SEVEN CHURCHES

The Book of Revelation was written in A.D. 96.
The writer was the Apostle John. He was told to write the things
which he "saw" and "heard." The Book therefore is a divinely given book,
and is the "Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 1:1) and not of John.
It is the most important and valuable prophetic book in the Bible.
All through the Old Testament there are scattered references to things
 which are to come to pass in the "Last Days."

The Book of Revelation reveals The Divine Program, or order,
in which these events are to happen.It is the Book of Consummation and
its proper place in the sacred canon is where it is placed,
at the end of the Bible. The Book is full of "action."

Earth and heaven are brought near together. The clouds roll away,
thrones, elders, and angelic forms are seen; harps, trumpets, cries from disembodied souls, and choruses of song are heard.
Earth touches heaven, and alas it touches hell also.
There are strong moral contrasts. Good and evil meet.

There is no blending, but sharp contrasts, and a long protracted
conflict that ends in victory for the good. The Book is addressed
to the "seven churches which are in Asia." By Asia is not meant the great Continent of Asia, or even the whole of Asia Minor, but only
its western end. Neither were the seven churches named the only
churches in that district, for there were at least
 three other churches:

Colosse, Col. 1:2; Hierapolis, Col. 4:13; and Troas, Acts 20:6,7.
These Seven Churches then must be representative or "typical"
churches, chosen for certain characteristics typical of the character of
the Church of Christ from the end of the First Century down to
the time of Christ's return for His Church, and descriptive of
Seven Church Periods clearly defined in Church History.

John when he received his message was a prisoner on the Isle of
Patmos. He heard behind him a "great voice," as of a trumpet,
and when he turned he saw "Seven Golden Candlesticks," and
standing in their midst one like unto the "Son of Man,"
who held in His right hand "Seven Stars.

" He was told that the "Seven Stars" were the "Angels"
(Ministers or Messengers) of the Seven Churches, and the
"Seven Candlesticks" represented the Seven Churches.
"Lampstand" is a better translation for the word "Candlestick,"
 and is so given in the margin of our Bibles.

A "Candlestick" requires a light which is self. onsuming,
while a "Lampstand" is simply the "Holder" of a lamp whose light
is fed from a reservoir of oil, thus typifying the oil of the Holy Spirit.
Thus Christ looks upon the churches as not the Light,
but simply the "Light Holder."

The use of the figures "Lampstands" and "Stars," which are only for
service in the night, indicates that we are living in the "Night" of this Age.
The "Key" to the interpretation of the Book of Revelation is
 its "Threefold Division." Rev. 1:19. I. Things Past.

The Things Which Thou Hast SEEN." The Vision of Christ in the midst of
the "Lampstands." Chapter one. II. Things Present.
 "The Things Which ARE." Obviously the Seven Churches.
Chapters two and three. John was not far from 100 years old,
and the only remaining Apostle. The Temple and city of Jerusalem
had been destroyed, and the Jews dispersed 26 years before,
and John's attention was called to the condition of the "Seven"
representative churches of Asia.

III. Things Future. "The Things Which SHALL BE HEREAFTER.
" Beginning with the fourth chapter unto the end of the Book.
Rev. 4:1. It is worthy of note that the "Messages to the
Seven Churches" are inserted between Two Visions,
the "Vision of Christ" in the midst of the "Seven Lampstands"
in chapter one, and the "Vision of the Four and Twenty Elders"
 round about the Throne, in chapter four.

 As chapter four is a vision of the "Glorified Church" with the Lord,
after it has been caught out (1 Thess. 4:13-17), then the Second
Division of the Book- "The Things Which Are," and
which includes chapters two and three, must be a description or
prophetic outline of the "Spiritual History" of the Church from
the time when John wrote the Book in A.D. 96, down to
the taking out of the Church, or else we have no "prophetic view"
of the Church during that period, for she disappears from
the earth at the close of chapter three, and is not seen again
until she reappears with her Lord in chapter nineteen.
 
This we shall find to be the case. This interpretation of the
"Messages to the Seven Churches" was hidden to the early Church,
 because time was required for Church History to develop and
be written, so a comparison could be made to reveal the correspondence,
if it had been clearly revealed that the Seven Churches stood for
"Seven Church Periods" that would have to elapse before
Christ could come back, the incentive to watch
 would have been absent.

 While the character of these Seven Churches is descriptive of
the Church during seven periods of her history, we must not
forget that the condition of those churches, as described,
were their exact condition in John's day.

So we see that at the close of the First Century the leaven of
"False Doctrine" was at work in the Churches. The churches are given
in the order named, because the peculiar characteristic of that
Church applied to the period of Church History to which it is assigned.
 It also must not be forgotten, that, that which is a distinctive
characteristic of each Church Period, does not disappear with that
Period, but continues on down through the next Period,
and so on until the end, thus increasing the imperfections of
the visible Church, until it ends in an open Apostasy, as shown on
the chart "The Messages to the Seven Churches
 Compared with Church History.
" We will now consider each message separately.

I. The Message to the Church at EPHESUS. Rev. 2:1-7.
 The complaint that Christ makes against this Church is that it
"had left its First Love." Its character is seen in its very name,
for Ephesus means to "let go," "to relax." It had become a Backslidden
Church. Paul, who founded it, warned it of what should happen,
in his parting message. "I know this, that after my departing shall
grievous 'wolves' enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

Also of your own selves shall men arise, 'speaking perverse
things,' to draw away disciples after them." Acts 20:29,30.
The significance of this warning is seen in the commendation of
 the Message, vs. 6 "But this thou hast, that thou 'hatest'
the deeds of the Nicolaitans which I also hate.
" Here Paul's "wolves" are called Nicolaitanes.

They were not a sect, but a party in the Church who were trying
to establish a "Priestly Order." Probably trying to model the Church
after the Old Testament order of Priests, Levites, and common people.
This is seen in the meaning of the word, which is from "Niko"
 to conquer, to overthrow, and "Laos" the people or laity.
The object was to establish a 'Holy Order of Men," and place
them over the laity, which was foreign to the New Testament plan,
and call them not pastors, but Clergy, Bishops,
 Archbishops, Cardinals, Popes.

Here we have the origin of the dogma of "Apostolic Succession,"
and the separation of the Clergy from the Laity, a thing that
God "hates." The Church at Ephesus was not deceived,
but recognized them as false apostles and liars.
The character of the Church at Ephesus is a fair outline of
the Church Period from A.D. 70 to A.D. 170.

II. The Message to the Church at Smyrna. Rev. 2:8-11. 
The Church in its "Ephesian Period" having lost its "First Love,"
the Lord is now about to "chastise" it, so as to cause it to return to Him.
 Smyrna has for its root meaning "bitterness," and means "Myrrh,"
an ointment associated with death, and we see in the meaning of
the word a prophecy of the persecution and death which was
to befall the members of the Smyrna Church.
They were told not to "fear" the things that they should be called
on to suffer, but to be faithful "unto" death, not "until" death.
That is, not until the end of their "natural" life, they were not
to "recant" when called upon to face a Martyr's death,
 but remain faithful until death relieved them of their suffering.
The reward would be a "Crown of Life."
This is the Martyr's crown.

They were told that the "author" of their suffering would be the Devil,
and its duration would be "ten days," which was doubtless
a prophetic reference to the "Ten Great Persecutions"
under the Roman Emperors, beginning with Nero,
A.D. 64, and ending with Diocletian in A.D. 310.
Seven of these "Great Persecutions" occurred during this
"Smyrna Period" of Church History. Or it may refer to the 10 years
of the last and fiercest persecution under Diocletian.
This Period extended from A.D. 170 to Constantine A.D. 312.

 III. The Message to the Church at Pergamos. Rev. 2:12-17. 
 In this Message Pergamos is spoken of as "Satan's Seat."
 When Attalus III, the Priest King of the Chaldean Hierarchy,
fled before the conquering Persians to Pergamos, and settled there,
Satan shifted his capital from Babylon to Pergamos.
At first he persecuted the followers of Christ, and Antipas was
one of the martyrs. But soon he changed his tactics and
began to exalt the Church, and through Constantine united
the Church and State, and offered all kinds of inducements
for worldly people to come into the Church. Constantine's
motive was more political than religious.
He wished to weld his Christian and Pagan subjects
into one people, and so consolidate his Empire.

The result of this union was that two false and pernicious doctrines
crept into the Church. The first was the "Doctrine of Balaam," and
the second the "Doctrine of the Nicolaitanes." The latter
we have already considered under the Message to the
Church at Ephesus. And the foothold it had secured in the Church
was seen in the First Great Council of the Church held at
Nicaea, in A.D. 325. The Council was composed of about 1500
delegates, the laymen outnumbering the Bishops 5 to 1.
It was a stormy council, full of intrigue and political methods,
and from the supremacy of the "Clergy" over the "Laity"
it was evident that the "Doctrine of the Nicolaitanes" had
secured a strong and permanent foothold.

The "Doctrine of Balaam" is disclosed in the story of Balaam found
in the Book of Numbers, chapters 22 to 25 inclusive. When the Children
of Israel on their way to Canaan had reached the land of Moab, Balak
the king of Moab sent for Balaam the Son of Beor, who lived at Pethor
on the river Euphrates, to come and curse them. When the Lord
would not permit Balaam to curse Israel, he suggested to Balak that
he invite them to the licentious feasts of "Baal Peor," and thus cause
Israel to fall into a snare that would so anger the Lord,
that he would Himself destroy them.

This Balak did, and the result was that when the men of Israel went
to those sensual feasts and saw the "daughters of Moab" they committed whoredoms with them, which so kindled God's anger that He sent
a plague that destroyed 42,000 of them. Now the word "Pergamos"
means "Marriage," and when the Church entered into a union with the
State it was guilty of "Spiritual Fornication" or "Balaamism."
The "Balaam Method" that Constantine employed was to give
to the Bishops of the Church a number of imposing buildings
 called Basilicas for conversion into churches, for whose
decoration he was lavish in the gift of money.

He also supplied superb vestments for the clergy, and soon the Bishop found himself clad in costly vestments; seated on a lofty throne in the apse of the Basilica, with a marble altar, adorned with gold and gems, on a lower level in front of him. A sensuous form of worship was introduced, the character of the preaching was changed, and the great "Pagan Festivals" were adopted, with but little alteration, to please the Pagan members of the church,
and attract Pagans to the church.

For illustration, as the Winter Solstice falls on the 21st day of December, which is the shortest day in the year, and it is not until the 25th that the day begins to lengthen, which day was regarded throughout the Heathen world as the "birthday" of the "Sun God," and was a high festival, which was celebrated at Rome by the "Great Games" of the Circus, it was found advisable to change the Birthday of the Son of God, from April, at which time He was probably born, to December 25th, because as He was the "Sun of Righteousness," what more appropriate birthday could He have than the birthday of the Pagan "Sun God"? It was at this time that "Post Millennial Views" had their origin.

As the Church had become rich and powerful, it was suggested that by the union of Church and State a condition of affairs would develop that would usher in the Millennium without the return of Christ, and since some scriptural support was needed for such a doctrine, it was claimed that the Jews had been cast off "forever," and that all the prophecies of Israel's future glory were intended for the Church. This "Period" extends from the accession of Constantine,
A.D. 312 to A.D. 606, when Boniface III was crowned "Universal Bishop."

 IV. The Message to the Church at Thyatira. Rev. 2:18-29. 
 In His commendation of this Church, Christ lays the emphasis on their "works," as if they depended on them, and claimed they deserved merit for
"works" of "Supererogation." But He had a complaint to make against
 them that was terrible in its awfulness. He charges them not merely with permitting a bad woman, Jezebel, who called herself a "Prophetess,"
to remain in the Church, but with permitting her to "teach" her pernicious
doctrines, and to "seduce" the servants to "commit fornication,
" and to "eat things sacrificed to idols."
 Who this woman was is a question.

She was a "pretender," and called herself a "prophetess." Probably
she was of noble lineage. She certainly was a woman of
commanding influence. Whether her real name was Jezebel or not,
she was so like her prototype in the Old Testament, Jezebel
the wife of Ahab, that Christ called her by that name. Jezebel,
 the wife of Ahab, was not by birth a daughter of Abraham,
but a princess of idolatrous Tyre, at a time, too, when its royal
family was famed for cruel savagery and intense
devotion to Baal and Astarte.

Her father, Eth-baal, a priest of the latter deity, murdered the
reigning monarch Phales, and succeeded him. Ahab, king of Israel,
to strengthen his kingdom, married Jezebel, and she, aided and
abetted by Ahab, introduced the licentious worship of Baal into Israel,
and killed all the prophets of the Lord she could lay her hands on.
And this influence she exercised, not only while her husband
was alive, but also during the reign of her two sons,
 Ahaziah and Jehoram. Moreover, the marriage of her
 daughter Athaliah to Jehoram, son of jehoshaphat king of Judah,
introduced idolatrous worship into Judah, and it was not
 long before there was a house of Baal built in Jerusalem,
and so Jezebel caused all Israel to sin after the sin of
Jeroboam the son of Nebat. 1 Kings 16:29-33.

 There is no question that, whether Jezebel was a real person or not,
she typified a "System" and that "System" was the "Papal Church."
 When the "Papal Church" introduced images and pictures into its
churches for the people to bow down to it became idolatrous.
And when it set up its claim that the teaching of the Church is
superior to the Word of God, it assumed the role of "Prophetess."
 A careful study of the "Papal System" from A.D. 606 to the
Reformation A.D. 1520, with its institution of the "Sacrifice of the Mass"
and other Pagan rites, reveals in it the sway of "Jezebelism." It was
also a period of "Jezebelistic Persecution," as seen in the wars of
the Crusades, and the rise of the Inquisition.

A careful comparison of this "Message" with the Parable of "The Leaven,"
 (see the chapter on "The Kingdom"), will reveal the wonderful
correspondence between the two, the "Jezebel" of the Church of Thyatira,
being the "Woman" of the Parable, who inserted the "Leaven" of "
False Doctrine" into the Meal of the Gospel. This Period extended from
A.D. 606 to the Reformation A.D. 1520.

V. The Message to the Church at Sardis. Rev. 3:1-6. The Church at Sardis was called a "Dead Church" though it had a name to live. That is, it was a "Formalistic Church," a church given over to "formal" or "ritualistic" worship.
It had the "Form of Godliness without the power." The meaning of the word "Sardis" is the "escaping one," or those who "come out" and so it is an excellent type of the Church of the Reformation Period.
By the Reformation we mean that period in the history of the Christian Church when Martin Luther and a number of other reformers protested against the false teaching, tyranny and claims of the Papal Church. This Period began about A.D. 1500. The condition of affairs in the realm dominated by the Papal Church
became intolerable, and came to a crisis when Martin Luther on October 31, 1517 A.D., nailed his 95 Theses on the church door at Wittenberg, Germany.
 From that date the Reformation set in.
But it was more a struggle for political liberty, than a purely Christian or religious movement. It had the advantage of encouraging and aiding the circulation of the Holy Scriptures, that had hitherto been a sealed book, the revival of the Doctrine of "Justification by Faith," and a reversion to more simple modes of worship;
but the multiplication of sects only led to bitter controversial contentions, that, while they threw much light on the Word of God, interfered greatly with the spiritual state of the Church, until it could truthfully be said, "That she had a name to live and was dead." While the reformers swept away much ritualistic and doctrinal rubbish they failed to recover the promise of the Second Advent.
They turned to God from idols, but not to "wait for His Son from the Heavens." The "Sardis Period" extended from A.D. 1520 to about A.D. 1750.

VI. The Message to the Church at Philadelphia. Rev. 3:7-13. There is no question about the meaning of the word Philadelphia. It means "Brotherly Love," and well describes the charity and brotherly fellowship that dissipated the bitter personal animosities that characterized the theological disputants of the "Sardis Period," and made possible the evangelistic and missionary labors of the past 150 years. Three things are said of this Church.

It had a "little strength." It was like a person coming back to life who was still very weak. It was the "dead" Sardis Church "revived," and Revivals have been characteristic of the Philadelphia Period. These Revivals began with George Whitefield in A.D. 1739, followed by John Wesley, Charles G. Finney and D. L. Moody.
It had set before it an "open door," that no "man" could shut. Note that this promise was made by Him, who "hath the 'Key of David,' He that 'openeth' and no man shutteth; and 'shutteth' and no man openeth." In 1793 William Carey sailed for India, where he found an "open door," and since then the Lord has opened the door into China, Japan, Korea, India, Africa and the isles of the sea, until there is not a country in the world where the missionary cannot go.

 It was to be kept from the "hour of temptation" (Tribulation), that shall come upon all the world. As the Church at Philadelphia is still in existence, and the only one of the seven that has survived, and while it suffered more or less under the "Ten Persecutions" of the "Smyrna Period," it has never yet suffered in a persecution that was world-wide.

This "hour of temptation" then must be still future and refers doubtless to the "Great Tribulation " that is to come upon the "whole world," just before the return of the Lord to set up His Millennial Kingdom, and as the promise is that the "Philadelphia Church" shall not pass through the Tribulation, is not this additional proof that the Church shall be "caught out" before the Tribulation? The "Philadelphia Period" covers the time between A.D. 1750 and A.D. 1900.

We must not forget that the characteristics of all these Periods continue on in the Church down to the end. This is true of the Evangelistic and Missionary movements of the "Philadelphia Period," but they are now more mechanical and based on business methods, and there is less spiritual power, and this will continue until Christ returns. VII. The Message to the Church at Laodicea.
Rev. 3:14-22. Christ has no "commendation" for this Church, but much to complain of. He says- "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold or hot; I would thou wert cold or hot. So then, because thou art luke warm, and neither cold or hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."
There is nothing more disgusting or nauseating than "tepid" water. So there is nothing more repugnant to Christ than a "tepid" church. He would rather have a church "frozen" or "boiling." It was the "chilly spiritual atmosphere" of the Church of England that drove John Wesley to start those outside meetings which became so noted for their "religious fervor," and it was the same "chilly atmosphere" of the Methodist Church that drove William Booth in turn to become a "Red hot" Salvationist. Our churches today are largely in this "lukewarm" condition.

There is very little of warm hearted spirituality. There is much going on in them, but it is largely mechanical and of a social character. Committees, societies, and clubs are multiplied, but there is an absence of "spiritual heat." Revival meetings are held, but instead of waiting on the Lord for power, evangelists and paid singers are hired and soul winning is made a business. The cause of this "lukewarmness" is the same as that of the Church of Laodicea Self-Deception.

 "Because thou sayest I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind and naked." They thought they were rich, and outwardly they were, but Christ saw the poverty of their heart. There are many such churches in the world today. More so than in any other period in the history of the church. Many of these churches have Cathedral-like buildings, stained glass windows, eloquent preachers, paid singers, large congregations.

Some of them have large landed interests and are well endowed, and yet they are poor. Many of the members, if not the majority, are worldly, card playing, dancing, and theatre going Christians. The poor and the saintly are not wanted in such churches because their presence is a rebuke. These churches do not see that they are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked.

 If we were to visit such churches they would take pride in showing us the building, they would praise the preaching and singing, they would boast of the character of their congregations, the exclusiveness of their membership, and the attractiveness of all their services, but if we suggested a series of meetings for the "deepening of the Spiritual Life," or the "conversion of the unsaved," they would say "Oh, no, we do not want such meetings, we have need of nothing." The Church at Laodicea was not burdened with debt, but it was burdened with WEALTH.

The trouble with the church today is that it thinks that nothing can be done without money, and that if we only had the money the world would be converted in this generation. The world is not to be converted by money, but by the Spirit of God. The trouble with the Church of Laodicea was that its "Gold" was not of the right kind, and so it was counseled to buy of the Lord "gold tried in the fire." What kind of gold is that? It is gold that has no taint upon it. Gold that is not cankered, or secured by fraud, or the withholding of a just wage. What a description we have of these Lao days in James 5:1-4.

But the Church of Laodicea was not only poor, though rich, it was blind. Or to put it more accurately "Near Sighted." They could see their worldly prosperity, but were "Short Sighted" as to heavenly things, so the Lord counseled them to anoint their eyes with "Eye Salve." Their merchants dealt in ointments and herbs of a high degree of healing virtue, but they possessed no salve that would restore impaired Spiritual Vision, only the Unction of the Holy One could do that.

But the Church was not only poor, and blind, it was naked. Their outward garments were doubtless of the finest material and the latest fashionable cut, but not such as should adorn the person of a Child of God. So they were counseled to purchase of Christ "White Raiment," in exchange for the "raven black woolen" garments for which the garment makers of Laodicea were famous. Then a most startling revelation was made to the Church of Laodicea, Christ said- "Behold, I Stand at the Door and Knock." These words are generally quoted as an appeal to sinners, but they are not, they are addressed to a Church, and to a Church
in whose midst Christ had once stood, but now found Himself
excluded and standing outside knocking for admittance.

 This is the most startling thing recorded in the New Testament, that it is possible for a church to be outwardly prosperous and yet have no Christ in its midst, and be unconscious of the fact. This is a description of a Christless Church. Oh, the EXCLUDED CHRIST. Excluded from His own nation, for they Rejected Him; excluded from the world, for it Crucified Him; excluded from His Church, for He stands outside its door Knocking for Entrance.

How did Christ come to be outside the Church? He had been within it once or there never would have been a Church. How did He come to leave? It is clear that they had not thrust Him out, for they do not seem to have missed His presence. They continued to worship Him, to sing His praises, and engage in all manner of Christian service, yet He had withdrawn. Why? The reason is summed up in one word Worldliness. But how is Christ to get back into His Church? Does it require the unanimous vote or invitation of the membership? No.
 "If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to Him, and will sup with him, and he with Me." That is, the way to revive a lukewarm church is for the individual members to open their hearts and let Christ re-enter, and thus open the door for His reappearance.

The character of the Church today is Laodicean, and as the
Laodicean Period is to continue until the Church of the
"New Born" is taken out, we cannot hope for any great change until the Lord comes back.
"If Christ should come today, I'll not be here tomorrow; He'll take His ransomed ones away From death and sin and sorrow.
In the midair He'll come To call His loved ones home, To take them to the 'place prepared,' As He, before He left, declared."

150 Titles of Jesus Christ in Scripture:

Advocate – 1 John 2:1
Alpha and Omega – Revelation 1:8; 22:13
The Almighty – Revelation 1:8
Amen – Revelation 3:14
Apostle and High Priest of our Confession – Hebrews 3:1
Author and Finisher of our Faith – Hebrews 12:2

Beloved – Matthew 12:18
Beloved Son – Colossians 1:13
Bread of God – John 6:33; 50
Bread of life – John 6:35 Living
Bread – John 6:51
Bridegroom – John 3:29
Brother – Matthew 12:50
Captain of our Salvation – Hebrews 2:10
Carpenter – Mark 6:3
Carpenter’s Son – Matthew 13:55
Chief Shepherd – 1 Peter 5:4
Chosen One – Luke 23:35
Christ – Matthew 16:20
Christ Jesus – 1 Timothy 1:15; Colossians 1:1
 Christ of God – Luke 9:20
Christ the Lord – Luke 2:11
Christ who is above all – Romans 9:5
Consolation of Israel – Luke 2:25
Chief Cornerstone – Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:6
 Dayspring – Luke 1:78
Deliverer – Romans 11:26
Deliverer from the wrath to come – 1 Thessalonians 1:10
Eldest of many brothers – Romans 8:29
Emmanuel – Matthew 1:23
Faithful and True Witness – Revelation 1:5; 3:14
Father Forever – Isaiah 9:6
First and Last – Revelation 1:17; 2:8
Firstborn among many brothers – Romans 8:29
First born from the dead – Revelation 1:5
Firstborn of all creation – Colossians 1:15
First Fruits – 1 Corinthians 15:20
Friend of tax collectors and sinners – Matthew 11:19
Gate of the sheepfold – John 10:7
Glory – Luke 2:32
Good Shepherd – John 10:11; 14
Grain of Wheat – John 12:24
Great Shepherd of the sheep – Hebrews 13:20 Head –
Ephesians 4:15
Head of the Church – Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22
Hidden Manna – Revelation 2:17
High Priest – Hebrews 3:1; 4:14; 7:26
He Who Holds of the Keys of David – Revelation 3:7
He who is coming amid the clouds – Revelation 1:7
Holy One – Acts 2:27
Holy One of God – Mark 1:24
Holy Servant – Acts 4:27
Hope – 1 Timothy 1:1
Horn of Salvation – Luke 1:69
I Am – John 8:58
Image of God – 2 Corithinians 4:4; Colossians 1:15
Indescribable Gift – 2 Corinthians 9:15 Intercessor – Hebrews 7:25
Jesus – Matthew 1:21 Jesus the Nazarene – John 18:5
Judge of the World – 2 Timothy 4:1; Acts 10:42 Just One – Acts 7:52 Just Judge – 2 Timothy 4:8 King – Matthew 21:5
King of Israel – John 1:49
King of Kings – Revelation 17:14; 19:16; 1 Timothy 6:15
King of Nations – Revelation 15:3 King of the
Jews – Matthew 2:2 Lamb of God – John 1:29
Last Adam – 1 Corinthians 15:45 Leader – Matthew 2:6; Hebrews 2:10
Leader and Perfecter of Faith – Hebrews 12:2
Leader and Savior – Acts 5:31
Life – John 14:6; Colossians 3:4
Light – John 1:9; John 12:35
Light of all – Luke 2:32; John 1:4
Light of the world – John 8:12
Lion of the tribe of
Judah – Revelation 5:5 Lord – Luke 1:25 One
Lord – Ephesians 4:5 My Lord my God – John 20:28
Lord both of the dead and the living – Romans 14:9
Lord God Almighty – Revelation 15:3 Lord
Jesus – Acts 7:59
Jesus is Lord – 1 Corinthians 12:3
Lord Jesus Christ – Acts 15:11
Lord of all – Acts 10:36
Lord of Glory – 1 Corinthians 2:8
Lord of lords – 1 Timothy 6:15
Lord of Peace – 2 Thessalonians 3:16
The Man – John 19:5 Master – Luke 5:5
Mediator – 1 Timothy 2:5
Messiah – John 1:41; 4:25
Mighty God – Isaiah 9:6
Morning Star – 2 Peter 1:19; Revelation 2:28; Revelation 22:16
 Nazarene – Matthew 2:23 Passover – 1 Corinthians 5:7
Power and wisdom of God – 1 Corinthians 1:24
Power for salvation – Luke 1:69
Priest forever – Hebrews 5:6 Prince of
Life – Acts 3:15 Prince of Peace – Isaiah 9:6
Rabboni – John 20:16 Ransom – 1 Timothy 2:6
Redeemer – Isaiah 59:20
Rescuer from this Present Evil Age – Galatians 1:4
Radiance of God’s Glory – Hebrews 1:3
Resurrection and Life – John 11:25
Rising Sun – Luke 1:78 Root of David –
Revelation 5:5 Root of David’s line – Revelation 22:16
Root of Jesse – Isaiah 11:10
Ruler – Matthew 2:6
Ruler of the kings of the earth – Revelation 1:5
Ruler andSavior – Acts 5:31

Savior – 2 Peter 2:20; 3:18
Savior of the world – 1 John 4:14; John 4:42
Second Adam – Romans 5:14
Servant of the Jews – Romans 15:8
Shepherd and Guardian of our souls – 1 Peter 2:25
Slave – Philippians 2:7
 Son – Galatians 4:4 Beloved
Son – Colossians 1:13 Firstborn
Son – Luke 2:7
Son of Abraham – Matthew 1:1
Son of David – Matthew 1:1
Son of God – Luke 1:35
Son of Joseph – John 1:45
Son of Man – John 5:27
Son of Mary – Mark 6:3
Son of the Blessed One – Mark 14:61
Son of the Father – 2 John 1:3
Son of the Living God – Matthew 16:16
Son of the Most High – Luke 1:32
Son of the Most High God – Mark 5:7 Only
 Son of the Father – John 1:14
Source of God’s creation – Revelation 3:14
Spiritual Rock – 1 Corinthians 10:4 Living
Stone – 1 Peter 2:4
Stone rejected by the builders – Matthew 21:42; 1 Peter 2:8
Stumbling Stone – 1 Peter 2:8

Teacher – Matthew 8:19; Matthew 23:10
Testator of the New Covenant – Hebrews 9:16
True God – 1 John 5:20
True Vine – John 15:1
The Way the Truth and the Life – John 14:6
The One who is, is was, and who is to come – Revelation 3:7
Wisdom of God – 1 Corinthians 1:24
Wonderful Counselor – Isaiah 9:6
Word – John 1:1; 14
Word of God – Revelation 19:13
Word of Life – 1 John 1:1

"Shincheonji ( SCJ) "

Shincheonji “New Heaven and New Earth” 
cult infiltrating churches Churches warned of ‘deceptive cult’ 
linked to South Korea infiltrating congregations Hundreds of 
British churches, including some of the UK’s largest 
congregations, have been warned against possible 
infiltration by a group accused of being a “cult” 
promoting “control and deception”. 

The Church of England has issued a formal alert to 
almost 500 parishes in London about the activities of 
the group known as Parachristo. The organisation, 
a registered charity, runs Bible study courses at 
an anonymous industrial unit under a Botox clinic and 
a personal training company in London Docklands. 

But it is understood to be linked to a controversial 
South Korean group known as Shinchonji (SCJ) – or 
the “New Heaven and New Earth” church (NHNE) – 
whose founder Man-Hee Lee is 
referred to as God’s “advocate”. 

 It is claimed that some of those who become involved gradually 
withdraw from friends and family and actively lie about their 
real lives […] A companion article, titled The Korean religious 
leader on a collision course with the Church of England notes: 
Organisers insist Parachristo exists solely to help 
“understand the Bible more deeply”. 

[…] Former attendees of Parachristo study groups have 
claimed that existing members effectively pose as new students. 
Shinchonji teaching documents seen by The Telegraph 
instructs these “maintainers” to “arouse curiosity” of 
newcomers and “try to be close to each other until 
the student relies on you fully”. 

They are told to “take notes of the conversation with 
the student” and report back to the group leader. 
Shincheonji — Cult of Christianity According to the SCJ, 
their leader – Manhee Lee – is the Messiah or 
the spokesperson of the Messiah (“Promised Pastor”). 

Lee Man-Hee claims that Jesus appeared before him 
as a “bright heavenly figure.” Some see him as God’s 
“promised pastor” who holds the key to avoid 
impending judgement. Followers believe that 
Lee Man-Hee is the second coming of Jesus Christ. 

Reportedly the church teaches that Lee Man-Hee is 
the angel referred to in Revelation 22:16: 
 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for 
the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, 
and the bright Morning Star.” 

 The church also believes that Revelation 7:2 refers to 
South Korea (East) and to Lee Man-Hee (angel): 
Then I saw another angel coming up from the east, 
having the seal of the living God. 

 According to the group’s promotional literature 
Lee Man-Hee is the only person who can testify 
to the mysteries of the Book of Revelation — 
which he claims already 
has been fulfilled. 

He is said to teach that the world has already ended, 
and that we are currently living in the afterlife. 
 Shincheonji denies the biblical teaching that people are 
saved by faith in Jesus Christ — and not by works. 
The church denies the doctrine of the Trinity. 

Shincheonji’s teachings contradict essential doctrines of 
the Christian faith, thus identifying the group as, theologically, 
a cult of Christianity. Sociologically Shincheonji has 
many cult-like characteristics as well. 

Front Groups; Alternative Spellings Note the different 
spellings of the name of the group: Officially it is 
Shincheonji, Church of Jesus, the Temple of the 
Tabernacle of the Testimony (SCJ).

Commonly referred to as Shincheonji, but the name is 
sometimes spelled without the ‘e’ — Shinchonji. 
 Likewise, the name of the cult’s leader is Lee Man-Hee, 
which is sometimes written as Man-Hee Lee or Manhee Lee. 
 Lee Man-Hee founded Shinchonji in 1984. 

Other names related to this movement: 
Mannam Volunteer Association/Mannam International 
Youth Coalition (MIYC), 
International Peace Youth Group (IPYG)/Heavenly Culture, 
World Peace, Restoration of Light (HWPL), Temple of 
the Tabernacle of the Testimony (SCJ). 

World Peace… and Deception Like similar cults, 
Shincheonji claims it promotes world peace — 
but its deceptive nature tends to backfire, like it did 
when the cult organized the World Alliance of
 Religions Peace Summit (WARP). 

Wikipedia: From 17-19 September 2014 
Shincheonji organised their SCJ 6th National Olympiad.
 It is the major event for SCJ which they hold 
every four years, and it coincides with Lee’s birthday.
[3] On this occasion, they also invited many international 
guests who all believed they were attending a secular
 “World Peace Summit”. 

As the two events took place simultaneously and 
in the same venue, it led to significant confusion and 
embarrassment for international guests who had been misled. 
Here’s one blogger’s experience at a similar event: 
“We thought we were going to a world peace festival…
turned out to be a religious cult sort of thing.”

# 1 - If You Must Find Fault, This Is The Way To Begin.

A friend of mine was a guest at the White House for a weekend during the administration of Calvin Coolidge. Drifting into the President's private office, he heard Coolidge say to one of his secretaries, "That's a pretty dress you are wearing this morning, and you are a very attractive young woman." That was probably the most effusive praise Silent Cal had ever bestowed upon a secretary in his life. 

It was so unusual, so unexpected, that the secretary blushed in confusion. Then Coolidge said, "Now, don't get stuck up. I just said that to make you feel good. From now on, I wish you would be a little bit more careful with your Punctuation." His method was probably a bit obvious, but the psychology was superb. It is always easier to listen to unpleasant things after we have heard some praise of our good points. A barber lathers a man before he shaves him; and that is precisely what McKinley did back in 1896, when he was running for President. 

One of the prominent Republicans of that day had written a campaign speech that he felt was just a trifle better than Cicero and Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster all rolled into one. With great glee, this chap read his immortal speech aloud to McKinley. The speech had its fine points, but it just wouldn't do. It would have raised a tornado of criticism. McKinley didn't want to hurt the man's feelings. He must not kill the man's splendid enthusiasm, and yet he had to say "no." Note how adroitly he did it. "My friend, that is a splendid speech, a magnificent speech," McKinley said. "No one could have prepared a better one. 

There are many occasions on which it would be precisely the right thing to say, but is it quite suitable to this particular occasion? Sound and sober as it is from your standpoint, I must consider its effect from the party's standpoint. Now you go home and write a speech along the lines I indicate, and send me a copy of it." He did just that. McKinley blue-penciled and helped him rewrite his second speech, and he became one of the effective speakers of the campaign. 

Here is the second most famous letter that Abraham Lincoln ever wrote. (His most famous one was written to Mrs. Bixby, expressing his sorrow for the death of the five sons she had lost in battle.) Lincoln probably dashed this letter off in five minutes; yet it sold at public auction in 1926 for twelve thousand dollars, and that, by the way, was more money than Lincoln was able to save during half a century of hard work. 

The letter was written to General Joseph Hooker on April 26, 1863, during the darkest period of the Civil War. For eighteen months, Lincoln's generals had been leading the Union Army from one tragic defeat to another. Nothing but futile, stupid human butchery. The nation was appalled. Thousands of soldiers had deserted from the army, and en the Republican members of the Senate had revolted and wanted to force Lincoln out of the White House. "We are now on the brink of destruction," Lincoln said. It appears to me that even the Almighty is against us. 

I can hardly see a ray of hope." Such was the black sorrow and chaos out of which this letter came. I am printing the letter here because it shows how Lincoln tried to change an obstreperous general when the very fate of the nation could have depended upon the general's action. This is perhaps the sharpest letter Abe Lincoln wrote after he became President; yet you will note that he praised General Hooker before he spoke of his grave faults. Yes, they were grave faults, but Lincoln didn't call them that. Lincoln was more conservative, more diplomatic. 

Lincoln wrote: "There are some things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you." Talk about tact! And diplomacy! Here is the letter addressed to General Hooker: I have placed you at the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course, I have done this upon what appears to me to be sufficient reasons, and yet I think it best for you to know that there are some things in regard to which I am not quite satisfied with you. I believe you to be a brave and skillful soldier, which, of course, I like. I also believe you do not mix politics with your profession, in which you are right. 

You have confidence in yourself, which is a valuable if not an indispensable quality. You are ambitious, which, within reasonable bounds, does good rather than harm, But I think that during General Burnside's command of the army you have taken counsel of your ambition and thwarted him as much as you could, in which you did a great wrong to the country and to a most meritorious and honorable brother officer. 

I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the Government needed a dictator. Of course, it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you command. Only those generals who gain successes can set up as dictators. What I now ask of you is military success and I will risk the dictatorship. The Government will support you to the utmost of its ability, which is neither more nor less than it has done and will do for all commanders. 

I much fear that the spirit which you have aided to infuse into the army, of criticizing their commander and withholding confidence from him, will now turn upon you. I shall assist you, as far as I can, to put it down. Neither you nor Napoleon, if he were alive again, could get any good out of an army while such spirit prevails in it, and now beware of rashness. Beware of rashness, but with energy and sleepless vigilance go forward and give us victories. You are not a Coolidge, a McKinley or a Lincoln. You want to know whether this philosophy will operate for you in everyday business contacts. Will it? Let's see. Let's take the case of W. P. Gaw of the Wark Company, Philadelphia. 

The Wark Company had contracted to build and complete a large office building in Philadelphia by a certain specified date. Everything was going along well; the building was almost finished, when suddenly the sub-contractor making the ornamental bronze work to go on the exterior of this building declared that he couldn't make delivery on schedule. What! An entire building held up! Heavy penalties! Distressing losses! All because of one man! Long-distance telephone calls. Arguments! Heated conversations! All in vain. 

Then Mr. Gaw was sent to New York to beard the bronze lion in his den. "Do you know you are the only person in Brooklyn with your name,?" Mr Gaw asked the president of the subcontracting firm shortly after they were introduced. The president was surprised. "No, I didn't know that." "Well," said Mr. Gaw, "when I got off the train this morning, I looked in the telephone book to get your address, and you're the only person in the Brooklyn phone book with your name." "I never knew that," the subcontractor said. 

He checked the phone book with interest. "Well, it's an unusual name," he said proudly. "My family came from Holland and settled in New York almost two hundred years ago. " He continued to talk about his family and his ancestors for several minutes. When he finished that, Mr. Gaw complimented him on how large a plant he had and compared it favorably with a number of similar plants he had visited. "It is one of the cleanest and neatest bronze factories I ever saw," said Gaw. "I've spent a lifetime building up this business," the subcontractor said, "and I am rather proud of it. 

Would you like to take a look around the factory?" During this tour of inspection, Mr. Gaw complimented the other man on his system of fabrication and told him how and why it seemed superior to those of some of his competitors. Gaw commented on some unusual machines, and the subcontractor announced that he himself had invented those machines. He spent considerable time showing Gaw how they operated and the superior work they turned out. He insisted on taking his visitor to lunch.

 So far, mind you, not a word had been said about the real purpose of Gaw's visit. After lunch, the subcontractor said, "Now, to get down to business. Naturally, I know why you're here. I didn't expect that our meeting would be so enjoyable. You can go back to Philadelphia with my promise that your material will be fabricated and shipped, even if other orders have to be delayed." Mr. Gaw got everything that he wanted without even asking for it. The material arrived on time, and the building was completed on the day the completion contract specified. 

Would this have happened had Mr. Gaw used the hammer-and-dynamite method generally employed on such occasions? Dorothy Wrublewski, a branch manager of the Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, Federal Credit Union, reported to one of our classes how she was able to help one of her employees become more productive. "We recently hired a young lady as a teller trainee. Her contact with our customers was very good. She was accurate and efficient in handling individual transactions. 

The problem developed at the end of the day when it was time to balance out. "The head teller came to me and strongly suggested that I fire this woman. 'She is holding up everyone else because she is so slow in balancing out. I've shown her over and over, but she can't get it. She's got to go.' "The next day I observed her working quickly and accurately when handling the normal everyday transactions, and she was very pleasant with our customers. "It didn't take long to discover why she had trouble balancing out. After the office closed, I went over to talk with her. She was obviously nervous and upset. 

I praised her for being so friendly and outgoing with the customers and complimented her for the accuracy and speed used in that work. I then suggested we review the procedure we use in balancing the cash drawer. Once she realized I had confidence in her, she easily followed my suggestions and soon mastered this function. We have had no problems with her since then." Beginning with praise is like the dentist who begins his work with Novocain. The patient still gets a drilling, but the Novocain is pain-killing. A leader will use ...

 • Principle 1 - Begin with praise and honest appreciation.

# 2 - How To Criticize-And Not Be Hated For It

Charles Schwab was passing through one of his steel mills one day at noon when he came across some of his employees smoking. Immediately above their heads was a sign that said "No Smoking." Did Schwab point to the sign and say, "Can't you read.? Oh, no not Schwab. He walked over to the men, handed each one a cigar, and said, "I'll appreciate it, boys, if you will smoke these on the outside." They knew that he knew that they had broken a rule - and they admired him because he said nothing about it and gave them a little present and made them feel important. 

Couldn't keep from loving a man like that, could you? John Wanamaker used the same technique. Wanamaker used to make a tour of his great store in Philadelphia every day. Once he saw a customer waiting at a counter. No one was paying the slightest attention to her. The salespeople? Oh, they were in a huddle at the far end of the counter laughing and talking among themselves. Wanamaker didn't say a word. Quietly slipping behind the counter, he waited on the woman himself and then handed the purchase to the salespeople to be wrapped as he went on his way. 

Public officials are often criticized for not being accessible to their constituents. They are busy people, and the fault sometimes lies in overprotective assistants who don't want to overburden their bosses with too many visitors. Carl Langford, who has been mayor of Orlando, Florida, the home of Disney World, for many years, frequently admonished his staff to allow people to see him. clamed he had an "open-door" policy; yet the citizens of his community were blocked by secretaries and administrators when they called. Finally the mayor found the solution. 

He removed the door from his office! His aides got the message, and the mayor has had a truly open administration since the day his door was symbolically thrown away. Simply changing one three-letter word can often spell the difference between failure and success in changing people without giving offense or arousing resentment. Many people begin their criticism with sincere praise followed by the word "but" and ending with a critical statement. For example, in trying to change a child's careless attitude toward studies, we might say, "We're really proud of you, Johnnie, for raising your grades this term. 

But if you had worked harder on your algebra, the results would have been better." In this case, Johnnie might feel encouraged until he heard the word "but." He might then question the sincerity of the original praise. To him, the praise seemed only to be a contrived lead-in to a critical inference of failure. Credibility would be strained, and we probably would not achieve our objectives of changing Johnnie's attitude toward his studies. 

This could be easily overcome by changing the word "but" to "and." "We're really proud of you, Johnnie, for raiseing your grades this term, and by continuing the same conscientious efforts next term, your algebra grade can be up with all the others." Now, Johnnie would accept the praise because there was no follow-up of an inference of failure. We have called his attention to the behavior we wished to change indirectly and the chances are he will try to live up to our expectations. Calling attention to one's mistakes indirectly works wonders with sensitive people who may resent bitterly any direct criticism. 

Marge Jacob of Woonsocket, Rhode Island, told one of our classes how she convinced some sloppy construction workers to clean up after themselves when they were building additions to her house. For the first few days of the work, when Mrs. Jacob returned from her job, she noticed that the yard was strewn with the cut ends of lumber. She didn't want to antagonize the builders, because they did excellent work. So after the workers had gone home, she and her children picked up and neatly piled all the lumber debris in a corner. 

The following morning she called the foreman to one side and said, "I'm really pleased with the way the front lawn was left last night; it is nice and clean and does not offend the neighbors." From that day forward the workers picked up and piled the debris to one side, and the foreman came in each day seeking approval of the condition the lawn was left in after a day's work. One of the major areas of controversy between members of the army reserves and their regular army trainers is haircuts. The reservists consider themselves civilians (which they are most of the time) and resent having to cut their hair short. 

Master Sergeant Harley Kaiser of the 542nd USAR School addressed himself to this problem when he was working with a group of reserve noncommissioned officers. As an old-time regular-army master sergeant, he might have been expected to yell at his troops and threaten them. Instead he chose to make his point indirectly. "Gentlemen," he started, "you are leaders. You will be most effective when you lead by example. 

You must be the example for your men to follow. You know what the army regulations say about haircuts. I am going to get my hair cut today, although it is still much shorter than some of yours. You look at yourself in the mirror, and if you feel you need a haircut to be a good example, we'll arrange time for you to visit the post barbership." The result was predictable. Several of the candidates did look in the mirror and went to the barbershop that afternoon and received "regulation" haircuts. 

Sergeant Kaiser commented the next morning that he already could see the development of leadership qualities in some of the members of the squad. On March 8, 1887, the eloquent Henry Ward Beecher died. The following Sunday, Lyman Abbott was invited to speak in the pulpit left silent by Beecher's passing. Eager to do his best, he wrote, rewrote and polished his sermon with the meticulous care of a Flaubert. Then he read it to his wife. It was poor - as most written speeches are. 

She might have said, if she had had less judgment, "Lyman, that is terrible. That'll never do. You'll put people to sleep. It reads like an encyclopedia. You ought to know better than that after all the years you have been preaching. For heaven's sake, why don't you talk like a human being? Why don't you act natural? You'll disgrace yourself if you ever read that stuff." That's what she might have said. And, if she had, you know what would have happened. And she knew too. 

So, she merely remarked that it would make an excellent article for the North American Review. In other words, she praised it and at the same time subtly suggested that it wouldn't do as a speech. Lyman Abbott saw the point, tore up his carefully prepared manuscript and preached without even using notes. An effective way to correct others' mistakes is ... • Principle 2 - Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly.

# 3 -Talk About Your Own Mistakes First

My niece, Josephine Carnegie, had come to New York to be my secretary. She was nineteen, had graduated from high school three years previously, and her business experience was a trifle more than zero. She became one of the most proficient secretaries west of Suez, but in the beginning, she was - well, susceptible to improvement. One day when I started to criticize her, I said to myself: "Just a minute, Dale Carnegie; just a minute. You are twice as old as Josephine. 

You have had ten thousand times as much business experience. How can you possibly expect her to have your viewpoint, your judgment, your initiative - mediocre though they may be? And just a minute, Dale, what were you doing at nineteen? Remember the asinine mistakes and blunders you made? Remember the time you did this ... and that ... ?" 

After thinking the matter over, honestly and impartially, I concluded that Josephine's batting average at nineteen was better than mine had been - and that, I'm sorry to confess, isn't paying Josephine much of a compliment. So after that, when I wanted to call Josephine's attention to a mistake, I used to begin by saying, "You have made a mistake, Josephine, but the Lord knows, it's no worse than many I have made. 

You were not born with judgment. That comes only with experience, and you are better than I was at your age. I have been guilty of so many stupid, silly things myself, I have very little incliion to criticize you or anyone. But don't you think it would have been wiser if you had done so and so?" It isn't nearly so difficult to listen to a recital of your faults if the person criticizing begins by humbly admitting that he, too, is far from impeccable. 

E.G. Dillistone, an engineer in Brandon, Manitoba, Canada, was having problems with his new secretary. Letters he dictated were coming to his desk for signature with two or three spelling mistakes per page. Mr. Dillistone reported how he handled this: "Like many engineers, I have not been noted for my excellent English or spelling. For years I have kept a little black thumb - index book for words I had trouble spelling. 

When it became apparent that merely pointing out the errors was not going to cause my secretary to do more proofreading and dictionary work, I resolved to take another approach. When the next letter came to my attention that had errors in it, I sat down with the typist and said: " 'Somehow this word doesn't look right. It's one of the words I always have had trouble with. That's the reason I started this spelling book of mine. 

I opened the book to the appropriate page.] Yes, here it is. I'm very conscious of my spelling now because people do judge us by our letters and misspellings make us look less professional. "I don't know whether she copied my system or not, but since that conversation, her frequency of spelling errors has been significantly reduced." The polished 

Prince Bernhard von Bьlow learned the sharp necessity of doing this back in 1909. Von Bьlow was then the Imperial Chancellor of Germany, and on the throne sat Wilhelm II-Wilhelm, the haughty; Wilhelm the arrogant; Wilhelm, the last of the German Kaisers, building an army and navy that he boasted could whip their weight in wildcats Then an astonishing thing happened. 

The Kaiser said things, incredible things, things that rocked the continent and started a series of explosions heard around the world. To make matters infinitely worse, the Kaiser made silly, egotistical, absurd announcements in public, he made them while he was a guest in England, and he gave his royal permission to have them printed in the Daily Telegraph. 

For example, he declared that he was the only German who felt friendly toward the English; that he was constructing a navy against the menace of Japan; that he, and he alone, had saved England from being humbled in the dust by Russia and France; that it had been his campaign plan that enabled England's Lord Roberts to defeat the Boers in South Africa; and so on and on. No other such amazing words had ever fallen from the lips of a European king in peacetime within a hundred years. 

The entire continent buzzed with the fury of a hornet's nest. England was incensed. German statesmen were aghast. And in the midst of all this consternation, the Kaiser became panicky and suggested to Prince von Bьlow, the Imperial Chancellor, that he take the blame. Yes, he wanted von Bьlow to announce that it was all his responsibility, that he had advised his monarch to say these incredible things. 

"But Your Majesty," von Bьlow protested, "it seems to me utterly impossible that anybody either in Germany or England could suppose me capable of having advised Your Majesty to say any such thing." The moment those words were out of von Bьlow's mouth, he realized he had made a grave mistake. The Kaiser blew up. "You consider me a donkey," he shouted, "capable of blunders you yourself could never have committed!" Von Bьlow's knew that he ought to have praised before he condemned; but since that was too late, he did the next best thing. 

He praised after he had criticized. And it worked a miracle. "I'm far from suggesting that," he answered respectfully. "Your Majesty surpasses me in manv respects; not only of course, in naval and military knowledge but above all, in natural science. I have often listened in admiration when Your Majesty explained the barometer, or wireless telegraphy, or the Roentgen rays. I am shamefully ignorant of all branches of natural science, have no notion of chemistry or physics, and am quite incapable of explaining the simplest of natural phenomena. 

But," von Bьllow continued, "in compensation, I possess some historical knowledge and perhaps certain qualities useful in politics, especially in diplomacy." The Kaiser beamed. Von Bulow had praised him. Von Bьlow had exalted him and humbled himself. The Kaiser could forgive anything after that. "Haven't I always told you," he exclaimed with enthusiasm, "that we complete one another famously? We should stick together, and we will!" He shook hands with von Bьlow, not once, but several times. 

And later in the day he waxed so enthusiastic that he exclaimed with doubled fists, "If anyone says anything to me against Prince von Bьlow, I shall punch him in the nose." Von Bьlow saved himself in time - but, canny diplomat that he was, he nevertheless had made one error: he should have begun by talking about his own shortcomings and Wilhelm's superiority - not by intimating that the Kaiser was a half-wit in need of a guardian. 

If a few sentences humbling oneself and praising the other party can turn a haughty, insulted Kaiser into a staunch friend, imagine what humility and praise can do for you and me in our daily contacts. Rightfully used, they will work veritable miracles in human relations. Admitting one's own mistakes - even when one hasn't corrected them - can help convince somebody to change his behavior. This was illustrated more recently by Clarence Zerhusen of Timonium, Maryland, when he discovered his fifteen-year-old son was experimenting with cigarettes.

 "Naturally, I didn't want David to smoke," Mr. Zerhusen told us, "but his mother and I smoked cigarettes; we were giving him a bad example all the time. I explained to Dave how I started smoking at about his age and how the nicotine had gotten the best of me and now it was nearly impossible for me to stop. I reminded him how irritating my cough was and how he had been after me to give up cigarettes not many years before. "I didn't exhort him to stop or make threats or warn him about their dangers. 

All I did was point out how I was hooked on cigarettes and what it had meant to me. "He thought about it for a while and decided he wouldn't smoke until he had graduated from high school. As the years went by David never did start smoking and has no intention of ever doing so. "As a result of that conversation I made the decision to stop smoking cigarettes myself, and with the support of my family, I have succeeded." A good leader follows this principle: • Principle 3 - Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person

# 4 - No One Likes To Take Orders

I once had the pleasure of dining with Miss Ida Tarbell, the dean of American biographers. When I told her I was writing this book, we began discussing this all-important subject of getting along with people, and she told me that while she was writing her biography of Owen D. Young, she interviewed a man who had sat for three years in the same office with Mr. Young. 

This man declared that during all that time he had never heard Owen D. Young give a direct order to anyone. He always gave suggestions, not orders. Owen D. Young never said, for example, "Do this or do that," or "Don't do this or don't do that." He would say, "You might consider this," or "Do you think that would work?" 

Frequently he would say, after he had dictated a letter, "What do you think of this?" In looking over a letter of one of his assistants, he would say, "Maybe if we were to phrase it this way it would be better." He always gave people the opportunity to do things themselves; he never told his assistants to do things; he let them do them, let them learn from their mistakes. 

A technique like that makes it easy for a person to correct errors. A technique like that saves a person's pride and gives him or her a feeling of importance. It encourages cooperation instead of rebellion. Resentment caused by a brash order may last a long time -even if the order was given to correct an obviously bad situation. Dan Santarelli, a teacher at a vocational school in Wyoming, Pennsylvania, told one of our classes how one of his students had blocked the entrance way to one of the school's shops by illegally parking his car in it. 

One of the other instructors stormed into the classroom and asked in an arrogant tone, "Whose car is blocking the driveway?" When the student who owned the car responded, the instructor screamed: "Move that car and move it right now, or I'll wrap a chain around it and drag it out of there." Now that student was wrong. The car should not have been parked there. But from that day on, not only did that student resent the instructor's action, but all the students in the class did everything they could to give the instructor a hard time and make his job unpleasant. 

How could he have handled it differently? If he had asked in a friendly way, "Whose car is in the driveway?" and then suggested that if it were moved, other cars could get in and out, the student would have gladly moved it and neither he nor his classmates would have been upset and resentful. Asking questions not only makes an order more palatable; it often stimulates the creativity of the persons whom you ask. 

People are more likely to accept an order if they have had a part in the decision that caused the order to be issued. When Ian Macdonald of Johannesburg, South Africa, the general manager of a small manufacturing plant specializing in precision machine parts, had the opportunity to accept a very large order, he was convinced that he would not meet the promised delivery date. 

The work already scheduled in the shop and the short completion time needed for this order made it seem impossible for him to accept the order. Instead of pushing his people to accelerate their work and rush the order through, he called everybody together, explained the situation to them, and told them how much it would mean to the company and to them if they could make it possible to produce the order on time. 

Then he started asking questions: "Is there anything we can do to handle this order?" "Can anyone think of different ways to process it through the shop that will make it possible to take the order?" "Is there any way to adjust our hours or personnel assignments that would help?" The employees came up with many ideas and insisted that he take the order. They approached it with a "We can do it" attitude, and the order was accepted, produced and delivered on time. An effective leader will use ... 

• Principle 4 - Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.

# 5 - Let The Other Person Save Face

Years ago the General Electric Company was faced with the delicate task of removing Charles Steinmetz from the head of a department. Steinmetz, a genius of the first magnitude when it came to electricity, was a failure as the head of the calculating department. 

Yet the company didn't dare offend the man. He was indispensable - and highly sensitive. So they gave him a new title. They made him Consulting Engineer of the General Electric Company - a new title for work he was already doing -and let someone else head up the department. Steinmetz was happy. 

So were the officers of G.E. They had gently maneuvered their most tempera-mental star, and they had done it without a storm - by letting him save face. Letting one save face! How important, how vitally important that is! And how few of us ever stop to think of it! We ride roughshod over the feelings of others, getting our own way, finding fault, issuing threats, criticizing a child or an employee in front of others, without even considering the hurt to the other person's pride. 

Whereas a few minutes' thought, a considerate word or two, a genuine understanding of the other person's attitude, would go so far toward alleviating the sting! Let's remember that the next time we are faced with the distasteful necessity of discharging or reprimanding an employee. 

"Firing employees is not much fun. Getting fired is even less fun." (I'm quoting now from a letter written me by Marshall A. Granger, a certified public accountant.) "Our business is mostly seasonal. Therefore we have to let a lot of people go after the income tax rush is over. 

It's a byword in our profession that no one enjoys wielding the ax. Consequently, the custom has developed of getting it over as soon as possible, and usually in the following way: 'Sit down, Mr. Smith. The season's over, and we don't seem to see any more assignments for you. Of course, you understood you were only employed for the busy season anyhow, etc., etc.' "The effect on these people is one of disappointment and a feeling of being 'let down.' Most of them are in the accounting field for life, and they retain no particular love for the firm that drops them so casually. "I recently decided to let our seasonal personnel go with a little more tact and consideration. 

So I call each one in only after carefully thinking over his or her work during the winter. And I've said something like this: 'Mr. Smith, you've done a fine job (if he has). That time we sent you to Newark, you had a tough assignment. You were on the spot, but you came through with flying colors, and we want you to know the firm is proud of you. You've got the stuff - you're going a long way, wherever you're working.

 This firm believes in you, and is rooting for you, and we don't want you to forget it.' "Effect? The people go away feeling a lot better about being fired. They don't feel 'let down.' They know if we had work for them, we'd keep them on. And when we need them again, they come to us with a keen personal affection." At one session of our course, two class members discussed the negative effects of faultfinding versus the positive effects of letting the other person save face. Fred Clark of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, told of an incident that occurred in his company:

 "At one of our production meetings, a vice president was asking very pointed questions of one of our production supervisors regarding a production process. His tone of voice was aggressive and aimed at pointing out faulty performance on the part of the supervisor. Not wanting to be embarrassed in front of his peers, the supervisor was evasive in his responses. This caused the vice president to lose his temper, berate the supervisor and accuse him of lying. "Any working relationship that might have existed prior to this encounter was destroyed in a few brief moments. 

This supervisor, who was basically a good worker, was useless to our company from that time on. A few months later he left our firm and went to work for a competitor, where I understand he is doing a fine job." Another class member, Anna Mazzone, related how a similar incident had occurred at her job - but what a difference in approach and results! Ms. Mazzone, a marketing specialist for a food packer, was given her first major assignment - the test-marketing of a new product. She told the class: "When the results of the test came in, I was devastated. 

I had made a serious error in my planning, and the entire test had to be done all over again. To make this worse, I had no time to discuss it with my boss before the meeting in which I was to make my report on the project. "When I was called on to give the report, I was shaking with fright. I had all I could do to keep from breaking down, but I resolved I would not cry and have all those men make remarks about women not being able to handle a management job because they are too emotional. 

I made my report briefly and stated that due to an error I would repeat the study before the next meeting. I sat down, expecting my boss to blow up. "Instead, he thanked me for my work and remarked that it was not unusual for a person to make an error on a new project and that he had confidence that the repeat survey would be accurate and meaningful to the company. He Assured me, in front of all my colleagues, that he had faith in me and I knew I had done my best, and that my lack of experience, not my lack of ability, was the reason for the failure.

 I left that meeting with my head in the air and with the determination that I would never let that boss of mine down again." Even if we are right and the other person is definitely wrong, we only destroy ego by causing someone to lose face. The legendary French aviation pioneer and author Antoine de Saint-Exupйry wrote: "I have no right to say or do anything that diminishes a man in his own eyes. What matters is not what I think of him, but what he thinks of himself. Hurting a man in his dignity is a crime." A real leader will always follow ... 

• Principle 5 - Let the other person save face.

# 6 - How To Spur People On To Success

Pete Barlow was an old friend of mine. He had a dog-and-pony act and spent his life traveling with circuses and vaudeville shows. I loved to watch Pete train new dogs for his act. I noticed that the moment a dog showed the slightest improvement, Pete patted and praised him and gave him meat and made a great to-do about it. That's nothing new. 

Animal trainers have been using that same technique for centuries. Why, I wonder, don't we use the same common sense when trying to change people that we use when trying to change dogs? Why don't we use meat instead of a whip? Why don't we use praise instead of condemnation? Let us praise even the slightest improvement. 

That inspires the other person to keep on improving. In his book I Ain't Much, Baby-But I'm All I Got, the psychologist Jess Lair comments: "Praise is like sunlight to the warm human spirit; we cannot flower and grow without it. And yet, while most of us are only too ready to apply to others the cold wind of criticism, we are somehow reluctant to give our fellow the warm sunshine of praise."  I can look back at my own life and see where a few words of praise have sharply changed my entire future. 

Can't you say the same thing about your life? History is replete with striking illustrations of the sheer witchery raise. For example, many years ago a boy of ten was working in a factory in Naples, He longed to be a singer, but his first teacher discouraged him. "You can't sing," he said. "You haven't any voice at all. It sounds like the wind in the shutters." But his mother, a poor peasant woman, put her arms about him and praised him and told him she knew he could sing, she could already see an improvement, and she went barefoot in order to save money to pay for his music lessons. 

That peasant mother's praise and encouragement changed that boy's life. His name was Enrico Caruso, and he became the greatest and most famous opera singer of his age. In the early nineteenth century, a young man in London aspired to be a writer. But everything seemed to be against him. He had never been able to attend school more than four years. His father had been flung in jail because he couldn't pay his debts, and this young man often knew the pangs of hunger. 

Finally, he got a job pasting labels on bottles of blacking in a rat-infested ware house, and he slept at night in a dismal attic room with two other boys - guttersnipes from the slums of London. He had so little confidence in his ability to write that he sneaked out and mailed his first manuscript in the dead of night so nobody would laugh at him. Story after story was refused. Finally the great day came when one was accepted. True, he wasn't paid a shilling for it, but one editor had praised him. 

One editor had given him recognition. He was so thrilled that he wandered aimlessly around the streets with tears rolling down his cheeks. The praise, the recognition, that he received through getting one story in print, changed his whole life, for if it hadn't been for that encouragement, he might have spent his entire life working in rat-infested factories. You may have heard of that boy. His name was Charles Dickens. Another boy in London made his living as a clerk in a dry-goods store. 

He had to get up at five o'clock, sweep out the store, and slave for fourteen hours a day. It was sheer drudgery and he despised it. After two years, he could stand it no longer, so he got up one morning and, without waiting for breakfast, tramped fifteen miles to talk to his mother, who was working as a housekeeper. He was frantic. He pleaded with her. He wept. He swore he would kill himself if he had to remain in the shop any longer. Then he wrote a long, pathetic letter to his old schoolmaster, declaring that he was heartbroken, that he no longer wanted to live. 

His old schoolmaster gave him a little praise and assured him that he really was very intelligent and fitted for finer things and offered him a job as a teacher. That praise changed the future of that boy and made a lasting impression on the history of English literature. For that boy went on to write innumerable best-selling books and made over a million dollars with his pen. You've probably heard of him. His name: H. G. Wells. Use of praise instead of criticism is the basic concept of B.F. Skinner's teachings. 

This great contemporary psychologist has shown by experiments with animals and with humans that when criticism is minimized and praise emphasized, the good things people do will be reinforced and the poorer things will atrophy for lack of attention. John Ringelspaugh of Rocky Mount, North Carolina, used this in dealing with his children. It seemed that, as in so many families, mother and dad's chief form of communication with the children was yelling at them. And, as in so many cases, the children became a little worse rather than better after each such session - and so did the parents. 

There seemed to be no end in sight for this problem. Mr. Ringelspaugh determined to use some of the principles he was learning in our course to solve this situation. He reported: "We decided to try praise instead of harping on their faults. It wasn't easy when all we could see were the negative things they were doing; it was really tough to find things to praise. We managed to find something, and within the first day or two some of the really upsetting things they were doing quit happening. 

Then some of their other faults began to disappear. They began capitalizing on the praise we were giving them. They even began going out of their way to do things right. Neither of us could believe it. Of course, it didn't last forever, but the norm reached after things leveled off was so much better. It was no longer necessary to react the way we used to. The children were doing far more right things than wrong ones." All of this was a result of praising the slightest improvement in the children rather than condemning everything they did wrong. 

This works on the job too. Keith Roper of Woodland Hills, California, applied this principle to a situation in his company. Some material came to him in his print shop which was of exceptionally high quality. The printer who had done this job was a new employee who had been having difficulty adjusting to the job. His supervisor was upset about what he considered a negative attitude and was seriously thinking of terminating his services. 

When Mr. Roper was informed of this situation, he personally went over to the print shop and had a talk with the young man. He told him how pleased he was with the work he had just received and pointed out it was the best work he had seen produced in that shop for some time. He pointed out exactly why it was superior and how important the young man's contribution was to the company, Do you think this affected that young printer's attitude toward the company? Within days there was a complete turnabout. 

He told several of his co-workers about the conversation and how someone in the company really appreciated good work. And from that day on, he was a loyal and dedicated worker. What Mr. Roper did was not just flatter the young printer and say "You're good." He specifically pointed out how his work was superior. Because he had singled out a specific accomplishment, rather than just making general flattering remarks, his praise became much more meaningful to the person to whom it was given. 

Everybody likes to be praised, but when praise is specific, it comes across as sincere - not something the other person may be saying just to make one feel good. Remember, we all crave appreciation and recognition, and will do almost anything to get it. But nobody wants insincerity. Nobody wants flattery. Let me repeat: The principles taught in this book will work only when they come from the heart. I am not advocating a bag of tricks. I am talking about a new way of life. Talk about changing people. 

If you and I will inspire the people with whom we come in contact to a realization of the hidden treasures they possess, we can do far more than change people. We can literally transform them. Exaggeration? Then listen to these sage words from William James, one of the most distinguished psychologists and philosophers America has ever produced: Compared with what we ought to be, we are only half awake. We are making use of only a small part of our physical and mental resources. Stating the thing broadly, the human individual thus lives far within his limits. 

He possesses powers of various sorts which he habitually fails to use. Yes, you who are reading these lines possess powers of various sorts which you habitually fail to use; and one of these powers you are probably not using to the fullest extent is your magic ability to praise people and inspire them with a realization of their latent possibilities. Abilities wither under criticism; they blossom under encouragement. To become a more effective leader of people, apply ... • Principle 6 - Praise the slightest improvement and praise every improvement. Be "hearty in your approbation and lavish in your praise."