me for that big cough. Jesse Schwamb: This is like presuppositional editing. You know, we don't actually do anything in post. It's not ex anti editing. It's, it's literally presuppositional. [00:15:52] Theological Discussion on Assurance Jesse Schwamb: But to that end, we are in Matthew 13. This is the main course. This is the reason why we're here. There's lots of reasons to worship, and one of them is to come before and admire and love our God who has given us his specific revelation and this incredible teaching of his son. And that's why we're hanging out in Matthew 13. So let me read, because we have just a couple of really sentences here, this really short parable and that way it'll catch us up and then we can just launch right back into we're, we're basically like, we're already in the rocket. Like we're in the stratosphere. We're, we're taking it all the way now. So this is Matthew chapter 13. Come hang out here. It's in the 24th verse. And this is what we find written for us. This is the word of the Lord. He put another parable before them saying. The Kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the weeds and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also, and the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds? He said to them, an enemy has done this. So the servant said to him, then, do you want us to go and gather them? But he said, no less than gathering the weeds, you root up the weed along with them. Let both grow until the harvest. And at harvest time, I will tell the reapers, gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but to gather the wheat into my barn. Tony Arsenal: That's good stuff. That's good stuff. Um, you know, we, we covered most of. I don't know, what do you wanna call it? The first order reading of the parable last week. Jesse Schwamb: Right. Tony Arsenal: On one level, the parable, uh, as Christ explains it, uh, a little bit down further in the chapter is extremely straightforward. It's almost out, it's almost an allegory. Each, each element of the parable has a, a, a figure that it's representing. And the main purpose of the story is that the world and specifically the church, um, is going to be a mixed body until the last days, until the end of time. And so there's, there's the Sons of God or the Sons of the Kingdom, uh, and then there's the sons of the evil one. And we talked a lot about how. These two figures in the parable, the, the, the weeds or the tears? Um, tears is a better word because it's a specific kind of, uh, specific kind of weed that looks very much like wheat at its immature stages. Right. And you can't actually discern the difference readily, uh, until the weed and the wheat has grown up next to each other. Um, and so, so part of the parable is that. The, the sons of the kingdom and the sons of the enemy, or the sons of the evil one, they don't look all that different in their early stages. And it's not until the sort of end culmination of their lives and the end culmination of things that they're able to be discerned and then therefore, um, the, the sons of the devil are, are reaped and they go off to their eternal judgment and the sons of the kingdom are, uh, are harvested and they go off to their eternal reward. What we wanted to talk about, and part of the reason that we split this into two episodes. Is that we sort of found ourselves spiraling or spiraling around a question about, uh, sort of about assurance, right? And false assurance, true assurance. And there is an eschatological element to this parable that I, I think we probably should at least touch on as we we go through it. Um, but I wanted to just read, um, it's been a little while since we've read the Westminster Confession on the show. So I wanted to read a little bit from the Westminster Confession. Um, this is from chapter 18, which is called of assurance of grace and salvation. This is sort of the answer to Jesse's question. Do the, do the tears know their tears or, or could they possibly think that their wheat? So this is, uh, section one of chapter eight. It says, although hypocrites and other unregenerate men may vainly deceive themselves with false hopes and carnal presuppositions or presumptions of being in favor with God in the state of salvation. Which hope of their shall perish yet such as truly believe in the Lord Jesus and love him in sincerity, endeavoring to walk in all good conscience before him may in this life be certainly assured that they are in a state of grace and may rejoice in the hope of the glory of God, which hope shall never make them ashamed. And so we, in the reform tradition at least, which is where we find ourselves in the reform tradition, um, we would affirm that people can. Deceive themselves into believing that they're in proper relation with God. Jesse Schwamb: Right? Tony Arsenal: And so it's not the case that, uh, that the weeds always know they're weeds or think they're weeds. It's not even the case. And this was part of the parable. It's not even the case that the weeds can be easily distinguished even by themselves from, uh, from the weeds. So there is this call, uh, and this is a biblical call. There's a call to seek out assurance and to lay claim to it. That I think is, is worth talking about. But it's not as straightforward as simple proposition as like, yeah, I'm confident. Like it's not just like, right, it's not just mustering up confidence. There's more to it than that. So that's what I wanted to start with, with this parable is just maybe talking through that assurance. 'cause I, I would hate for us to go through this parable. And sort of leave people with maybe you're a weed and you don't know it. 'cause that's not right. That's not the biblical picture of assurance. Um, that's the, that's the Roman Catholic picture of assurance that like, yeah, there's no such thing as assurance and people might not realize, but assurance of salvation is actually one of the, one of the primary things that was recovered particularly by the Reformed in the Reformation. Um, and so I think we, we often sort of overlook it as maybe a secondary thing. Um, but it really is a significant doctrine, a significant feature of reformed theology. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah. I'm glad you said that because it is a, is a clear reminder. It's a clearing call as the performers put forth that it is. Under like the purview of the Christian to be able to claim the assurance by the blood of Christ in the application of the Holy Spirit in a way that's like fully orbed and fully stopped. So you can contrast that with, and really what was coming outta Catholicism or Rome at the time. And I was just speaking with a dear brother this past week who. Grew up in the Catholic church and he was recounting how his entire religious experience, even his entire relationship, if we can call it that in a kind of colloquial sense with God, was built around this sense of deep-seated guilt and lack of true performance, such that like assurance always seemed like this really vague concept that was never really fully manifested in anything that he did. Even while the church was saying, if you do these things, if you perform this way, if you ensure that you're taking care of your immortal sins and that you're seeking confession for all the venial stuff as well, that somehow you'll be made right, or sufficiently right. But if not, don't worry about it. There's always purgatory, but there'd be some earning that you'd have to accomplish there. Everywhere along the way. He just felt beaten down. So contrasting that with what we have here. I don't believe, as you're saying, Tony, that's Jesus' intention here to somehow beat up the sheep. I, I think it is, to correct something of what's being said about the world in which we live, but it's at the same time to say that there are some that are the TAs is to say there are some that are the children of God, right? That there are some that are fully crisply, clearly identified and securely resting in that identity without any kind of nervous or anxious energy that it might fall out of that state with God that, that in fact their identity is secure. And as I've been thinking about this this week, I, I'm totally with you because I think part of this just falls, the warning here is there's a little bit of the adventures in Romans one here that's waiting for us, that I like what you said about this idea of, of self deception and maybe like a. Subpart to this question would be, are the, are the terrors always nefarious in their lack of understanding? So we might say there's some that are purposely disruptive, that the enemy himself is, is promulgating or trying to bring forward his destruction, his chaos by way of these tears. But are, are there even a subgroup or another group, uh, co-terminus group or, you know, one in the same hierarchy where there's just a lot of self deception? I, I think that's probably where I fall in terms of just trying to explain that. Yes, I think it was present here is a real quantity, a real identity where they're self-deceived. Imagining themselves to be part of God's people, yet lacking that true saving faith. And this just, I'm gonna go in a couple places where I think everybody would expect in the scriptures, if we go to like Ephesians four, they're darkened and they're understanding alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them. And one Corinthians, when Paul writes, the natural person does not accept the things of the spirit of God, and he's not able to understand them because they're spiritually discerned. And then the book that follows the God of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers. And of course then like everything in Romans one, so I bring all that up because E, even at the end, we're gonna get there, the Es, this eschatological reality when you know God is separating out the sheep and the goats. Still, we find this kind of same trope happening there. But the unregenerate, what I'm reading from this. Importantly is that the unregenerate, they're not merely ignorant, they're blinded, as we all were on point to the spiritual truth. Yeah. By nature and by Satan. That that is also his jam. He loves to blind, to lie, to kill, steal, and destroy. So thus, even if they're outwardly belonging to the church, they're outwardly belonging to the world. They're outwardly belonging to some kind of profession. They cannot perceive the reality of their lost condition apart from divine illumination. Who can, that might be stating the obvious, but I think that's like what we're getting after here. I I, I don't know if there's like any kind of like conspiracy here. It's simply that that is the natural state of affairs. So why wouldn't we expect that to be reflected again in the world and that side by side, we're gonna find that shoulder to shoulder. We are, there are the children of God, and there are those that remain blind and ignorant to the truth. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And, and you know, it, again, I, I, um, I don't know why I'm surprised. Uh, I certainly shouldn't be surprised. Um. But Matthew is like a masterful storyteller Yeah. Here, right. He's a masterful, um, editor and narrator. Um, and he's, he's put together here, of course, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Um, and, and there's some good reason to think in the text we're not gonna get too, in the nitty gritty here, there's some good reason to think in the text that Christ actually delivered these parables as a set as well. So it's not just, it's not just Matthew coating these, although it could be. Um, but it, it seems like these were all delivered probably as like a common set of parables. And the reason I say that is because when we start to look at this parable and the one we previously went through, the parable of the soils, um, or the parable of the sower. Um, what we see is the answer to your question of why do some people, you know, why are some people deceived? Well, yes, there is secondary causation. The devil deceives them. They blind themselves. They, you know, suppress the, the, the truth and right unrighteousness. But on a, on a primary causation level, um, God is the one who is identi, is, is identifying who will be the sons of the, you know, devil and the sons of the kingdom. Mm-hmm. This is another, and yet another example of election is that the, the good sower sowed good seed, and the good seed was the elect and the enemy. Although in God's sovereignty, God is the one who determines this. The enemy is the one who sows the reprobate. Right? So all, all men. Star, and this is, I, I guess I didn't really intend to go here, but this is good evidence in my mind for, um, infra laps, Arianism versus super laps. Arianism, right infra laps, arianism or sub lapse. Arianism would say that God decrees, uh, to permit the fall and then he decrees to redeem some out of the fall, right? Logically speaking, not temporally speaking. Super laps. Arianism, which is the minority. It's the smaller portion of, of the historic tradition, although modern times, I think it's a little bit louder and a little bit more vocal, but super relapses. Arianism would argue that God, um, decrees. Sort of the, the decree of election and reprobation is logically prior to the decree of the fall. And so in, in that former or in the super laps area model, the fall becomes a means by which the reprobate are justly condemned. Not, um, not the cause of their condemnation, but a way to sort of justify the fact that they will be separated from God, right? Because of their reprobate. [00:28:36] Exploring the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares Tony Arsenal: I know that there's, there's probably some super lab streams that would nuance that differently and some that are probably just screaming straw man, uh, in a coffee shop somewhere and, and people are thinking you're crazy. Um, but by and large, that's actually a rel, a relatively accepted, um, explanation of it. There are certainly potential problems with, uh, sub, sub lapse agonism as well. But in this, in this parable, what we see is the people who are, um, who are elect, are sowed into the field and the people who are reprobate are also sowed into the field. And so God saves the people who are sewed into the field that are, they elect, he saves them out of this now mixed world by waiting and allowing them to grow up next to the reprobate, um, in sort of this mixed world setting. And then he redeems them out of that. Um, and, and, and so we have to sort of remember. Although it is a pretty strict, sort of allegorical type of parable, it's still a parable. So we shouldn't, we shouldn't always draw like direct one-to-one comparisons here. It's making a theological point, but, um, but it's important for us to re remember that, that it is ultimately, it is God who determines who is the elected and who is not. But it's, it's our sin. It's the devil deceiving us. It's the secondary causes that are responsible for the sons of the devil, right? It, the, the men come to the, to the sower and say, who is done this? He says it was an enemy. Jesse Schwamb: Right? Right. Tony Arsenal: He doesn't say like, well, actually I put the seed there and so, you know, I'm, I, it's not an equal distribution. He's not sowing good seed and bad seed. He sows the good seed and the devil sows the bad seed. [00:30:24] Theological Implications and Assurance Tony Arsenal: Um, and, and that's a, I think that's an important theological point to make. And as far as assurance goes. We, we can't depend on our ability to perceive or sort of like discern election in a raw sense, right? We have to observe certain kinds of realities around us. Um, and, and primarily we have to depend on the mercy and, and saving faith that God gives us. That's right. Um, you know, our, our assurance of faith does not primarily come from fruit checking. Um, we have to do that. It's important, we're commanded to do it, and it serves as an important secondary evidence. But a, a, a person who wants to find assurance. Of salvation should first and foremost look to the promises of Christ and then depend on them. Um, and, and so that's, I think all of that's kind of wrapped up into this parable. It's, it's, it's amazing to me that we're only like two parables in, and we're already, you know, we're already talking about super lapse arianism and sub lapse arianism, and it's, it's amazing. I, I love this. I'm loving this series so far, and we're barely scratching the surface. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, it's all there. I think you're right to call that out. It strikes me, like, as you were speaking, it really just hit me higher that I think you're right. Really the foundation on this, like the hidden foundation is assurance and it's that assurance which splits the groups, or at least divides them, or it gives us, again, like the distinct, kind, discrete compartments or components of each of them. So. Again, I think it's help saying, 'cause we wanna be encouraging. That's, that's our whole point here is when the Apostle Peter says, be all the more diligent to make certain about his calling and choosing of you. That herein we have the scripture saying to us, time and time again, be sure of what God has done in your life. Be confident in that very thing. And so if assurance is, as we're saying, that's the argument hypothesis we're making. That's the critical thing here. [00:32:11] False Assurance and True Faith Jesse Schwamb: Then the division between the children of God and the children of the devil is false versus true assurance. So the tears, I think what we're saying here, basically they typically live under false asserts. They may attend church, confess, belief, appear righteous, yet their hearts are unregenerate. Their faith is maybe historical. It's not saving, it could be intellectual, but it's not spiritual. And of course, like just a few chapters before this, we hope those famous verses where Jesus himself drops the bomb and says, listen, many of you, he's talking to the people, the, the disciples around him, the crowds that we're gathering and thronging all about. He says, many of you're gonna say to me, Lord, Lord, do we not prophesy your name? Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Jesse Schwamb: And then I will declare to them, I never knew you depart from me. These are not people who knew they were false, they thought they belonged to Christ. Their shock on judgment day is gonna reveal this profound self-deception. And that self-deception is wrapped up in a false type of assurance, a false righteousness. So I think one of the things that we can really come to terms with and grab a hold of is the fact that when we are. Confessing, repenting seeking like our status in Christ because of Christ. Then we have confidence that we are in fact part of the children of God. When everything is stripped away from us and all we're crying out is only and completely and solely and unequivocally, Jesus Christ, then I think we have great reason to understand that we should be confident in our assurance. [00:33:38] Historical Perspectives on Assurance Jesse Schwamb: You know, I was reading this week from Thomas Brooks and did incidentally come across this, a quote, an assurance and reminded me of this passage, and here's what he writes. You know, of course he's writing in like 16 hundreds, like mid 16 hundreds. It's wild, of course, but we shouldn't be surprised that what you're about to hear sounds like it could have been written today for us. In this conversation, but, uh, he writes, assurance is the believer's arc where he sits Noah alike quiets and still in the midst of all distractions and destructions, commotions and confusions. However, most Christians live between fears and hopes and hang, as it were, between heaven and hell. Sometimes they hope that their state is good. At other times they fear that their state is bad. Now they hope that all is well and that it shall go well. Well with them forever. Then they fear that they shall perish by the hand of such corruption or by the prevalency of such and such temptation. They're like a ship and a storm tossed here and there, and. I think that he's right about that. And I think the challenge there is to get away from that. I love where it starts, where he says, what wonderful turn of phrase assurance is the believer's arc or Noah, like, you know, we're sitting and the commotion, the destructions, the commotion, the confusions of all the world. That's why to get this right, to be encouraged by this passage, to be challenged by it is so critical because we're all looking for that arc. We all want to know that God has in fact arrested us so completely that no matter what befalls us, that everything, as we talked about before, all of our, all of the world, in fact is subservient to our salvation. But that's a real thing that cannot be snatched away from us because God has ordained it and intended it, built it, created it, and brought it to pass. And so I think that's all like in this passage, it's all the thing that's being called us to. So. I, I don't want us to get like too hung up. It's a good question, I think to ask and answer like we were trying to talk about here, but you're right. If we focus too much just on the like, let's gaff for these tears. Who are they? Like let's people's, like Readers Digest in People's magazine these tears. Like who are they? Do we have a list of them? Who do we think they are? How could it be me? Is it really me? Am I, am I anxious about that? Really what we should be saying is following what Peter calls us to do that is to be all the more diligent to make certain about his calling and his choosing. So even there like our emphasis and focus, isn't it like you're saying Tony about like, let me do some fruit inventory. I got like a lot of good bananas. I got a lot of ripe pears. Like, look at the tree. This, this is good. Even there, the emphasis is to turn our eyes on Jesus, as it were, and to make certain about his work, his calling and his choosing of us. And I think when we do that, we're falling down in worship and in yielding and submission to him, rightfully acknowledging that the righteousness of Christ is the one that is always in every way alien to us and imputed. And that is what makes us sons and daughters of God, that good seed sown by Jesus himself. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I just wanna read, I wanna um, round out a few more paragraphs here out of the Westminster confession because I do think, you know, when we even talk about assurance, we're not even always all saying the exact same thing. And I think that's important because when we talk about assurance of faith, we need to be understanding that this is the rightful, not only the rightful possession of all Christians, but it's the rightful responsibility of all Christians to seek it. So here's, here's section two of that same chapter. It says, this certainty referring to assurance. This certainty is not a bare conjectural and probable persuasion grounded upon a, a fallible hope, but an infallible assurance of faith founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made, the testimony of the spirit of adoption, witnessing with our hearts that we are the children of God, which spirit is the earnest of our inheritance, whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption. So. One of the, the things that I think is, is important here is people read this and say the inward evidences of those graces unto which these promises are made. They read that and they think that it's referring to like good work and like spiritual renewal, but it's, it's not, it's the inward evidence of those graces unto which of the promises are made. So it's this inner, inner renewal. It's the spirit testifying to our spirit. And then, um, chapter, uh, section three here, it says. This infallible assurance doth not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long and conflict with many difficulties before he be partaker of it, yet being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given of God. He may without extraordinary revelation there, right there is response to Roman Catholicism in the right use of ordinary means at attain there unto. And therefore, it is the duty of everyone to give all diligence, to make his calling and election. Sure. And thereby his heart may be enlarged in peace and in joy in the Holy Ghost, in love and thankfulness to God and in strength and cheerfulness in the duties of obedience. The proper fruits of this assurance so far is it from inclining men to looseness? Right. [00:38:53] The Role of Good Works in Assurance Tony Arsenal: So we often hear and and I, I think there are good, um, there are good reformed Christians that put. The emphasis of assurance on, or they, they put an overemphasis, in my opinion, on how good works function within our assurance. Right. They, they often will ask us to look to our good fruit as sort of, not the grounding, but as a strong evidence. But at least in terms of the confession here, the cheerfulness in the duties of obedience is the fruit of assurance. Jesse Schwamb: That's right. Not Tony Arsenal: the cause or grounding of assurance. So rather than, this is what this last line says. It says so far, is it from inclining? Mental looseness assurance should drive us to obedience and fruitfulness in Christ. And so yes, it is in a certain sense an evidence because if that fruitfulness and obedience is absent from our lives, there's a good reason for us to question whether this infallible assurance is present in our lives. But the assurance is what drives us to this obedience. Um. You know, like, I think you could use the analogy of like a married couple. A married couple who is very secure in their relationship and in their, uh, love for one another and their faithfulness to each other is more likely to cheerfully serve and submit to each other and to respect each other and to sacrifice for each other than a couple that's maybe not so sure that the other person has their best interest in mind. That's or maybe isn't so sure that this thing is gonna work out. I think that's the same thing, like the sacrifice and the service that a husband, uh, performs for his wife, whom he loves and trusts and is committed to and knows that she's faithful and committed to him. That is not causing that faithfulness. It's not causing that trust and that love. It is the outcome and the outflow of it. It's good evidence that that love exists, but it's not caused by it. And assurance here is the same kind of dynamic assurance is not. We can't assure ourselves of our salvation by doing good works. No matter how many good works you do, there are lots and lots of people who are not saved and who will not be saved, who do perfectly good works in appearance. Right. They have the, the outward appearance of godliness, but lack its power. Right, right. Out of right outta Paul, writing to Timothy there. Yes. So that's, that's important for us as we continue to parse all this out, is yes, the fruit is present. Yes. The wheat is to, is discernible from the tears by its final, fruitful status. Right? It grows up to be grain, which is fruitful rather than weeds and tears, which are only good to be burned, but it is not the fruit that causes it to be wheat. It's wheat that causes the fruit to grow. If, if it wasn't wheat, it wouldn't grow fruit, not because the fruit makes it grain, but because it is in fact wheat to start with. Jesse Schwamb: Right. Yeah, that's right on. So I think like by summation we're kind of saying. At least the answer to this question. You know, do the tears know that they're tears? Yes and no. Some do, some don't. I think, yes, there are some that are gonna be consciously hypocritical, willfully rejecting Christ while pretending for worldly gain. I think that's, that's certainly plain to see. And at the same time, do the tears know the tears? Sometimes? No. There's self deceived under spiritual blindness and they have some kind of false assurance. And this idea of, again, coming in repentance before God and seeking humbly to submit to him is I think one of those signs of that kind of true assurance, not a false assurance. And you already stole where I was thinking of Tony by going to Second Timothy again. Thomas Brooks in precious remedies against Saint's device is one of like the best. Books ever. I know that he's really outspoken. He loves to harp on the fact that one of Satan's most effective snares is to make men and women content with a form of godliness without its power. Yeah. And that's often what we're talking about here, I think, is that Satan loves to fish in the shallow waters a profession. And really that can happen in any kind of church or religious culture, that there is this shallowness where that loves religious appearance, prayer, knowledge fellowship, but not the Christ behind them. And so whether we're looking to somebody like Brooks or Jonathan Edwards and we're trying to parse out what are our true affections, not in a way again, that somehow leans well, I feel enough, then somehow that justifies, not inwardly, but again, definitely trying to understand our conviction for conversion tears. For repentance that. Really what we're after is not like just the blessings of Christ, but Christ himself, which I think really leads us to this eschatological perspective then to round all everything out because you know, we talked about before, there's an old phrase, it's like everywhere. A lot of people talk in heaven. Not everybody's going there. And so this idea of like, people will talk about be so great to be there and it's sometimes this, the heaven that they speak of is like absent Christ, you know, as if like, if Christ wasn't there, at least in their perspective, it still wouldn't be half bad. And so I think that does lead us to understand what is this in gathering? What is this? You know, bringing everything into the barn and burning everything else up. And like you just said, if at the beginning you cannot tell the injurious weed aside from that beautiful kernel of wheat that's coming up, but if in the end you can see what's happening in the end, then that brings us all to consummation. What does it mean in this parable? Tony Arsenal: Yeah. [00:44:19] Eschatological Judgment and Assurance Tony Arsenal: And, and I think this actually sort of forces us to grapple a little bit with, with another sort of persnickety feature of this parable that, that I think, I think personally sometimes gets overlooked is we are very quick to talk about this parable to be about the church. And it is. Right. And, and there's reasons to talk like that. But when Christ explains the parable, he doesn't say the field is the church. He says the field is the world. Right. And so we have to, we have to, we have to do a little bit of, um. We have to do a little bit of hermeneutics to understand that this is also speaking of the church, right? It's not as though the church is some hermetically sealed off body that the dynamics of the world and the, the weed and the tears like that, that doesn't happen in the church. But when we talk about the end of the age here, he says the son of man will send his angels and they will gather out of his kingdom. All causes of sin in all lawbreakers. Right? So, so the, the final eschatological judgment, it's all encompassing. And I dunno, maybe I'm, maybe I'm becoming a little bit post mill with this, um, the, the world is already the Kingdom of Christ. Right? Right. That's right. It, it's not, it's not just the church on earth that is the kingdom of Christ. And so when we talk about this eschatological reaping, um, what we see is, is very straightforward. There are those who are, uh, who belong to Christ, who were sown by him into the world, who were, uh, were tended by him, who were protected by him, who he intended to harvest from the very beginning, right? The good sower sows good seed into the field, and that good seed is and necessarily will be wheat. It's not as though, um, it's not as though, and again, this is one of those ways where like the parables sometimes, uh, are telling a little bit of a different story. Even though they're sharing some themes in the first parable, in the parable of the sower, he sows the same seed into the world. But the seed in that first parable is not the, is not the person receiving the seed. The seed is the one is the word of God. Yes. And so the word of God is sewn promiscuously, even to those who will be hard soil and who will be rocky soil and have thorns. The word of God is, is sewn to all of those people. Across the whole world in this parable. The seed that is the good seed that is sown is and always was going to be weed that was, or wheat, which was going to grow into fruitfulness and be gathered into the barn. Right? That was a foregone conclusion. The, the, when the sower decided to sow seed, all of that said he is the one who did that. He's the one that chose that. He's the one that will bring us to completion, right? And then also the ones that are not of his kingdom, the sons of the devil, they will also be reaped at the end. Actually we'll be reaped before the, you know, they'll be reaped and gathered and, and tossed into the furnace before the sons of the kingdom are gathered together. Jesse Schwamb: Right. Tony Arsenal: So it, again, this is a parable and even though this is Christ's explanation of the parable, I don't think that Christ was intending to give us like a strict timeline. Right. I don't think he was encouraging us to draw a chart and try to map out where this all happens in order. Um, I do think it's relevant that, that, at least in the explanation of this parable, I mentioned it last week, that, that the rap, the rapture is actually the wicked being raptured. They're the ones that are gathered and taken out of the world and cast into the fiery furnace before the, before the righteous are gathered together and, and brought into Christ Barn. Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, there's a great unmasking that's happening here in this final stage. I mean, that's critically the point. I think there's a lot of stuff we could talk about open handedly and kind of hypothesize or theorize what it means. But what is plain, I think, is that there's this unmasking, this unveiling of the reality of the light of Christ's perfect judgment. But that judgment is for both parties Here it is coming and what was hidden beneath outward religion or more, a facade is gonna be revealed with eternal clarity. That's just the reality. It is coming. So in some ways it pairs. I think at least well in this, well purposely of course in this teaching because Jesus is saying, hold on, like we talked about last time. Do this is not for you to judge. You are ill-equipped. You are not skilled enough to discern this. And therefore though, you wanna go in hot and get spicy and try to throw out all the weeds. Wait for the right time. Wait for the one like you're saying, Tony has from all of eternity past intended for it to be this way. Super intending his will over all things in the casting of the seed. And as we say, Philippians, of course, finishing that good work, which was started, he will finish. It is God's two finish again. And so he says, listen, that day is coming. There's gonna be a great unmasking. Uh, get ready for it. And the scriptures bear witness to that in so many other ways. So. There's such a journey in these like handful of verses, isn't there? I mean, it's really wild. The things that not like we come up with or we read into the text, but as we sit in it a little bit, as we just spend even a cursory amount of time letting it pour over us, that we find there's like a conviction in a weight in these things that are beyond just the story and beyond just even like the illustrations themselves. What we find is, again, it's as if Jesus himself in his brilliance, of course, through the power of the Holy Spirit, is illuminating the mind in the spirit to open up our conception, understanding of the kingdom of God by bringing it to us through his perspective in our own terms, of course, which is both our language and like the context of the world in which we live, and that simple example of farming and seed. And again, even just that there are these interest weeds that look like wheat. I went on this like rabbit hole this week and did a lot of research on like tears and Yeah, like especially people in like the Midwest United States who like know a lot more about agriculture than I do have a lot to say about this. It's not just like we shouldn't be surprised like. Isn't it incredible that like there are actually weeds out there that look like, yeah, it's a brilliance of just knowing that this teaching is so finely tuned. Like we can even just talk about that. Like the world is finely tuned. This teaching is so finely tuned to these grant theological principles that we can at one point be children and appropriate them enough and assume them into our own intellectual capacity so that we can trust in them. And yet even as like adults with like, let's say like the greatest gift of intellectual capacity, still find that we cannot get to the bottom of them because they're so deep. They draw us into these really, really grand vistas or really like extremely deep cold theological waters. And I just find. That I am in awe then of what Jesus is saying here because there's a truth for us in assurance that we ought to clinging to. And there's also like stuff that we should come back to. We shouldn't just stop it here and put it out of our minds until the next time we, we want to just be stimulated by something that's interesting or that we want to just grab somebody and shake them cage style, cage two style and say like, look at this great thing that I just learned about this, this particular parable. But instead, there's so much here for us to meditate on. And in that, I think rather than the Christian finding fear in this parable, what they should find is great comfort. We should be Noah alike sitting in the ark saying, it is well with my soul. And our reason for that is because we know God has cast a seed through his son Jesus Christ. And to be a child, a child of God is the greatest thing in all the universe. Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I, I think that, um, transitions nicely to, uh, I'll make this point quick because we're coming up on time here. Um. [00:52:04] Christ's Divinity and Sovereignty Tony Arsenal: The other little subtle thing that Christ does here in this parable is he, he absolutely asserts his divinity and sovereignty overall creation. Jesse Schwamb: That's right. Yep. Tony Arsenal: Right. It, it's almost like a throw. There's a couple little like lines that are almost throwaway lines, right in the, the first, the beginning of the parable here. Um, the parable itself, uh, he says, um, the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed into a field. And then he says, um, the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, right? And then when he interprets the parable, he says, well, the, the servants are, the field is the world, right? So he's the master of the world, and the servants are the angels. So he's the master of the angels. And then if, if there was any doubt left in your mind. Says in verse 41, the son of man will send his angels. That's right. And they will gather out of his kingdom, which is the world, all the causes of sin and all lawbreakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. Right? So we have this, this robust picture that there is election. The the good sower sows good seed into the world, and the good seed will necessarily grow into wheat and will be preserved and protected and ultimately harvest Well, why can we have assurance that that will be the case? Well, because the master of the house is the son of man who is the Lord of the universe and the creator of all things. And his angels do his will. That's right. So, so the whole thing is all wrapped up. Why can we have assurance? Because God is a good God and Christ is a good savior, and the savior of the world is the creator of the universe, right? If any of those facts were not true. Then we couldn't have assurance. If God wasn't good, then maybe he's lying. If Christ wasn't the savior of the world or the God of the universe, the creator of the universe, then he wasn't worthy to be the one who saves. All of this is wrapped up in the parables, and this is what's so exciting about the parables. In most of the instances that we look up, especially of the sort of longer parables, these kinds of dynamics are there where it's not just a simple story making a simple point, it is making one primary point. Usually there's one primary point that a, that a parable is making. But in order to make that primary point, there's all these supporting points and supporting things that have to be the case. If the, if the good sower was not the master of the house and a, a competent, uh, a competent landowner who knew the difference between wheat and weeds, even at the early stage, right? His, his servants go and go, what happened? What's with all of these weeds? They can tell the difference somehow, Jesse Schwamb: right? Tony Arsenal: He's immediately able to go, well, this was an enemy. Jesse Schwamb: That's right. Tony Arsenal: And while they're bumbling around going, should we go rip it all up and start over? He is like, no, no, no, no. Just wait until, wait until it all grows up together. And when that happens, the Reapers will come and they'll take care of it and they'll do it in my direction, right? Because he's competent, he's the savior, he's the creator, he's the good master, he is the good sower. Um, we can be confi

In this episode we continue our Whitetail Strategies series by talking about a few tips and tricks we can utilize if we are the weekend deer hunter. This includes us here at Feed Bandit so we have to do what we can to maximize our time out in the field. Someday we'll be “all season” […]

Thursday, 23 October 2025   “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind, Matthew 13:47   “Again, the kingdom of the heavens, it is like a seine having been cast into the sea, and from every kind having been gathered.” (CG).   In the previous verse, Jesus told the parable of the Pearl of Great Price. Next, He begins another parable, saying, “Again, the kingdom of the heavens, it is like a seine.”   A word found only here in Scripture is seen, sagéné. A seine or dragnet. It is a derivative of satto, to equip, “especially a pack-saddle (which in the East is merely a bag of netted rope)” HELPS Word Studies.   Such a net is curtain-like. It would be weighted, thus forming a circle for the fish as it dropped. As it is pulled out, the fish would be captured in it and hauled onto the shore or boat. As several of the disciples were fishermen, and as they probably all went out together while in the Galilee, they would all be aware of what Jesus was referring to.   Of this, Jesus next says, it is “having been cast into the sea.” The sea is where fish are, but Jesus is making a metaphor. So understanding the sea in the Bible will help us understand the intent. The sea has several overall connotations, including chaos or a place of chaotic existence, thus unpredictability. In such a place, there is danger, such as sea monsters.   It also gives the idea of the people groups of the earth, who by nature are generally chaotic, even if there are governments and some sense of order. That is seen, for example, in Revelation 17, where the Great Harlot sits on many waters, meaning in lands throughout the earth. There it says –   “The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.” Revelation 17:15   A similar analogy is seen in Daniel 7:2. One can think of the multitude of languages, cultural ideas, and norms, etc. Thus, there is a sense of the chaotic. The net is thrown into the sea, “and from every kind having been gathered...”   The verse stops in the middle of the thought, but one can see that there is a sense of a gathering from the sea. Without going any further, it cannot help but be seen that this extends beyond Israel. If Israel represented one type of fish, there would be harmony, not chaos. Though there may be various accents, there was one language to unite them, etc.   Life application: It is a chaotic world. Despite this, in modern times, there is the ability to supposedly overcome the chaos in ways never thought of before. In the past, if there were nations with distinct languages, say English and Chinese, there was an absolute need to have people proficient in both languages available in both nations for effective diplomacy to take place.   If there were an interpreter from China only, that interpreter could bias the translation on behalf of her country, thereby gaining an advantage. Only by having two independent translators verify one another could diplomacy truly be considered reliable.   This process required integrity, time, sound education, etc. Today, the world's languages are quickly being digitized, and in real time, languages are able to be interpreted in both languages through the power of computers. Curiously, there is the obvious play on this by the tech giant Google. The place where languages were separated was Babel –   “But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 And the Lord said, ‘Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. 7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.' 8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city. 9 Therefore its name is called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.” Genesis 11:5-9   In an assent to this event, the modern Google translator is called Babbel. It is as if they are attempting to undo what God had done. Obviously, God knew this would occur, but the point is that man's efforts, like at Babel, are being directed to uniting the people of the earth as if to show their primacy and ability to cast off God.   Nothing has changed. Man believes he has the ability to do anything. But there are underlying divisions in the world that would have to be dealt with. An example of this is found in Daniel 2:41-43. Such things must be dealt with, and it will lead to great slaughters of people in an attempt to harmonize the goal of world unity. The problem with that is that no two people think exactly the same. The only way to have absolute unity is to eradicate everyone else. God understands this. Hence, Jesus said –   “For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.” Matthew 24:21, 22   How desperately man needs God's hand to direct him. Without that, we are all goners. Thank God for Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind.   Gracious and glorious heavenly Father, thank You that we have a hope that extends beyond this tragic, fallen world. Because of our Lord Jesus, there is hope for humanity. Someday, we who believe the gospel will be gathered before You for all eternity. There will be no more war or conflict. Won't that day be wonderful? And so, we pray You speed the coming of it. May it be so. Amen.  

In our FINAL wheel without BB27... Survivor 47 and RHAP's own Aysha Welch returns to the podcast hoping for some better picks than her first time. Wheel let you decide if Aysha should be happy or not with her next batch of six players. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Someday, your children will move out on their own – are you preparing them to biblically and logically grapple with the hot-button issues they will face in the world? Today, we introduce Victor Joecks, host of the Sharpening Arrows Podcast. Victor shows how we can break down topics like declining support for Israel, transgender ideology, immigration, and abortion— exploring each issue from all sides so that our students are prepared for the arguments the world will throw at them.If you're looking for creative ways to start deep discussions with your teens as they learn to form their worldviews, this episode is for you!

In this episode, you'll discover why the true value of your practice isn't built when you sell—it's built every day you show up to lead it. Nathan Hayes joins me to unpack the mindset and strategies of owners who play the long game—the ones who treat every decision as an investment in their future freedom. They don't wait until retirement to think about value. They build systems that run without them. They create teams that thrive without micromanagement. And they keep their practices so well-run that buyers line up when it's time to exit. If you've ever wondered what you can be doing now to ensure your practice grows in value—this episode will change the way you think about ownership.   Follow our Podcast on All Available Platforms Follow our Podcast on Instagram Follow IDOC on Facebook Follow IDOC on LinkedIn Watch our Podcast Video on YouTube

Ethanimale is back in The Diary Room hoping for some more inspiring wheel spins than his first time around! And just maybe... the wheel was inclined to reward him for his patience. Each week in The Diary Room, a wheel of names will randomly select SIX players from North American Big Brother history to enter the bracket. In three separate head-to-head matchups, three players will advance to the next round and three players will be eliminated. Someday, we'll find the best Big Brother player of all time! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Join us on Patreon for more Diary Room!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Vote in Battle Backs and even cast a vote for the actual Diary Room episodes! Follow us on BlueSky! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@thediaryroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@diaryroompcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@mattliguori⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@amanadwin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠! ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on Facebook!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stop waiting for perfect. Start today. Al Levi breaks down why momentum beats perfection, how to “box” your business so it can scale, and the seven powers he uses to build teams and companies that last. Al Levi shares the mindset and mechanics to grow: start now, ship at 80 percent, and build on documented systems, not slogans. We get into his “seven powers” framework (planning, operations, staffing, sales, sales coaching, marketing, finance), why people need the why, and how to turn ideas into a focused “top five” plan you'll actually finish. We also hit training that sticks, marketing that maps to sales, and the long game of leadership. Episode Guest: Al Levi - 7powercontractor.com/systems -- A candid business podcast for growth-minded leaders and entrepreneurs. Hosted by Josh Zolin. The truth about leadership, business, and becoming who you're meant to be. 

When New York Times bestselling author Tembi Locke faced sending her only child to college, she created what she calls a "college moon" - a transformative journey through Sicily that offers fresh wisdom for anyone navigating major life transitions.In her new audio memoir, Someday, Now: A Memoir of Family, Reclaiming Possibility, and One Sicilian Summer, Locke shares intimate insights about blending families after loss, finding presence during change, and how the places we love can become anchors for our well-being.You can find Tembi at: Website | Instagram | Episode TranscriptIf you LOVED this episode, you'll also love the conversations we had with Suleika Jaouad about turning illness and upheaval into creative meaning and wonder.Check out our offerings & partners: Join My New Writing Project: Awake at the WheelVisit Our Sponsor Page For Great Resources & Discount CodesCheck out our offerings & partners: Beam Dream Powder: Visit https://shopbeam.com/GOODLIFE and use code GOODLIFE to get our exclusive discount of up to 40% off. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You can't scroll through Housewives TikTok and not see this guy! Miguel Luciano's talent is unmatched and today he's giving us the backstory of how he discovered and embraced his gift. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tembi Locke is a New York Times best-selling author, screenwriter, producer, actor and podcast host. Tembi sits down with Jenna Bush Hager to discuss her new immersive audio memoir ‘Someday, Now,' where she returns to Sicily for one last summer with her daughter before she leaves for college. Blending her intimate narration with the sounds of Sicily, it's a beautiful story of motherhood, memory, and the bittersweet art of releasing a child into adulthood. Tembi shares her experience of staying hopeful after heartbreak, finding love after loss, and the power of writing to heal.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This week we’re joined by author and actor Tembi Locke. She takes us from her whirlwind childhood to her life today as a bestselling writer and performer. We talk about the heart behind her memoir From Scratch and her new audiobook Someday, Now, the rituals and traditions that keep us grounded, and why midlife can feel a lot like adolescence (in the best way). It’s a rich conversation on grief, creativity, and finding light through it all. Preorder our new book, Crushmore, here: geni.us/CrushmoreBook Look for the blue box at retailers everywhere or shop jlab.com and use code PODCRUSHED for 15% off your order today. Head to squarespace.com/PODCRUSHED to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain using code PODCRUSHED. Use code PODCRUSHED or go to Harbor.co/PODCRUSHED for $50 off and experience the security every parent deserves. Head to prettytasty.com and use code PODCRUSHED at checkout for your first subscription order FREE (up to a $49 value), plus 15% off every subscription order after that. Take the online quiz and introduce Ollie to your pet. Visit https://www.ollie.com/podcrushed for 60% off your first box of meals! #ToKnowThemIsToLoveThem

Speed up hiring with Indeed! Now get a $75 sponsored job credit when you go to Indeed.com/trent Sign up for your $1/month trial period at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠shopify.com/trent⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ EXCLUSIVE NordVPN Deal ➼ https://nordvpn.com/trent Try it risk-free now with a 30-day money-back guarantee! In this episode, I sit down with Tembi Locke—author, actress, and one of the most powerful storytellers I know. Together, we dive into what it feels like when your kids leave the house and you step into that season of being an empty nester. We talk about the sadness that can come with it, the way life looks different, and the journey of finding yourself again. Tembi shares wisdom on rediscovering your purpose, keeping love alive in this next chapter, and embracing the new opportunities that come with change. And make sure you stay tuned until the end, because we have a special bonus conversation you won't want to miss. And, make sure you get her new memoir " Someday, Now"