Leaderboard

Campaign funds Donald Trump's campaign said Thursday that its operation raised nearly $139 million in July for the former president's election effort — and amassed $327 million in cash reserves for the roughly three-month sprint to the election. Trump's total represents a jump from June when his campaign and aligned committees reported bringing in nearly $112 million, but the July total was dwarfed by the fundraising haul of his newly minted Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris. The Harris campaign said it raked in a whopping $310 million in its July fundraising efforts, with more than $200 million raised in the first week of her candidacy. The Harris team has $377 million cash on hand, marking the latest sign of how the change at the top of the Democratic ticket has energized grassroots and high-dollar supporters.

? NABJ chief says Trump stalled Moments before former President Trump took the stage at the National Association of Black Journalists annual convention in Chicago on Wednesday, the organization's president was called back to address an issue, Axios' Delano Massey, Sophia Cai and Russell Contreras write. Trump didn't want to be fact-checked live and was refusing to go on stage, NABJ president Ken Lemon told Axios. "[Trump's team] said: 'Well, can you not fact-check? He's not going to take the stage if you fact-check,'" Lemon said. The Q&A with the GOP presidential nominee was delayed before he eventually joined a panel of Black journalists. At the time, Trump blamed the delay on audio problems. Lemon told Axios: "There were audio problems, but they were resolved very quickly." Behind the scenes: The stalemate was so prolonged that NABJ leaders were prepared to explain to an audience of nearly 2,000 people why Trump wouldn't appear. As Lemon was preparing that statement, Trump walked onstage. Keep reading ... Trump campaign's post-event statement.

Key Harris adviser Vice President Kamala Harris' brother-in-law and former U.S. associate attorney general Tony West has become a powerful adviser in her new campaign, as Harris asserts control over an organization built to elect a different candidate. Why it matters: With less than 100 days to go, Harris is delicately retooling the presidential campaign with people she trusts, Democrats familiar with the matter told Axios. But some Democratic advisers in close contact with the campaign worry West's prominent role could re-create the same family dynamics that at times caused unnecessary drama in her 2020 campaign. Driving the news: In the first weeks since Harris became the likely nominee, West has frequently been at her side and is a point person in communicating with the campaign's leadership. Among the biggest changes so far is the emergence of West in the informal, but influential, role of helping Harris take control of the campaign. He is married to Harris' sister, Maya, who is not expected to take an operational campaign role like she did in 2020 but will remain a close confidante. Zoom in: When Harris rallied the campaign staff in Wilmington, Delaware, last month, she gave a vote of confidence to the existing campaign team. Harris did not select many of the campaign's key operatives and strategists and is beginning to place her own advisers in important roles for the final campaign sprint. The bottom line: Many successful presidential candidates have had their family members serve as close advisers. Go deeper Shapiro's weekend Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is entering the weekend with extra buzz after canceling a fundraising swing in New York, as first reported by CNN. Why it matters: The Harris vetting team has met with at least six candidates, two sources told NBC News. They are Shapiro, Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Govs. Tim Walz (Minnesota), JB Pritzker (Illinois) and Andy Beshear (Kentucky). Zoom in: A campaign called "No Genocide Josh" to scuttle Shapiro as a VP prospect, largely over his support for Israel, is facing pushback from Jewish members of Congress across the political spectrum, Axios' Andrew Solender reports. "I think there is that sense that somehow we're not objective [on Israel] because we're Jewish, which is just not true or fair," Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) told Axios. Between the lines: A story in The Atlantic yesterday noted Kelly and Walz are not facing such campaigns despite having similarly pro-Israel politics. Several high-profile Jewish lawmakers, including Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), have since called out what they say is an antisemitic double standard. New Dem firm A half-dozen former senior Biden administration officials are joining forces with Democratic Party veterans to launch a new one-stop communications and strategy advisory firm. Why it matters: Lafayette Advisors will aim to help Fortune 100 companies, as well as labor unions and progressive groups, with knowledge and expertise into how some of President Biden's signature spending bills are designed to be implemented. Driving the news: Partners will include Ryan Berni, who served on the infrastructure team in the Biden White House, and Zach Butterworth, who led private sector engagement for Biden. Both worked closely with Mitch Landrieu, Biden's former transportation czar, and former Rep. Cedric Richmond, who was Biden's first director of public engagement. Richmond will be a senior adviser to the new firm. They will be joined by Bradley Beychok, a co-founder of American Bridge 21st Century, Ankit Desai, a lobbyist at ABI Associates, Michael Halle, a former senior adviser to Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and Leah Israel, who currently serves as the chief development officer for the 2024 Democratic National Convention. Jennifer Palmieri, who served as communications director for President Obama and Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, will also join the group as a senior adviser. Go deeper Signs point to Shapiro No one who really knows is talking. But White House, campaign and party sources tell Axios all signs point to Vice President Harris picking Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, 51, as her running mate, Axios' Hans Nichols reports. Why it matters: Virtually all roads to 270 electoral votes run through Pennsylvania — one of the few things the Harris and Trump campaigns agree on. While Harris could surprise everyone, she seems to be headed toward a pick that a wide variety of sources — Republicans and Democrats — think is both shrewd and straightforward. It's a combination of math and logic: Pennsylvania is the biggest swing-state prize on the map. And Shapiro has a 61% approval rating. Shapiro's VP stock hit record highs yesterday after CNN reported he was canceling a series of weekend fundraisers in the Hamptons. Technically, a total of six potential running mates are still in play. But most of the conversation among senior Democrats has narrowed to Shapiro and Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona. Shapiro met with Harris' vetting team on Wednesday. Kelly did the same on Tuesday. For several days, Wall Street has been convinced Harris will pick a governor — in part because big-dollar donors were told to mail in their checks this week to avoid triggering a pay-to-play financial rule. Screenshot: MSNBC ?️ What we're watching: Face-to-face interviews between the sitting vice president and her potential replacement have yet to happen. But Harris plans to meet with the candidates as the last step in the super-condensed vetting process, Politico reports. What we're hearing: After an epic month, the Democratic Party is done with surprises. No more bombshells. The system is overloaded. Democrats believe that if Harris has telegraphed it's Shapiro, she should pick Shapiro. The Harris campaign has urged reporters not to read into Philadelphia being chosen to kick off a battleground tour on Tuesday (map above). But Shapiro will almost certainly be there — either as a running mate or runner-up. A Trump insider told Axios that many top Republicans also assume the pick will be Shapiro: "Pennsylvania's the whole ballgame."

Fact check: Trump, who approved multiple prisoner exchanges, falsely claims he gave up ‘nothing’ to get Americans back In May, former President Donald Trump declared that he was the only person who could obtain the release of Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich from a Russian prison. After President Joe Biden proved the claim wrong on Thursday by securing the release of Gershkovich and others in a multi-country prisoner exchange, Trump posted a series of skeptical questions on social media. https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/01/politics/fact-check-trump-falsely-claims-he-gave-up-nothing-american-prisoner-exchanges

Texas woman who traveled to DC arrested for allegedly making threats against Trump The Metropolitan Police Department said it arrested a Texas woman who traveled to Washington, DC, for allegedly making threats against former President Donald Trump and carrying a gun without a license. https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/02/politics/texas-woman-arrested-trump-threats

Even if no else has not, I have!! As far as I'm concerned you have a beautiful soul. I might not also agree with everything you post, but enjoy reading your posts!! They give me food for thought, for that I thank you! Have a Blessed Sabbath!

(N) Colossians 1:21-22 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

I can agree with the words I highlighted. I agree that we are not "lost" because we have sinned. We are also NOT "saved" because our sins were forgiven. We are "lost" IF we will not open our heart's door to the indwelling of Christ. [THIS is the "sin against the holy spirit.] And we are "saved" IF we open our heart's door to Christ, and remain in this "relationship". It is only as we open our heart's door, and allow Christ to "overcome" in us and through us - that we CAN "overcome evil with good" - BECAUSE "it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God" (Gal 2:20 NKJ). We cannot claim any credit for the overcoming. The overcoming is done by Christ. Which is the contest - the contest between the indwelling Christ and the self (still selfish and still left with free will). It is the contest between striving to do it by one's own strength (which always fails), and trusting Christ to overcome in us. We have one thing to DO. BELIEVE in Him. [The "belief" I speak of includes surrender with trust. Devils also believe, but they do not surrender or trust.] He will not believe for us. To do so would violate our FREE WILL. So - "what is Christ DOING in Heaven now" ?? ANSWER: He is overcoming - through us - day by day by day. He is pleading with us to trust Him, so that He can do the overcoming - for us. Someday the surrender to the indwelling Christ will be complete for every redeemed person. When that day comes - there will BE no more striving. And with the final destruction of Satan, EVIL will be no more.

Thank you for the response Jackson, I will try my best to respond. I will keep my responses in blue for consistency. In Heb 9:2 , Paul gives a description of the First Apartment of the Sanctuary, and He calls it the “Hagia” In Heb 9:3 Paul speaks of what is behind the second veil and calls it the “Hagia Hagion” Paul then has described both apartments and named them. Now going to verse 9:12, we see that Paul says that Jesus with His blood entered the Hagia. There is no confusion here over terms. Paul says Jesus entered the First Apartment of the heavenly Sanctuary. While it is true that the Greek word ta hagia can be translated, “holy place”, “Most Holy Place”, or “sanctuary ”, it is the context of Hebrews 9 and 10 which indicates positively that ta hagia is meant to apply to the Most Holy Place in Hebrews 9:12, 25-28, 10:19-20. While priest could enter daily into the first apartment or Holy Place only the high priest could enter the second apartment or Most Holy Place once a year and only with a blood sacrifice(Hebrews 9:6-7). Hebrews 9:11-12 goes on to both compare and contrast the work of Christ as our High Priest with the work of the earthly high priest. Christ as our High Priest entered once for all, not once a year, and not by means of the blood of goats and bulls but by means of his own blood into the heavenly Most Holy Place. The context of Hebrews 9 fully supports the New International Version’s translation of ta hagia in Hebrews 9:12: “He (Christ) did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12, NIV). The wonderful message of Hebrews, was that because Christ had already made a complete atonement for sins (Heb. 9:26, 28; 10:12), sinful man who accepts by faith Christ's completed atonement can “…have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way opened for us, through the curtain, that is, his body, and since we have a great priest over the house of God. Let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith. . .” (Heb. 10:19-22, NIV) See also Heb 6:19-20 19We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, 20where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. I refer you to Lev 4:13-18. The sacrificial blood for the sin of the entire congregation was required to be brought into the First Apartment. Was not Jesus’ sacrifice for the sins of the entire human race? I stated that blood was not always required to enter the first compartment. Blood was however always required for the second compartment. Hebrews contrasts goats and calves blood. Specifically, goats blood was only brought into the sanctuary on two occasions, both involving the Most Holy Place. Bringing blood into the sanctuary is symbolic of bringing sin into the Sanctuary. This signified that the sin was forgiven but not blotted out . The sins now had to await the Day of Atonement when they would be removed from the Sanctuary and placed on the scapegoat. This would be the “cleansing of the sanctuary”, which in Leviticus would be on the 10th day of the seventh month of each year. There is not a single Bible verse anywhere in the Old or New Testament that says that confessed sins are transferred into the holy sanctuary or defile the sanctuary in any way. In the Old Testatment, the sins of the penitent believer were laid upon the sacrificial animal and the innocent animal was killed. This sacrificial act cancelled out the sins of the sinner, and those sins ceased to exist. This is proven by the fact that the sin offering then became "most holy" (Num. 18:9). It did not carry sin, for the sin was eradicated by its death. The Bible teaches that the blood sanctifies or makes holy (Heb. 9:13). Jesus said his blood gives "life" (John 6:53). His blood is never described anywhere in the Bible as a transportation mechanism to move sins from sinners into the heavenly sanctuary. Even on earth the sanctuary of Moses was defiled by the act of sin, not by its confession. (Num. 19:13,20; Lev. 20:3) When the sacrifice died as a sin offering at the entrance of the sanctuary, the payment for the confessed sin was complete. The ministering priest collected its blood which had become most holy (Lev. 4:20; 5:6; 6:7, 25-27; Numb. 18:9). The fat portions of the animal were placed on the altar of burnt offering, thus again confirming its holiness (Ex. 29:37). Depending on the circumstances, either the blood or portions of its flesh (eaten by the priest) were also brought into the sanctuary -- again making them most holy (Numb. 18:9). The blood was brought inside the sanctuary, not to defile it, but as a proof (receipt of payment rendered) that the redemption price had already been fully paid. The priest announced to the penitent that “an atonement for him before the LORD” had been made and that he was “forgiven” of his “trespass” (Lev. 4:20; 5:6 and 6:7). Sacrificial blood always “cleansed” or “washed away” sin. Sacrificial blood did not transfer sin to another place (to be dealt with later) only to defile that other place -- the Most Holy Place in heaven! ... In fact, the death penalty awaited any priest who dared to bring anything defiled into the sanctuary (Exod. 28:43). The vicarious death of the innocent sacrificial animal allowed the priest to grant forgiveness (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 9:15). The sin had disappeared! The sin itself had been washed away! The sin itself never entered beyond the entrance of the inner court into that sanctuary itself. ... The priest did not “bear SIN” nor did he “transfer sin” into the sanctuary. Like Christ, he typically bore the GUILT (or punishment) of sin for the sinner. The blood was “proof of payment” which was presented to God. The Aaronic priest was performing a ritual which had formerly been a required punishment by every male head-of-household. The priest was performing a sanctified and necessary act of reconciliation--not defilement. ... All sacrificial animals were types of Jesus Christ. You are wrong teaching that the daily, weekly, monthly and seasonal blood sacrifices defiled the temple while the yearly Day of Atonement blood cleaned it. Shockingly, this theology teaches that Jesus Himself was, and still is, the greatest polluter of the heavenly sanctuary because he bore, and is still transferring sins into it…The Bible presents the blood of Christ as the cleansing medium for sin. It is never represented as defiling in any sense. Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; Was Peter, as he preached to the crowd in the temple after the healing of the lame man, intending to point to a future blotting out of sins? Acts 2:38 Acts 3:19 “Repent ye and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ “Repent ye, therefore turn again unto the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” that your sins may be blotted out that there may come seasons of refreshment from the presence of the Lord. Peter’s use of blotting out of sins had the same meaning as remission of sins. The clear intent of Peter’s words pointed not to a future blotting out of sins, but to a present blotting out (or remission) of sins in A.D. 31 for all who on the day they heard Peter speak accepted Christ as Messiah. Then the sanctuary is symbolically cleansed of the sins of the people and placed on the head of Satan. It is then and only then that anyone has eternal redemption. 1.If, as Seventh-day Adventists claim, the scapegoat is a figure of Satan then we are faced with a lot of problems. How can the high priest confess his sins and the sins of Israel over Satan? Remember the scapegoat is for atonement for Israel to God. Can God’s people make atonement with Satan? NO. Will Satan forgive them and remove their sins? NO. 2.By placing the sins of Israel on the scapegoat does this mean that Satan is now carrying their confessed sins and will be punished for them? NO. The Scapegoat is only a picture of Christ carrying away our sins. The new covenant calls the old covenant laws a shadow of the reality of Christ which is the finished work of Christ. Col 2:13-17. 3.The scapegoat was sent away alive bearing confessed sins. Can this represent Satan, who will be cast into the fires of Hell at the end of the world? NO. If the scapegoat was a representation of Satan, then the goat should have been burned alive as Satan will, instead of being set free. 4.Can the scapegoat represent Christ, who bore the sins of the world to the cross? YES. The first goat represented Jesus bearing the sins of the world and covering them with his blood. The scapegoat represented Christ removing sins from his people. 5.Did Jesus fulfill the scapegoat being let out into the wilderness? Jesus did not have to fulfill every minute detail of the sanctuary service. The scapegoat being led by a man into the wilderness was necessary to show that the sins of God’s people were separated from them and removed a long distance away from them. Jesus did not have to fulfill the type by going out into the wilderness being led by a man, as did the goat. Jesus did not fulfill having lots cast for him to be determined by God to offer himself on Calvary. The scapegoat was simply an illustration of Jesus’ plan to remove sin and restore man, so God can accept him. This is the atonement. 6.The two goats that were chosen for a sin offering had to be without defects for the atonement to God. Lev. 4:3,23,28,32. We ask this question, could the scapegoat without defects be a representation of Satan? NO. Satan is far from being without defects. He is a liar and a murder from the beginning. Only a goat without defects could represent Christ. 7.Is there a Bible text that indicates that Satan bears confessed sins of God’s people or will be punished for them? NO. Satan will never bear the confessed sins of God’s people neither will he be punished for them. Jesus has bore the punishment and paid the price for our sins. 8.Satan can never bear our sins. It is God himself that removes our transgressions. God tells us through the writer of Hebrews that in the new covenant, “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” Never does God tell us in his word that he will lay the sins of God's people on Satan. Heb 10:16 - 17 (NIV) “This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.” Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” Only Jesus Bore and Removed Our Sins Psa 103:12 (NIV) "as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us." 1 Pet 2:24 (NIV) "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." Isa 53:6 NIV) "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isa 53:11 (NIV) "After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied ; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities." Thank you for the Discussions. I can see that we are going to be firmly planted in our beliefs, we will just have to agree to disagree.

Thank you Jackson for the breakdown, I have looked at this while conducting my research and taken it into consideration. This is compelling support, I think with the complexity of the Greek to English could be cause for some confusion. Because the Author didn't refer to the Most Holy place in the same verbiage does that negate that he references it? Hagia Hagion is holy holy's now if I say Most Holy or Holy of Holy's are those different if I don't use the consistent Most Holy verbiage? I will break down my understanding. Lets look at the contexts of the verses, and what the author of Hebrews is referencing. Hebrews chapter 9 begins with a description of the earthly sanctuary service. As part of this description of the earthly sanctuary the author points out the limited access of the earthly high priest who could only go into God's presence once per year, on the day of atonement: Heb 9:6 (ESV)These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section, performing their ritual duties, 7but into the second only the high priest goes, and he but once a year, and not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. This shows the limited nature of access to God in the old covenant sanctuary. Even the high priest had very limited access to God's presence. He alone could enter once per year into God's direct presence, and not without blood. He did not stay but withdrew again until the next year. This description of the earthly sanctuary, including the day of atonement, sets the stage for the argument in the rest of the chapter. The author demonstrates that Jesus' sanctuary ministry surpasses the old covenant sanctuary service. The author's description of the day of atonement at the beginning of the chapter clues us in to where he is going. He is leading up to the argument that Jesus fulfilled this entry of the high priest once per year. Heb 9:11(ESV)But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,e then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. Jesus' entry here is described with a number of specifics. 1. Jesus entered as high priest into the sanctuary. 2. He entered by means of blood. Blood was not necessary to enter the first compartment of the sanctuary. Blood was required, however, to enter the second compartment. So this entry of Jesus included ministration in the heavenly equivalent of the second compartment. 3. Jesus blood is said to be superior to that of goats and calves. While there are various sacrifices spelled out in the Old Testament, few involved entry into the sanctuary with blood. The reference to goats and calves reduces further the possibilities for the old testament service being referenced. Specifically, goats blood was only brought into the sanctuary on two occasions, both involving the Most Holy Place. The first service involving goat blood and entry into the sanctuary is the service to inaugurate the sanctuary (described in Leviticus chapters 7 and 8). The second is the Day of Atonement. 4. The entry of Jesus with blood secured eternal redemption. This shows the finality of the blood work Jesus is performing here. If there was more blood atonement to be provided, how could this be said in the first century? The last passage that spells out the Day of Atonement fulfillment of the cleansing of the sanctuary is the most clear yet. Heb 9:23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. Heb 9:24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Heb 9:25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own In this passage we see the following: 1. It was necessary for the earthly sanctuary to be purified. It is necessary for the heavenly realities, of which the earthly were a copy, to be purified with better sacrifices. 2. The fulfillment of this cleansing is then spelled out. Christ has entered into heaven itself, to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Where in the sanctuary does the Bible teach that the "presence of God" exists? Lev 16:2and the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron your brother not to come at any time into the Holy Place inside the veil, before the mercy seat that is on the ark, so that he may not die. For I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat. The place of the Lord's presence in the Old Testament tabernacle was upon the mercy seat in the Most Holy Place. In order for Christ to have entered into the "presence of God" He must have entered into the Most Holy Place. This is further validated by the fact that the authors of the NT repeatedly referred to Jesus as sitting or standing on the right hand of God 3. This presentation of Christ before God, where He presents or offers Himself the completed sacrifice for sin, is contrasted with the entry of the high priest on the day of atonement. The high priest had to enter in once every year, again and again, year after year. However, Jesus entered once and presented Himself before God, and only had to do so once. Just as the earthly high priest would minister blood in God's immediate presence while cleansing the earthly sanctuary, so Jesus ascended to God and ministered the sacrifice of Himself that had been made on the cross. I will have to disagree with your conclusion. So we see from Hebrews that Jesus' death and ministration of His blood - made purification for sin - secured eternal redemption - cleansed the heavenly things with better sacrifices As this was all done before the time of the writing of Hebrews.