Weinstein’s former assistant breaks NDA after 20 years of silence

She accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault while working as his assistant and says she was forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement. Twenty years later, Rowena Chiu has broken her silence and her NDA to tell her story.

Welcome to The National, the flagship nightly newscast of CBC News

Mary Parker Follett

Mary Parker Follett (3 September 1868 – 18 December 1933) was an American social worker, management consultant, philosopher and pioneer in the fields of organizational theory and organizational behavior. Along with Lillian Gilbreth, she was one of two great women management experts in the early days of classical management theory. She has been called the “Mother of Modern Management”.[2] Instead of emphasizing industrial and mechanical components, she advocated for what she saw as the far more important human element, regarding people as the most valuable commodity present within any business. She was one of the first theorists to actively write about and explore the role people had on effective management, and discuss the importance of learning to deal with and promote positive human relations as a fundamental aspect of the industrial sector.[3]

Life

Follett was born in 1868 in Quincy, Massachusetts, to a wealthy Quaker family. Her family was composed of Charles Allen Follett, a machinist in a local shoe factory, and Elizabeth Curtis (née Baxter) Follett, respectively of English-Scottish and Welsh descent, and a younger brother. Follett attended Thayer Academy, a collegiate preparatory day school in Braintree, Massachusetts, and spent much of her free time caring for her disabled mother. In September 1885 she enrolled in Anna Ticknor‘s Society to Encourage Studies at Home.[4]

From 1890 to 91, she studied at the University of Cambridge and then moved to study at Society for the Collegiate Instruction of Women in Cambridge (later known as Radcliffe College).[5] For the next six years, Follett attended the university on an irregular basis, eventually graduating summa cum laude in 1898. Her Radcliffe thesis, The Speaker of the House of Representatives, was published in 1896. She would go on to apply to Harvard but would be denied entrance to the university on the basis that she was a woman.[6]

Over the next three decades, she published many works. She was one of the first women ever invited to address the London School of Economics, where she spoke on cutting-edge management issues. She also distinguished herself in the field of management by being sought out by US President Theodore Roosevelt as his personal consultant on managing not-for-profit, nongovernmental, and voluntary organizations.[7]

Follett died in 1933 in Boston, Massachusetts.

Ideas and influences

Mary Parker Follet defined management as “the art of getting things done through people“. Follett’s educational and work background would shape and influence her future theories and writings. One of her earliest career positions would see her working as a social worker in the Roxbury neighborhood of Boston from 1900 to 1908. During this period her interactions with the Roxbury community would lead her to realize the importance of community spaces as areas to meet and socialize.[8]

Her experience in developing vocational guidance and evening programs in public schools, she would develop what would be her life’s work and her theories in group dynamics. “The New State,” her second writing published in 1918, would evolve from a report into her second published work. This publication would go on to lay the foundational theories for her most important theories and become a major center of attention of her career.[9]

By participating in local recreational, educational, and advocacy groups Parker developed her ideals of participatory democracy and her ideals of society as “integrative.” Observing people led Parker to believe that the boundaries of a person’s identities are porous, affected by the society around them, which, in turn, is affected by the identities of the people within it. Thus the self and the society, according to Parker, are in a cycle in which they constantly help to create one another.[10]

Organizational theory

In her capacity as a management theorist, Follett pioneered the understanding of lateral processes within hierarchical organizations (their recognition led directly to the formation of matrix-style organizations, the first of which was DuPont, in the 1920s), the importance of informal processes within organizations, and the idea of the “authority of expertise,” which really served to modify the typology of authority developed by her German contemporary, Max Weber, who broke authority down into three separate categories: rational-legal, traditional and charismatic.[11]

She recognized the holistic nature of community and advanced the idea of “reciprocal relationships” in understanding the dynamic aspects of the individual in relationship to others. Follett advocated the principle of what she termed “integration,” or noncoercive power-sharing based on the use of her concept of “power with” rather than “power over.”[12]

Follett contributed greatly to the win-win philosophy, coining the term in her work with groups. Her approach to conflict was to embrace it as a mechanism of diversity and an opportunity to develop integrated solutions rather than simply compromising.[13] She was also a pioneer in the establishment of community centers.

Writings

Follett’s unique background often led her to take positions on major issues that mediated between the conventional viewpoints. In The New State, she took the position on societal change that:

It is a mistake to think that social progress is to depend upon anything happening to the working people: some say that they are to be given more material goods and all will be well; some think they are to be given more “education” and the world will be saved. It is equally a mistake to think that what we need is the conversion to “unselfishness” of the capitalist class.“[14]

Likewise, her position on the labor movement was as follows:

Neither working for someone nor paying someone’s wages ought to give you power over them.“[15]

Transformational leadership

Ann Pawelec Deschenes (1998) found obscure reference pointing to Mary Parker Follett having coined the term “transformational leadership“. She quotes from Edith A. Rusch’s The Social Construction of Leadership: From Theory to Praxis (1991):

…writings and lectures by Mary Parker Follett from as early as 1927 contained references to transformational leadership, the interrelationship of leadership and followership, and the power of collective goals of leaders and followers (p. 8).

Burns makes no reference to Follett in Leadership. However, Rusch was able to trace what appear to be parallel themes in the works of Burns and Follett. Rusch presents direct references in Appendix A. Pawelec (Deschenes) found further parallels of transformational discourse between Follett’s (1947, 1987) work and Burns (1978).[citation needed]

From The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett (p. 247): “Moreover, we have now to lay somewhat less stress than formerly on this matter of the leader influencing his group because we now think of the leader as also being influenced by his group.”[12]

Influence

Although most of Follett’s writings remained known in very limited circles until republished at the beginning of this[which?] decade, her ideas gained great influence after Chester Barnard, a New Jersey Bell executive and advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, published his seminal treatment of executive management, The Functions of the Executive. Barnard’s work, which stressed the critical role of “soft” factors such as “communication” and “informal processes” in organizations, owed a telling but undisclosed debt to Follett’s thought and writings. Her emphasis on such soft factors paralleled the work of Elton Mayo at Western Electric’s Hawthorne Plant, and presaged the rise of the Human Relations Movement, as developed through the work of such figures as Abraham Maslow, Kurt Lewin, Douglas McGregor, Chris Argyris and other breakthrough contributors to the field of Organizational Development or “OD”.[16]

Her influence can also be seen indirectly perhaps in the work of Ron Lippitt, Ken Benne, Lee Bradford, Edie Seashore and others at the National Training Laboratories in Bethel, Maine, where T-Group methodology was first theorized and developed.[17] Follett’s work set the stage for a generation of effective, progressive changes in management philosophy, style, and practice, revolutionizing and humanizing the American workplace and allowing the fulfillment of Douglas McGregor’s management vision of quantum leaps in productivity. effected through the humanization of the workplace.[18]

Legacy

After her death, her work and ideas would disappear from American organizational and management circles of the time but continue to gain followership in Great Britain. In the last decades, her work has been rediscovered. During the 1960s, her ideas would re-emerge in Japan, where management thinkers would apply her theories to business.[citation needed]

Management theorist Warren Bennis said of Follett’s work, “Just about everything written today about leadership and organizations comes from Mary Parker Follett’s writings and lectures.”[19]

Her texts outline modern ideas under participatory management: decentralized decisions, integrating role of groups, and competition authority. Follett managed to reduce the gap between the mechanistic approach and contemporary approach that emphasizes human behavior.[20]

Her advocacy for schools to be used after hours for recreational and vocational use affected the Boston area, where schools opened their doors after hours for such uses, and community centers were built where schools were not located, which was a revolutionary concept during the 20th century. Her experience working in that area taught her a lot about notions of democracy and led her to write more for a wider audience, particularly the business world. She believed that good practice in business would have a significant impact on other institutions.[18]

Follett’s legacy has been recognized by the establishment, in 1992, of the annual Mary Parker Follett Award for the outstanding paper to appear each year in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. The award citation states that it is named “in memory of a pioneering woman in the field of management and accountability literature who was international and interdisciplinary in her approach.”[21]

George Carlin – It’s a Big Club and You Ain’t In It! The American Dream

The Real Owners of this Country don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They want OBEDIENT WORKERS, OBEDIENT WORKERS.

What explains elite contempt for Joe Rogan? – System Update with Glenn Greenwald

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/S0tFgPG26vA?start=3766″ frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture” allowfullscreen></iframe>
very soon thereafter she converted
58:57
into a real enemy she emerged two months
58:59
later and wrote this
59:01
article aggressively condemning the idea
59:04
that trans women should be able to
59:06
compete in female athletic and female
59:10
athletics because it the the the kind of
59:13
intolerance for her even asking
59:17
converted her it alienated her converted
59:19
her into an enemy and
59:20
it seems like people who don’t care
59:22
about outcomes are about winning
59:24
really don’t get bothered by that but
59:27
let me just ask you about one
59:28
the kind of the last um
59:32
kind of prong of the case of the liberal
59:34
case against joe rogan i find this one
59:36
really interesting
59:37
too which is you know people say
59:41
okay fine he he liked bernie like tulsi
59:45
um and yet i believe in 2016 if i’m not
59:48
mistaken
59:50
he said that he was voting for trump
59:51
over hillary
59:53
and i’m certain that after saying that
59:56
he
59:56
thought bernie was the best candidate
59:58
and really like tulsi
59:59
he’s now saying i can’t vote for biden i
60:02
probably would vote for trump over biden
60:05
which would is leading ripples to say to
60:07
people like you
60:09
why would we possibly why should we
60:12
possibly regard somebody
60:14
as an ally who is
60:18
saying twice now that they’re going to
60:19
vote for donald trump and i guess like
60:21
an
60:21
ancillary part of that question is you
60:24
know there is this phenomenon of people
60:26
who twice voted
60:27
for barack obama and then voted for
60:29
donald trump in 2016
60:31
not a small number a large number and
60:33
here in brazil
60:34
same thing you know a lot of people who
60:35
voted for bolsonaro in 2018
60:38
were people who voted for the workers
60:40
party four consecutive
60:42
elections so if you’re kind of a
60:44
political junkie who relies on the
60:46
polarization of choose between rachel
60:48
maddow and sean hanovey
60:50
it doesn’t make any sense that somebody
60:52
could do that to say i like bernie
60:54
but i’m gonna vote for trump because you
60:56
have to pick an ideological box
60:58
and joe rogan clearly is a person
61:01
who doesn’t think that way and i think
61:03
there’s like this liberal sense that
61:05
that makes him bizarre when in fact
61:07
i think it makes him pretty common it’s
61:09
one of the reasons why people like him
61:11
because he’s not in one of those boxes
61:13
but what do you say to liberals who
61:15
would make that argument that how can we
61:17
consider somebody supporting
61:19
this authoritarian racist for president
61:22
to be an ally
61:25
well i mean there are two things that
61:26
you you have to kind of
61:29
kind of set the record straight on first
61:31
is that i i’m pretty sure in 2016 he
61:33
voted for gary johnson so he voted for a
61:35
libertarian i don’t think he voted for
61:37
trump in 2016.
61:39
um and in 2020 again he first you know
61:42
supported tulsi
61:43
then he supported bernie um and then
61:46
most recently if you really
61:48
look at his comments it’s not that he’s
61:49
saying he’s endorsing trump but he’s
61:51
saying that
61:52
he would he would vote for trump um
61:55
as a result of the party choosing biden
61:57
because he just doesn’t think biden can
61:59
do the job
62:00
just from a kind of mental age
62:04
decline standpoint so it’s not like the
62:06
most heartfelt support of trump but yeah
62:08
i mean
62:08
let’s set that aside and just say okay
62:10
like he’s willing to vote for trump
62:12
right
62:12
um i mean the idea that you wouldn’t
62:15
want to engage
62:16
someone who is willing to go from the
62:19
most
62:20
liberal the most left candidate in the
62:23
democratic primary and willing to then
62:26
switch over to trump
62:27
i mean you know it’s the argument that
62:29
the left’s been making
62:30
for you know for years now right that
62:33
like
62:33
these this is the is the guy to be
62:36
studying right he’s the one that we can
62:38
kind of crack the code on
62:40
um as for you know why that’s the case
62:43
i think it’s real again it’s really
62:45
threatening i don’t think
62:46
you know i think the democratic
62:48
establishment what i tend to tell people
62:49
is that the democratic establishment
62:52
their main priority is not really to
62:54
actually even win elections
62:56
it’s to keep control of the democratic
62:58
party right like that’s where most of
63:00
their power comes from it’s certainly
63:01
where
63:02
their most reliable source of power
63:04
comes from it’s keeping control of the
63:05
party because as long as you can
63:07
keep control of the party and you keep
63:08
control of the cultural
63:10
um levers of power in the country
63:13
you’re always going to be able to
63:15
command 50
63:16
of the political system you’re always
63:18
going to be able to command
63:20
um you know the entire media apparatus
63:23
that’s devoted to politics right you’re
63:25
good
63:25
or at least half of it right you’re
63:27
going to in control the liberal half
63:29
and so i think it’s i i mean i it’s
63:32
i’m sorry to say but i think it’s a
63:34
really cynical calculation
63:36
that cultural elites and democratic
63:39
party elites are making when they make
63:41
these decisions because when when you
63:43
engage joe rogan
63:45
and you engage his viewers you’re being
63:47
bringing in
63:48
a ton of people who you can’t
63:50
necessarily rely on to keep these clean
63:52
lines of political and cultural
63:54
engagement you’re
63:55
you’re completely blowing up the
63:57
political system you’re you’re blowing
63:59
up the racket
64:00
right and why would you want to do that
64:02
because at the end of the day
64:04
hell trump could get reelected and
64:05
they’d still control the party they can
64:07
still control the other half they’d be
64:10
raising hundreds of millions of dollars
64:12
for their think tanks and therefore you
64:14
know the media institutions and so
64:16
it’s a great racket why would you risk
64:18
that just for
64:19
winning you know the presidency for
64:21
maybe four years eight years
64:22
don’t get me wrong obviously they’d like
64:24
to win that too
64:26
but i don’t think that’s the real game i
64:27
don’t think that’s ever been the real
64:28
game
64:30
we saw that in the uk right where the
64:33
centrists and playwrights and moderates
64:36
who controlled the labor party
64:38
levers of power forever whether they
64:40
were in power out of power
64:42
when they lost control of their own
64:44
party to jeremy corbyn
64:46
they it was very obvious if you’re just
64:48
paying minimal attention but we now know
64:50
from documents that have been leaked and
64:51
reports that have been issued
64:53
they were actively working against the
64:56
labor party they preferred
64:58
to destroy corbyn and retake control
65:01
of the party even if it meant empowering
65:04
the tories and making boris johnson
65:06
prime minister because as you say
65:09
their top priority is ensuring that they
65:11
maintain
65:12
control of their party and secondary
65:15
or even more distantly is actually
65:18
winning elections
65:19
um and you know i think that you know
65:22
it’s like when people ask me why i go on
65:23
tucker carlson i
65:24
can barely even understand the question
65:26
because it’s such an obvious answer
65:28
which is
65:29
because there are four million people
65:30
watching and whatever percentage it is
65:33
that i can reach in any way not
65:34
necessarily change their minds instantly
65:37
but just kind of make them a little more
65:38
open
65:39
to hearing from different people maybe
65:41
get them kind of unsettled about
65:44
who they should be paying attention to
65:46
or introducing some ideas that maybe
65:48
maybe it’s ten percent maybe it’s five
65:50
percent maybe it’s fifteen percent
65:52
why would i ignore that if i actually
65:54
care about outcomes
65:55
to watch you know i i it kind of shocked
65:58
me edward snowden
65:59
uh appeared on rogan’s show for the
66:02
second time this week and so i went back
66:03
to look at what the audience was the
66:05
first time he appeared which is
66:06
about 10 months ago and even though
66:09
edward snowden being edward snowden kind
66:11
of spoke in like a monologue form for
66:13
about
66:14
three hours you know and he was
66:16
obviously remote because he couldn’t
66:18
go to the studio since he’s trapped in
66:19
russia the audience for that
66:22
appearance from edward snowden just on
66:25
youtube never mind all the other
66:26
platforms
66:27
was 15 million people 15 million
66:31
um which is you know four or five times
66:34
the size
66:35
of a primetime cable host even on their
66:37
best night
66:38
and obviously by virtue the fact that
66:40
you watch it that people
66:42
listen to it and can hear him say i
66:44
support tulsi or i support
66:46
bernie obviously there’s huge numbers of
66:48
those
66:49
that audience that are very reachable
66:51
from a liberal perspective
66:53
anybody who says i don’t want to have
66:56
anything to do
66:57
with a show that reaches 15 million
66:59
people
67:00
is somebody to me who’s saying
67:04
i look at politics as about everything
67:06
other than
67:07
winning wielding power and changing the
67:10
world
67:11
right right and they shrouded in moral
67:13
language right they shrouded
67:15
in how could you associate with someone
67:17
like that how could you you’ll be
67:18
tainted by someone like that
67:20
um they shrouded in those things but at
67:22
the end of the day it’s a much more
67:24
cynical calculation it’s
67:25
it’s put forth as some kind of moral
67:28
decr
67:29
declaration but it’s really a cynical
67:31
calculation
67:32
calculation in terms of controlling the
67:33
party in terms of controlling cultural
67:36
power centers
67:37
why would we want to upset that this is
67:40
a great setup
67:41
um and yeah that’s why you see 15
67:43
million people tuning in to edward
67:45
snowden because it completely cult
67:47
cuts across all of these cultural lines
67:50
i mean there aren’t
67:51
you know being interested in edward
67:53
snowden just his story and what he did
67:55
and the cultural and political impact he
67:57
had
67:58
that’s not a liberal or conservative
68:00
idea that’s
68:01
that’s reaching millions of people um
68:03
but that’s just not interesting to
68:05
um what informs the you know the the
68:08
careers and the lifestyles of the people
68:10
that
68:11
sort of hold these both the political
68:13
and cultural
68:14
levers of power in the country yeah so
68:16
yeah so thanks very much for
68:18
for taking the time i i think is a
68:20
really important topic not just
68:22
because it’s important to understand the
68:24
phenomenon of joe rogan although that
68:25
is important there are very few people
68:28
having the kind of cultural
68:30
and political impact that he’s having
68:34
um in a reaching a group of people who
68:38
often tune out politics or who aren’t
68:40
engaged in the traditional ways which
68:42
makes him
68:44
even more important than just the
68:45
numbers alone but i do think too
68:47
the reaction to him tells us a lot about
68:50
how media figures view their position
68:52
how liberals view what their political
68:54
project uh is and so
68:56
um i i think your your analysis on
69:00
twitter and the discussion that we just
69:02
had
69:02
um has really clarified those issues in
69:05
in a really helpful way so thank you so
69:07
much for
69:08
taking the time to talk to me um and i
69:10
hope people will tune into your
69:13
back channel youtube program where
69:14
you’re doing a lot of these kind of
69:15
header docs
69:17
uh discussions with people across a wide
69:20
range of
69:21
ideological and cultural uh belief
69:24
systems so

Religious Power vs. Religious Liberty with David French

There are few public thinkers the Holy Post cites more often than David French, and he’s finally here in person! (Well, in person via Zoom.) French is the Senior Editor of The Dispatch, a columnist for Time, and a pro-life conservative attorney. Although many Christians are worried about the erosion of religious liberty, French says, “We have never enjoyed more religious liberty than we do right now.”

The problem is that Christians are losing cultural power, and our attempts to retain it are often doing more harm than good. He helps us understand recent Supreme Court rulings about religious liberty and LGBT rights, why conservatives who are against face masks aren’t really pro-life, and how both the Left and Right get racism wrong. French explains why he will not vote for Trump, and why evangelicals have gone from holding their noses to enthusiastic support of a president who lacks both character and competency. Plus, what is “David Frenchism” and should we be worried about it?

Episode 418: The Pandemic, Power, & the Apocalypse

Back in 2016, Donald Trump gave a campaign speech promising that if elected “Christianity will have power.” The Holy Post crew discusses why this message has so much appeal to some Christians today, the way fear has come to mark our faith, and what we can do to counteract the trend. After the podcast is interrupted by a tornado, Christian asks if we’re seeing signs of the apocalypse. Skye says, “No” and shares his idea for a sermon titled “How Stupid Do We Think God Is?” Plus, listener mail.

15:25
winds
15:26
and uh so there were tornado warnings it
15:29
doesn’t appear that any actual tornadoes
15:31
did any damage anywhere at least not
15:34
that i’ve heard chicago they touched
15:35
down
15:36
in like the river north area rogers park
15:40
park really oh my goodness
15:43
wow that’s densely populated um
15:46
we lost like um half a tree here
15:50
and that was all but uh over in our
15:53
power just barely went out but came back
15:55
on my mom a few
15:56
uh two suburbs over in wheaton lost
15:59
power for
16:00
like 20 hours and uh whole streets
16:03
in wheaton were impassable because of
16:05
downed trees
16:07
so it was some power lines i saw
16:10
and yeah i was driving by on naperville
16:13
road and like
16:14
fences that lined the street were kind
16:16
of blown over
16:18
wow we lost one big tree branch but
16:21
other than that we were safe so i was
16:23
very thankful
16:24
i’m sure there’s not a lot of people
16:25
that can say that any trees down in your
16:27
yard sky
16:29
no actually this area wasn’t too bad
16:31
just little branches here and there but
16:32
you know the fact that it’s 20 20 i’m
16:35
just happy we didn’t have like blood
16:37
blooded in the streets or yeah you know
16:39
comets
16:40
fall in on us or something a bug of
16:42
frogs
16:43
right uh jason how’s uh aurora
16:46
it actually didn’t hit here very hard at
16:49
all i was really
16:50
i thought we’d get a hit a lot harder
16:51
but it was you know a couple tree
16:52
branches down
16:53
things like that didn’t ever lose power
16:55
at all the whole steeple on college
16:58
church
16:58
is gone yeah the old one or the new one
17:01
not the new one
17:02
not the the little one on the back part
17:04
of the church or the
17:06
okay yeah yeah they lost a steeple
17:09
that seems like it could be god’s
17:12
judgment i mean that’s clearly
17:13
a storm blows the steeple off your
17:15
church
17:16
but at what point let me just stop you
17:19
and just ask
17:20
because i know our listeners are
17:21
thinking that at what point
17:24
do you look at 2020 and then begin to
17:27
wonder
17:29
is this something apocalyptic like
17:32
i mean it just keeps coming the hits
17:35
just keep coming and
17:37
there is good biblical precedent for god
17:40
using the you know nature and animals to
17:44
like you know pour out his wrath and
17:46
judgment
17:48
uh-huh skye no just no
17:52
so never at any point truthfully i want
17:55
to know for sure
17:56
never at any point do you never ever
17:59
think i do
18:00
wonder what god is doing here no i never
18:03
do
18:03
really i don’t phil i really don’t like
18:07
when it comes to storms and stuff like
18:08
that no i
18:09
don’t yeah but i know not just one storm
18:12
but cumulatively
18:14
would you okay but christian christian
18:16
it’s a global it’s a global pandemic
18:19
it was a local storm in iowa and
18:21
illinois
18:22
it’s like how do you can’t it doesn’t
18:24
make sense i am
18:26
not talking about that i am not just
18:28
talking about a global pandemic and one
18:30
storm if you took
18:31
all of the events of 2020
18:34
and you lump them together you have to
18:36
admit
18:37
it it’s the tragic the tragic death of
18:41
kobe bryant
18:42
the what else i mean the pandemic
18:45
the olympics got canceled that was
18:47
george george floyd yeah i mean
18:49
and if you just take out the pandemic
18:51
this would be a pretty normal year
18:53
yeah we have stuff like this fairly
18:55
often it’s the pandemic
18:57
we also had the flying locusts
19:01
that we’re taking all over the sandstorm
19:04
like i mean it’s just that happens all
19:06
the time we just don’t report it
19:08
because it’s something things are worse
19:10
this year
19:11
than normal because of the pandemic yes
19:14
yes yes because of the pandemic there
19:17
was a pandemic just like this
19:19
a hundred years ago and that wasn’t
19:22
the end of the world clearly but okay
19:25
just
19:25
i want to go back to this question phil
19:27
you have to answer it okay
19:29
ever in your mind do you never think
19:31
this
19:32
gee i wonder what god is doing maybe
19:34
there is something we should learn
19:36
maybe something is going to happen do
19:38
you never those thoughts
19:39
there is always something we should
19:41
learn i don’t think god is pushing
19:44
around weather patterns
19:45
or viruses to send secret messages to us
19:50
because he’s already given us his word
19:53
which tells us what we need to know
19:57
that’s true and i don’t think he knocked
20:00
kobe bryant’s helicopter out of the air
20:02
and i don’t think he inspired kanye west
20:04
to run for president
20:06
and i don’t think i mean if you look at
20:09
the 20th century there was
20:10
the 20th century was so much worse than
20:14
what we have so far in the 21st century
20:17
in terms of chaos and death and violence
20:20
and pestilence so it’s
20:23
it’s just hard to say but you know we
20:25
didn’t experience most of it firsthand
20:27
we missed most of it we weren’t born
20:29
so you know everyone thinks that the
20:31
experiences of their lifetime
20:33
are the most impactful experiences that
20:36
have ever happened
20:37
because they’re the most impactful
20:39
experiences that have ever happened to
20:40
me
20:41
which is you know a little bit of
20:43
potentially
20:44
um disney princess
20:47
because it’s happening to me it has
20:51
great biblical meaning um but yeah
20:55
people have always pointed to current
20:56
events
20:56
and said this is it god’s judging or
20:59
doing or whatever
21:00
you know and it’s like it’s like
21:03
predicting the second coming the only
21:05
thing
21:05
we know for absolutely sure is that
21:08
everyone
21:09
who has ever predicted a date for the
21:12
second coming
21:13
has been wrong that’s true
21:16
except there is stuff that we do know we
21:19
do know that he will come in the clouds
21:21
and every eye will see him
21:23
what does that have to do that has
21:24
nothing to do with that has nothing to
21:26
do with predicting your knowledge
21:28
right okay that’s true but it does mean
21:31
that we will be able to see him when he
21:33
comes
21:34
and they’re right in other words it’s he
21:36
did when and he even says this he said
21:38
when someone says here there’s the you
21:39
know don’t believe it because it’s not
21:40
going to be a subtle thing
21:42
he’s not going to come back as the
21:43
invisible man right
21:45
and you have to look for the the uh the
21:47
hand print on the shower glass door
21:50
like in the movie it’s not going to be
21:51
like that but do you not think that
21:53
there’s going to be
21:54
anything that leads up to his coming at
21:57
all there’s like
21:58
no warning signs it’s just going to be
21:59
like bam he’s there
22:01
i think all of the traffic signals start
22:04
to
22:04
flash purple come on seriously i’m
22:08
asking a serious question
22:10
i don’t know firing minds i don’t know i
22:13
um when i was 19 years old working for
22:18
my first video production job and i got
22:20
sent out to
22:21
salt lake city utah to train on my first
22:24
computer graphics
22:26
system i had a a classmate who was
a few years older he was like 25.
he had already been married and divorced
and we were talking
and i wanted to find out why and he said
that he read the book the late great
planet earth by hal
lindsey which made everybody go nutty
for end times prophecy
and he was so convinced that the world
was about to end
that he thought i don’t want it to end
before i get married
so he rushed into a marriage so that he
could have the experience of being
married
before the world ended and it was a huge
mistake
23:05
and he ended up at 25 divorced and that
23:08
that had
23:08
that that imprinted on me i thought
23:11
people
23:12
go crazy and make terrible decisions
23:16
when they focus too much on trying to
23:18
predict the end times
23:20
so i’m not going to do that so ever
23:23
since then
23:24
i’ve just thought okay it is going to
23:25
happen and we do not know when
23:29
and that is all we’ve been told we
23:31
absolutely need to know
23:33
the funny thing is part of the reason
23:35
jesus and the apostles later talk about
23:38
the end and the coming judgment and all
23:40
that sort of stuff
23:41
is so that we would prepare and we would
23:44
take urgent action but the urgent
23:46
action they call us to take is action
23:49
toward
23:50
character and holiness and virtue it’s
23:53
be loving and kind and patient and
23:55
forgiving and
23:56
you know all the fruit of the spirits so
23:58
the irony is that this guy you’re
mentioning goes out and
essentially runs into a sexual
relationship because he doesn’t want to
miss out on the opportunity
which is the total opposite of what he’s
supposed to do he’s supposed to be more
self-controlled more patient
more kind and it’s just funny to me that
we
we apply this eschatological stuff to
24:18
our lives and then can
24:19
take away the polar opposite biblical
24:22
message of the
24:23
one that jesus and his apostles gave us
24:25
yeah probably
24:26
trying to gain the system it seems like
24:28
to to our own advantage
24:30
yes yeah and i i tend to strongly
24:35
react against going to extremes
24:38
i like to moderate i like to stay in the
24:41
middle i
24:42
yeah to to a fault to a fault that i you
24:44
know there are times where i should be
24:46
more
24:47
up in arms or and i’m not because i
24:50
my my tendency is to try to moderate
24:53
my response at all times so when i
24:56
see theology that uh tends to
produce extremes of behavior in people
i kind of have a natural innate pushback
you know to that sort of wow if that if
believing if interpreting that verse
that way
makes you behave like that ah i’m i’m
gonna
i’m gonna back away from that
25:21
interesting
25:22
maybe good may be bad i don’t know i
25:23
just don’t like freaking out
25:26
well i appreciate y’all’s perspective on
25:28
that okay i’m sure our listeners do too
25:30
so thank you for going so
25:31
i have a big branch down in my yard i am
25:34
not going to go out
25:35
and stand next to it and look for jesus
25:38
in the sky
25:39
i don’t think they’re connected and i’m
25:41
not saying you think that christian i’m
25:42
just saying
25:43
that no i’m just saying sometimes i do
25:47
wonder like i just i mean i desperately
25:50
want
25:50
christ to come back and his kingdom to
25:52
be established on earth and things to be
25:54
all right the world and so i think
25:58
part of me hopes like okay maybe it is
26:01
so bad right now and that’s because
26:02
something exciting is gonna happen
26:05
or you don’t think this is exciting
26:07
enough
26:08
this is an extremely exciting good i
26:10
mean exciting good
26:11
good exciting i think most of the
26:13
warnings in in scripture
26:16
are about not being ready in the sense
26:19
that
26:19
jesus comes back and you’re not walking
26:22
in the way of jesus
26:23
right so the solution
26:26
is not to try to run you know figure out
26:28
which which russian
26:30
nation your european union is going to
26:33
what and the where and the how
26:35
it’s just walk in the way of jesus and
26:37
regardless of when it happens
26:39
he’s gonna you’re gonna be fine you’re
26:41
gonna be right
26:42
you’re gonna be fine and if someone says
26:44
hey would you like the mark of the beast
26:47
say no probably not i’ll pass
26:53
no i don’t think so i don’t think i want
26:55
that uh that doesn’t mean it’s upc
26:57
codes it doesn’t mean it’s a vaccine it
27:00
doesn’t mean it’s a microchip
27:02
that like the ones we put in our dogs so
27:04
that we don’t lose them one day that’s
27:05
not the mark of the beast
27:08
you’re not gonna i think was it was it
27:10
um juan hernandez who said this last
27:12
week
27:13
or two weeks ago at okoboji said because
27:15
people were asking about the mark of the
27:16
beast he was teaching on revelation and
27:18
he said
27:19
you you will not accidentally get the
27:22
mark of the beast
27:23
if there is a literal mark of the beast
27:26
it won’t be something that you realize
27:28
oh crap i got i thought i was just
27:31
getting
27:31
i thought i just was downloaded the
27:34
target app
27:35
and now i’ve got the mark of the beast
27:37
that’s like if there is a literal mark
27:39
of the beast
27:40
it’s not going to sneak up on you you
27:43
will have to opt into it
27:44
you know related to that phil i have
27:46
been debating putting together a sermon
27:49
and it’s it’s working title is how
27:52
stupid do we
27:52
think god is
27:56
isn’t that jesus that’s your next book
27:58
right there
27:59
it could be how stupid do we think god
28:01
is because for to your point
28:03
if the mark of the beast is something
28:04
that a faithful christian might
28:06
accidentally stumble into
28:08
and acquire in some way you think god is
28:11
so stupid
28:12
as to say oh sorry you’re out now
28:14
because you accidentally downloaded that
28:16
app and you accidentally got that
28:17
vaccination when you were six months old
28:20
you forced not that it’s ridiculous you
28:22
thought you were signing up for your gas
28:24
station’s
28:24
frequent buyer program but you got
28:28
the mark of the beast so and i think
28:31
this relates to a whole bunch of
28:32
different areas of our of our
28:33
public christian lives and different
28:35
things that go on but we i really think
28:37
a lot of christians genuinely believe
28:38
god is truly stupid
28:40
and that’s why they’re so fearful that
28:42
they don’t make any missteps
28:44
but or don’t think that that’s yes i
28:46
totally do
28:48
i absolutely do no he just he just wants
28:51
us
28:52
the alternative view sky jatani dear
28:56
friend of mine
28:57
is is that he expects us to be smart
29:00
enough not to make dumb mistakes
29:04
i don’t know about that okay i think
29:06
you’re both wrong
29:07
i think i think that people don’t think
29:10
god is stupid
29:12
i think people forget how powerful he is
29:16
and that he’s not out there to trick us
29:18
or to lay a trap for us
29:21
well powerful people can trick you i i
29:23
think christian
29:25
i’d spend it a little differently it
29:26
isn’t that that people think god isn’t
29:29
powerful i think that people view god
29:31
as an impersonal force more than
29:34
a person and so they they think of i
29:37
mean dallas willard used this analogy he
29:39
talked about
29:40
a vision of god as just being like the
29:42
scanner at the grocery store
29:44
and as long as you have the right code
29:46
as long as you have the right thing the
29:47
scanner picks up
29:48
right thing if you have the wrong scan
29:49
the wrong code you get the wrong thing
29:51
so for example
29:52
um i mean this opens up a can of worms
29:55
but
29:56
there are certain christians who want
29:58
america to have a certain political
29:59
foreign policy toward the nation state
30:01
of israel
30:02
and they think as long as america
30:03
supports the state of israel god will
30:05
bless america
30:06
and and they then discredit all the
30:09
nuances of
30:10
god’s character and does he actually
30:12
care about the marginalized and what
30:13
about justice and what about refugees
30:15
doesn’t matter as long as america
30:16
supports israel we’re good it’s like no
30:19
it’s a much much more complicated
30:21
issue than that hey we’ve got the right
30:24
code
30:24
america’s got the right law toward
30:26
israel before god’s on our side that’s
30:27
what i mean by they think god is stupid
30:29
like he doesn’t have
30:30
a personal engagement and nuanced
30:32
understanding of a very complicated
30:34
things
30:34
and we can get by by tricking him more
30:36
or less with just
30:38
going through the right motion saying
30:39
the right prayers giving the right
30:41
amount of money
30:42
scanning the right law into our books
30:44
whatever that’s what i mean by that we
30:45
pretend that god is just this impersonal
30:48
force that we can manipulate
30:50
because he’s stupid but i think that is
30:52
a subconscious
30:53
thing i don’t think people consciously
30:56
think god is stupid
30:57
of course not of course not but we
30:58
behave like he is
31:00
yes right what are those tests
31:04
where you where you use a number two
31:05
pencil and you fill in the little
31:06
circles and the
31:07
antron yes yes we we think following
31:11
jesus is the equivalent
31:12
of of acing a scantron test
31:16
where i had all the right dots and all
31:18
the right circles and that’s the only
31:20
thing that god will look at is what
31:21
comes out of the scantron
31:23
machine right that’s a good analogy
31:25
thank you you can use that in your
31:27
sermon but you have to you have to
31:28
credit me at the end of the sermon
31:30
that would be a good dude i would be
31:32
happy to thank you thank you very much
31:34
hey we were going to talk about
31:35
something else
31:36
in fact we were talking about something
31:38
else we don’t have a ton of time now so
31:41
i think we can still briefly mention it
31:43
because there wasn’t a whole lot to say
31:45
but but it is a really good article in
31:47
the new york times
31:48
uh under the headline christianity will
31:51
have power you can look it up it was
31:52
written by elizabeth
31:54
diaz who covers religion for the new
31:56
york times um and she went to sioux
31:58
center iowa
31:59
to interview people who had supported
32:01
donald trump in 2016
32:02
and she pointed out something
32:03
interesting which i didn’t even know was
32:05
that one of the most famous things he
32:07
ever said during the primary he said
32:09
in sioux center iowa at dort university
32:13
and it’s the thing that everyone focused
32:15
on which is that is where he said and
32:17
this is a very conservative dutch
32:18
reformed community with a
32:20
dutch reformed school and this is where
32:24
he said he could stand in the middle of
32:25
fifth avenue and shoot somebody and he
32:27
wouldn’t lose
32:28
any voters and every journalist in the
32:30
world
32:31
focused on that like what did he just
32:34
say
32:35
it’s even hard to figure out exactly
32:36
what that means was he saying his
32:38
followers just aren’t very moral i mean
32:42
his followers are so passionate the
32:44
loyal
32:45
and loyal he could kill somebody and
32:48
they would still follow him
32:49
wait then i i would argue he was a
32:52
hundred percent correct
32:54
well that’s a whole different story but
32:56
what um
32:57
miss diaz focuses in on is is that
32:59
something
33:00
else he said in that speech may have
33:02
been more important than that
33:04
and uh so she quoted at length and and
33:06
he said to these
33:08
conservative christians and in the
33:10
northwest corner of iowa very near the
33:12
bible conference that we go to every
33:13
year
33:14
i will tell you christianity is under
33:16
tremendous siege whether we want to talk
33:18
about it
33:18
or we don’t want to talk about it he
33:21
said christians make up the overwhelming
33:22
majority of the country and then he
slowly then he slowed slightly to stress
this part
and yet we don’t exert the power that we
should have
33:32
it’s interesting that he said we because
33:34
he is
33:35
i don’t know that he ever stood up
33:36
before this point and said i am totally
33:38
a follower of jesus
33:40
uh but now he’s part of the we if he
were elected president he promised that
would change
and then he said christianity will have
power
if i’m there you’re going to have plenty
of power
you don’t need anybody else you’re going
to have somebody representing you
very very well remember that and
that that’s what she focuses in on this
article is
is his statement if you elect me
christianity
will have power and that’s what you know
34:09
we’ve been talking with with david
34:10
french about what’s the difference
34:11
between religious power and religious
34:13
liberty
34:13
that’s kind of what we’ve been hinting
34:15
at a long time it’s it’s interesting
34:16
because then
34:17
um what what mrs diaz misty is i don’t
34:20
know what her first name is don’t
34:22
remember
34:23
she travels around sioux center iowa and
34:26
orange city which is
34:27
right next door and interviews people
34:30
about so how do you think he’s done and
34:32
are you still going to vote for him this
34:33
year and you know what’s your response
34:35
to all the the hoop law
34:37
and the overwhelming response is he’s
34:40
done what he said he would do
34:41
he’s done what he said he would do you
34:42
know we have more we have more power now
34:45
we’re not losing as much
34:47
so it’s a really interesting article
34:50
um just to hear people it’s not
34:53
one-sided it doesn’t have an obvious you
34:55
know
34:55
liberal bias they’re not trying to make
34:56
these people look stupid they’re just
34:58
asking him the questions
34:59
you know how do you feel he’s done and
35:02
you know what what’s your sense of the
35:03
world
35:04
and it’s fascinating so i just i just
35:06
wanted to take a couple minutes
35:08
you know for skye and christian to say
35:09
okay how did you what’s your reaction
35:11
when you read that what did it make you
35:14
think i know christian mentioned that it
35:16
made you generally sad
35:17
uh but let’s just get a little bit of
35:19
response to what we saw from
35:21
such a detailed look at how
35:24
you know middle american christians are
35:26
feeling
35:27
well like i said when we started this i
35:29
felt like it rang super true
35:33
am i signed out no here you’re there
35:36
yeah you’re
35:38
saying i got a message saying you’ve
35:39
been signed out
35:41
oh not of this maybe something else
35:43
maybe maybe your mark of the beast app
35:46
so you know so that’s good yeah that’s
35:48
very good anyway
35:50
so i um you know it rang very true
35:52
because it sounds like a lot of people
35:54
that i know
35:55
in my area of the country things i’ve
35:57
heard them say forever
35:59
it did make me very sad uh and i’m not
36:02
sure
36:03
what we do about that i think that was
36:05
what was so hard and
36:06
what the article that we talked about
36:07
earlier you know we can look at this
36:10
and we can acknowledge that is probably
36:12
true but how do we
36:14
change it
36:17
yeah skye what did you make of the how
36:20
did you respond
36:21
i i’m kind of um i felt
36:24
bad because i don’t necessarily i don’t
36:27
blame these people
36:28
i think when you’ve when you see the
36:32
world
36:32
the way they have been formed to see it
36:35
i can understand why you don’t believe
36:37
you have any alternative
36:39
if you believe the world is in that
36:41
desperate a place if the country’s in
36:43
that desperate place
36:44
and the only option available to you
36:48
is this very flawed
36:51
broken immoral leader who nonetheless
36:54
says he will give you
36:55
and your religious beliefs influence and
36:58
power
36:59
i can see why people are in a corner and
37:02
want to do that i don’t necessarily
37:04
blame them when i i have less sympathy
37:07
however
37:08
for the church leaders and those with
37:11
greater influence who are here in this
37:12
culture to represent jesus who have
37:15
formed in them this view of their faith
37:18
and that’s where i think the blame lies
37:20
not with the person on the street
37:22
who doesn’t believe they have any
37:25
alternative
37:26
so uh i i i it’s sad it’s very sad
37:30
because i think it says something about
37:31
the state of the american church more
37:32
than it says about the state of american
37:34
politics
37:35
and there’s a ton of talk uh quotes from
37:38
different people
37:40
like this um in their area
37:43
area because they have their own
37:44
christian school they send their kids to
37:47
we feel like we are in a little area
37:49
where we are still protected
37:51
you know where we’re we’re safe we we’re
37:53
afraid of losing that
37:55
um and then you know if if trump is
37:58
re-elected then
37:59
i feel like we are safe for four more
38:01
years
38:02
so there’s this theme of safety you know
38:05
being
38:06
being at risk and it’s not not
38:08
necessarily you know that people are
38:10
going to come and shoot you
38:11
but that our way of life is going to
38:13
disappear
38:14
that we have values and they’re going to
38:16
disappear that’s what they’ve
38:17
capitalized on i mean that’s what the
38:20
trump campaign the republicans have
38:22
capitalized on and they have going back
38:23
to the 80s and i’m sure before
38:26
whereas we’re going to show you all the
38:27
things you should be really afraid of
38:29
and you should be really really afraid
38:31
of these things
38:32
we’re going to be the ones that protect
38:33
you from happening whether they’re
38:34
abortion
38:35
or you know crime or you know
38:39
be that what it may we the republicans
38:42
are going to keep your life the way it
38:44
is
38:44
protected safe and happy and what really
38:47
breaks my heart is that what that
38:48
reveals in us in our heart
38:50
is that we believe that our salvation
38:52
our happiness our peace
38:54
is in installing a correct political
38:57
leader and system
39:04
right which is essentially a false
39:06
gospel
39:07
and it’s a false god actually right yeah
39:10
so and that and that i wish that some of
39:12
these folks
39:13
i wish there was more interaction across
39:16
the country among christians in
39:18
different environments
39:19
like if you were to take a bunch of
39:20
christians in northwest iowa like the
39:22
ones that were interviewed in this
39:23
article
39:23
and put them in a room with a bunch of
39:25
christians from manhattan
39:28
right who live in like this liberal
39:30
bastion of democratic power
39:33
yeah and they could interact with each
39:34
other and realize we share the same
39:36
faith
39:36
we have the same hope in christ we’re in
39:39
very different environments and yet look
39:40
here are christians
39:41
thriving in a post-christian liberal
39:45
paradise absolutely you know the liberal
39:48
uh kind of nirvana and yet their faith
39:51
is strong and they’re doing great like
39:53
i wish there was a vision for we can no
39:55
matter what happens
39:56
politically we as the people of christ
39:59
can thrive
40:00
yeah and we don’t have to be driven by
40:03
fear
40:03
in our public engagement yeah the last
40:07
person they interview in the article is
40:09
is the um
40:10
latino pastor of a latino congregation
40:13
in
40:13
i think or in orange city or sioux
40:16
center
40:16
who you know has a lot of white
40:19
evangelical friends
40:20
and is an evangelical and so shares
40:24
many of their social concerns but when
40:26
they come to politics he says
40:28
yeah they they don’t bring that up
40:30
around me and i don’t bring it up around
40:32
them
40:32
you know i think they know that
40:36
um the things trump says and does aren’t
40:39
necessarily
40:40
great for the people in my congregation
40:43
and they don’t want me to feel awkward
40:46
and i don’t want to make them feel
40:48
awkward
40:48
you know so and that’s kind of part of
40:51
of
40:52
i mean it’s kind of exactly what you’re
40:53
saying is that doesn’t
40:55
here’s a group right in the community
40:57
that could say our perspective is a
40:59
little different
41:00
let’s talk about it but instead the
41:02
choice is
41:03
our perspective is a little different
41:05
let’s not bring it up because we want to
41:07
maintain
41:08
civility you know and we don’t know
41:11
what’ll happen if we actually disagree
41:14
with each other
41:15
we haven’t been taught how to
41:17
respectfully
41:19
have a difference of opinion and have a
41:21
civil conversation about it
41:23
and not let it fracture us into our
41:25
silos right
41:27
that’s what’s project yeah and our and
41:29
our leaders aren’t helping
41:30
because they’re not they’re not doing it
41:32
either you know because they’re
41:34
too afraid that i’m gonna i’m gonna lose
41:37
support of the people that are following
41:38
me it’s gonna threaten my ministry
41:40
so i’m just gonna i’m just not gonna
41:43
speak up
41:44
and and that’s why i put the blame there
41:46
rather than with
41:47
the people in the pew or in the voting
41:49
booth it’s our
41:50
christian leaders have failed to
41:52
disciple the american church
41:53
in this critical area of faith okay skye
41:56
so what do we do
41:57
how do we turn that around what what
42:01
vision
42:01
can you paint for us of something that
42:04
might begin
42:05
to to turn that tide i mean just from
42:08
that article
42:10
oh sorry i was gonna say what if you
42:12
wrote
42:13
a little ebook called the voting booth
42:16
i’ll suggest that name you could call it
42:18
the voting booth
42:20
and it could talk about christian
42:22
political engagement what if you did
42:24
that
42:24
what if i did that four years ago and
42:27
it’s already available on amazon for
42:29
anybody who wants it for like i don’t
42:30
know
42:31
we may need to point that out again we
42:33
might yeah
42:34
yeah but alternative to that would be
42:38
take this uh latino pastor from the
42:40
article
42:41
like why not get a gathering of church
42:44
leaders from that community from
42:46
different
42:47
traditions all christian whatever and
42:49
have them come together and
42:50
and have those open conversations or
42:52
invite your congregations to meet
42:54
together and do a panel discussion about
42:56
how do we view our christian faith in
42:58
the public square and why does it lead
43:00
some of us to vote differently and how
43:01
do we
43:02
have a bigger vision of this and just
43:04
come to a place of diverse
43:06
engagement and understanding to broaden
43:08
their vision a little bit but the more
43:10
you have and this is not just true of
43:11
conservatives it can be just as true
43:13
of liberals if if your entire
43:16
environment is an echo chamber where
43:18
you’re only engaging in one
43:20
cable news network or a handful of
43:22
websites or just the algorithm from your
43:24
social media feed that keeps shoveling
43:26
the same
43:26
messages into your in your um inbox then
43:30
yeah you’re gonna get you’re gonna come
43:32
to this myopic vision that this is the
43:33
only way to be a faithful christian
43:35
in the public square so we have to begin
43:38
opening up
43:39
the dialogue and it’s it’s up to church
43:42
leaders to take the risk to do that
43:43
and i know this is the problem with our
43:45
ecclesiology is so many of our churches
43:47
will punish pastors
43:49
who try to do that um but at the end of
43:51
the day
43:52
pastors are not accountable to their
43:54
people they’re accountable to the lord
43:56
and at some point we have to decide who
43:58
we fear more
44:00
all right we need to wrap this up
44:02
because we’ve gone long now since we had
44:03
a two-day
44:05
a two-day news segment interrupted by
44:09
an apocalypse which generated its own
44:11
storyline
44:12
uh we have a guest guy i think we have a
44:14
guest i hope so we’ll see
44:16
i hope we have i guess this this episode
44:19
might be shorter rather than longer
44:21
if not it’s probably long enough as it
44:23
is all right guys you guys uh have a
44:25
great week
44:26
and we will see you next time wait can i
44:27
say one quick what what what
44:29
what okay what what super exciting news
44:31
today everybody
44:32
you can’t tell anybody you can keep it
44:34
secret
44:35
but we are going to be screening at a
44:37
drive-in movie theater on october 10th
44:40
in chagrin falls ohio with the girl who
44:42
wore freedom
44:43
it’s our first in-person film festival
44:46
screening so
44:47
you’re the first to hear it here okay
44:50
social media for it we’ll keep you
44:51
posted you can buy tickets and join us
44:53
if you are driving distance from chagrin
44:55
falls ohio i have no idea where that is
44:58
north ohio near cleveland check it out
45:01
check it out
45:01
okay we’ll see you next week all right
45:03
bye everybody everyone
45:06
how do you like your sermons i’m
45:08
guessing you prefer something that’s
45:09
easy to listen to
45:10
easy to understand maybe a sermon with
45:12
three alliterated points and a specific
45:14
application at the end after all no one
45:17
goes to church on sunday hoping to be
45:18
confused when they leave
45:20
no we want answers and we expect our
45:22
bible teachers to give them
45:24
but that’s not how jesus preached
45:27
although he taught the truth
45:28
he rarely told it directly instead
45:31
jesus told it slant indirectly subtly
45:34
and often wrapped in a story that was
45:35
actually designed to obscure the truth
45:38
for many of his listeners
45:39
that meant his audience had to work to
45:42
understand him
45:43
it took effort and concentration that’s
45:45
totally different from the comfortable
45:47
setting we try to create today in our
45:49
churches with our
45:50
cushioned theater seats and built-in cup
45:52
holders
45:53
that’s why we’re doing a series right
45:55
now in with god daily about jesus
45:57
parables
45:58
each day i’m writing to help you
46:00
understand the critical truths that he
46:01
taught
46:02
and were hidden in these stories and how
46:04
they apply to things going on in our
46:06
world today
46:07
like how the story of the good samaritan
46:09
relates to religious pluralism
46:11
or connecting the unmerciful servant
46:13
story to black lives matters
46:15
this is a series you don’t want to miss
46:17
it’ll help you understand jesus in a new
46:19
way
46:20
and apply those truths to your world
46:22
right now and of course
46:23
many of the daily devotionals include my
46:25
hand-drawn illustrations
46:27
and audio versions if you prefer to
46:29
listen rather than read
46:31
you can sign up today at
46:32
withgoddaily.com
46:34
or by downloading the with god daily
46:36
mobile app from itunes or google play
46:39
so check out with god daily today it’s
46:41
the daily devotional for people who hate
46:43
daily devotionals
46:46
the holy post podcast is a production of
46:47
phil fisher enterprises
46:49
that’s phil’s company and sky pilot
46:51
media that’s sky’s company
46:53
production assistance by julie betcher
46:56
editing by jason rugg
46:57
help us create more thoughtful christian
46:59
media by supporting us at patreon.com
47:01
forward slash holy post
47:03
also be sure to leave a review on itunes
47:06
so more people can discover thoughtful
47:08
christian commentary
47:09
plus ukulele and occasional but news
47:12
visit holypost.com for show notes news
47:15
stories and more