Prophetic Dream: Death of the House of Prayer- by JOHN BURTON

Found here. Great article.

-----------------------------------

I recently had a dream that really shines the light on the coming battle in the church. As I've said, the church is to be a House of Prayer. Any other dominant defining attributes than intercession dilute and compromise the church's mission.

The church isn't to be a house of teaching, a house of friendships or a house of evangelism. It's a House of Prayer, a place that facilitates a lifestyle of night and day intercession. We are all called to pray at that level, not just some mystical, elite group of prayer warriors. The coming church will be a church on fire. No longer will we gather around a fire to warm our flesh, but rather we'll lay across it as burning ones who allow the Consuming Fire to do just that—consume us.

As we pray and live on fire, much trouble will come. We will threaten those who don't choose to pray, those who don't see the need. There are already strategies and theologies that are opposing and assaulting the prayer movement, and my dream brings clarity to that reality.

"And He taught them, and said, 'Is it not written, "My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations"? But you have made it a "den of thieves."'" (Mark 11:17).

Assisted Suicide—The Dream
In the dream, I was walking up a dirt hill where my dad was. In the dream, my dad represented the prayer movement. In the Branson, Missouri area he gave leadership to a significant regional prayer effort called the Uninterrupted Prayer Team (the UP Team).

My dad was on the top of that dry, dirty hill for a very specific reason. He was going to be executed. It was a public execution. I was shocked at how passive my dad was. He was on a bed, like a hospital bed, and he was submitted to the demand that he die.

I sensed that the forces were too strong for me to fight against them. He was to be executed, and there seemed to be nothing I could do about it.

I asked my dad what in the world was going on. He was pleasant in his demeanor, and in fact, most of the people around him who were helping facilitate the public execution were casually going about their day, and they were good friends of my dad. They were "good Christians" who were focused on having a great day and did what they could to eradicate anything that would threaten that.

My dad said, "John, this is going to be an assisted suicide."

I couldn't believe it! The pressure of the church as it opposes the prayer movement will be so great, that many will be overwhelmed and will lose hope that their mandate to pray will have impact. The prayer movement is at risk of agreeing with its own death!

The church today is threatened by the prayer movement, and it will do much to embrace the spirit of the age and execute the spirit of intercession.

As the dream continued, I then left his side and walked down the dirt road in deep, troubling thought. I looked down and saw a lighter, that looked like it was broken. I picked it up and I understood that if I could only get it to light, the execution would be called off.

If we pray, the fire of God will burn, and the opposing spirits will lose their strength.

Believe me, this is a very real situation. Someone actually contacted me online recently and arrogantly told me that they and others in a local church were actually praying for a local house of prayer to close down—and it did close down.

It's absolutely stunning that supposed Christians can oppose prayer with such zeal that they actually pray against the prayer movement!

We can't even call people to prayer today due to the fear that they will leave our churches! My God! How can we presume revival is near?

I met with a House of Prayer network leader the other day who said that people leave churches when leaders shift time, energy and attention from them to God. I've watched that happen myself, and it rips me up!

The coming church will be marked by constant prayer, and there will be a divide along this line. If we don't pray, I do believe it's a serious issue with eternity hanging in the balance. If we truly know God, we will understand the desire and need to connect with Him in prayer.

A CHURCH ON FIRE
Where are the ones who aren't looking first for human friends, personal affirmation or a sense of belonging but who are seeking after every available minute to minister to God in prayer? The prayer rooms must be full—and the main prayer room in the American church is the Sunday morning sanctuary!

And don't you even think of using the excuse that you need to create a non-threatening environment for the new believer! Every person, young or old, immature or seasoned must be in the prayer room—and it must be their primary focus! What if the Upper Room were toned down in the hopes of drawing a bigger crowd and interested seekers?

We must absolutely refuse to tone down the activity of the Holy Spirit out of respect of those less hungry! God is a consuming fire, and He is about to consume what is unholy and compromised. Who are we to presume we know better how to facilitate a service? Is inviting the Holy Spirit to step aside as we give preference to human wisdom the way to go? I've heard it said that the main Sunday service should be a toned-down meeting so as not to freak out visitors and seekers. Apparently the meeting where the Holy Spirit has liberty to move in freedom should be reserved for a night when there's little risk of the unconverted showing up.

This is humanistic religion at its best! Did those in the Upper Room tone down the Holy Spirit so as not to confuse and trouble the seekers in the city? Absolutely not! In fact, the power was so extreme and so unusual that the people were provoked to wonder and proclaim, "they must be drunk!" What was happening was off of their grid.

When man moves, it's naturally familiar. When God moves, it's supernaturally shocking. Keep in mind, there's always a spirit giving leadership in a service—the spirit of man, a demonic spirit or the Holy Spirit.

I told God one day many years ago that if I responded to His extreme call to facilitate a white hot environment of prayer in our church I would lose my reputation. People would sever relationship with me and hurl accusations my way.

God said, "Good. My Son was of no reputation, why should you be?" I was rocked. It was that day, many years ago, that I stopped trying to look good and build a ministry and make people happy about running with me. Selfish ambition died that day. The moment we make decisions based mostly on attracting people, keeping people or raising money is the moment we have failed as leaders.

"But He emptied Himself, taking upon Himself the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And being found in the form of a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:7-8).

I'm not trying to build a ministry—I'm devoted to obeying God and delivering the messages He has given me. I know these messages will directly hit theologies and ideals that so many hold dear. That's the point. I crave people's freedom from those harmful ideals! I desire the truth of Jesus to invade everybody's life!

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" (Matt. 10:34).

One reason I'm OK with this divisive strategy (that Jesus affirmed above) is that it clearly reveals who's for and who's opposed. I'd rather make the message clear and know who I'm running with than to tone it down and have those who are opposed to it in our camp. So, we love and serve everybody in the camp, but we can't get sidetracked from our mission for the sake of their comfort.

Trust me, the resulting remnant of burning ones will rejoice at such an atmosphere of clarity and fire! Those who are lukewarm today just may awaken and burn tomorrow—if we have the courage to preach the very difficult, costly truth and call every person to the fire of continual prayer!

I'm sure there are some who translate boldness and refusal to soft-step issues as arrogance—but I do not apologize. Yeah, I know that sounds arrogant! The reason I don't apologize is because I wrestle with the call to humility continually, and I check my heart nonstop. The possibility of pride and arrogance is there, without question, and I take that very seriously. I check my heart to ensure I'm humble and full of love. It's wisdom to receive insight from your critics, at least to a point!

People that are close to me do know my heart—and they know I'm broken before the Lord. My call is to aggressively sound alarms, gather people around the mission of revival and provoke people to pray night and day. It can't be a soft-spoken suggestion if we hope to awaken a great end-time army!

Several years ago in Colorado, the Lord directed me very urgently to learn how to walk in extreme humility and extreme boldness at the same time. It was a full year of intense prayer and discovery—a personal school of the Holy Spirit. In that school, I learned much, including this—I was not to attempt to appear humble, I was to be humble. Why was this important? Because the Elijah-level boldness that is required to impact a region would often look like anything but humility. It would appear as arrogance and selfish ambition.

We are not in a season where we need to gather around a table and water down the message in the hopes of finding common ground that results in handshakes and smiles. The message of the hour will overturn that table with violence.

I endeavor to love every person deeply, but I refuse to affirm systems, methodologies, theologies and lifestyles that are an offense to the Word of God. I will, in humility and boldness, be relentless in provoking the sleepers to awaken and those given to a lukewarm life to be shaken. Prophetic threats against human systems and unholy altars results in accusation, gossip and resistance.

"When the men of the city got up early in the morning, the altar of Baal was torn down, the Asherah pole beside it was cut down, and the second bull had been offered on the new altar that had been built. They said to each other, 'Who has done this?' When they had inquired and asked, they responded, 'Gideon son of Joash has done this.' Then the men of the city said to Joash, 'Bring out your son so that he may die, for he tore down the altar of Baal and cut down the Asherah pole beside it.' Joash then said to all who stood against him, "Would you plead for Baal? Would you save him? Whoever fights for him will be killed by morning. If Baal is a god, let him fight for himself, for someone has torn down his altar" (Judg. 6:28-31).

I know the accusations will continue, but you need to know that, if you are bold, you will provoke. You must be OK with that! Love people deeply, hate the enemy powerfully and know there will be a crisis in the middle as God, people and demons step into the ring. Don't wrestle against flesh and blood! Be innocent! But don't presume a passive spirit is the same thing as a humble spirit.

The assault against the prayer movement is extreme and we must advance against the spirit of the age with fire in our veins and tears in our eyes.

Camaro Highs and Lows - by Barry Kluczyk

Found here. (dead link)

-------------------------------
Contrasting the best and worst from the first five generations of Chevy’s iconic performer

With the introduction of the sixth-generation Camaro, it’s worth looking back over the car’s long, storied history to contrast the milestones that helped make it an automotive icon with a few of the admitted misfires. It all weaves a colorful and important tapestry for a car that is inextricably linked with American culture and affordable, attainable performance. We’ve selected 10 highlights and lowlights; so let’s get started.

 
High: Camaro goes on sale on September 29, 1966, and is an instant success, racking up 220,906 sales in its first model year – including 602 built with a special handling package known by the order code Z/28.

The Camaro debuted in late 1966 to enthusiastic Baby Boomers clamoring for Chevy’s entry in the all-new “ponycar” segment. More than 220,000 were sold in the first year.

 
Low: For the sake of development expediency and production value (read: low cost), the original Camaro is based on the existing Chevy II architecture. It wasn’t a sports car, but then again, neither was the Falcon platform on which the original Mustang was built. So there.

First-year Camaros featured a single-leaf rear suspension design that hobbled performance. This RS/SS owner is clearly calling the dealer to ask about axlehop during her stoplight-to-stoplight run-ins with Mustangs and Barracudas.

 
High: Camaro paces the Indianapolis 500 for the first time on May 30, 1967, and again on May 30, 1969. Production replicas of the 1969 models, with their distinctive Hugger Orange stripes and orange houndstooth interiors, go on to become iconic examples of the Camaro’s first generation and remain popular collector models.

.
Chevrolet built 3,675 convertible replicas of the 1969 Camaro Indy Pace Car, some with 350 engines and others with the 396. All wore Hugger Orange stripes and interior trim. It would be the final year for Camaro convertibles for more than 15 years.

 
Low: Camaro convertible production ceases after 1969 and won’t return until 1987.

Working in conjunction with Chevrolet Racing Director Vince Piggins, Bill “Grumpy” Jenkins helped establish the Camaro’s racing cred on the dragstrip. It is believed this car may have been the first Camaro built with the L78-code 396 engine, rated at 375 hp. Regardless, it’s a piece of drag racing history.

 
High: Camaro’s racing legacy starts strongly on the dragstrip and road course with Bill “Grumpy” Jenkins claiming the 1967 NHRA Super Stock championship in his all-new, L78 396-powered Camaro, and Penske-backed Camaros driven by Mark Donohue ripping through SCCA’s Trans-Am series. Donohue was the winningest driver in 1968 and 1969, claiming the unofficial driver championships. They weren’t officially awarded until 1971, which Donohue won.

 
After an inauspicious start with the 1967 Camaro, the Penske racing team experimented with a lightweight body using acid-dipped sheetmetal. It worked, and the car was updated with 1968 Camaro body components in an effort to field two cars at the Sebring 12-hour race that year. This car, owned by Patrick Ryan, has been restored to its 1968 Sebring appearance, where it won the Trans-Am class and finished Third overall.

Low: Bill Jenkins switched to a Vega in 1972, ultimately revolutionizing NHRA Pro Stock with a 1974 model featuring a purpose-built chassis with a strut-type suspension. It would become the blueprint for Pro Stock race cars – and it was a Vega, not a Camaro. Mark Donohue also ditched the Camaro and drove an AMC Javelin when he won the championship in 1971.

 
High: Second-generation Camaro debuts in 1970 with an all-new, purpose-built architecture shared by no other vehicle in Chevy’s lineup. It was also the pinnacle for second-gen performance, with the 360hp LT-1 engine in the Z28 and 375 hp from the available 396 big-block (it really displaced 402 cubes).

 
With solid lifters, an aggressive camshaft, and a stout 11:1 compression ratio, the 1970 Z28’s LT-1 engine represented the pinnacle of performance for second-gen Camaros. They are fairly rare these days. Fewer than 9,000 of the nearly 125,000 1970 Camaros built were Z28s.

Low: Industry-wide regulatory changes cause precipitous drops in compression ratios and consequently power ratings by 1971 – a factor exacerbated by a change from gross power ratings to more realistic net ratings. The LT-1’s horsepower rating therefore drops from 360 to 275 hp. The big-block exited the scene after 1972. The muscle car era was over.

 
High: For 1975, organizers of the International Race of Champions replace Porsche race cars with identically prepared Camaro race cars. Camaros would be used in the series from 1975-’80 and 1984-’89 (the series wasn’t run from 1981-83). The popularity of the IROC series eventually drove Chevrolet to release the IROC-Z model in 1985.

 
The Camaro was a track star in the IROC racing series from the mid-1970s through late-1980s. The series featured identically prepared race cars driven by the best drivers from different forms of racing, from open-wheel and Sprint cars to NASCAR.

Low: Camaro V-8 output bottoms out in 1981 with an anemic 267ci (4.3L) version of the small-block rated at a measly 115 hp and 200 lb-ft of torque. It was also the year Chevy Chase did the flick Modern Problems and the national unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. In other words, it was a tough year.

 
The Camaro’s popularity exploded through the mid- and latter-parts of its second generation, even though performance dropped like the watermelons off the roof in an old David Letterman bit. This ’76 Camaro is wheezing its way up the mountain, pulling every lb-ft out of its 140hp 305 small-block.

 
High: Camaro production hits its all-time high in 1979, with 282,571 – including nearly 85,000 Z28 models. Wow. Numbers like that today would make the Camaro one of the best-selling cars in the industry.

 
The Camaro helped define the late 1970s and sales reached their all-time high in 1979, at 282,571. Nearly 85,000 of them were Z28s. Most ended up on the cover of Car Craft.

Low: Jeff Spicoli (Sean Penn) wrecks Charles Jefferson’s (Forest Whitaker) 1979 Z28 while cruising with Jefferson’s brother in the classic 1982 movie Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Not to worry, though. He can fix it. His father is a television repairman with the ultimate set of tools.

 
At least one of the nearly 85,000 1979 Z28s built was sacrificed for cinematic art in Fast Times at Ridgemont High, when Jeff Spicoli’s time at the wheel ended in disaster – although he offered to fix it with his father’s “TV repairman” tools. More than 30 years later, we have to ask: What the heck is a TV repairman?

High: All-new, third-generation Camaro introduces a radical redesign in 1982 that would help define the high-tech cultural aesthetic of the decade. The 1982 Z28 was the first American production car to incorporate ground effects in its design and all models incorporated modern strut-type front suspensions. It was also named the Motor Trend Car of the Year.

 
The third-generation Camaro was a radical departure that, like the preceding generation, would help define the culture of its decade. It was also designed as more of a true performance car, with a greater emphasis on aero and a more responsive suspension system, including rack-and-pinion steering and a strut-type front suspension.

Low: Yes, Virginia, they made four-cylinder Camaros from 1982-86 – and the less said about those Iron Duke-derived anchors, the better. Output ranged from a struggling 88 hp to a lackluster 92 hp.

 
Behold the glory of the four-cylinder third-gen Camaro powerplant – and we use “power” subjectively. The 151-cubic-inch Iron Duke derivative was offered in carbureted and throttle-body injection versions, but none cracked the 100-horsepower threshold. Sad.

High: The Gen III small-block V-8 known as the LS1 is introduced in the 1998 Z28 and SS models, ushering in a new era in high performance. It’s hard to understate the impact the LS1 and the subsequent members of the LS engine family have had on the automotive performance world. They have fundamentally changed the way hobbyists and racers alike approach performance and established new benchmarks for streetable performance cars. Seriously.

 
The LS1 engine, introduced in the Camaro in 1998, returned a level of performance that hadn’t been seen since the heyday of the muscle car. Better still, it responded to upgrades such as camshafts and cylinder head porting like a fedora-wearing hipster let loose in a vinyl-only record store.

Low: The LS1 is not enough to save sinking Camaro sales. They bottom out at only 29,009 worldwide in 2001 and GM pulls the plug on the F-body on August 27, 2002, ending production after 35 years. Bummer.

 
The Camaro’s timeline came to a temporary end in 2002, when production ended after 35 years. This is the very last fourth-gen Camaro built, and it is part of GM’s collection of historic vehicles.

High: Chevrolet shows a retro-styled Camaro concept vehicle at the 2006 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, previewing the 2010 production model that would go on to become a cultural icon through channels such as the Transformers movies. It also proved to be the right car at the right time, as Gen 5 sales have exceeded 500,000 and outpaced Mustang for four straight years. USA-1, indeed.

 
Chevrolet signaled the Camaro’s return with a decidedly retro interpretation introduced as a concept vehicle in 2006. The production Gen 5 model would thankfully be executed almost identically to this dramatic, expressive concept.

Low: Not that we’re complaining or anything, but the production Gen 5 Camaro debuted on the porky side; and its junk in the trunk made handling and overall performance a bit less than sharp or exhilarating. Outward visibility wasn’t so hot, either. Hey, we’re still fans, but just sayin’.

 
The Gen 5 Camaro was a sales and cultural phenomenon, helped in no small part by its role in the Transformers movies. Chevrolet even built a Transformers Edition in 2010.

High: The Gen 5 Camaro Z/28. Yes, the SS, 1LE, and supercharged ZL1 are mucho terrifico, but the Z/28’s driving experience is from another plane of existence – and comparing it with other Camaro models is like comparing the Millennium Falcon with a Cessna 172. It’s that good. In fact, in a Motor Trend comparison that helped solidify the Z/28’s position as the magazine’s 2014 Best Driver’s Car – the first American car so-awarded – it was pitted against a Nissan GT-R Track Edition and a Porsche 911 Turbo S. The rear-wheel-drive Z/28 lapped the track faster than both all-wheel-drive competitors, prompting the editors to proclaim, “It stands as one of the absolutely best track-focused cars in the world.”

 
Chevrolet showed the Transformers movie cars at the Gen 6 reveal event in Detroit, in May 2015.

Low: 2015 was the final year for the Gen 5 Z/28, and there ain’t one on the docket for 2016. Get one now while you can.

 
The Camaro Z/28 returned to its road course roots in the fifth generation and the result was nothing short of spectacular, amazing, and all the other superlatives one could pry out of a thesaurus. Its track-ready suspension and 505hp LS7 engine compose a literally world-beating combination – and represents Chevrolet at its very best.

9 Sins the Church Is Okay With - by Frank Powell

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.
---------------------------------

This feels to me like an attempt to include things that are not really sin, with a pop psychology spin. Admittedly there are some sins here, but most are states of mind that may be damaging in some way, but are not sin. This has the effect of cheapening real sin by including contemporary cultural viewpoints in the absence of Scriptural condemnations.

I've included an occasional Scripture that either refutes the claim or explains another dimension of the supposed "sin."

Read on:
---------------------------------

Are we changing the Bible to fit our culture or are we changing our culture to fit the Bible?


I was in an engineering class the first time I watched the tragic explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger. Even though I wasn’t alive when it happened, I caught a glimpse of the horror thousands must have felt as the events unfolded.

And, the first question everyone wanted to know was, “What happened?”

After months of investigation, here’s what the Rogers Commission (the group commissioned to investigate the explosion) discovered: an o-ring seal in the right solid rocket booster failed at take-off. I won’t bore you with the details, but an o-ring is a small device relative to the size of a space shuttle. Very small.

It wasn’t something huge, like a puncture in the rocket booster or a hole in the cabin, that caused this disaster. It was a small, seemingly insignificant, o-ring failure.

I think there’s a lesson here for the church. What if the big sins, you know the ones you try hardest to avoid, aren’t the greatest threat to your joy and the church’s mission?

Maybe it’s the sins lying underneath, the ones considered normal or acceptable, the ones going undetected, that are affecting the church the most. I want to address 9 of these sins.

1.) FEAR

The phrases “do not fear” and “do not be afraid” appear 365 times in the Bible. Ironic? I think not. And here’s what I think the church misses about fear. Let me pose this as a question. What is the opposite of fear? Courage? Bravery? William Wallace?

Wrong. Wrong. And right, but you’re ruining my point.

The opposite of fear is…LOVE. Add to this the reality that God is love. So, according to the Transitive property of mathematics, the opposite of fear is…God.

If you’re a child of God, the one sin that shouldn’t plague you is…fear.

Yet, Christians are the most fearful people on earth. Even our salvation is rooted in fear. Does it bother anyone that the primary method of bringing people to Jesus has been to scare them away from hell?

That’s fear language, the antithesis of God. Look at what John says.

There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.1 John 4:18

The church is scared to make decisions out of fear. Christians are hesitant to step into dangerous situations out of fear. The catalyst for our obedience is fear. Where’s the love?

Several weeks ago, I decided to remove the words “fear, scared, and terrified” from my vocabulary. Maybe you should do the same. It could change how you see the world. And God.

(Ph. 2:12 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed — not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence — continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling...

Ep. 6:5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear...

1Pe. 1:17 Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear.)

2.) APATHY

Apathy’s best friends are passivity and entitlement. Together, they’re a vicious threesome.

There’s nothing mediocre or normal about God. His power is beyond comprehension. His beauty is beyond description. His love is beyond measure. The same God who created the universe and formed stars desires a relationship with you.

Yet, the attitude is often, “Okay, God loves me. That’s great. What’s for lunch?” No. You don’t get it, bro. God loves you. And you’re content with, “That’s great.”

What?!

Our apathetic approach to God explains a lot about why people in America aren’t lining up to become Christians.

I mean, think about it. How many Christians have you met that left you thinking, “Wow, I want to be like them?” But this should be the norm, right? Am I way off here? Shouldn’t you be so transformed by God that people want to ask about your life, even if they hate God?

In Scripture, when men and women truly experience God, everything changes. Everything. So, that begs the question, “Have you experienced God?”

3.) GLUTTONY

In my younger days, I would literally eat myself sick. I mean, if I ordered food, I ate all of it. Period. Naturally, this presented a problem when I ate buffets.

Looking back, I see that my attitude was gluttonous. And the gluttony wasn’t that I ate myself sick. It was that I used a gift God gave me on myself…in excess.

Gluttony is primarily about the heart. It’s a craving for excess. Gluttony says, “Those voids God is supposed to fill…don’t worry about that. I will fill them.” Gluttony happens when you lose your awe of God. You see, as long as your eyes are fixed on Jesus, your heart’s desire is for him.

Is the world not desperate for this message? As we gorge our stomachs with food and flood our houses with trinkets, our discontent only increases.

Where are the Jesus followers who will fix their eyes completely on him, throwing away anything that treads the line between want and need? Where are the Christians who will feast in excess on God?

4.) WORRY

Worrying gives you something to do, but it doesn’t get you anywhere.

The great philosopher Van Wilder once said, “Worrying is like a rocking chair. It gives you something to do, but it doesn’t get you anywhere.” That’s right. But Van Wilder isn’t the only one who talked about worry. Jesus said you shouldn’t worry about anything (Matt. 6:25-34). But Jesus wasn’t serious was he? I mean, really Jesus? Anything?

He was serious. You see, worrying is symptomatic of a larger issue…lack of faith. And for followers of Jesus whose primary mission is to show the glory and nature of God to the world, worrying is a problem.

Recently, I asked a good friend why worry plagues the church, and he said something profound, “My greatest concern is that we don’t want to need God. We’re Americans. We’re independent.”

That’s hard-hitting stuff right there.

Americans will do anything to maintain the illusion of control and responsibility, so no wonder worry plagues us. Worry is the by-product of bearing a weight only God can bear.

Do you see the irony here? The more independence you desire, the more worry you will experience. So, why not give everything to God and let his peace reign over your life?

5.) FLATTERY

I erased this like five times, but God kept telling me to put it back. So, I did. With hesitancy. I love you, God.

I like performing. I always have. And while there’s nothing wrong with the spotlight, there’s a lot wrong with making yourself the center of it.

If your identity is tied to man’s praise, you’ll be eternally discontent.

If your identity is tied to man’s praise, you’ll be eternally discontent. People are fickle. They’re here today and gone tomorrow. They’re for you one day, against you the next. They love you when you agree with them, dislike you when you don’t.

Yet, we love human praise, at least I do. Exhibit A: Instagram, SnapChat, and Facebook. While I love social media, they’re also platforms that perpetuate flattery. You post pictures about your life hoping the world will “like” it. Who cares if it’s not the real you? You need the approval. So, even if you need 30 minutes to find that perfect selfie, it’s worth the time.

Jesus, however, didn’t need the praise and glory of men. He didn’t care what they thought. His only concern was doing the will of God. This attitude is what the world is desperate to see.

It’s hard to point people to Jesus if you need their approval.

Let’s be honest, it’s hard to point people to Jesus if you need their approval.

And when you need the approval of others, your life will have more ups and downs than the Goliath at Six Flags in Atlanta.

I rode that beast. I know.

6.) COMFORT

Comfort might be the patriarch of the “church approved” sins family. When the church becomes comfortable, Christianity starts to die.

Christians must be extremely intentional with their thoughts and actions to avoid comfort. If not, you become resistant to change. You start making secondary issues primary. You begin to see the mission as catering to insiders rather than reaching outsiders.

And here’s the thing about the sin of comfort. Once it shows up, it’s extremely difficult to remove. When you challenge comfort, people don’t just get angry. They get fightin’ mad. Comfort will even tell you to crucify an innocent man.

The church can’t be missional and comfortable at the same time.

The church can’t be missional and comfortable at the same time. It’s time to make a decision.

(Mt. 5:4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.

1Co. 14:3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort.

2Co. 1:4 who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God.

7.) CONSUMERISM

I grew up watching Sesame Street. My favorite character?…Cookie Monster. I felt like we were the same person. And what I mean is we both loved cookies. I would often go around the house saying, “Gimme da cookies.”

It never worked.

Many Christians are like Cookie Monster. Their mantra is, “Gimme more…well anything. Just give me more. More. More. More.”

The essence of this sin is a false understanding of God, that God is a taker. But nothing could be further from the truth. God is a giver. He’s the Giver. And, as a man or woman created in his image, you should be a giver.

So, what are you creating? What are you giving back to the world? What are giving back to others?

8.) PATRIOTISM

Cue the nasty e-mails. Maybe it’s just me, but I can’t picture Jesus waving an American flag while showing off his “I love ‘Merica” tattoo. Jesus wasn’t against the government. In fact, if you’re a Jesus follower, the Bible calls you to pray for your nation and for your leaders (1 Tim. 2:1-4). But Jesus was very clear about how God’s name would become famous throughout the world…the church. Not the government. Not a nation. The church.

When your allegiance is torn between your country and your God, American ideals begin to shape your faith more than God. And you transpose American values onto God, believing God would be an American and think like an American.

Celebrate American values. That’s great. But, at the end of the day, your citizenship is not with America. It’s in heaven.

9.) LYING

If gluttony is the elephant in the room everyone sees, but no one talks about, lying is the elephant in the room no one sees. Lying is so socially acceptable, even in Christian circles, that it often goes undetected. We’re desensitized to it.

And here’s why this is dangerous for Christians.

There’s a rarely-discussed passage in Matthew 5:33-37 where Jesus confronts the Pharisees about oaths. Most Americans only hear the word oath when a celebrity lies in court (under oath). But Jesus isn’t talking about oaths in this passage.

He’s talking about INTEGRITY.

Here’s what Jesus is saying. You should live with such high integrity that your word doesn’t need attachments to make it legitimate. So, typical phrases like, “I promise,” “I swear,” and “I put it on my mom’s grave” should never come from your mouth.

“Frank, c’mon on man. Are you interpreting that correctly? Say you promise.”

These words are a kick in the pants, right? If you’re like me, you say things all the time and never follow through. You lie to make yourself sound better. You lie to stay out of trouble. You lie to get ahead. Sometimes you lie just to lie.

Jesus says there’s no place for that if you’re a Christian. Your word matters. If you say something, God expects you to do it. It’s better to tell the truth and lose your job than lie and keep it.

How serious is this? Jesus says anything more than our word is from the evil one, Satan. That’s real.

______________

Sometimes the undetected sins are the most toxic. My hope is you will see this as an opportunity to grow. I also realize there are some “church approved” sins I didn’t mention. It’s your turn.

How Do We Get People to Care About Climate Change? - by Richard Schiffman

Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.

--------------------------------

Actually, the title should be, "How do we get people to care about what we care about?"

Dr. Stoknes has created his categories for our supposed psychological state. Apparently there is no principled opposition, no contrary evidence, and no other reason at all to deny climate change besides having a psychological condition.

This makes for some truly clueless at-a-distance psychoanalysis.

Read on:
--------------------------------

This interview first appeared at the Yale Environment 360 blog.

Per Espen Stoknes, a Norwegian psychologist and economist, has been doing a lot of thinking about a question that has bedeviled climate scientists for years: Why have humans so far failed to deal with the looming threat posed by climate change?

That question is the focus of his recent book, What We Think About When We Try Not To Think About Global Warming, in which he analyzes what he calls the five psychological barriers that have made it difficult to deal realistically with the climate crisis.

Those include: the distant nature of the problem (it’s far off in time and often in other parts of the globe); the doom-and-gloom scenarios about the impacts of climate change, which make people feel powerless to do anything about it; and the psychological defenses that people have to avoid feeling guilty about their own contributions to fossil fuel emissions.

In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Stoknes — who co-founded three clean energy companies and helps lead the BI Center for Climate Strategy at the Norwegian Business School — talks about these barriers and about how the discussion of climate change needs to be reframed. “We need a new kind of stories,” he says, “stories that tell us that nature is resilient and can rebound and get back to a healthier state, if we give it a chance to do so.”

Yale Environment 360: Scientists and journalists have been warning us for years about climate change. But you say the message is not getting across. Why not? (Let's see if he can tell us. If he can't, will tell the real reasons.

You know, I will say right now that I doubt he has ever talked to a dissenting scientist. I doubt he has done anything except sit in his ivory tower and psychoanalyze people he has never met.)

Yale Environment 360Per Espen Stoknes: My work starts with what I call the psychological climate paradox. Long-term surveys show that people were more concerned with climate change in wealthy democracies 25 years ago than they are today. So the more science, the more Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments we have, the more the evidence accumulates, the less concerned the public is. To the rational mind this is a complete mystery. (Those who dissent are irrational. Because SCIENCE. SCIENCE will be capitalized here on out, to note the appeal to superior credentials of SCIENTISTS as it applies to the unquestioning obedience of the "low class." 

And here we have the first reason dissenters dissent, unaccounted for by Dr. Stoknes. The imperious arrogance of those who are apologists for climate change is palpable. These SCIENTISTS can't comprehend why people don't like them, they don't understand why people don't accept them, the don't get why people dismiss them. 

The reason is, they presume to not only know exactly what the climate is doing and why, they also know exactly what you should be forced to do as a result. And they know for certain that everyone else are idiots or apologists for Big Oil. This un-nuanced, narrow view of the issue, where SCIENTISTS expect to be able to implement their solutions without being questioned, is pompous and presumptive.)    

CORPORATE WELFARE IN CALIFORNIA - by Robert Reich

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.

---------------------------------------

Dr. Reich can't seem to get past his leftist rose-colored glasses. Dr. Reich notes that in California there was a property tax freeze years ago, which benefited existing companies who already owned property. Apparently, companies which purchase property later are not treated the same, and thus do not enjoy this freeze, instead paying current tax rates.

But rather than make it easier for new companies by lowering their taxes to the same level, he wants the existing companies to pay more! This can only be the conclusion if you're a leftist, because to them more tax on business is always good.

But it's not. Higher taxes on business means higher prices on the products we buy, less hiring, less innovation, and less business expansion. When government decides it is entitled to bigger and bigger portions of the revenue of a company, it has in effect decided that it can spend the company's money better than the company can.

And we note once again, as we have explained many times before, that companies really doesn't pay any tax, no matter how much money the government takes from them. We, the end consumer, pay all business taxes in the form of the price of the products we purchase. Taxes are a business expense that gets passed down to us.

Read on:

-------------------------------

Poster: Equality doesn't mean treating everyone the same

Found on FB recently.

This really gives some insight into the leftist mindset. We do realize it is not intended to be a nuanced position on equality vs. sameness. But we can analyze it for what it does say and for what it assumes. 

This is what we shall do.

First, we need to note that the topic is not about status, it is about treatment; that is, how do we ("we" always means government) treat people. For this meme, "treatment" is a function of government, not how people should treat each other. It's all about the amount stuff government gives people. 

The side labeled "same treatment" means everyone gets one box from government. None of the people are standing on the ground, they all get something, the same thing, from government. 

The point of the picture is "same treatment" does not yield "equality," which means government needs to change (redistribute) the number of boxes each person gets.

So the side labeled "equality" takes away the tall man's box and gives it to the short woman. The tall man apparently doesn't need any help at all, but the short woman needs more help. So government makes things "equal." Everyone gets the same result, as opposed to receiving the same government beneficence. 

By this measure, different treatment is justified. The tall man is privileged, so government is justified in taking his box and giving it to another it deems more worthy. 

But as we mentioned, everyone started with a government box. No one was standing on the ground. But this isn't actually what is happening. What actually happens is that everyone should be shown as standing on the ground ("same treatment"), and then in order to make things equal ("equality") the tall man should be shown with his legs cut off and the short woman should be shown standing on the tall man's legs. 

We aren't really talking about reshuffling the stuff government gives us. No, it is about reshuffling what people own and produce by penalizing people who own and produce more.

This is a twisted view of equality. We would therefore suggest that "equality" is not everyone ending up the same. People do not deserve the same results. Differing results is the natural process of possessing differing abilities. Brain surgeons provide a rare and specialized skill set, and most likely will obtain a better result than a ditch digger. This is quite proper.

People aren't the same as far as their life outcomes, work ethic, training, and intelligence. Therefore, no one should expect the same outcomes. That is unreasonable.

Wealth redistribution is unreasonable.

A Democratic Socialist is not Marxist socialist or Communist.

Found this on FB. Commentary below.

"A Democratic Socialist is not Marxist, Socialist or Communist, A Democratic Socialist is still a capitalist, just one who seeks to restrain the self destructive excesses of capitalism and channel government's use of our tax money into creating opportunities for everyone. Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically to meet human needs, not simply to make profits for a greedy few."

Leaving aside its grammatical deficiencies, there isn't single true statement contained in this poster. Not one. The author demonstrates an appalling ignorance of politics, economics, and law in a mere two sentences. Either that, or the author is deliberately attempting to obfuscate, as socialists are wont to do. This is known as agitprop. 

Either way, we cannot allow this mess to pass without comment. Here we go:

The Real Reason the Pentecostal Movement Keeps Growing - by ED STETZER

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. Interesting article.

--------------------------------------

There are parts of the globe where the greatest church growth is happening through the Pentecostal movement. One of the most frequently asked questions is: "In a world where the church seems to be declining in many areas, how they are bucking the trend?"

There is never one reason why a movement succeeds. But some factors rise to the surface. Pentecostals will say they are growing because the Spirit is moving in a powerful way. I get that, and actually would affirm that as part of the reason, but from a sociological perspective, other things are happening and worth exploring.

I was recently asked (by Pentecostal leaders) what some sociological reasons might be. So following that meeting, and in this brief post, I want to explore how the beliefs of Pentecostals actually promote and produce growth compared to other more "mainstream" groups.

Pentecostals Value Their Shared Experience
From a statistical perspective, Pentecostals tend to be less "nominal" than other believers. The reason is often obvious—the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

In almost all Pentecostalism (as contrasted to other continualist streams), speaking in tongues follows the Holy Spirit's baptism. After that experience, it's hard to say, "Oh I don't take this whole thing serious, I don't even know if it's real."

When you believe you're speaking in another language, that belief reshapes the way you think about faith!

Being a nominal Presbyterian, Methodist or Baptist is easier, though there are some outward expectations, like baptism (among credobaptists), that can mark a spiritual commitment. But Pentecostal believers and churches constantly emphasize spiritual practice and engagement.

That helps make a more robust faith.

So more often than not, stagnation is not as compatible with a real Spirit-filled experience. The end result—it's harder to be a nominal Pentecostal—the beliefs of the movement tend to weed out nominalism. Because of what is happening in church and the community of faith, people tend not to just hang around as casual observers.

Either you join in it, or you move on. Many join. Movements populated by nominals are usually in decline. Nominals don't populate Pentecostalism, so it grows.

Pentecostals Want to Share Their Values
Not only does a valued distinctive encourage participation and growth in the local body, but it also provides an imperative for growth outside of the local body. When you appreciate what you have as much as Pentecostals do, you aren't satisfied to experience it yourself. You think others should have the same opportunity to partake of the movement of the Spirit of God.

When I meet with Pentecostal leaders, they're strategizing about where to plant a church. They break out the maps and determine where they need to focus their attention.

Never mind there are already six churches in a 10-block community. To them, there's not a Spirit-filled church in that community until they plant one. So they are often avid planters, not just in their own area, but also around the world.

The Outrageous Ascent of CEO Pay - Robert Reich

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.

------------------------------

Dr. Reich applauds the invasion of the SEC into the private, legal operations of corporations. For what purpose? The only possible reason for government involvement is for future government regulation. We know that mandating disclosure is always the prelude to mandating practices. 

We see this over and over in leftist activism. They are never content with simply pointing out the object of their ire. They always undertake to force compliance with their viewpoint. If they can't do it through boycott and hyperbole, they will invoke government. 

Dr. Reich also makes some truly outlandish claims about CEOs and their value.

Read on:
--------------------------------

Openly defying and brazenly disrespecting your president, while hoping that he fails...

Um, no. Treason:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

And from the Constitution itself:

Article III, Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

This Is How Much A Big Mac Would Cost If The Minimum Wage Was $15 - BY BRYCE COVERT

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.
------------------------------------

The Left typically engages in simplistic analysis when it comes to economics, and this article is no exception. 

McDonalds sells about 225 million burgers world wide per year, with more than a third sold in the US. That's about 75 million burgers. With a $15/hr. minimum wage, employee expense would increase by about $8 billion in the US. Doing the math, that's an astounding $106 per burger. Obviously there are more elements at work, but the price per burger will certainly not increase by the author's stated $.17.

At least the author acknowledges that the wage increase will increase the cost of the product, which is something the Left usually doesn't want to admit. Thus, we can assert the wage increase is nothing more than an indirect tax. And the Left loves raising taxes, especially on eeevil big corporations.

Left out of the author's discussion is the impact on small businesses and mom-and-pop operations. That's on purpose, I'm sure. Because the impact will be devastating, forcing small businesses to scale back or close. In other words, the Left is in favor of shutting down small business in favor of hated big corporations, because big corporations more easily can absorb these kinds of costs. Ironic.

Read on:

---------------------------------

Letter writer wrongly maligned Planned Parenthood - By Eveline Damiano

Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.
------------------------------------

First, the letter Ms. Damiano is responding to: