Hypocrisy

Extravagantly powerful and noisy engines helped make Ferrari the ultimate sports car brand. Now the company wants to persuade the superrich to buy a model with no engine at all.

The Italian carmaker this week started lifting the hood on its first fully electric vehicle, a yearlong project that has cost the brand hundreds of millions of dollars and promises to set a benchmark for how battery-powered sports cars should look, sound and drive.

…EVs pose a particular challenge for luxury sports-car brand, which say roar and rumble are central to their identities and appeal. Ferrari, perhaps more than any other automaker, has built its brand on internal combustion engines.

Ferrari said its EV wouldn’t mimic engine sounds, as some competitors have. Instead, it will pick up the sound of what it calls the “electric engine” and amplify it into the cabin to give the driver feedback when required.”

Maybe Ferrari is onto something but for many who adore their cars a Ferrari without a roar seems like a love sung played on a kazoo or a passionate love that goes unspoken, or a marriage without warmth and fire, or a honeymoon without a dessert, or a love poem written by autocorrect, or finally a romantic dinner on paper plates. It may all be there but it’s missing something essential.

Being grateful is an American tradition, especially this week. And research has shown that it has mental- and physical-health benefits, including less depression and better sleep, relationships and success at work.

But a recent article on The Wall Street Journal argued that what it calls “performative gratitude” may be bad for you. The article states: “Performative gratitude—compelling ourselves to be grateful when we’re not—is a form of toxic positivity. The energy we expend trying to avoid the uncomfortable feeling will, ironically, keep us focused on the problem. Then we feel guilty because we failed to be grateful.”

“Forced gratitude is manipulating,” says Sara Kuburic, a psychotherapist based in Sydney. “It prevents us from taking responsibility to change things to make them the way we want them to be.”

Pushing ourselves to feel grateful can harm our relationships, too. If we’re putting on a facade, we’re not being honest, and that can lead to resentment and a lack of communication. It can also make us appear like a Pollyanna—someone out of touch with reality. And this can leave us vulnerable to people who see us as a pushover.
One of the researchers said, “Grateful people may be perceived to be more forgiving and tolerant, so others may feel they can get away with something.”

Possible Preaching Angles:

The Bible urges us to be grateful for the Lord and his good character—but that can still allow room to express negative emotions like sadness or anger, as we see so often in the psalms of lament, for instance. But that isn’t ingratitude; it’s gratitude that has grappled with sorrow but still trusts in God.

The longer the internet lives, the more inescapable a certain trend becomes: the performance of grief. That is, when someone on TikTok, Instagram, or YouTube, exhibits a hardship for audience consumption. At The Atlantic, Maytal Eyal has an interesting appraisal:

People post videos of themselves crying (or trying not to). Some of these videos moody music; many rack up hundreds of thousands of views. … Influencers and celebrities strip down to what can seem like the rawest version of themselves, selling the promise of “real” emotional connection—and, not infrequently, products or their personal brand.

The weepy confessions are, ostensibly, gestures toward intimacy. They’re meant to inspire empathy, to reassure viewers that influencers are just like them. But in fact, they’re exercises in what I’ve come to call “McVulnerability,” a synthetic version of vulnerability akin to fast food: mass-produced, sometimes tasty, but lacking in sustenance. True vulnerability can foster emotional closeness. McVulnerability offers only an illusion of it.

In my years as a therapist, I’ve seen a trend among some of my younger clients: They prefer the controlled environment of the internet — the polish of YouTube, the ephemeral nature of TikTok — to the tender awkwardness of making new friends. Instead of reaching out to a peer, they’ll turn to the comfort of their phone and spend time with their preferred influencers.

Psychotherapist Esther Perel touched on this impulse while discussing what she calls “artificial intimacy.” She says that these digital connections risk “lowering our expectations of intimacy between humans” and leave us “unprepared and unable to tolerate the inevitable unpredictabilities of human nature, love, and life.”

Putting yourself out there is uncomfortable. But I also worry that by relying mostly on social media to encounter other humans, they’re forfeiting opportunities to develop the skills that could help them thrive in the flesh-and-blood world.

A new survey from Bankrate.com found that 40% of adults in the U.S. with a live-in partner have committed financial infidelity. Younger generations were more likely to keep money secrets: 67% of Gen Zers said they have confessed at least one instance of financial infidelity, followed by Millennials at 54%.

What sort of things are they hiding? 33% are spending more than their spouse or partner would be cool with, and 23% have racked up debt that their partner has no knowledge of. Others keep secret credit or savings accounts.

Avigail Lev, director at Bay Area Cognitive Behavioral Therapy says, “Choosing to be private about where and how you spend your money is just privacy. (But) having agreements with your partner about how you use money and hiding it on purpose, lying or deceiving, that’s financial infidelity.”

Money is one of the leading causes of divorce, yet often couples still struggle to communicate openly about finances. CPA Melisssa Pavone says, “Many couples never unpack their financial history and beliefs, leading to misunderstandings and resentment. Without open dialogue, secrets fester and financial infidelity can erode trust — just like physical infidelity.”

Why would someone who loves you deeply be dishonest about money? CPA Emily Luk says, “Sometimes it’s about guilt or fear — worrying that their partner won’t approve of a certain purchase, or that an old financial mistake might scare them off. Other times, it’s a way to avoid conflict or keep the peace. They might think it’s easier to conceal credit card statements than to have a tough conversation."

There can be differences in couples' money personalities and values: One is a spender, the other a saver. But money can also take the form of power, control, safety, past financial trauma, or even a mental health issue, substance use, or gambling disorder.

The Freakonomics podcast explored why the phrase “I don’t know” is so difficult for people to say. Contrary to the common belief that “I love you” is the hardest phrase, the hosts argue that “I don’t know” is even more challenging, and our reluctance to admit ignorance starts in childhood and persists into adulthood.

Psychological experiments show that when children are asked nonsensical questions, such as whether “a sweater is angrier than a tree,” most will invent answers rather than admit they don’t know. This tendency to fabricate answers instead of acknowledging uncertainty is not just a childhood trait-it carries over into adult life, especially in professional environments. In the business world, saying “I don’t know” is often seen as a sign of incompetence, so people feel pressured to respond with any answer, even if it’s made up.

The podcast hosts note that despite their reputation as “business experts,” they rarely hear anyone in corporate settings-especially in front of a boss-admit they don’t know something. The prevailing belief is that expertise means always having an answer, even if one must fake it. However, this mindset is counterproductive. Pretending to know everything may protect one’s image in the short term, but it stifles learning and personal growth.

The hosts argue that admitting “I don’t know” is essential for improvement and learning. Embracing uncertainty opens the door to genuine inquiry and self-betterment. Rather than faking expertise, the real path to growth is to acknowledge what we don’t know and use that as a starting point for discovery.

There’s nothing spooky about ghostworking. The newly coined term describes a set of behaviors meant to create a facade of productivity at the office, like walking around carrying a notebook as a prop or typing random words just to generate the sound of a clacking keyboard.

Pretending to be busy at the office is not something workers recently invented, of course, but it appears to be reaching critical mass. According to a new survey, more than half of all U.S. employees now admit to regularly ghostworking.

According to the report, the results show that 58% of employees admit to regularly pretending to work, while another 34% claim they do so from time to time. What might be most striking are some of the elaborate methods workers use to perform productivity. Apparently, 15% of U.S. employees have faked a phone call for a supervisor’s benefit, while 12% have scheduled fake meetings to pad out their calendars, and 22% have used their computer keyboards as pianos to make the music of office ambiance.

As for what these employees are actually doing, in many cases it’s hunting for other jobs. The survey shows that 92% of employees have job searched in some way while on the clock, with 55% admitting they do so regularly.

The ongoing return-to-office resurgence has left many employees feeling like they’re working inside of a fishbowl, performing for the watchful eye of employers. Employees sensing a greater need to broadcast that they’re getting work done. So ghostworking is a performance. It involves actively projecting an appearance of busyness without actually engaging in meaningful work.

Possible Preaching Angles:

1) Diligence; Employees; Sincerity - Scripture encourages believers to work wholeheartedly, not just for human approval, but as if working for God; 2) Hypocrisy - The act of ghostworking is a kind of hypocrisy—projecting an image that does not match reality.

Ah, how the heart is bent towards self-righteousness! Even criminals look down on other criminals. That's what happened in a strange story from Spain. According to the First Thoughts blog a 64-year-old man in the city of Jaén reported a home burglary. The victim, who happened to coach a youth soccer team, listed several electronic appliances as stolen.

Days later, police received an anonymous call from a payphone. It was the burglar, informing them that he had left three videotapes in a brown envelope under a parked car. Apparently, the stolen tapes were evidence that the soccer coach was also a criminal. The thief included a note stating that he wanted the police to do their job and "put that (expletive) in prison for life." Nine days after the burglary, the police arrested the soccer coach.

The article concludes: "There is a well-worn adage that evangelism is one beggar telling another where to find bread. (But) so often, I live out my Christian faith more like a criminal telling the cops where to find the crooks. This should not be. When I find myself picking up the phone to report that others have fallen short, may I instead speak the words of another thief: When you come into your kingdom, remember me (Luke 23:42).

One of the most potentially lucrative new technologies is the advent of generative artificial intelligence programs. The race to perfect AI has prompted companies large and small to invest huge sums of time and money to corner the market on this emerging technology.

One important issue is the lack of a regulatory framework to enforce the intellectual property rights of companies and creative people. Their work is used to train the AIs, which need millions of examples of creative work to properly learn how to replicate similar works.

Microsoft Corp. and OpenAI are investigating whether data output from OpenAI’s technology was obtained in an unauthorized manner by a group linked to Chinese artificial intelligence startup DeepSeek. They believe that this is a sign that DeepSeek operatives might be stealing a large amount of proprietary data and using it for their own purposes

Ironically, OpenAI itself has been sued by individuals and entities, including The New York Times, alleging "massive copyright infringement" for using copyrighted materials to train its AI models without permission or compensation. So, it looks supremely hypocritical to complain about DeepSeek stealing their proprietary data, when most of OpenAI’s proprietary data was made by stealing the data of others. In the race to perfect AI, it seems there is no honor among thieves.

Possible Preaching Angle:

This is a classic case of “the pot calling the kettle black,” and a blatant display of “he who lives in a glass house shouldn't throw stones.” It is the very nature of a Pharisee to condemn the very flaws they themselves embody, oblivious to the transparent vulnerability of their own character.

Document MS 165, also known as the ‘Shark Papers,’ is a unique manuscript found at the National Library of Jamaica. It tells the enthralling story of the American brig the ‘Nancy,’ implicated in a court case for smuggling, filed by British Commander Hugh Whylie.

Hugh Whylie's vessel, the Sparrow had captured the ‘Nancy’ in 1799 in the waters of the Caribbean (an area that was forbidden at that time for American vessels), on suspicion of smuggling contraband. However, its captain, Thomas Briggs provided documentation to show that the vessel was Dutch and not American, and therefore had authority to sail in that area. He insisted they were not doing anything illegal. Although not having concrete proof, Captain Whylie, on suspicion, nevertheless sent the crew of the ‘Nancy’ to Jamaica for a court hearing.

Since the captain of the ‘Nancy’ seemed to have his paperwork well in order, for a while it looked like the case could not be sustained due to a lack of evidence of smuggling or of the brig being of American origin.

The story took a new twist however with the arrival of another British vessel, the ‘Ferret,’ whose crew had caught a large shark off the Haitian coast around the same time. To the surprise of the crew, they found sealed documents from the ‘Nancy’ in the shark’s belly. They had apparently been thrown overboard to avoid being convicted for smuggling.

The documents taken from the shark’s belly contained receipts, letters, notary documents, and bills from the ‘Nancy,’ and eventually proved vital in convicting Captain Briggs of smuggling and perjury.

Possible Preaching Angle:

In Luke 12:2, Jesus, speaking about the hypocrisy of the Pharisees said, “There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.” Numbers 32:23 further warns us, “...be sure, your sin will find you out.”

Certain words that many companies use in their annual reports—words like ethical, integrity and responsibility—are meant to convey trustworthiness. But research suggests that companies that use such words in annual filings known are often hiding their untrustworthiness.

The study found that use of “trust” words in annual statements was linked with a decreased interest in the stock of the company in question. Basing their findings on 21 words that seek to evoke a sense of trustworthiness, the authors also found that companies whose annual filings included the words tended to pay about $100,000 more in auditing fees than firms without the words.

Companies using trust words were also about 15% more likely to receive a comment letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission asking them to clarify information on their annual report than companies that didn’t use trust words.

One of the researchers wrote, “Companies likely use trust words to project a positive image and better manage information within the annual report, but it seems that no one is really fooled.”

More than a century ago, 110 Black soldiers were convicted of murder, mutiny, and other crimes at three military trials held at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio. Nineteen were hanged, including 13 on a single day, December 11, 1917, in the largest mass execution of American soldiers by the Army.

The soldiers’ families spent decades fighting to show that the men had been betrayed by the military. In November of 2023, they won a measure of justice when the Army secretary, Christine E. Wormuth, overturned the convictions and acknowledged that the soldiers “were wrongly treated because of their race and were not given fair trials.”

In January 2024, several descendants of the soldiers gathered at Fort Sam Houston National Cemetery as the Department of Veterans Affairs dedicated new headstones for 17 of the executed servicemen.

The new headstones acknowledge each soldier’s rank, unit, and home state—a simple honor accorded to every other veteran buried in the cemetery. They replaced the previous headstones that noted only their name and date of death.

Jason Holt, whose uncle, Pfc. Thomas C. Hawkins, was among the first 13 soldiers hanged in 1917, said at the ceremony, “Can you balance the scales by what we’re doing? I don’t know. But it’s an attempt. It’s an attempt to make things right.”

Possible Preaching Angles:

We all long for justice, for the day when things will finally be made right. In this life, justice happens slowly, haphazardly, and sometimes not at all. But when Jesus returns, all things will be made right.

In September 2024, a Portland, Oregon advocacy group for safe and sustainable transportation rescinded its endorsement of mayoral candidate Carmen Rubio. This was after troubling reports of Rubio’s driving habits came to light. Daily newspaper The Oregonian reported that Rubio damaged a parked Tesla and left the scene without leaving a note.

This seemingly minor incident was of great public interest since it followed previous reports of Rubio accumulating 150 parking and driving tickets over the course of her advocacy career. Rubio also had at least one instance of failing to appear in court, had her car towed due to unpaid fines and fees, and had her license suspended six times.

Initially, The Street Trust advocacy group expressed disappointment but chose to stand by Rubio, citing her commitment to safer streets. However, the incident involving the damaged Tesla prompted the group to withdraw its support. The Street Trust stated that Rubio's actions contradicted their values and that they could not hold candidates accountable if they didn't act when those values were compromised. The group emphasized its commitment to supporting candidates who align with its mission of creating safer streets and promoting sustainable transportation.

While many of Rubio's prominent supporters, including Oregon governor Tina Kotek, did not withdraw their endorsements, Rubio was eventually defeated by another candidate.

Possible Preaching Angle:

Leaders must be held accountable not only for their values, but their actions. Those who serve the public must abide by the same laws that they enforce on others.

Dozens of people crowded a warehouse in Northwest Portland, lured by a sign promising free items, including furniture. The sign, however, wasn't posted by the business owner, and the items weren't free. Carl Sciacchitano, a local resident, noticed the commotion around 9 a.m. and asked a woman if people were selling items. She replied, “No, it’s all free.”

Portland Police Bureau spokesperson Mike Benner revealed that the sign was allegedly posted by 51-year-old Shannon Clark, asking for volunteers to distribute the warehouse's contents to people in the neighborhood. Clark was arrested on suspicion of second-degree burglary, theft by deceiving, and aggravated burglary, but prosecutors declined to file charges. He was released the same day. Elizabeth Merah, spokesperson for the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office, mentioned that the office had requested more information and that charges might be filed later.

Sciacchitano observed that the situation escalated quickly, noting, “It just got bigger and crazier.” One person even brought a U-Haul to take items from the warehouse. When police arrived around 3 p.m., they estimated 50 to 70 people were present, with some believing the items were part of a business liquidation.

Police are still determining the number of items taken and by whom. Sciacchitano found the incident baffling, saying, “Even now I’m trying to figure out how it makes any sense ... Orchestrating this crowdsourced looting seems like such a strange and elaborate thing for that guy to have done without it benefitting him.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Deception; Deceiver; Devil; Satan – Pranks like this illustrate how easily some people can be misled. The ultimate deception is that of Satan who has deceived the whole world (Rev. 12:9).

After a two-week battle with a sudden fast-spreading infection, Joshua Dean, a former quality auditor at Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems, passed away. Dean had recently given a deposition alleging that his firing in 2023 was in retaliation for having disclosed what he called “serious and gross misconduct by senior quality management of the 737 production line.”

The Boeing 737 MAX has a troubled safety record, with high-profile crashes in 2018 and 2019 killing hundreds, and an Alaska Airlines flight in early 2024 that had to make an emergency landing after an explosive decompression due to an insufficiently secured door plug.

According to The Seattle Times, Dean was 45 years old, in relatively good health, and known for a healthy lifestyle. In February, he spoke to NPR about Spirit’s troubling safety practices.

"Now, I'm not saying they don't want you to go out there and inspect a job … but if you make too much trouble, you will get the Josh treatment,” Dean said, about his previous firing. “I think they were sending out a message to anybody else. If you are too loud, we will silence you.”

Dean’s death comes two months after another Boeing whistleblower, John Barnett, was found dead of a potentially self-inflicted gunshot wound. Barnett was also in the process of testifying against Boeing about potential safety lapses in the manufacturing of the Boeing 787, and claims that he was similarly retaliated against for his whistleblowing. Barnett was 63 at the time of his death, and known for a vocal criticism of what he perceived to be Boeing’s declining production standards.

Dean’s attorney Brian Knowles, whose firm also represented Barnett, refused to speculate on whether the two deaths are linked, but insisted that people like Dean and Barnett are important.

Knowles said, “Whistleblowers are needed. They bring to light wrongdoing and corruption in the interests of society. It takes a lot of courage to stand up. It’s a difficult set of circumstances. Our thoughts now are with John’s family and Josh’s family.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Sometimes telling the truth can be costly. But this should never inhibit us from standing for the truth.

For years, Jalon Hall was touted as a bright spot for Google’s reputation for diversity. Hall is an African American deaf woman, and had been highlighted on the company’s official social media channels. On LinkedIn, Google praised Hall and said she was “helping expand opportunities for black deaf professionals,” and on Instagram she was hailed as “making life at Google more inclusive.”

But for Hall, those platitudes were only words, and were not backed up with actions. Hall recently filed a lawsuit against Google for failing to provide the accommodations they promised her, and for creating a hostile work environment by characterizing her complaints according to racialized stereotypes.

In an interview Hall said, “Google is using me to make them look inclusive for the deaf community and the overall disability community. In reality, they need to do better. I’m standing in the gap for those often pushed aside.”

Hall says when she was hired as a content moderator in 2020, the company promised to provide interpreters to help her review content as part of YouTube’s child safety regulations, but the company refused. And a manager in another division called her an “aggressive black deaf woman” and advised her to “keep her mouth shut and take a sales role.”

Hall says she filed three HR complaints before she sued, and wants to remain at Google to help promote a better work environment for others.

In early March, the Biden Administration began supporting a bill in Congress that would potentially result in a ban of the social media app TikTok. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called it “important,” saying the administration welcomes it. And it’s not the first restriction on the app; in 2022, Biden signed a bill banning the app on government phones because of potential security risks.

But critics of the president are calling such support hypocritical, because a month prior, the President’s re-election campaign began using the app to engage younger voters.

“We’re going to try to meet voters where they are,” said Jean-Pierre. Campaign staffers clarified that while no White House staffers have the app on their phones, they are working directly with TikTok influencers to get their message across, and taking appropriate security precautions.

The legislation in question, which has received bipartisan support, would require Bytedance, the Chinese company that owns TikTok, to sell the app or face a nationwide ban because of the way its data is stored. U.S. intelligence officials are concerned that Bytedance could be compelled to leak TikTok user data to the Chinese government.

If the bill passes, it would likely be challenged in court by Bytedance, who successfully sued the Trump administration to overturn a similar executive order in 2020.

Possible Preaching Angle:

If we say one thing with our words but communicate something else with our actions, we are not walking in truth, and therefore our words will lack credibility.

In an interesting piece of science, Nautilus looks at what happens to our brains when we don’t tell the truth. It turns out that the more you lie, the more truthful it seems. Because while a lie might initially appear to the brain as a lie—a fabricated memory sets off your brain’s alarm bell—over time its “source-monitoring” fatigues with each fib. Lying cements the false details at the expense of the real ones.

Psychologist Quin Chrobak said that if a lie or fabrication provides an explanation for something, it’s more likely to become confused with what’s true. He said, “People are causal monsters. We love knowing why things happen,” and if we don’t have an explanation for something, we “like to fill in the gaps.” The pressing human need to fill those gaps, might also pertain to beliefs we hold about ourselves.

Another important factor underlying this effect is repetition. Psychology professor Kerri True explained, “If I tell the lie to multiple people, I’m rehearsing the lie.” And rehearsing a lie seems to enhance it. “The more you repeat something,” Chrobak said, “the more you actively imagine it, the more detailed and vivid it becomes,” which further exploits the brain’s tendency to conflate detail with veracity.

What’s at stake here is more than a scientific explanation for the pathological liar in your life. This process is at work in every self-rationalization and self-justification we tell ourselves.

If falsehood fatigue could explain how people can fall down the rabbit hole of online echo chambers. It’s also a glowing advertisement for a daily/weekly reminder that we cannot trust ourselves. That the devices and desires of our heart—what we believe to be true about ourselves—are all plagued by faulty wiring.

Regularly confessing one’s frailty in this regard might just reset the brain’s falsehood fatigue and bring you closer to the Truth that sets you free.

Possible Preaching Angle:

While this primarily applies to a person’s personal life, it also applies to politicians and governments. Hitler and his henchmen famously said, “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” Quoting from the book The Crown of Life (1869). Ultimately all lies can be traced to Satan for “he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:44).

Separating fact from fiction is getting harder. Manipulating images—and creating increasingly convincing deepfakes—is getting easier. As what’s real becomes less clear, authenticity is “something we’re thinking about, writing about, aspiring to and judging more than ever.” This is why Merriam-Webster’s word of the year is “authentic,” the company announced in November of 2023.

Editor Peter Sokolowski said, “Can we trust whether a student wrote this paper? Can we trust whether a politician made this statement? We don’t always trust what we see anymore. We sometimes don’t believe our own eyes or our own ears. We are now recognizing that authenticity is a performance itself.”

According to the announcement from Merriam-Webster, “authentic” is a “high-volume lookup” most years but saw a “substantial increase” in 2023. The dictionary has several definitions for the word, including “not false or imitation,” “true to one’s own personality, spirit, or character” and “worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact,” among others.

Sokolowski said, “We see in 2023 a kind of crisis of authenticity. What we realize is that when we question authenticity, we value it even more.”

Other words that saw spikes this year include “deepfake,” “dystopian,” “doppelgänger,” and “deadname,” per Merriam-Webster. This year’s theme of searching for truth seems fitting following last year’s focus on manipulation. The 2022 word of the year was “gaslighting,” a term that originated from a 1938 play by Patrick Hamilton. In the play, a woman complains that the gas lights in her house are dimming while her husband tries to convince her that it’s all in her head.

Possible Preaching Angle:

As technology’s ability to manipulate reality improves, people are searching for the truth. Only the Word of God contains the absolute truth “your word is truth” (John 17:17), as revealed by Jesus, who is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

Would you invest with someone who guarantees a 50% annual return with no risk of loss? Would you reply to an email offering you a share of a lost treasure in a far-away country, in exchange for sending just a little bit of money to kickstart the recovery effort? Would you buy a Picasso or a Dali from a late-night infomercial?

We didn’t think so. But many people do fall for scams like these. Why? Are the victims uneducated, unintelligent, or constitutionally naïve? Unfortunately for all of us, the answer is no. Even people at the top of their professions can be taken in.

Several former cabinet secretaries were convinced to join the board of Theranos, whose founder, Elizabeth Holmes, was convicted of criminal fraud. Wealthy art collectors bought phony paintings from a famous Manhattan gallery. According to the FBI, phishing scams led to losses of more than $43 billion between 2016 and 2021.

In their book Nobody’s Fool: Why We Get Taken In and What We Can Do About It, two researchers write:

Frauds are ever evolving and can be complex and sophisticated, but even simple ploys can take us in … Most of the scams people fall for today are not really new; they are remixes and mashups of tricks that have worked for generations … Taking steps to avoid deception means we have to abandon the myth that only the gullible can be taken in. There are scams out there waiting for each of us, no matter how sophisticated we think we are. Rather than “it can’t happen to me,” your mantra should be “accept less, check more.”

Possible Preaching Angles:

1) Money; Finances – Even the financially savvy can be taken in by a lack of vigilance or a desire for quick profits or a slick sales pitch; 2) Deceiver; Deception; Satan – This is especially good advice for our defense against our spiritual enemy, Satan. He has thousands of years of experience in deceiving people and we must keep our grip on the shield of faith and the sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:10-17).

Author Brené Brown was at a book signing where a woman and her husband approached her with books to get autographed. After Brown signed the books, the wife turned to leave and said, “Come on, hon” to her husband. “No,” he replied, “I want to talk with her for a second.”

Uncomfortable, Brown just waited. The man then looked at her and said, “I really love all this stuff you're talking about, this shame, and being perfect, and having to be someone we're not, and having to reach out. It is really powerful. But I never heard you mention anything about men.”

She felt relieved and said: “I don't study men.” He immediately responded, “That's convenient.” Nervously, she asked, “Why convenient?”

“It's convenient you don't talk about men,” he said, “Because when we reach out, when we tell our stories, when we share our shame experiences, we get the emotional s____ beat out of us.”

Brown was about to reply when he added, “Before you say anything about those dads, and those coaches, or about those bosses and mean bully friends, let me explain this to you. My wife and my three daughters, you just signed books for, they would rather see me die on top of my White Horse than see me fall off.” And then he just left.

Possible Preaching Angle:

This story reveals the stresses men face today—the pressure to stay on your “white horse,” to maintain your image of strength and invulnerability, rather than to trust in God’s grace and be vulnerable in Christian community.