Join us this week as Steve Bremner interviews Shaun Wissmann, a fellow missionary to Chorrillos, Peru. In this first part of Shaun’s story, he shares his childhood and adolescence, and the lifestyle of drugs and alcohol and spending time in in-patient treatment, all by the age of 17. God has done a radical work in Shaun’s life, and we encourage you to give this a listen and not miss the conclusion next week.

Shaun and Amanda’s site: CalledtoPeru.org. Visit this post in particular for more of a write-up of some of what Shaun shared in these podcasts.

Shaun’s posts on Theology21.com.

Get a free audio book at audibletrial.com/Fireonyourhead

If you’d like to subscribe to the Fire On Your Head Podcast, visit our directory in iTunes, or visit FireOnYourHead.com for more subscription options.

If you’re wondering what the title is all about, let me tell you about my other site, Fire Press.  Yesterday I published a guest post by fellow revival grad and blogger, Joshua Burton.  We only know each other through the internet, and social media, but have a lot in common.  As he mentions in the beginning of the post, an ex-professor of ours at FIRE School of Ministry had posted a Facebook note about how he’d heard of some church worship music leaders getting drunk and dropping F-bombs.  I had made a comment on the note, it had gotten shared over 60 times, and had lots of likes and comments.

A week or two later, Josh tagged me in a note he wrote about his thoughts on the matter, and I knew I had to share it on Fire Press as soon as I was done reading it, and he gave me permission when I asked him about it.  I knew it would resonate with people, but it also helped give a record amount single-day traffic to the site.  So that’s a bonus.

If you haven’t read it I encourage you to.  However, doing so is not necessary for hearing my thoughts, which are more of a response to the matter.

A Matter of Building Electric Fences

Guilt, deception, shame, and the use of the skills and materials from the world around them (clothing made of fig leaves in this case) replaced the security they had known by learning of the world and themselves under the shadow of the love of God.  Their sense of identity forever shifted from listening to God and the world He gave them, to listening to a fearful voice within themselves that spoke of shame, guilt, and the need to control and use the world to hide their insecurity.

Earlier this year I started–and abandoned as I often seem to do– a series on electric fences that Christians erect around each other.  I’m not about to defend cussing (I don’t think highly of Christians who do it), nor am I about to defend drinking, since, I don’t do it, but don’t see it as sin at all.  Drunkenness, yes, drinking at all, no.  But I couldn’t help but think, and so does Josh in his post, that an awful lot of the standards we use to judge each other with are man-made or self-made.

Sure, the Bible is clear on plenty of holiness matters and their particulars.  That’s not what I’m saying or talking about.  But oftentimes we make our own classifications of what is acceptable and what is problematic.  We erect electric fences to place around each other because we don’t seem to actually want to give the Holy Spirit room to bring people into proper holiness Himself, like he’s perfectly capable of doing.  Instead, we need to create the lines and assume if people cross our lines in the sand, they aren’t holy, or committed or they’re in compromise or whatever the case may be.  We forget He not only doesn’t need our help at all, but, we can’t do it better than Him like some of us seem to think!

Josh goes on to nail it further when he says;

The greater tragedy is that many have become so deafened by the voice of spiritual judgment, that they associate it with the voice of God, and believe that in sharing it they are doing the work of God.

Unfortunately that’s the case, isn’t it?  We forget that Satan tends to beat up and puke on us.  He pushes.  The Holy Spirit leads, and encourages.  Most of us don’t seem to understand the difference, sadly enough.   We’re so used to having the devil puke on us and tell us through our own mind or other peoples’ voices that we don’t measure up or aren’t doing enough of this or that, that we easily assume it’s the Holy Spirit.  We know we need to change.  We know we have issues, and that can’t be argued with, so since we’re already working on something in our lives we want to change or wish we had power to overcome, we assume that voice is the Holy Spirit “convicting” us.

I’m of the opinion so many believers don’t actually commune as much with Him as they claim to on the outside.  You may think, because I’m not worked up about something that you are, that I in fact don’t commune with him or else “I’d be more passionate, like you are”.  That’s fine by me.  I still personally think too many don’t fully recognize the true voice of their Shepherd, and therefore so easily fall prey to other counterfeit voices that sound correct because the data is correct, because, correct–I do need to put away this or give up that.  Since we’re not following the Shepherd’s voice directly, we become a people who need rules and regulations to tell us what we’re supposed to look like and behave like.  We accept and impose on one another a codified religion, so we know where the electric fences are that we’re to avoid, because it’s much easier obeying externals than listening to that still small voice for ourselves.

From personal experience, and just plain my ever-developing understanding of the Scriptures and Holy Spirit Himself, He operates a lot more with incentives, not guilt trips.  He’s a lot more invitational into holiness, rather than kicking me like some other believers believe He does, for not walking holy enough already.

If more Christians would start walking in complete love, the more excellent way, instead of the ‘electric fence’ building way we’ve gone about things, I really think we could see a real revolution and evolution in the way we grow and become an organism the outside watching world would be more easily enticed to join.

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17)

I was conflicted if it’s appropriate to take this text and apply it to our daily lives on a practical level, or leave it the way it is realizing this is a text talking about grievous sin.  But, this is probably the most straightforward text in the entirety of the Scriptures about interpersonal conflicts and how believers are to handle them.  Yet it also portrays a system that I never rarely see followed, as gossiping and backbiting seems to take the form many Christians resort to instead, whenever they have a problem with another believer or group.  The principles laid out in this particular Scripture are for when a serious offense has occurred, where witnesses are required.  But based on the totality of Scriptures, we already know the principle here is that you speak to someone, not everybody else about someone. Consider Matthew 5:23:24;

So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you,  leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

Jesus was teaching these things to Jewish listeners, who were still going to temple, and leaving gifts on the altar.  We don’t do that under the new covenant, but the principle we glean from it is how to reconcile with our brothers and sisters in Christ first rather than going through pious motions of external religiosity.  So we may be dealing with a passage that I’ll cover more in depth in the next upcoming post, but for today I thought I’d share my thoughts and a personal experience that has caused me to be more careful not to fall into the trap of skipping the first step, talking to the original offender.

When “Getting Someone’s Advice” Borders On Gossipping

I see it happen all the time, whether I’m made the recipient of someone’s gossip about someone else or whenever I’m told “those people [insert denomination or belief system here] do this, or believe that”, I try to catch it and ask the person “have you talked to them for yourself or have you merely heard that?”  When people tell me a problem they have with someone, I’ve been known to say “have you talked to them about it before coming to me?”  If they say no, then I say something like “well, then I’m giving you 48 hours to do so or else I’ll tell them myself that you’ve come to me about them behind their back.”

I’m hardly ever made the recipient of anybody’s gossip anymore as a result.  Go figure.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m just as guilty as anybody for falling to this trap, and have had it bite me in the butt when people I’ve spoken about have found out.  In recent months I’ve had people point out when I was slipping down that slope.  But in the last several years of my life I’ve become a lot more careful at trying to avoid talking about any of my problems with other people TO other people–you know, different ‘other’ people who are not involved or don’t need to be involved.  At least not until or unless I’ve spoken to the original person first.  If that’s not possible, then I resort to other communication like email to the offending person.  Again, I’m not perfect but still learning.

Nobody likes finding out everybody’s mad at them about something, but nobody has the guts (or character) to tell you gently to their face, as per the instructions in Matthew 18:15-17.

Why This Matters To Me a Great Deal

When I was 20 years old I was living in Pensacola, Florida attending Bible School, I experienced something like this on the receiving end that rattled my cage enough that I learned to try not doing the same to anybody else.  During the Christmas break I’d stayed in town while many of my classmates went home.  I was talking over instant messenger with a friend who was offended with me regarding something I felt at the time was not a concern to him; that I shouldn’t have received financial aid from the school for my next semester’s tuition because “it’s for people who need it”–I felt I needed it, applied, and the powers that be decided I could use some, and paid 3/4 of my tuition for me that next semester.  This brother for whatever reasons felt I shouldn’t have done that, because in his mind I wasn’t entitled to any.  That was what we were talking about when the conversation changed.

After reading all of his answers (this was over IM, remember) I politely tried following Matthew 18, and telling him one on one I thought he was being out of line and fairly unreasonable, and that he should back off and not worry about this particular thing. It had been something I felt like I should say, for a number of weeks already, and now this moment seemed to me–at least at the time–to be a moment that made it more obvious to do so.  I approached it by trying to articulate he had an immature tendency to try running other peoples’ lives (such as mine) and this was a moment where I felt he was doing that.

To my horror (at the time) he turned the tables on me, and rebuked ME in return, telling me basically “everybody” thinks I’m a sarcastic jerk and I’ve made lots of people cry and go to him for advice on how to deal with me, since he was a long time friend who knew me better than everybody.  I was stunned and hurt at the same time because, now, I was thinking about myself and lost track of what I was trying to bring up in that conversation with him.

I took his accusation seriously and now felt terrible that I’d allegedly “offended so many people”.  I thought about it for days after that.  Now, don’t get me wrong, his concerns were based in truth–I still have a tendency to rub people the wrong way, I can be blunt, sarcastic, sassy, and so on and often humbling myself and apologizing to people often.  So this would be even more so true if you go back ten years in time to when I was less mature than I am now.

During that conversation I had asked this brother to give me specific examples, and he provided a few, naming names and saying what I had done in various situations.  I had asked because part of me felt he was bluffing and I wanted to catch him on it, but if this were all true, I’d go apologize to people I owed apologies to.  Or at least try to work up the courage to, since some things are easier said than done, I realize.  As a result, for the first month of my second semester, I became much more reclusive and introverted and had very little social interaction with anybody, especially at school–remember, “nobody” liked me, after all.  It bugged me so deep I even contemplated dropping out of school and going back home to Canada, as an embarrassment or failure, or both.  But I reached a breaking point when I realized this whole matter was quite a ridiculous reason to drop out of school and go home.  I was there for a reason, far away from home and when that realization overpowered how much I was hurt by the thoughts of what I needed to do to change, I took action.

The Imaginary Army of Wounded Soldiers

Finally, after I’d been stewing on this for almost or at least more than a month, I couldn’t take it anymore and the next time I saw any of the individuals my friend told me I’d offended, I approached them individually and explained why I was apologizing, and apologized.  The first brother looked at me funny, and then asked me why I thought he was offended, and seemed to not remember the incident I was apologizing for.  Then he asked me who told him that.  I told him “brother so and so”, and this friend said basically said “don’t listen to him, he’s full of crap and I’ve had to deal with stuff with him myself.”  I may be paraphrasing, but it was basically that I was not to worry about it.

That hit me like a ton of bricks.  Both because of the relief it brought, but the realization I’d been hanging on to an offense for the last month I probably didn’t need to.  Then, I had more courage to approach the next person on the list, and virtually the same thing happened, and then with person number three, the same pattern–’Steve, what are you talking about?  I don’t remember that occasion.’

Once I had realized I was letting something eat my lunch for more than a month, that was all for nothing, I approached the initial brother and brought the conversation up and told him I had spoken to each of those people.  I’m not sure whether he was embarrassed that I approached him coming out of the bathroom at school, or because I had bothered to go speak to everybody he had named.  He responded with “we’ll talk about this later.”

My response was “no, we won’t”  And rather harshly suggested not to ever bring up situations or people that had not actually been offended or angry with me unless they actually were.  I probably was frustrated enough that I didn’t share my thoughts with him in a very spiritual way, but at any rate, I felt liberated and learned a painful lesson and decided, as best as I can, I’ll try never to do to someone else what I had put myself through with a false accusation.  I’m sure I’ve fallen short, and the slippery slope into gossip is admittedly a steep one, and it’s all too easy to defend ourselves to others instead of speaking to the person we have a problem with.

But life is so much easier and enjoyable when we don’t do stuff like that, or let it rub off our shoulders if someone plays the “everybody else feels the way I do” card on us.

Questions To Ponder

Have you ever found yourself using the “everybody else feels the way I do” line when trying to rebuke someone or out of defensiveness in some situation?

Does it work or add credence to your accusation?

Has anybody ever done that to you?  How did it make you feel?

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me,  but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18:4-6) 

Today’s post was originally intended to be the second half of a previous post, Would You Cut Off Your Own Hand If Your Life Depended On It?, but it was getting long and I thought it’d be better to split it up and maybe start a series based on this part of Matthew 18 for a few posts.  If you’ve not read my previous post, it’s highly encouraged you do so before reading this because I’m building on things I laid out there.

Speedstick is NOT For Running Faster

I remember something humorous from my childhood, from when I was old enough that personal hygiene was starting to become important, around 10 or 11 years of age.  I was using Speedstick deodorant or antiperspirant (I can’t really remember which of the two it was) and my brother who is nearly 5 years my junior saw it in the bathroom, and asked my parents at the dinner table about it and what it’s for.  My dad, jokingly said “you put it on your feet and it helps you run faster.”  I was old enough to recognize that he was being facetious, but my brother was young enough that, if one of our parents said it, it’s true and he trusted them.

One weekend I was in the bathroom downstairs in our house, and I hear “swooshing” noises coming from the recreation room.  I knew it was my brother since he was down there playing with toys or something, and I decided to go have a look and see what was going on.  There, I saw him in his pyjamas, running back and forth across the room, making swooshing noises.  I knew he had put the Speedstick on his feet and was running back and forth across the room to see if it worked.  I asked him about it, kinda laughing (it was funny!) but gently enough because I knew he probably didn’t realize our dad was joking earlier.  Years later we all have had a good laugh about it.  Of course my brother claims it didn’t happen, or if it did he doesn’t remember it. Obviously, I’ve got plenty of dumb things I myself have fallen for, but I thought this was a harmless example–kids believe whatever you tell them–if they trust you, of course, and since generally they are very trusting and unassuming, they are impressionable.

Jesus told his disciples that if they wanted to be great in the kingdom of God, they had to become like a little child–contrary to what many people think, He didn’t say become childish.  What are little children like?  They are trusting.  They believe what you tell them.  Such, we are to become like in relation to God–trusting him like a child, and that if He says something, it’s true.  Period.

What Are You Causing New Believers To Believe?

If you tell a young Christian–and by young I don’t mean their age, but someone who might not have read the Word much for themselves that God doesn’t heal, because “it’s part of His plan to teach something“, you are responsible for having gotten them to believe a lie.  If you tell a new or impressionable believer they don’t need to speak in tongues or it’s not for today, you’re accountable for what you cause other little ones to accept as fact.  James 3:1 says not many of us should become teachers, because we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. Why?  Because we who teach others or have an impact on them, can change the trajectory younger believers are on, for better or worse.  You might wind up causing someone to believe they can run faster if they put deodorant under their feet.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t take that lightly.  Jesus tells us it would be much better to throw ourselves into the sea with a millstone necklace, than to cause someone to veer off in the wrong direction, or miss the intended target or destination.  Then he goes on to warn and say, if you are easily giving in to sinful temptation, you need to cut off the offending part of your life–take a drastic measure.  Both the consequences of causing someone else to drift in the wrong direction, and of not dealing with sin, result in the same extreme consequence–death.  Better to enter heaven crippled and missing one measly limb than to be thrown into hell fire while perfectly physically whole.

The word Jesus used here for ‘offense’ in the Greek is skandalon.  Many other instances in the New Testament translate this word as “stumbling block.”  Any impediment placed in the way and causing one to stumble or fall, such as a stumbling block, or an occasion of stumbling.  Like a rock which is a cause to trip over or have your path blocked.

Christians so easily recognize this passage as talking about causing someone to fall, but what about the more subtle understanding, of just putting something in someone’s way?  Like, placing something in their path so big, they have to climb over it or walk around it or if they perceive it as so insurmountable, that we slow down their progress, or they give up and turn around altogether, and backslide.  Or that they just take much longer to get to their proper destination now that something is in the way to slow them down or stop them all together?  What if we cause some kind of diversion, that prevents them from producing all the fruit the could have in their life?

Putting a stumbling block in someone’s path, or ‘scandalizing’ them, has more to do with changing someone’s trajectory than just causing them to sin.  Remember, unbelief is sin.   The path they’re on changes, even if slightly, because of the offense.  They detour, and wind up in a completely different destination than they ought to.  Because of you or I, having taught them or influenced them wrong.

Questions To Ask Yourself:

What are you responsible for causing other believers, weaker or more immature than you, to believe–whether for good or bad?

What influence are you having on others–is it for good for bad?

Are you putting stumbling blocks in others paths by your example?  By bad or incorrect doctrines or teachings?

If you’ve never had the chance to listen to it, about a year ago Dave Edwards and I did a podcast discussion, rather impromptu but Spirit-led, on the subject of “Children, Keep Yourselves From Idols” (a la 1 John 5:21)

Why it’s relevant to today’s post, is because we were having an epiphany that most bad belief systems, as well as addictions or problems, usually start early in life, or are a seed that gets planted early, when we’re the most impressionable.

In my previous post I decided to leave out the whole battle of words between Google+ and Twitter, and focus on it for a moment in just a quick OP-ED of my own in a separate post.

First, on Tuesday Google+ changed the Internet, and its competitors specifically Twitter called it “a bad day for the internet”.  Of course they did.  They have the most to lose from the move.

In a statement, Twitter complained that,

“people, publishers, news organizations and Twitter users would suffer from not being able to quickly see tweets in search results.

“As we’ve seen time and time again, news breaks first on Twitter; as a result, Twitter accounts and Tweets are often the most relevant results.”

Apparently Google used to have a paid deal to get real-time access to Twitter’s live “firehose” of tweets, and from 2009 until a year and a half later used to show these real-time results (tweets) in relevant search results.

In a statement to the site AllThingsD a Google spokesperson said:

“We want to help you find the most relevant information from your friends and social connections, no matter what site it’s on. However, Google does not have access to fully crawl the content on some sites, so it’s not possible for us to surface all that information. Ushering in the new era of social and private data search will take close cooperation, and we hope other sites participate so we can provide the best possible experience for our users.”

I personally always thought Twitter had more to lose from the existence and competition of Google+ than Facebook not because of the size of the network but the way its users use it.  I find personally Twitter to be much better for spitting out random thoughts or thought-provoking quotes quickly from my phone.  Google+ you can do that as well, only, it’s proven to be a way to find and follow more diverse groups of people with the same interest.  So, as a result, I think personally Twitter is being a bit of a big whiny baby about this. They’re just mad because frankly, Google+ is a bigger threat to them now.

I think the recent post by Anthony Myers at International Business Times, says it all, as he points out:

Google is not the only one using social network data to fine-tune its search results. Microsoft’s Bing has been adding Facebook content to search since May. Google dominates the search landscape, however, so the spotlight is on them. Twitter has also chimed in on the new search model because they say it forces their content lower down in search results.

The tallest blade of grass is the one that gets cut by the lawnmower first.  Or everybody shoots at the turkey with the tallest neck.  Whatever it is.  Also, as a famous king Solomon once said, one person’s side of the story seems right until you hear the other person’s (my paraphrase of Proverbs 18:17).  Google responded with something like :

We are a bit surprised by Twitter’s comments about Search plus Your World, because they chose not to renew their agreement with us last summer (http://goo.gl/chKwi), and since then we have observed their rel=nofollow instructions.

For those who may not know, Rel=nofollow is code that prevents search engines from following links.  Apparently, according to Google, it was Twitter who ended their previous search agreement in July, implying Twitter wanted more money and that was the reason Google backed out.  It seems subject to interpretation as to who ended what, but Google has made their public stance that it was Twitter.  Sources close to Twitter are saying that it was indeed Twitter’s own doing that the deal ended.

Twitter Took A Risk Betting On Itself, and It’s Not Working Out in The End

A new post this afternoon from TechCrunch.com contributor Josh Consttine states:

Actually, I think backing out of the Google firehose deal was a courageous move for Twitter. It showed the company was willing to bet on continued growth and making Promoted Tweets, Accounts, and Trends work as a major revenue stream. Since these sponsored content types are artificially injected into Twitter Search results and the home page, they wouldn’t have appeared in Google Search.

However, like Dustin W. Stout, I’m calling it marketing hogwash.  He points out:

“What Twitter is really mad about is that they realize that the one thing that rocketed them to success was their search– Google has now showed them who’s boss in the search game”.

Yep.

The big thing everybody seems to be forgetting, is Google, and Twitter, are BUSINESSES.  In Twitter’s case, they’ve not necessarily found a decent revenue model, while Google has.  And if social networking is going to help them increase, and they are going to use their number one asset, search, it makes sense they’ll go in the business direction they’ve gone in.  Facebook did this with Bing, and nobody seemed to care.  Now that Google, the juggernaut is doing it, people are slamming them.

If people don’t like that Google’s search results now show them ‘relevant’ content from their social network, they can always use Yahoo instead, or Bing who does the same thing with Facebook but nobody seems to be attacking them about it.

Google isn’t providing a public service.  Should it be obligated to put Twitter’s pages above its own when people are clearly searching for them?

**Featured Picture copyright http://allthingsd.com/20120110/twitter-dumps-on-google-for-pushing-google-plus-in-search/.**

Other Articles and Opinions on This Topic:

Google Plus My World, by John Ellis

Google Fires Back at Twitter : You Took Yourself Out of Search by Sarah Kessler, of Mashable.com

Google To Twitter : You Quit Us, We Didn’t Quit You – by Matt Peckham,  at Time’s Tech section.

Google+ in search: Google had no choice – by Stephen Shankland

Well, it came as no surprise really to most of us early adopters of Google+ that they finally completely and obviously integrated their social networking services with their search engine and its results.

On Tuesday they rolled out what they’re calling “Google Plus Search Your World.”  If you’re on Google+ and have more than just 5 followers–four of whom post nothing– then you’re seeing lots of news updates about a little kerfuffle he said she said between them and Twitter, which I’ll get to in a separate post, since it’s quite ridiculous if you think about it.

But for now, I’m pleasantly surprised  so far at where I project this will go for bloggers and other web users such as businesses who want to get their content indexed better on the search engine.

Right now, it’s hard to tell if this will benefit people or make people flock to Google+ in droves or not–which I doubt it really will.  But if you’re a blogger or an aspiring author, and you’re not currently taking advantage of the service to raise your profile, then you are definitely doing the modern equivalent of investing in Beta Max instead of VHS.

Let me explain why you need to jump on this: to date, Facebook is the dominating force in social networking, with over 800 million followers.  However, due to their licensing agreements and privacy settings, they can only make public whatever the user allows to be shared publicly.  Google+ does this too however, giving you the option to share content with specific circles and not be indexed publicly if you so choose.  However, Google offers a search engine and other services.  Google has the largest universal audience base, demolishing Bing and Yahoo and other search engines by comparison, but they don’t have the largest social network.  At least at the moment.  And, they simply don’t have permission to dig deep into Twitter and Facebook to share their results or findings about you.

Google+ suggestions are also integrated into these new results if you’re searching using “personal search” instead of “global search”. If users search for broad topics, like say technology, Google will show what it considers “prominent people who frequently discuss this topic on Google+”. Again, Google is gauging social authority from Google+ and is only pulling these “prominent people” from Google+, not Facebook or Twitter.

Why Blending Social and Search is a Brilliant Move by Google

In an article at Econsultancy.com, Kevin Gibbons, Founder, SEOptimise says:

There was an interesting study by Nielsen a couple of yeas ago, and this stated that 42% of people trust search engine results, while a huge 90% trust recommendations from people they know.

When I think of my own personal habits, I find that the news I read and the articles I click on, by and large come from social networking, specifically Facebook and Google+.  Then, sometimes if a catchy title or tweet comment in my Twitter feed catches my attention I visit the link, so at first glance seems true for my online viewing habits.  So if someone is using Google to search for something, and they are signed into their account, they are shown results that their friends ‘plus oned’ or shared, or written about on Google+.  There’s already uproar and mixed opinion about this if this is good.

Danny Sullivan says:

Google’s job as a search engine is to direct searchers to the most relevant information on the web, not just to information that Google may have an interest in.

These suggestions would be better if they included other services, and that’s the standard Google’s search results should aim for, returning the best.

I’m personally not thinking it will go over too well that users are, by default, signed into the personal search results feature instead of the global one.

Stephen Shankland points out in his blog post about it;

Here’s where Google is key. People go to Facebook and Twitter to speak their own mind and to listen to whatever is on the minds of the people they follow. But they go to Google search for specific answers.

I think I agree.  So, combining those two factors–search and social–is a brilliant idea on Google’s part.

So Why Does This Provide An Opportunity For Those Trying to Raise Their Online Profile?

So without saying I think it’s right or wrong that Google is favouring Google+ in its search results, it is what it is and this matters to anybody who is making their presence known on the Internet, since over 70% users use Google for their searches, above Bing and Yahoo, and others.

It’s my opinion, based on how I’ve used Google+ these last six months, that if you’re intentionally trying to be found on the Internet, you need to be on Google+.  That’s even more obvious now that the searches are integrated with what people are sharing on Google+.

So long as you have a Google profile, or you have a blog or some place on the Internet you’re putting forward your content, you should position yourself for being shared more on the network.  If you’ve got content or a service you’re providing, and it’s being shared by people on Google+ the same way people have shared in the closed eco-system of Facebook, then this will be made obvious in the search results to those who may be searching for something related to what you provide or write about.

If You’re Not On Google+, You’re Not A Suggestion

If you’re hitting home runs that people are interested in sharing with their friends, in this case, on Google+ specifically, this will start manifesting itself prominently in the search results of other people, for example, who may be friends with those who are sharing.  This is also why I decided to start making all of my posts, especially if I’m sharing blog content I’ve written myself–public, because I want the search engines like Google, the most used of them, to retrieve relevant content when people are searching for things that are related to me and my writings.

So, get familiar with Google+ but don’t make the mistake of thinking it’s the same as Facebook.

Other Relevant Read and Others’ Opinion:

Tom Anderson, founder and creator of MySpace’s thoughts.

Real-Life Examples of How Google’s “Search Plus Pushes Google+ Over Relevancy – by Danny Sullivan at Search Engine Land.

Google+ in search: Google had no choice, by Stephen Shankland at http://news.cnet.com/

Google Plus My World, by John Ellis

“Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes! And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into the eternal fire. (Matthew 18:7-8, ESV)

In this post I’m beginning to hash out some thoughts based out of a well known, but well misunderstood passage in Matthew 18.  Instead of making a big long essay-like post, this will be the first of at least two posts

I remember a scene from the first Mad Max movie, after or around the climax–it’s been a while, and my memory may be failing me.  Mel Gibson’s character is basically going on a rampage toward the end and has finally snapped and is killing lots of bad guys–methodically hunting down each member of the gang that murdered his family.

In one scene, Max handcuffs a man’s ankle to a wrecked vehicle whilst the man begs for his life. Max ignores his begging and sets a crude time-delay fuse using a leaking fuel tank and a lighter set close to it. Throwing him a hacksaw, he tells him he may be able to saw through the handcuffs in ten minutes, or through his ankle in five.   Max then drives away in his car, and as he does so, the vehicle explodes in the background, presumably killing the man he had left behind handcuffed to the wreckage.

If I disturbed you by sharing that scene and put images in your mind you don’t want, I apologize.  It’s been years since I’ve seen that movie but that scene toward the end has always been etched in my mind when I think of the Bible’s clear command about cutting off the offending limb that causes to sin.  But Jesus’ warning for dealing with sin, or offenses in our lives is just as radical, if not more so disturbing and offensive to our “nice” image of a hippy Jesus who just tells everybody to love each other.

For that Mad Max character it would have been much better to escape that wreckage missing a foot, than for him to die in the explosion, which would have been a far smaller fate than eternal hellfire, for sure.  But the visual is still very powerful to me.

Desperate Times Call For Desperate Measures

You don’t just think of being capable of cutting off your own limb unless you’re in a life or death situation.  When death is facing you in the eye, you are capable of making more drastic decisions that you otherwise wouldn’t when there’s no pressure put on you.  Survival and desperation change what you find yourself capable of doing.

Every so often I hear in the news of hikers in the Canadian wilderness who fall from a cleft while alone and nobody knows they’re out there, or loggers who get pinned underneath a tree that fell on them, and for various reasons can’t move or get out from under the weight of it unless they remove the limb that’s stuck under a large unmovable weight.  There was a movie recently which starred James Franco, telling the true story of a biker of some sort (I’ve not seen the movie, just previews) who realized the only way out of a dire situation of being trapped in some kind of crevice was to cut off his own leg.

Jesus tells us to take sin this seriously.  As if our life depends on it.  Because it does.

We’re also very used to pulling this verse out of context, and applying it only to ourselves.  However, if we look at the whole of chapter 18 of Matthew’s Gospel, we’re shown that Jesus told his listeners this in the midst of his disciples asking him about greatness in the kingdom of God.  He then brought a little child in front of them and told them to become like this one, and then in verses 5 and 6 tells them it’d be easier to swim with a millstone necklace than to face the long-term eternal consequences of what would happen if you cause one of them to be offended and stumble.  We will get to that in my next post, though.

Jesus said this right before urgently teaching that if your hand causes you to sin, then cut it off.  The context was in relationship and community.  Have you ever thought about it?  This is not talking about priests molesting children, but a horrendous act like that would obviously be included.  It’s not even specifically or outright talking about hypocrisy and causing someone else to backslide or “fall of the bandwagon” because of your bad example of a Christian–but that can and obviously does include that.  It’s not talking about women wearing inappropriate clothing and causing men to lust or struggle with where their eyes wander, as I so often hear this passage invoked to mean.  However, it does include that also.

Have you ever thought of this in context of the verses following; when Jesus immediately starts speaking of the little ones again, and that if a man has a hundred sheep and one goes astray, the 99 are left while the shepherd goes after the one (v.10-14).  Then after that, talks about how to deal with a brother who offends (v.15-20), and the chapter ends off with the story of the unforgiving servant (v.21-35).  I’m starting to have a sneaking suspicion cutting our hand off that causes us to sin is not just about our own rescue of our life, but helping prevent other sheep from going astray or wandering after our offense–which is usually related to unforgiveness.

I’ll spell that out some more in a post for next week, How Long Can You Hold Your Breath Underwater?

Questions To Ask Yourself:

Is there any area of your life that you need to cut off or it will lead you to death?

What is Jesus speaking to you about that you need to stop doing that’s causing others to be offended unnecessarily and wander away from the faith?

Is there anybody you’re not forgiving, and thus remaining offended?

Tonight I tried another first–ordering pizza online.  In Peru.  For some reason it felt like an exercise in futility at first, until my pizza came and made it all worth it in the end.

I live in South America, so this was through a Spanish website, and since I had just moved into a new neighbourhood one month ago, I wasn’t sure if I was placing my address correctly in the registration information.

Usually when I have friends over, and we decide on going Dutch and splitting on a pizza, I get them to make the call.   This is because I’m always worried the credit on my phone will run out while I’m trying to understand the person on the other end.  I speak relatively good Spanish, but on the phone it’s much harder to understand people in another language.  Especially if they are pimple-faced young adults working in a hectic work environment and are in a hurry and not speaking clearly enough.  Plus, it’s easier to be a jerk to someone on the phone than face to face.  Then, they usually seem to sound like a cross between the adults in Charlie Brown, and that fast talking man from those micro machine commercials from my childhood.  Only, in Spanish.

The first time I had ever tried ordering pizza over the phone I had been living here 5 months.  The person on the other end didn’t understand me, and hung up.  Then, when I first moved into my previous apartment, and was more confident in my Spanish–in other words, I knew for certain what the Spanish names were for the toppings I was ordering–”pepperoni”–I did a victory dance when the pizza arrived and the order was correct.

I probably made a much bigger deal out of it than I should have, but that’s only because I had nervously dialed the numbers for like 20 minutes before finally going all the way and letting it ring and hoping I didn’t sound like a Spanish version of Yoda to the person on the other end.  It reminded me very much of the first time I ever called a girl I liked over the phone.  I’m positive I went through the same type of ordeal, and probably made as much sense to the person on the other end in that situation, too.

So I ordered a ‘large’ Pepperoni pizza, because that was the special, and I didn’t want to complicate it by putting on what I wanted.  Then along with that, I got a 2 L bottle of Inca Kola, and a box of cinnamon bread sticks covered in manjar blanco sauce.  Obviously this was either a two person meal, or enough food for myself to eat for a couple of days.  OK, I’m a loner tonight so it’s two days’ worth of food, but anyway.

Once I placed the order, I got a call from the Dominos I’d be receiving it from, to ‘confirm’ the order.  Um, isn’t that kind of redundant?  Like, if I wanted to talk to them on the phone about my order I would have just called them, right?

At any rate, it turned out there was a special where I could get what I was asking for, but cheaper by like 6 soles.  Well, I didn’t initially understand this from the call because the guy on the other end was speaking like that micro machines guy, and all I understood was something was the same price and did I want it–yes or no.  But when the delivery boy came, and it cost me less money than I thought it would, and I checked the receipt, then I understood the phone call a little better.

And I did a victory dance and enjoyed my pizza.

I’ve decided to heck with it.

Now that I’ve got over 1700 people who’ve circled me on Google+, I’m going to just post things publicly instead of to circles, except when I specifically only want people in certain circles to see the posts–like more personal stuff like prayer requests, or emergencies I want only few people to know I’m in need of or whatever.  It’s just too much work to select the different circles I should put people in when I’ve circled many of them back. I’ve made so many different circles as it is, and I’m just ‘bulk’ selecting circles when I make posts, anyway.

Also, now that many people have circled me lately, it’s just become a lot of bother to check every profile anymore to see if I should put each person in a circle or not, so, everything’s just going to go public to make this easier. I’m sure this will both encourage others to follow, since what you see is what you get (as far as what I share online goes, for that matter), but I’m sure this will also weed out people who lose interest when more specific interests are made more available that they might not track with me on. Which is fine, we’re all looking for interesting content we’re interested in following, and I am not and will not be everybody’s cup of tea, I’m sure.

Since I write prolifically on various Christian themes on my two main sites, and our podcast, I’d like search engines like Google to be able to cull them, and not just goofy gifs I re-share, obviously. If you suddenly notice that my stream starts looking more like a blog, it’s not that it changed, but what I’ve shared publicly has.

I’ve noticed various people circling me who I don’t necessarily want to circle back in order for them to see more than just my public posts, and many people just uncircle me after a while anyway, making me tire of bothering to “reciprocate circling” everybody.

So I’m just going to be public about it all anymore.

Oh, and if you’ve circled me but don’t actually know me, I actually am honoured you found me interesting enough to follow.

I’ve been reading some disturbing news online lately and as some of you know if you’ve got me in your Facebook or Google+ feeds, I’ve been doing everything I can to alert as many people to this as possible.

Well, my blog is not going to turn into a place where I write about American politics or conspiracy theories (of which I don’t hold to any).  But as Canadian–an outsider looking in–who has gotten to live in the United States during his early formative adulthood, during 9/11 and when the USA invaded Iraq–I’m now left stunned, confused and speechless.

On Google+, I constantly am seeing peoples’ posts flood my news feed about NDAA and SOPA.  I go to Facebook and type in key words like NDAA or “Indefinite detention” and the silence is almost deafening.  Crickets.  Almost nothing shows up from my friends.  In fact, my own posts and links are the only results I get.

I’ve got over 1280 contacts on Facebook, and the bulk of them are American, and barely any of them are even concerned about this?  Not even mocking it with sarcasm or posting humorous “this is too crazy to be true” type of posts?  Instead, I continue to see the same celebrity gossip and videos about people getting hit in the crotch unsuspectingly.  I ask questions.  I posted a comment that more people are concerned about Katy Pery and Russell Brand getting divorced than they are about this bill that passed, and sure enough, I start getting comments…about Katy Pery.

I even had someone tell me that they didn’t really concern themselves with it until they checked Snopes.com, an Urban legend site, to see if it was merely a rumour or if it was true.  Pretty funny, or sad, or both if something your president has done is so outrageous sounding that you need to check a rumor website to see if there’s any fact to it!

Yes, my American friends, the rest of the world‘s media is reporting about it.  Just because your country’s isn’t, doesn’t mean it’s not happening–and the fact your mainstream, and even fringe media, aren’t covering it should be cause for concern and give you something to think about for a moment.  Why aren’t they covering it?  It’s a top story in Europe.  The rest of the outside world looking in and watching are scratching our heads saying “not the great America, too?  Not them!”  Because it sets a precedent and we worry our governments might follows suit, since “everybody wants to be like America”–at least that’s what Americans tell me.

Does NO ONE care that President Obama and the Congress committed TREASON?

When I posted the attached photo above to Facebook, I was asked why I’m so concerned about it since I’m a Canadian.  In essence I responded by saying “Same reason that last time I saw some thugs breaking into a car I yelled at them and threatened to call the police, and I rang the doorbell of the house it was parked in front of to notify them, instead of walking along my way because “it wasn’t my car.” “.  I’m not sure if the friend was being intentionally obtuse or not, but just because a country is not mine, doesn’t mean I won’t say something about injustice or yell when I see someone else’s child step out on to the street despite oncoming traffic.  I’ve done this with regard to things going on here in Peru, and in Darfur.  ”Why do you care Steve, since it’s not your country?”  What a stupid question.

The reason I, as a Canadian “care so much” about the US, is that you guys being looked upon by many countries and many people as the champion of freedom and democracy, are now descending into a fascist military state.  Since you guys have prided yourself on being champions of freedom, and being the “greatest country in the world”, I would expect you to stand up to your rights and make a marked precedent on people power.  But barely a whimper, and a “there he goes again” when I bring it up again and again on my social networks.

I was asking a friend of mine through Facebook messages, how come he thought none of his fellow Americans seemed to care about this and he responded:

No one cares. It’s as if a spirit of ambivalence has fallen. Americans are so individualistic now, they don’t care unless they think something has a real chance of directly affecting them, so the go-to response is “if you’re not doing anything to get their attention, you won’t have any issues.”

That is what stuns me.  One should care.  If I were an American citizen, whose rights were just taken away in the name of national defence by a president doing the very opposite of what he campaigned on, I’d be outraged.

Friends, this broken campaign promise is not another “read my lips, no new taxes” promise, but one of fundamental rights and protections your constitution, prior to New Year’s Eve, used to guarantee you. Maybe the realization of it is so shocking one could never fathom something out of a futuristic sci-fi movie could actually be happening right now in a country once so great historically.   If anything, I admire the level of ignorance some people would like to remain in with their head in the sand believing hoping it’s not really true and that people like me are just conspiracy theorists.

Remember, you had the power to elect a minority president in 2008 who would have merely been a second or third class citizen some 150 years ago. Well, it’s the irony of ironies that he has taken your freedom from you.

He campaigned on promises of change, and boy are you getting it.  The question is whether or not you’ll stand by and let this go as far as it can, or revolt and do something about it.

Resources & Further Reading

The NDAA’s historic assault on American liberty, by Jonathan Turley, on The Guardian’s site, a highly liberal British magazine website.

R.I.P. Bill of Rights 1789 – 2011, by by Mike Adams, editor of Natural News.com

Add David Seaman to your circles on Google+.  He’s a frequent contributor to Business Insider. He is also one of the only ones I’m following who is consistently posting the latest about what’s going on with these bills, particularly NDAA.