text:
Le , de l'anglais signifiant « serpent », est un genre de jeu vidéo dans lequel le joueur dirige un serpent qui grandit et constitue ainsi lui-même un obstacle. Bien que le concept tire son origine du jeu vidéo d'arcade , il n'existe pas de version standard. Son concept simple l'a amené à être porté sur l'ensemble des plates-formes de jeu existantes sous des noms de clone.

Le jeu a connu un regain de popularité à partir de 1998 quand Nokia, une entreprise de télécommunications, l'a intégré dans ses produits. Avec l'émergence du nouveau support de jeu qu'est le téléphone mobile, il est devenu un classique du jeu sur appareil mobile.

Concept

Le joueur contrôle une longue et fine ligne semblable à un serpent, qui doit slalomer entre les bords de l'écran et les obstacles qui parsèment le niveau. Pour gagner chacun des niveaux, le joueur doit faire manger à son serpent un certain nombre de pastilles similaire à de la nourriture, allongeant à chaque fois la taille du serpent. Alors que le serpent avance inexorablement, le joueur ne peut que lui indiquer une direction à suivre (en haut, en bas, à gauche, à droite) afin d'éviter que la tête du serpent ne touche les murs ou son propre corps, auquel cas il risque de mourir.

Certains clones proposent des niveaux de difficulté dans lesquels varient l'aspect du niveau (simple ou labyrinthique), le nombre de pastilles à manger, l'allongement du serpent ou encore sa vitesse.

Historique
Le concept de  vient du jeu d'arcade Blockade, développé et édité par Gremlin Industries en 1976. La même année, un clone sort sous le nom de . En 1977, Atari Inc. publie deux jeux inspirés de  : le jeu d'arcade Dominos et le jeu Surround sur Atari 2600.  faisait partie des neuf jeux au lancement de l'Atari 2600 aux États-Unis et était vendu par Sears sous le nom de . La même année, un jeu semblable est édité pour l' sous le nom de .

Liste de jeux

Sur téléphone Nokia
Nokia est célèbre pour inclure  dans la majorité de ses téléphones. Parmi les différentes versions :
 Snake - L'originale, pour téléphones monochromes. Les graphismes se résument à des carrés noirs et il dispose de quatre directions. Il a été programmé en 1997 par Taneli Armanto, un ingénieur de chez Nokia et apparaît pour la première fois dans le Nokia 6110 ;
 Snake II - Inclus dans certains téléphones monochromes. Graphismes améliorés, introduction de bonus (insectes), d'une zone de jeu circulaire, et de labyrinthes (murs faisant obstacle placés dans la zone de jeu). Il est par exemple inclus dans le Nokia 3310, sorti en 2000 ;
 Snake Xenzia - Inclus dans les téléphones monochrome suivants (et certains téléphones couleurs d'entrée de gamme comme le Nokia 1600). Il est par exemple inclus dans le Nokia 1112, sorti en 2006 ;
 Snake EX - Inclus dans les téléphones couleurs. Première apparition dans le Nokia 9290 Communicator, en 2002. Les graphismes sont améliorés, et un mode multijoueur est inclus grâce au Bluetooth et à l'Infra-Red. Il est par exemple inclus dans le Nokia 6260, sorti en 2004 ;
 Snake EX2 - Première apparition dans le Nokia 3100 en 2003. Cette version est incluse dans de nombreux téléphones de la gamme Series 40 de Nokia ;
 Snakes - Une version en 3D. Le jeu est conçu pour N-Gage en 2005, développé par IOMO et édité par Nokia. Il inclut un mode multijoueur via Bluetooth. Les graphismes sont améliorés. Cette version a été également incluse dans les téléphones Nokia, sans le mode multijoueur dans certains  de la Série N comme le N70, le N73, le N80, etc ;
 Snake III - Une version en 3D, différente de Snakes. Il est par exemple inclus dans le Nokia 3250, sorti en 2005, ainsi que sur Nokia 5310, Nokia 5610, Nokia 2700 classic, Nokia 2730 classic et Nokia 6300, et inclus un mode multijoueur via Bluetooth.
 Snakes Subsonic - Suite de Snakes, sorti le  sur N-Gage.

Le , le musée d'art moderne de New York a annoncé que la version de Nokia de  était l'un des 40 jeux envisagés pour la collection du musée dans le futur.

 est encore inclus dans certains téléphones bas de gamme tel le Nokia 108, sorti en 2013.

Jeux pour navigateur web
Le navigateur américain Google a intégré dans son navigateur la possibilité de jouer gratuitement à sa version de Snake. Celle-ci se fait uniquement en ligne. Il suffit de taper « Snake » dans le moteur de recherche pour y accéder.

Jeux pour calculatrice

Postérité

En tant qu'exercice de programmation

Références

Liens externes
 Une implémentation en langage C

Genre de jeux vidéo


text:
Le Fetha Negest (Ge'ez: ፍትሐ ነገሥት, Loi des Rois) est la traduction en guèze d'un code juridique rédigé initialement en arabe, vers 1240, par l'écrivain copte égyptien Abul Fada'il Ibn al-'Assal sous le titre de Nomocanon. Il s'agit d'une compilation de textes légaux byzantins. Il est au fondement de toute une tradition juridique en Éthiopie.

Notes et références

Articles connexes
Kebra Negest

Culture éthiopienne
Droit canonique
Code juridique

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
World / Crime & Legal
Design for bombs mailed to Trump critics said came from internet; Florida leads pursued
Steve Robino arranges packages on a conveyor belt at the main post office in Omaha, Nebraska, last December. The shipment of several pipe bombs to CNN and several prominent Democrats raises fresh questions about mail safety and what measures the U.S. Postal Service and private delivery services take to prevent explosives and other illegal substances from entering into the mail. | AP
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK – The investigation into 10 pipe bombs sent to high-profile Democrats and critics of U.S. President Donald Trump is focusing on leads in Florida, a federal law enforcement source said on Thursday while another source said investigators believe the devices' design came from the internet.
All the suspicious packages were believed to have gone through the U.S. postal system at some point, the source said. Many of the packages had the return address of the Florida office of U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who formerly chaired the Democratic National Committee, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The instructions for such explosive devices are widely available on websites and in propaganda distributed by militant groups such as Islamic State and al-Qaida, said the second law enforcement official and a former federal government bomb expert.
Former Vice President Joe Biden and actor Robert De Niro on Thursday became the latest targets of the bombs, none of which exploded.
The bombs have heightened what already was a contentious campaign season ahead of the Nov. 6 elections in which Trump's Republicans will try to maintain majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives. The episode has also called attention to the harsh rhetoric Trump wields against his rivals.
Trump condemned the bombs but later blamed the media, his frequent foil, for much of the angry tone.
No one has claimed responsibility and the FBI urged the public to report any tips. The packages consisted of a manila envelope with a bubble-wrap interior containing "potentially destructive devices," the FBI said. Each bore a computer-printed address label and six "Forever" postage stamps, the agency said.
Some of the packages sent to New York locations had envelopes of white powder in them, but FBI Assistant Director William Sweeney said at a briefing in New York that initial analysis showed it was not a biological threat.
The pipe bombs discovered on Wednesday were similar to the ones sent to Biden and De Niro, a federal official told Reuters. Authorities described the devices as crude while security experts said their goal may have been to create fear rather than to kill.
One of the bombs was sent to the New York headquarters of CNN, which Trump has frequently derided for its coverage of him, and the network said on Thursday the device was being taken in a bomb-proof truck to the FBI lab in Quantico, Virginia, for analysis.
Leading Democrats said the bombs were a dangerous outgrowth of an antagonistic political atmosphere created by the president.
Trump and other Republicans have likened Democrats to an "angry mob," citing protests at the confirmation hearing of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The FBI said on Thursday one of the two packages sent to Biden — who once said he would have fought Trump if they were in high school — was discovered at a mail facility in his home state of Delaware and the second at another location.
The device intended for De Niro, who received a loud ovation when he hurled an obscenity at Trump at the Tony Awards in June, was sent to one of his properties in New York City.
At a Wisconsin rally on Wednesday night Trump, who has denounced news media organizations as an "enemy of the people," called attention to "how nice I'm behaving tonight" but on Thursday morning he attacked the media.
"A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News," Trump wrote. "It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!"
Several of the people who were sent bombs — including former President Barack Obama and Trump's rival for the presidency, Hillary Clinton — are frequent targets of right-wing critics.
Also sent packages were Eric Holder, who served as attorney general under Obama; former CIA Director John Brennan, who had his security clearance withdrawn after frequently lambasting Trump; prominent Democratic Party donor George Soros; and California Rep. Maxine Waters, another outspoken Trump critic. Two packages were sent to Waters, whom Trump has called "an extraordinarily low IQ person."
Several politicians, including U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, described the package bombs as an act of terrorism.
"Someone is trying to intimidate. Someone is trying to quash voices in this country using violence," De Blasio said. "I am confident that we will find the perpetrator or perpetrators."
Barack Obama, terrorism, Hillary Clinton, Florida, Joe Biden, CNN, Donald Trump, pipe bombs

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Update your basics with the Carla Basic Bandeau! The simple, strapless design is perfect for clean layering, and the stretchy fabric accommodates a comfortable fit for all shapes and sizes. A light elastic band across the top and bottom ensures that it will stay in place all day while you stay busy! Layer underneath your top for a clean look that will not detract from all the little details in your outfit! Comes in 2 neutral colors!
One Size | Bust 24"


text:
Trump's 'Wag the Dog' Moment
By Robert Parry | Consortium News | April 7, 2017
Just two days after news broke of an alleged poison-gas attack in northern Syria, President Trump brushed aside advice from some U.S. intelligence analysts doubting the Syrian regime's guilt and launched a lethal retaliatory missile strike against a Syrian airfield.
Trump immediately won plaudits from Official Washington, especially from neoconservatives who have been trying to wrestle control of his foreign policy away from his nationalist and personal advisers since the days after his surprise victory on Nov. 8.
There is also an internal dispute over the intelligence. On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a "high degree of confidence" that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.
But a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid.
One intelligence source told me that the most likely scenario was a staged event by the rebels intended to force Trump to reverse a policy, announced only days earlier, that the U.S. government would no longer seek "regime change" in Syria and would focus on attacking the common enemy, Islamic terror groups that represent the core of the rebel forces.
The source said the Trump national security team split between the President's close personal advisers, such as nationalist firebrand Steve Bannon and son-in-law Jared Kushner, on one side and old-line neocons who have regrouped under National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, an Army general who was a protégé of neocon favorite Gen. David Petraeus.
White House Infighting
In this telling, the earlier ouster of retired Gen. Michael Flynn as national security adviser and this week's removal of Bannon from the National Security Council were key steps in the reassertion of neocon influence inside the Trump presidency. The strange personalities and ideological extremism of Flynn and Bannon made their ousters easier, but they were obstacles that the neocons wanted removed.
Though Bannon and Kushner are often presented as rivals, the source said, they shared the belief that Trump should tell the truth about Syria, revealing the Obama administration's CIA analysis that a fatal sarin gas attack in 2013 was a "false-flag" operation intended to sucker President Obama into fully joining the Syrian war on the side of the rebels — and the intelligence analysts' similar beliefs about Tuesday's incident.
Instead, Trump went along with the idea of embracing the initial rush to judgment blaming Assad for the Idlib poison-gas event. The source added that Trump saw Thursday night's missile assault as a way to change the conversation in Washington, where his administration has been under fierce attack from Democrats claiming that his election resulted from a Russian covert operation.
If changing the narrative was Trump's goal, it achieved some initial success with several of Trump's fiercest neocon critics, such as neocon Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, praising the missile strike, as did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The neocons and Israel have long sought "regime change" in Damascus even if the ouster of Assad might lead to a victory by Islamic extremists associated with Al Qaeda and/or the Islamic State.
Wagging the Dog
Trump employing a "wag the dog" strategy, in which he highlights his leadership on an international crisis to divert attention from domestic political problems, is reminiscent of President Bill Clinton's decision to attack Serbia in 1999 as impeachment clouds were building around his sexual relationship with intern Monica Lewinsky.
Screen shot from Whitehouse.gov
Trump's advisers, in briefing the press on Thursday night, went to great lengths to highlight Trump's compassion toward the victims of the poison gas and his decisiveness in bombing Assad's military in contrast to Obama's willingness to allow the intelligence community to conduct a serious review of the evidence surrounding the 2013 sarin-gas case.
Ultimately, Obama listened to his intelligence advisers who told him there was no "slam-dunk" evidence implicating Assad's regime and he pulled back from a military strike at the last minute – while publicly maintaining the fiction that the U.S. government was certain of Assad's guilt.
In both cases – 2013 and 2017 – there were strong reasons to doubt Assad's responsibility. In 2013, he had just invited United Nations inspectors into Syria to investigate cases of alleged rebel use of chemical weapons and thus it made no sense that he would launch a sarin attack in the Damascus suburbs, guaranteeing that the U.N. inspectors would be diverted to that case.
Similarly, now, Assad's military has gained a decisive advantage over the rebels and he had just scored a major diplomatic victory with the Trump administration's announcement that the U.S. was no longer seeking "regime change" in Syria. The savvy Assad would know that a chemical weapon attack now would likely result in U.S. retaliation and jeopardize the gains that his military has achieved with Russian and Iranian help.
The counter-argument to this logic – made by The New York Times and other neocon-oriented news outlets – essentially maintains that Assad is a crazed barbarian who was testing out his newfound position of strength by baiting President Trump. Of course, if that were the case, it would have made sense that Assad would have boasted of his act, rather than deny it.
But logic and respect for facts no longer prevail inside Official Washington, nor inside the mainstream U.S. news media.
Intelligence Uprising
Alarm within the U.S. intelligence community about Trump's hasty decision to attack Syria reverberated from the Middle East back to Washington, where former CIA officer Philip Giraldi reported hearing from his intelligence contacts in the field that they were shocked at how the new poison-gas story was being distorted by Trump and the mainstream U.S. news media.
Giraldi told Scott Horton's Webcast: "I'm hearing from sources on the ground in the Middle East, people who are intimately familiar with the intelligence that is available who are saying that the essential narrative that we're all hearing about the Syrian government or the Russians using chemical weapons on innocent civilians is a sham."
Giraldi said his sources were more in line with an analysis postulating an accidental release of the poison gas after an Al Qaeda arms depot was hit by a Russian airstrike.
"The intelligence confirms pretty much the account that the Russians have been giving … which is that they hit a warehouse where the rebels – now these are rebels that are, of course, connected with Al Qaeda – where the rebels were storing chemicals of their own and it basically caused an explosion that resulted in the casualties. Apparently the intelligence on this is very clear."
Giraldi said the anger within the intelligence community over the distortion of intelligence to justify Trump's military retaliation was so great that some covert officers were considering going public.
"People in both the agency [the CIA] and in the military who are aware of the intelligence are freaking out about this because essentially Trump completely misrepresented what he already should have known – but maybe he didn't – and they're afraid that this is moving toward a situation that could easily turn into an armed conflict," Giraldi said before Thursday night's missile strike. "They are astonished by how this is being played by the administration and by the U.S. media."
One-Sided Coverage
The mainstream U.S. media has presented the current crisis with the same profound neocon bias that has infected the coverage of Syria and the larger Middle East for decades. For instance, The New York Times on Friday published a lead story by Michael R. Gordon and Michael D. Shear that treated the Syrian government's responsibility for the poison-gas incident as flat-fact. The lengthy story did not even deign to include the denials from Syria and Russia that they were responsible for any intentional deployment of poison gas.
The article also fit with Trump's desire that he be portrayed as a decisive and forceful leader. He is depicted as presiding over intense deliberations of war or peace and displaying a deep humanitarianism regarding the poison-gas victims, one of the rare moments when the Times, which has become a reliable neocon propaganda sheet, has written anything favorable about Trump at all.
According to Syrian reports on Friday, the U.S. attack killed 13 people, including five soldiers at the airbase.
Gordon, whose service to the neocon cause is notorious, was the lead author with Judith Miller of the Times' bogus "aluminum tube" story in 2002 which falsely claimed that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was reconstituting a nuclear-weapons program, an article that was then cited by President George W. Bush's aides as a key argument for invading Iraq in 2003.
Regarding this week's events, Trump's desperation to reverse his negative media coverage and the dubious evidence blaming Assad for the Idlib incident could fit with the "Wag the Dog" movie from 1997 in which an embattled president creates a phony foreign crisis in Albania.
In the movie, the White House operation is a cynical psychological operation to convince the American people that innocent Albanian children, including an attractive girl carrying a cat, are in danger when, In reality, the girl was an actor posing before a green screen that allowed scenes of fiery ruins to be inserted as background.
Today, because Trump and his administration are now committed to convincing Americans that Assad really was responsible for Tuesday's poison-gas tragedy, the prospects for a full and open investigation are effectively ended. We may never know if there is truth to those allegations or whether we are being manipulated by another "wag the dog" psyop.
Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s.
April 8, 2017 - Posted by aletho | False Flag Terrorism, Militarism | Benjamin Netanyahu, Michael D. Shear, MICHAEL R. GORDON, Middle East, New York Times, Syria, United States, Zionism


text:
Watch 2022 online sermons » Craig Smith » Craig Smith - On-the-Job Relationships
Craig Smith - On-the-Job Relationships
TOPICS: Am I Right?!, Relationship
Well, hey, welcome to Mission Hills Church Online. So glad to have you with us. I want you to know, no matter where you are in the world and what circumstances you're facing, you have a church home with us, and we're so glad that you're with us today. We are actually wrapping up our relationship series today. For the last few weeks, we've been unpacking God's surprising secret to every relationship ever. And if you're just joining us, and you're not sure what that is, I'll go ahead and catch you up real quick. It is this. It's to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. That is the surprising secret to every relationship ever. It's to submit to one another, to serve each other, to put each other's needs above our own, and ultimately to substitute God's mission and agenda for mine in the relationship. That's the secret.
And for the last few weeks, we've been kind of leaning into, what does that look like in our family relationships? Today, we're gonna take a look at what that sort of looks like in our work relationships, specifically in the relationship between employees and employers. And let me…just to let you know, I've been on both sides of that table. I've spent most of my life as an employee. My first job, I was a market researcher, which is a really fancy title for a guy who stood in a mall with a clipboard and tried to get people's opinions on fabric softener and peanut butter kind of stuff, right? And I struggled with my boss in that job because I felt like she stayed in her office all day. I didn't know what she was doing in there. She would only come out to tell us we had not gotten enough surveys done. And I was like, "Well, how about you get out of your office, grab a clipboard, and get out here with us." Right? And then I worked for RadioShack, and I struggled with my boss there because I felt like he spent a lot of time in the office on his computer, but then he would come out and tell us we weren't selling enough stuff, right? So, I was like, "Well, I don't know what you're doing in there. Why don't you get out of here and do what you're telling us we've got to do or something like that." All right? So, I struggled with my boss there.
So I was really excited when I graduated college and I went into vocational ministry, meaning that I was gonna get paid to follow Jesus and help other people do the same thing. And because I thought, you know, "When I'm in the church, my bosses are gonna be awesome. I'm gonna have nothing but respect and admiration. I'll be able to look up to them." And it turns out that pastors are people too, and sometimes, like all people, they're difficult. I had a pastor that I had really substantial disagreements on their theology, and we struggled with our theology back and forth. I had a pastor that I really disagreed with the way he spent money and the decisions he made around financial stuff in the church. I had a pastor that I just felt like almost every one of his leadership decisions was almost the opposite of what I would have done. And so I struggled with all of my bosses, both inside and outside the church.
And so here's what I know as an employee. For all of the employees out there, and you can say a hearty amen right now. I know that as an employee, being an employee is difficult, and relating to employers can be challenging, right? Am I right? I am. I know I am, right? Then I became the boss, right? I went to the other side of the table. I became a lead pastor. So, I wasn't an employee anymore. I was an employer. And here's what I found out, that it turns out that all the other employees in the church were not like me when I was an employee. They weren't perfect, right? I was perfect, but I was having to suddenly deal with employees who honestly weren't. And I had to deal with, you know, gossiping. And I had to deal with, like, backbiting. And I had to deal with office politics. And I had to deal with people who criticized every decision I made, that nothing I did was good enough. I had to deal with people who didn't seem to do much work. I had to deal with people who didn't come into work, even though they were on the clock.
And so, here's what I realized, as an employer. As an employer, I realized that being an employer is difficult, and relating to employees can be challenging. So that's true on either side of the table. And I know that many of you out there understand exactly what I'm talking about. Some of you are employees and you know how challenging it can be to relate to an employer. Some of you are employers and you know how challenging it can be to lead your employees. And some of you are right in the middle. Honestly, some of you are middle managers. And honestly, I have tremendous respect for you because you have the hardest job out there because you have to lead employees, but you also have to answer to another boss. And so, you're kind of caught in between. And I know that's tough.
And so, what we're gonna find today is that God has two ingredients that are kind of the secret sauce to our work relationships. And it's true, whether you're an employee or an employer or a middle manager caught in between. So why don't you go and grab a Bible, start making your way to the Book of Ephesians 6?. Now, here's what you need to know about Ephesians if you're kind of new to the Bible. Ephesians was written by a man named Paul. He was a follower of Jesus, and he's writing to a church, a group of followers of Jesus in a city called Ephesus. And they're facing some difficult circumstances, not like we're facing. They weren't facing a pandemic. They were facing persecution for their faith. But here's what we know about difficult circumstances. Difficult circumstances put additional strain on our relationships. Difficult circumstances always put additional strain on our relationships. I don't think that difficult circumstances create weak spots in our relationships, but they absolutely exploit them. And they reveal where those are.
And so, what Paul's doing here is he's writing to a group of followers of Jesus, and he's basically saying, "Here's how you address those weak spots in your relationship." And as I said, we've already kind of leaned into what those look like in a family context, but now he's gonna lean into what it looks like to find and address those weaknesses in our work relationships, employees and employers. And so, he says this. He says to employees, chapter 6, verse 5 says, "Slaves, obey your earthly masters." And we're just gonna stop there for a second. Because my guess is that for some of us, those words set off all kinds of alarm bells, right? Slaves and masters, like, "What's going on here? I thought we were talking about employees and employers, and you're talking about slaves and masters?"
Well, here's what we need to understand. See, those words are kind of hot-topic words, but they have to do with our history as a country. And so, here's a couple things you need to keep in mind. The first one is this. The biblical concept of "slavery" and I'm putting quotes around it because I'm not even sure that's the best translation given our context. But the biblical concept of "slavery" was wildly different than New World slavery. New World slavery is what was practiced in this country in the United States of America from the 17th through the 19th Centuries. And let me just be really clear. New World slavery was horrific. It was shameful, and it was sinful, okay? Not only was it horrific and shameful and sinful back then, but honestly, the legacy that it's left us, the legacy that we're still living with today, the legacy of racism and prejudice, racism and prejudice are also horrific, shameful, and sinful. They have no place in the life of a follower of Jesus, but I think they're ultimately rooted in New World slavery, at least in this country.
But what we need to understand is that when the Bible talks about masters and slaves, what it's talking about is something that's wildly different than New World slavery, okay? In fact, I would say this, that the closest modern equivalent, okay, the closest equivalent in the modern world is actually employees and employers. That's the closest equivalent. It's not perfect, but it's the closest we're gonna come. And it's actually pretty close. And here's why I say that. See, in the ancient world, there were no corporations. There were no companies. Nobody worked for Lockheed Martin or Walmart or whatever. In the ancient world, people worked for families, okay? And there were basically two categories of people. Either you worked for your own family or you worked for someone else's family. Now, if you worked for someone else's family, you fell into one of two buckets, okay? One bucket was people who worked for somebody else's family with what we'd call short-term contracts, usually just one day at a time. They were contract laborers. And what would happen is they'd go work for a family, they'd serve a family, and at the end of the day, they'd be paid cash money for the work that they did for that family that day, okay? Those were day laborers, short-term contract employees.
The other category, the other people who fell into this kind of category of working for other families but into a slightly different bucket were people who had long-term connections to that family. They served that family for years, sometimes for their entire lives, in return for which, the Bible specified, that the people they were serving had to give them food and clothing and shelter and time off and legal rights and proper treatment. The Bible specifies all of that stuff, okay? So, you had this group of people who worked for a family for a long time in return for what they needed to not only to survive but to thrive. Now, what do you think the Bible calls those people who served another family, not their own, another family, over a long haul in return for what they needed to thrive? The answer is the Bible calls them slaves or servants, as some people think would be a better translation because it gets us away from the lens that we tend to read it through, which is the New World slavery model, okay? So sometimes it's better to think about them as servants. But that's what the Bible calls these people who had these long-term arrangements in return for what they needed to not just survive, but to thrive.
Now, in the modern world, what's the closest equivalent? In the modern world, what do we call someone who works for another person or another group of people in return for the things that they need to survive and to thrive? And the answer is we call them employees. And we call the people they work for their employers. And that's why I say this is probably the closest equivalent. So, let's read this again using those words through that lens. It says this, it says, "[Employees], obey your earthly [employers] with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ." Now, that sounds like three things they're supposed to have, but it's actually only two things. Two things, two key ingredients, two things that make up the secret sauce in the employee to employer relationship, okay?
And here's why I say it's just two things and not three. In the original Greek, because this wasn't written in English, it was written to the people in Ephesus who spoke Greek in the 1st century. And so, in the original Greek, what we have here are really two catchphrases, okay? The first catchphrase in original Greek literally says something like, "With fear and trembling. Serve them with fear and trembling." And that was a catch catchphrase that meant respect, okay? So fear and trembling means respect. The second phrase, the NIV says, "With sincerity of heart," but in literal language, it would actually say, "With singleness of heart." And that's a catchphrase that meant loyalty, okay? So you've got two catchphrases that basically mean two different things. He says, "Obey them with respect and with loyalty." Okay? So that's really what it says. It says, "Employees, obey your earthly employers with respect and loyalty, just as you would obey Christ." Okay, that's the two key things, "With respect and loyalty, just as you would obey Christ."
And I know some of you out there going, "Problem already. Pastor, if you just knew what my employer was like, you would not tell me that I'm supposed to have respect for that guy. My boss is an idiot. My boss is a jerk. My boss is about the worst human being I've ever encountered. There's no way that I am gonna be able to treat them with respect because I ain't got any respect for that person." Listen, I get that. I understand what it's like to be in a situation where you don't naturally feel respect for the person that you're working for, okay? Let me tell you two things because I think these are really important. The first one is this, it's that respect and loyalty are actions, they're not emotions. As is being described here, we're talking about actions, not emotions. Respect and loyalty are actions, the things that we are able to give to our employers, or to show to them, not things that we feel for them, okay? So these are actions. We can show someone respect, even if we don't necessarily feel it, okay?
The second thing you need to understand is that what Paul is saying here is motivated by the respect that we have for Jesus, not our employers. If we go back to that surprising secret to every relationship ever, he says, "Submit to one another out of reverence or respect for Christ." That's what motivates everything that he's talking about throughout this section of the Book of Ephesians, and it's what motivates our treating our employers with respect and loyalty. It's a respect that we have for Jesus. It's great if we feel that for our bosses. That's awesome, but if you don't, you don't have to, to still pay attention to what he says here, okay? Because it's motivated by the respect we have for Jesus, not necessarily the respect we have for our employers.
Okay. So, what does it look like to treat our employers with respect and loyalty? Well, he says this. He says, "Obey them. Obey them." Now, this is complicated, okay? This is really, really super tricky. Fortunately, I've been to Bible school. Fortunately, I have wrestled with the original languages here. Fortunately, I have a big shelf of books with really, really, you know, large commentaries with tiny print that allow you to delve into the historical context and to get all this background. So I'm able to tell you, from the benefit of all of that, that when Paul says, "Obey them," what he means is, "Do what they say," okay? That's what he means. So you're welcome. You know, I appreciate being able to use all my education to help you understand that. Basically, he says, "Do what they say." That's all he's saying. "Do what they say. Do what they're paying you to do."
And you might go, "Well, like, isn't that what employees do?" Apparently not, actually, not as much as you might like to think. Getting ready for this message, I read a bunch of studies. And one of the things that I found was that across all industries and across all age groups, it varies a little bit by age group, but if you kind of factor it all together, what you find out is that the average worker in the United States, the average worker, wastes between 1.5 and 2.5 hours a day while they're on the clock, 1.5 to 2.5 hours a day while they're on the clock. And we're not talking lunch breaks and things like that. We're talking about being on Facebook. We're talking about being on Instagram. We're talking about being on Amazon and buying stuff that you can play with that weekend, okay? We're talking about googling your own name, okay? We're talking about crazy stuff like that, that they're doing while they're on the clock being paid to do work, but they're not doing that work. They're doing these other things, okay?
Now, listen, Paul says that one of the main ways that we honor God by giving our employers respect and loyalty is actually by obeying. It is by doing the things that we're being paid to do. So, listen, this is really practical, but this is really important. The number one way that employees can show respect and loyalty is just by doing the work that we're paid to do, okay? As an added bonus, you can also sleep at night knowing that you're not a thief because honestly, doing personal stuff on a work time that you're being paid for, that's a kind of theft. But that's not even what he goes at here, okay? What he goes at is the fact that we can actually be serving Jesus, be honoring Jesus and God by giving our employers respect and loyalty by simply doing the job that we're called to do, okay? It's really practical, but it's a really important thing.
And he says this. He says, "Obey them not only to win their favor," in other words, not only to get an advancement, "When their eye is on you," when they're paying attention to you, "But as slaves or servants of Christ doing the will of God from your heart." In other words, don't just do the work they tell you to do in order to get ahead. Do it because it's the right thing to do, and do it when they're not looking at you, right? And that's where it gets tricky, right? It's one thing to give respect and loyalty to our employer when we're face-to-face with them, it's another thing to do that when they're kind of out of the scene, right, out of the picture. That's when it's really tempting to start talking bad about them, talking smack about them, right? Hey, I'm gonna be honest. I used to do this. I wasn't one for gossip really, but here's what I did do. I questioned most of their decisions to my fellow employees, or to my family, right? You know, I hear a decision, and I'm an opinionated guy, and so I would immediately start going, "That's kind of stupid." And I tell other people that I thought it was stupid. And I finally became convicted. The Holy Spirit convicted me that I needed to pay attention to this verse. And I wasn't obeying it in my life because I wasn't giving them respect and loyalty when I was questioning every one of their decisions and calling even their competence into question to other people.
And so here's what I figured I needed to do because I didn't necessarily agree with the decisions. I couldn't just change that. But what I did figure I could do is I could ask some questions. And so I started making it a practice in my life that before I questioned a decision that any of my bosses made, I would go talk to them and ask some questions. Instead of questioning their decisions, I would ask them some questions. Basically, go, "Hey, can you help me understand why this decision?" And here's what I found out. I'm humbled to admit this to you. Here's what I found out time and time and time again, was that there was complexity to the situation. There was a complexity that drove that particular decision that I didn't know anything about. Everything seemed black and white. Everything seemed, you know, pretty cut and dried to me, but it's because I didn't know what my bosses knew.
And the reality is this. I've come to understand this, that every position in an organization, every position has a perspective. And that perspective allows us to see certain things that people who aren't in that position don't see, okay? And that's certainly true for our employers. It's certainly true for our bosses. Because of the seat that they're in, they see things that we don't see as their employees, and they're having to consider those things as they're making those decisions. We don't know about those things, and so we're questioning their decision. We're calling them stupid idiots, but the reality is, it's not that they're incompetent. It's that they're dealing with a complexity we didn't know about. And I found that time and time again as I began to ask, "Hey, why this decision?" And I was super embarrassed looking back that all the ways that I had dishonored my employers by talking behind their back to other employees, even just questioning their decision.
So, here's a practical thing that might be useful to you as you think about showing your employer respect and loyalty. It's this. Assume complexity before incompetence. Assume complexity before incompetence. Assume that that decision probably was made in light of some things that you don't know about. And maybe you should find out about those things before you decide, and certainly before you tell anybody else what you've decided that that decision was stupid and idiotic, okay? A really practical thing that employees can do. Just assume complexity before incompetence.
And he says this. He says, "Serve wholeheartedly," okay? "Serve wholeheartedly as if you were serving the Lord, not people." And I love that. I love it because what Paul's doing there is, he's giving us an incredibly powerful principle. And here's the principle, it is that our work is an extension of our worship. Our work is an extension of our worship. That when we work well, we're actually extending our worship out into the world. Now, I think this is good news and bad news, depending on who you are. For some of you, this is really good news because you're not really good at what we traditionally call worship. Maybe you're not even comfortable with it. You know, you come to church, maybe you come in a little bit late, and you miss a song or two. And it's because, honestly, you're not real comfortable singing. And I get it. You know what? The church is like the only place in the world where we still sing out loud in public together, right? Where else do you do that? And so, it's super weird and It's super unusual in some ways. So maybe you're a little hesitant to get here for all the songs.
But maybe you're here, maybe you're here a little bit late, or maybe you're right on time but, you know, you're still a little uncomfortable. And then, of course, everybody stands up to sing. And so you're going, "I have to stand up, and I don't know what to do. And I'm supposed to sing," but you know, you sing just a little under your breath because you're not real comfortable with your singing, or maybe you're not comfortable with your breath and there's people real close, right, and you're worried about that, you know? But you're trying to do your best, right? You're doing your best. And then, you know, then the worst, it was like, "You've got to sing louder." And you're like, "I don't think you wanted me to do that." Right? But people around you are. So, you've got to do that. And they're like, you know, "Get your hands up." And the people around you are doing that. And you're like, "Man, they're better at this worship thing." And maybe, honestly, you struggle with it. And maybe you even feel a little bit guilty. Maybe you feel like maybe you're not as good a follower of Jesus because you're not as good at this whole worship thing.
But here's good news, right? If our work is an extension of our worship, you might be a much better worshiper than you think because you're a really good worker. Listen, you get up in the morning and you go, "I'm gonna go teach these kids like they were Jesus' kids." That's worship, right? You get up and you go, "Hey, I'm gonna crunch numbers like they were God's numbers like from the Book of Numbers." There's actually a Book of Numbers. "And I wanna crunch numbers like it's from the Book of Numbers," right? Hey, that's worship, okay? You're gonna study hard for a test. That's worship. You're gonna fold clothes at The Gap, but you're gonna do them well as though Jesus were gonna come browsing looking for jeans. That's worship. This is great news. Listen, if you work well to serve Jesus, to honor him, you're not just going to work. You're going to worship every day that you leave the house. That's awesome, right? That's good news.
Now, here's the bad news. The bad news is some of you out there, you're great singers in church and you're big slackers at work, okay? Like when church worship happens, you're like the best at it. Like you're already out loud. The worship leader didn't need to tell you anything, right? And you've already got the hands up and the people around you are kind of backing away because you're so enthusiastic. You're a great, great singer. So you think you're a great, great worshiper, but you go to work and you're on Facebook. You go to work and you're…you know what? You're on the upside of that. You're not wasting 2.5. You're one of those on the outlier that's kind of bringing everybody else's average, or you're wasting three, four, five hours on Facebook, or Amazon, or whatever it is, right? You're a slacker at work. And listen to me. You're a great singer at church, but a big slacker at work. You're not as sincere a worshiper as you think you are. Because our work is an extension of our worship. Listen to me. The quality of our work confirms or denies the sincerity of our worship. The quality of our work either confirms or denies the sincerity of our worship. How you live at work, how well you serve your employer either proves that you are a sincere worshiper of Jesus, or it calls that into significant question, okay? Good news, bad news, but it's news we have to pay attention to, okay?
And he says this. He says, "You're supposed to do it because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether slave or free, whether employee or employer." I love that, okay? Because what it says is that working hard isn't just the right thing to do, but it's also the thing that leads to rewards. He's saying that God rewards those who work well. That's awesome, right? God rewards those who work well. That's fantastic. And notice, he didn't just say for Gospel good, right? He didn't say he'll reward whoever does Gospel good. He says, "Reward whoever does whatever good." Right?
So listen, you share the Gospel with somebody, that's good and God rewards it. You're generous with your finances. That's good, and God rewards it. You go on a short-term mission trip. That's good. God rewards it. You join a serve team at work. That's good and God rewards it. But check this out. You spend a little bit extra time on that spreadsheet to make it perfect for your boss. That's good, and God rewards it. You polish up that presentation to make your boss look really good to his or her boss. That's good. God rewards it. You work hard at studying if you're student in school. That's good and God rewards it. Kids, you clean up your room like mom asks, not just by getting everything out of sight, but actually genuinely clean the room up, right? That's good and God rewards it. You get your job done on time and under budget. You save the company money. That is good, and God rewards it. God rewards whatever good we do. That's fantastic news.
And as a bonus, check this out. Great work earns us permission to live on mission on the job. See, at Mission Hills, we're all about helping people become like Jesus and join him on mission, which means extending his influence out into the world. And listen, you can't extend God's influence out of the world if you're not willing to talk about Jesus out in the world. And if you're called to extend his influence into your work, that means you're gonna have to talk about your faith at work. And I know a lot of Christians are really nervous about that because they feel like, "If I do that, you know, I'm gonna get in trouble and maybe even I'm gonna get fired." And, you know, we've heard stories about that kind of thing happening, but check this out. I'm not saying it can't ever happen, but I'm gonna tell you this. Do you know what the greatest safety net is for being outspoken about your faith and on mission with Jesus at your job is? Do you know what the greatest safety net is? It's the quality of your work.
Listen to me. Do you think, for one second, that they're gonna fire the top salesperson in the company, the top salesperson in the company just because she happens to tell people that she's a follower of Jesus? Not gonna happen. You think they're gonna get rid of the engineer that keeps finding ways to improve the bottom line of the company, keep finding ways to improve their products and increase their profits just because he keeps a Bible on his desk and he invites people to come to church with him on the weekend? Not gonna happen. Do you think the contractor who gets the job done on time and under budget… That does happen. It does. Do you think the contractor who gets the job done on time and under budget but who also hands his clients, you know, an invite card to the next sermon series of his church, you think they're gonna stop calling that guy to come do work? Not a chance, right? Listen to me. The quality of our work gives us permission to live on mission with Jesus. And that's an awesome thing. Okay. So what do we know? Here's what we know. Employees, we're supposed to see your work as an extension of your worship by treating your employers with respect and loyalty. That's what you're supposed to do. That's the bottom line, okay?
Now, that's employees. What about employers? Here's what he says. He says, "And [employers], treat your [employees] in the same way." I love that. "In the same way." In other words, extend to them what you expect from them, right? He says, "Treat them in the same way." Okay? Well, what does that mean? What's "In the same way?" Well, what he's already said. He said this. He says, "It's about respect and loyalty and doing it as though you're serving Jesus." So employers must treat their employees with respect and loyalty as if they're serving the Lord. Okay? That's what they're supposed to do. Now, obviously, it's gonna look a little bit different for an employer to show respect and loyalty to an employee, but it's the same concept, respect and loyalty as if you're serving the Lord.
Okay. If you're an employer, what does this look like? Well, let me give you a few things, some things that I've learned in my own journey from employee over to the other side of the table as employer. The first one is this. Assume complexity before incompetence. If that sounds familiar, this is exactly what I said to employees. You know, employees are questioning, you know, the boss' every decision because they're not aware of all, you know, the factors that are going into that decision. Well, employers, we've got to do the same thing with our employees. And sometimes we get frustrated because, you know, we ask them to do something, it's taking an awfully long time, or it didn't come out quite the way we expected it would. And we get frustrated. And we tend to assume that either they're lazy or they're just not paying attention, or they're not doing their job. But the reality is, remember, every position has a perspective. That includes the employee positions. And sometimes our employees are in a position to see things that as employers, we don't see. And so we ask them to do something. It seems super simple, super easy, but the reality is it's a lot more complex. And maybe they're trying really hard, but they're struggling to get it done in the time frame that we expected or in the way that we expected because we're not aware of complexity. And so rather than assuming that they're incompetent, we should start with the assumption that there's complexity, okay? Assume complexity before incompetence. We need to ask questions before we pass judgments. That's one of the ways we can do it.
Another way we can do it is this. Promote from inside rather than hiring from outside whenever possible, right? In other words, especially with upper-level positions, sometimes, you know, we find a management position, something like that, and we're like, "Okay, I need to bring somebody in," and we never even pay any attention to the people who were managed by that supervisor, right? We kind of look outside the organization and immediately go, "I need somebody else who's got the same experience as that position had and, you know, they occupied the same position in another company. And so we'll bring somebody from the outside." But the reality is that sometimes we have people in our organizations that are ready to rise up. And we should ask that question first. Before we look to the outside, we should look to see if we have somebody else that we can raise up into that position. It's actually gonna be good for us, in addition to being good for them, because the reality is, they're gonna have our culture. We're already gonna know whether or not we can trust them, whether they have chemistry. We already know what they're able to do and maybe where they struggle. And so where we can kind of come alongside them. So it's really good for us, too.
And that's part of being, I think, respectful and loyal to our employees, is to try to hire from within or promote from within rather than hire from without, okay? Now, you can't always do that. I know that. Sometimes you don't have the right person, so sometimes you do have to go outside, but we should at least start by asking the question, "Do we have somebody else here who's ready to rise up before we reach out to bring somebody else into the organization?" Okay?
Here's another thing you can do. You can invest in employee development. Okay? Invest in employee development. We try really hard to do this here at Mission Hills. We spend a fair amount of money on sending staff to conferences and having training days and getting them further education for stuff. And I know some employers kind of, they balk at this. They get a little nervous. In fact, I've had conversations just recently with an employer who went, "Yeah, that's great for the church, but the problem is, in the business world, you know, if you develop your employees, you make them really good at what they do, they're just gonna go somewhere else and work for somebody else. And so it will have all have been a wasted investment." And first off, I'm like, "Yeah, I think you might have a problem in your company." If you're developing people and they're immediately jumping ship, there might be a bigger problem.
But let's say that they do, okay? Let's say they do go work for somebody else. That's okay because here's the thing. Being respectful and loyal to your employees means caring about them as people rather than producers. It means caring more about them for the people that they are rather than for the producing that they can do for our company, okay, or for our church, our small business, whatever it is. And if we really care about people, then we're gonna want the best for them, whether that's with us or not with us, okay? So if you invest in developing somebody and they go work for somebody else and it's good for them, you know, you should consider that a win. That's what it means to be respectful and loyal to our people, okay? And honestly, if you don't feel that way, then the chances are you don't have genuine respect or loyalty to your employees. We take this seriously enough at Mission Hills. Actually, I have a full-time staff person who's in charge of staff development, and she sits on my executive team. That's how important I think this is. And really wanna encourage employers out there if you're gonna say that you are loyal and respectful to your employees, are you looking to develop them as people as well as workers?
Here's another thing you can do. You can invest in developing a healthy culture, okay? So much stuff written about this, we don't have anywhere near enough time to dig into it, but this is the thing. Maybe you've heard this phrase before. Culture eats vision for breakfast, or culture eats mission for breakfast, okay? Culture is basically…it's the actual values that drive the way you interact and make decisions in your organization, okay? Not the ones that you print on, you know, plaques and things like that and say, "Oh, we care about this. We care about that." I mean the ones that actually impact your day-to-day operations, the actual values that drive the way you interact with each other, and the decisions that you make, okay?
Developing a healthy culture is one of the best ways that an employer can demonstrate respect and loyalty to their employees because the thing is, if you have a really healthy culture, you're gonna achieve your mission, okay? You're gonna achieve your vision. You're gonna hit your goals and your benchmarks. But if you have an unhealthy culture, it doesn't matter what you do or how much you drive people, you're probably not gonna get there, okay? This is something we take pretty seriously at Mission Hills. I had somebody say to me the other day, "At a church the size of Mission Hills, do you kind of feel like a CEO rather than a pastor?" Yeah, there's some truth to that, but actually, you know what? I don't think of myself as a CEO. I actually think of myself as a CCO, a chief culture officer because I really believe that one of my most important jobs as the pastor here is to inspire people by creating a culture that allows us to accomplish our mission, a culture where people feel valued and cared for.
Here's another thing you can do, the last thing for employers out there. You can review your compensation on a regular basis. A lot of employers go, "Well, I give everybody, you know, a 2% raise or whatever every year." And that's not a bad starting point, but you know what? There's things that happen that maybe require you to reevaluate that people have more experience now. And maybe if you were hiring somebody else for that position, with that amount experience that they now have, you pay them more. So maybe you need to pay that employee more or the housing market's changed. And if you want people to be able to live and thrive, you maybe need to pay them more.
We're actually doing this right now at Mission Hills. We have a process every year that we go through that we think is fair to try to get people not only to pay them what other churches our size and in our kind of area of the country are paying people doing similar jobs, but we wanna pay them a little above that because one of our core values is crazy generosity. But you know what? We actually paid some money to a consultant this year to do an independent compensation analysis for all of our staff to make sure that we're being as fair and generous as we think we are. And if we're not, we're gonna make changes, okay? So there are some suggestions if you're an employer about how you can show respect and loyalty. Basically, all I'm asking you to do is extend what you expect. That's it, okay? Extend the respect and the loyalty that you expect.
He says, "Do not threaten them," or literally it says, "Give up threats," implying that for a lot of employers, threatening employees in one way or another is kind of their standard way of leading. And it's a terrible way to lead. He said, "Give that up." He says, "And do it, do that, give that up since you know that he, who is both their Master and yours, is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him." Basically, he says, "Hey, God's not impressed by your position, employers. He's the real big boss." Okay? So bottom line, employers, see your work as an extension of your worship by treating your employees with respect and loyalty. It's the same thing, right? It plays out a little different, but it's the same thing, both sides of the table, right? What's the big idea, for all of us, employer, employee, middle manager, see our work, we need to see our work as an extension of our worship by treating one another with respect and loyalty. Those two ingredients, they will transform your work relationships, transform them. I promise you.
All right. Let's push in a little bit. A question for all the employees out there. Is the quality of my work confirming or denying the sincerity of my worship? That might be an uncomfortable question to push into, but I'm gonna challenge you to push into it. Does the way that you conduct yourself at work extend your worship out into the world, or does it actually call into question the sincerity of your worship? Here's another question for employees. What's one way I could improve the quality of my work? What's one way that I could up the quality of my work and in that way, extend my worship into my work and into the world?
Here's a couple questions for employers. How about this one. Am I guilty of threatening my employees in some way, holding some kind of a threat over them to try to motivate them to work? It's not respectful? It's not being loyal. So, what do I need to do to change that? Okay? If that's the way that you are leading, what do you need to do to give up those threats, as Paul says? Instead, lead them out of respect and loyalty to them. Okay? The last question. What's one thing I can do to extend the loyalty to my employees that I expect from them? One thing you can do to extend loyalty, you don't have to come up with a billion things or 20 things, or even 5 things this week. What's one thing you can do as an employer to extend to your employees what you're expecting from them? Okay. The Bottom line? No matter where you sit at the table, right, bottom line, see your work as an extension of your worship by treating one another with respect and loyalty. Would you pray with me?
Hey, God, we just give you thanks. For those of us who have jobs, we just give you thanks that we have jobs. Maybe they're jobs that are difficult, maybe they're jobs that we're struggling with our employees or our employers, or maybe with our fellow workers, but Lord, we're thankful in the season that we have jobs, and we say that to you right now. But we also lift up all those who are struggling in this season. We know that a lot of people have lost jobs. We know that a lot of employers have had to make really difficult calls of furloughing employees or laying them off or cutting their wages. And I know that they're heartbroken over that. They're losing a lot of sleep over that. So we pray for those who have lost jobs and for those who have had to cut those jobs. And we pray that there would be a return to our economy quickly, as you end this pandemic and bring people back to work. Lord, maybe not only would all those people get their jobs back but maybe even those who had been struggling, looking for work before this pandemic started, would find meaningful, significant work at the end of it because of the greatness of your blessing on us, as we take these commands seriously.
Now, if you're a follower of Jesus, would you do something for me? Would you just take a moment right now, just begin praying? Start praying for all those who are watching around the world who don't have a relationship with Jesus. And if that's you, you tuned into this and, you know, maybe you don't go to church normally and you're not a follower of Jesus, that's fine. We're so glad you're with us. Hopefully, you found some practical things today that'll be a blessing to you. But the most important thing you need to hear is this. You know, Paul talked about, we all have a Master in heaven. What you need to understand is you have a Master in heaven. There is a God in heaven who treats us with the same respect and loyalty that he calls us to give to one another in the workplace. He treats us with love.
See, we've all sinned. We've all done wrong. We've all rebelled against God. We've walked away from him. And there's a cost to that. The cost is death, separation from God for all eternity. But in spite of our sin, God loves us so much that he sent his own Son, Jesus, who lived the perfect life. He had no sin to pay for. So when he went to the cross, he reached down, he took our sin on his shoulders. He died to set us free from our sin, from the guilt and shame, to remove all the barriers between us and God. That's how deeply God loves you. That's how deeply our Master in heaven respects us and is loyal to us. He sent his own Son to die for us. Three days later, he rose from the dead. And he provides salvation, forgiveness, and freedom simply by faith, by trusting in what he did for us, and our relationship with that Master who loves us, a relationship that begins now and transforms life here now, but it goes on forever.
And if you've never begun that relationship, here's how you can do it. Wherever you are, you're just gonna have this conversation with God. If you're ready to put your trust, to put your faith in this God, here's how you do it. Just say this in your heart:
Hey God, I know that I have not been loyal and respectful to you. I've sinned. I rebelled against you, and I'm sorry. Thank you for sending your son Jesus to pay for all the wrong I've done. I believe he rose from the dead to prove that he'd paid my debt. And I understand that he's offering me forgiveness and freedom and a relationship with you just by faith. So I'm gonna put my faith in you, Jesus, right now. I'm saying yes to a relationship with you. Come into my life. I'm yours for now and forever. Amen.


Fireball MUSTANG Coloring Book sells out at THE PETERSEN MUSEUM!!
Like LIGHTNING, Fireball's MUSTANG Coloring Book had virtually immediately sold out at the Petersen Museum Store. Have you gotten your copy yet? DO IT!


In October 2018, Myrtle Hibbs experienced full-body weakness following her battle with heart and respiratory failure.
Lois Collins, a resident at Parkview Care Center, recently had her artwork featured on a Christmas card.
After having heart surgery to replace a valve, Thomas Fritz needed rehabilitation before he was ready to return home.


text:
Q: Certificate errors on Exchange 2010 NLB CAS array server On my Exchange server, I have two CAS servers in a CAS NLB array.  I need to install a 3rd party SAN/UCC certificate on both of these servers for OWA.  I generated the request on CAS1, submitted to a public CA and installed it on the CAS1 server.  I didn't generate a CSR on the CAS2 server.  I exported the certificate out of CAS1 (with the private key) went to the CAS2 server and imported it into CAS2.  The certificate shows as installed on CAS2.  Problem is that EMC reports "The certificate is invalid for Exchange server usage" and it shows a red "X" next to the certificate in the EMC.
I've tried using both the certificates MMC and EMC to export it from CAS1 and using both to import it into the CAS2 server but no luck.  I've tried removing the certificate using both EMC and the certificates MMC but when I import it back in I still get the same results.  I've even restored the complete server from backup to a previous state before I started the certificate import process but I got the same results.  Because I've gotten the same results after a restore, I'm concerned that something else is wrong here.  I can double-click on the certificate in the EMC and in the certificate MMC and both report that the certificate as valid so the trusted root is working.
I wanted to rebuild the local server certificate store but I would think that a complete restore of a server would return the local server certificate store to the previous state.  Is there any certificate metadata maintained in AD for a computer object or more specifically for Exchange server objects?  Is there anywhere that I can look to figure out why Exchange 2010 SP3 UR2 is reporting that a certificate is valid on one CAS NLB array node but not valid on an identical node?

A: With many cert providers, you must import the intermediate cert into the appropriate folder in the Certificates console. Did you do that on CAS2?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


A trusted OOB application is a program the user trusts (similar to when a desktop application is installed on our machine).
Its XAP file is signed with a certificate, which ensures its trustworthy origin.
It has elevated permissions, which makes it possible, for example, to make calls to COM components, P/Invoke calls, or access the local filesystem.


text:
Suo padre era Carlo di Rohan, principe de Soubise, un grande amico di Luigi XV. Sua madre era Anna Maria de la Tour d'Auvergne. Anna Maria Luisa era una delle nipoti di Maria Anna Mancini, una delle famose Mazarinettes.

Attraverso Maria Anna Mancini, Carlotta era cugina sia del principe Eugenio di Savoia che di Luigi Giuseppe di Borbone, due famosi generali durante il regno di Luigi XIV. Anna Maria Luisa era anche bisnipote di Madame de Ventadour, la governante di Luigi XV quando era bambino.

Ella ebbe una sorellastra minore, Vittoria Armanda Giuseppa di Rohan. Vittoria sarebbe diventata in seguito la governante del futuro re Luigi XVII. Vittoria era anche cugina dell'amica dal triste destino della regina Maria Antonietta, la principessa de Lamballe.

Biografia

Infanzia

Carlotta Goffreda Elisabetta di Rohan nacque il 7 ottobre 1737 all'Hôtel de Soubise a Parigi, la residenza cittadina del Casato di Rohan.

Poiché la Casa di Rohan discendeva dai Duchi di Bretagna, a Carlotta e alla sua famiglia fu concesso il rango di Princes étrangers alla corte francese, con il corrispondente appellativo di Altezza.

Nel 1739, fu creata Marchesa di Gordes e Contessa di Moncha, titoli che ricevette da sua madre quando morì. Nel 1745, fu creata viscontessa di Guignen nel suo pieno diritto. Nella sua dote, le fu assegnata la signorìa di Annonay, che passò ai Borbone.

Matrimonio

Carlotta e Luigi Giuseppe di Borbone, principe di Condé, si sposarono al Palazzo di Versailles il 3 maggio 1753, il padre di Carlotta, secondo testimonianze, le diede una dote di 20 milioni di Lire.

Luigi Giuseppe era più anziano di Carlotta di un anno. Era Principe di Condé sin dal 1740, quando, alla giovane età di quattro anni, aveva perso suo padre, Luigi Enrico, principe di Condé. Suo padre, in qualità di Duca di Borbone, era stato un tempo il primo ministro di re Luigi XV e aveva svolto un ruolo attivo nell'organizzare il matrimonio del giovane re con la principessa polacca Maria Leszczyńska. Aveva soltanto quarantotto anni al momento della sua morte.

La madre di Luigi Giuseppe, la principessa tedesca Carolina d'Assia-Rotenburg, morì l'anno successivo all'età di ventidue anni. Come risultato, Luigi Giuseppe era rimasto orfano ed era stato allevato dallo zio Conte di Clermont.

Principessa di Condé

La nuova Princesse de Condé era tra le donne più importanti a corte, di grado superiore dopo la Regina Maria Leszczyńska e le sue otto figlie, la Duchessa d'Orléans e Mademoiselle, che sarebbe diventata in seguito sua nuora.

Luigi Giuseppe possedeva a corte il rango di Prince du sang con l'appellativo corrispondente di Altezza Serenissima, un appellativo che Carlotta assunse quando diventò Principessa di Condé.

Da questo matrimonio nacquero tre figli. Prima, una femmina nata nel 1755, seguita subito dal desiderato maschio nel 1756; un'altra femmina nacque nel 1758. Carlotta visse all'Hôtel de Condé a Parigi, la residenza della famiglia Condé, dato che il Palais Bourbon, costruito dalla nonna di Luigi Giuseppe, Luisa Francesca di Borbone, era stato venduto alla corona nel 1756. Principessa colta, fu molto gentile con i poveri.

Ultimi anni e morte

Fu all'Hôtel de Condé che Carlotta morì dopo una lunga malattia, come riportato dal Duca di Luynes. Aveva solo ventidue anni, la stessa età che la suocera, Carolina, aveva alla sua morte. Fu sepolta nel convento delle carmelitane del Faubourg Saint-Jacques. Il tempo ufficiale per lutto di Charlotte cominciò l'11 marzo.

Suo marito si risposò nel 1798, prendendo come sua seconda moglie la nobildonna italiana, Maria Caterina Brignole-Sale, la vedova di Onorato III, principe di Monaco.

Discendenza
Dal matrimonio tra Carlotta e Luigi-Giuseppe di Borbone-Condé nacquero:
 Maria di Borbone, Mademoiselle de Bourbon (16 febbraio 1755 - 22 giugno 1759) morì nell'infanzia.
 Luigi Enrico, Principe di Condé (13 aprile 1756 - 30 agosto 1830) sposò Batilde d'Orléans ed ebbe figli.
 Luisa Adelaide di Borbone (5 ottobre 1757 - 10 marzo 1824) morì nubile.

Titoli e trattamento
 7 ottobre 1737 – 3 maggio 1753: Sua Altezza, Carlotta Elisabetta Goffreda, principessa di Rohan
 3 maggio 1753 – 4 marzo 1760: Sua Altezza Serenissima, la Principessa di Condé

Ascendenza

Note

Altri progetti

Charlotte
Francesi del XVIII secolo


Can a viral video save an obese man?
It's difficult to watch Robert Gibbs. But it has nothing to do with the fact that he weighs nearly 700 pounds.
In a candid and wrenching plea on the eve of his 23rdbirthday last week, the Livermore, Calif., man did something extraordinary. He braved the mockery and opprobrium of the entire Internet in the calculated hope of "trying to go viral" and turn his life around. In a clip self-explanatorily called "Overweight guy asks for help," Gibbs explains, "I'm making this video because I don't know what else to do. I've tried losing weight on my own. Tried doing everything possible. Been on diets, been hospitalized. Always done what needed to be done at the time and then I'd just gain the weight back."
Gibbs' first wish -- to go viral -- has already come true. Within 24 hours, Gibbs' video had over 200,000 hits. It's now surged well past a million. And after Gibbs mentioned Dr. Phil in his video, the show reached out to him and is reportedly paying a visit to his home Wednesday.
The rapidity with which a sincere, life-or-death request for help can be met by the global community is heartening. In addition to Dr. Phil's response, Gibbs received an offer of assistance from "transformation specialist" Chris Powell this past weekend. Gibbs has also been deluged with advice and supportive response messages, including a deeply heartfelt video from YouTube heavyweight Boogie2988, who tells him, "You're inspiring me ...You're making a good decision and you're making a healthy choice ... May you get everything you want."
But can the Internet truly save a man's life? And is going viral now the go-to solution to a seemingly insurmountable crisis? Gibbs is already declining to be interviewed because of a claimed "exclusivity agreement with 'Dr. Phil,'" a trust you can only hope the show will treat honorably. He has also opened himself up to the kind of vicious, evil, "fat people deserve to die" trolling upon which YouTube was built. So what happens when Dr. Phil or Chris Powell pack up their TV cameras and the television advice-givers and the social media support system move on to the next thing? You've got to wince at the sustained cruelty the man -- who says he has diabetes, sores all over his body, is on disability and believes he has depression -- is in for.
Maybe Gibbs will fare as well as the "golden voiced" Ted Williams, who after a few setbacks and false starts is now, a year after he was discovered panhandling in Ohio, working steadily and has a roof over his head. Or he may become another victim of an insatiable, novelty-seeking public and the opportunism of daytime talk. But what's certain is that this isn't a story about losing weight. It's about something much bigger. Robert Gibbs did not become morbidly obese overnight. A man who's been hospitalized in the past needs more than mere diet or encouragement.
Gibbs says in his video, "For everyone that's going to make fun of me, I really don't care. This is my last chance, my last hope. I'm really scared that I'm not going to watch my niece and nephew grow up and I'm never going to have a family of my own. I've never had a life." That's why it's hard to watch Robert Gibbs, even as millions of us continue to do just that. He's a fellow human being in pain, asking us to look past his exterior and truly see him. Asking us to do what he says he can't do for himself: to save him.


text:
Scheme - Examples
=================

Program List
------------

*Algorithms*

-  **harmonic**.scm
    - implementation of generating a harmonic series

*Data Structures*

-  **rational**.scm
    - implementation of a rational number data structure

*Language*

-  **functions**.scm
    - generating custom functions
-  **lists**.scm
    - creating a variety of list functions
-  **recursion**.scm
    - recursively searching through a list

Compiling & Running Code
------------------------

Download DrRacket to run programs in Scheme.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


CINCINNATI, OH (FOX19) - Shoppers get your wallets ready -- the northern Kentucky Wayfair outlet store is opening permanently Valentine's Day week.
The home goods company will officially open the doors to its Florence location Feb. 15 at 10 a.m.
The company says they will be open permanently Fridays and Saturdays from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Sundays from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Wayfair originally opened at 5101 Renegade Way for a soft opening multiple weekends throughout the Fall and December before their official opening was announced.
The company says during their opening weekend, customers will receive 20 percent off already reduced prices throughout the store.
Wayfair also says they're hiring for warehouse roles in Hebron, Erlanger and Florence. You can text WayfairKY to 40458 to apply.


text:
Brad Paisley hits it out of the park at Irvine…
Brad Paisley hits it out of the park at Irvine show
Two decades into his career as a recording artist, the country star pleases fans with a robust set.
Country artist Brad Paisley performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. Chris Lane and Riley Green also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
By George A. Paul | britpopgeo@sbcglobal.net |
PUBLISHED: June 9, 2019 at 9:55 a.m. | UPDATED: June 9, 2019 at 9:55 a.m.
Brad Paisley is a big baseball enthusiast — especially the Los Angeles Dodgers. Last year, he sang the National Anthem during the World Series and did third baseman Justin Turner's special season-opening walkup song ("Gatorade"). Then there's the Paisley mascot, who comes onstage for "Celebrity" wearing a Dodgers jersey.
In Irvine on Saturday night, the singer/guitarist — marking the 20th anniversary of his debut album's release this month — even changed a "Ticks" lyric to "I'd like to see the other half of your Dodgers tattoo" (that elicited a minor booing here in Angels territory).
So, it wasn't a surprise when Paisley briefly made FivePoint Amphitheatre feel like being at a game for the seventh inning stretch while his version of the Kiss Cam took place alongside "My Miracle." The recent single, a first time co-write with noted tunesmith Gary Nicholson, is a touching ode for wife Kimberly and sure to be a staple at weddings for decades to come. Multiple couples at the venue smooched each time a camera zoomed in on them.
Country music fans watch Brad Paisley perform at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country music fans raise their beverages as Chris Lane performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country music fan Melissa Norton, from Huntington Beach, dances as Riley Green performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. Brad Paisley and Chris Lane also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Music fans file into Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 for country artist Brad Paisley. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country artist Riley Green performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 prior to Chris Lane and headliner Brad Paisley. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country music fans Jacob and Roxanne Rasar, from Riverside, play a game of corn hole at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 prior to Brad Paisley's show. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country artist Chris Lane performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 Riley Green and headliner Brad Paisley also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country music fans play a game of corn hole at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 prior to Brad Paisley's show. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
A guitarist for country artist Chris Lane performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019 Riley Green and headliner Brad Paisley also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
A young girl holds up a sign for headliner Brad Paisley at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. Chris Lane and Riley Green also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
Country music fans Sunnie Andrade, from West Covina, and Sun Park, from El Segundo, dance as Riley Green performs at Five Point Amphitheatre in Irvine Saturday evening June 8, 2019. Brad Paisley and Chris Lane also performed. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)
You can always count on Paisley to inject plenty of humor into a concert. His return to Orange County elicited smiles from the get-go. A clip featuring a snowstorm and Christmas music was projected on the backdrop screen. Then Paisley and the six-piece band performed "Beat This Summer," the perfect choice to kick off the solid 1 hour, 45-minute set.
Early on, the musicians barely paused between tunes such as the twangy "World," a soaring "Perfect Storm" and feisty, fiddle-laden "Water." Unlike many country music backing bands these days, they weren't annoyingly flashy, either — a refreshing change of pace. Instead, the guys left the dazzling displays to their boss man. Watching Paisley solo on his Fender electric guitars (changed often and sometimes mid-song) was fascinating.
"It's great they have an amphitheater for us to play again in Irvine," said Paisley, who performed at Irvine Meadows in 2016 before the venue was demolished. Concertgoers cheered loudly. Then he did "I'm Still a Guy," the whimsical mid-2000s song about metrosexuality, and was joined by opening acts Chris Lane and Riley Green. What resulted was a bit ragged, but fun. The guys took a break to snap a picture using a fan's phone, added a silly message and posted it to social media.
"This is Country Music," with images of old country legends on the Grand Ole Opry stage, was highly effective. Paisley signed his electric guitar and gifted it to a young boy sporting (what else?) a Dodgers cap. Then the song took on a patriotic tone as an American flag image and four Army men and women appeared onstage. Paisley and audience took a moment to salute them and other fellow members of the military serving around the world.
Last Friday would have been Prince's 61st birthday. Paisley paid tribute to the late music legend after "Last Time for Everything" (which namechecks "Purple Rain") by leading the crowd in a quick chorus snippet of that '80s hit. Later, he'd also give a nod to 1984 by doing a bit of Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher" during an instrumental display.
Festival Pass: How to experience some of California's biggest music festivals — from your car
Elsewhere, Paisley's mostly acoustic-based ballads "Letter to Me" (performed within the crowd), "Whiskey Lullaby" and "She's Everything" were clear standouts. Lane and Green rejoined Paisley for the usual high-spirited encore of "Alcohol."
Chris Lane turned in an engaging 40-minute opening set that began with his 2015 R&B-tinged country airplay chart topper "Fix." The gregarious North Carolina native rocked out and chugged a can of Bud Light during "Broken Windshield View," walked around with a camera amid the easygoing groove and smooth harmonies of "Fishin'" (co-written by Brian Kelley of Florida Georgia Line) and invited a middle aged female fan up to sit in a chair while he sang "I Don't Know About You" to her.
Lane's spirited 1990s country tribute medley featured bits of George Strait, Tim McGraw, Brooks and Dunn and Garth Brooks songs. But "Take Back Home Girl," his sultry 2017 hit duet with Tori Kelly, made the most indelible mark.
Rising newcomer Riley Green's sturdy 20-minute performance was highlighted by the upbeat and catchy recent single "In Love by Now" and rousing top 20 country hit "There Was This Girl." His wistful unreleased solo acoustic ballad "Grandpas Never Die" also proved particularly memorable.
With: Chris Lane, Riley Green
When: Saturday, June 8
Where: FivePoint Amphitheatre, Irvine
Next: The Mercury Insurance Concert Series continues with Train, Goo Goo Dolls, June 16; Santana, June 20; Hootie & the Blowfish, Barenaked Ladies, June 23; Brit Floyd, June 30.
George A. Paul | Music and entertainment writer
George A. Paul, whose first concert was Neil Diamond at The Fabulous Forum in 1983, has written about entertainment since the early 1990s. He also posts music news, reviews and interviews at newwavegeo.blogspot.com.
britpopgeo@sbcglobal.net


Fernández, J., Herrera, S., Gutiérrez, J.M., Rodríguez, M.A.
This work illustrates the usefulness of some recent spatiotemporal analysis tools in the field of weather and climate simulation. To this aim we present a recent characterization of spatiotemporal error growth (the so called mean-variance logarithmic (MVL) diagram, Primo et al. 2005, Gutiérrez et al. 2008). Behind a simple calculation procedure, the MVL diagram comes from a sound theoretical basis borrowed from the growth of rough interfaces (López et al. 2004), and has several applications as a diagnostic tool in the characterization of ensemble prediction systems. Namely, it is useful in characterizing (1) the initial perturbations applied in a simulation, (2) the model dynamics, acting as a fingerprint for different models and (3) the climatological fluctuations of the perturbations specific of each model. As opposite to the standard temporal analysis (spatially-averaged or single-point), the MVL spatiotemporal analysis accounts for the nontrivial localization of fluctuations, thus allowing disentangling the effects of the different initialization procedures (random, lagged, singular vectors) and the different model formulations.
We show an application of this diagram using a coupled ocean-atmosphere Ensemble Prediction System (Fernández et al. 2009); in particular we consider the DEMETER multimodel seasonal hindcast and focus on both initial conditions (three different perturbation procedures) and model errors (seven coupled GCMs). We show that the shared building blocks of the GCMs (atmospheric and ocean components) impose similar dynamics among different models and, thus, contribute to poorly sampling the model formulation uncertainty. We also illustrate how multiple scales in dynamical systems impose non-trivial effects on the growth of perturbations.