Friday, June 12, 2026

SF - 2.12.0 - FISMA

SF - 2.12.0 - FISMA

The Federal Information Systems Management Act, or FISMA, is a law in the United States, and therefore only applies to American systems.  It also primarily applies to American government systems.  Its significance to the broader field of information security is that Americans tend to assume that their laws apply to anyone else who is dealing with American companies or government agencies.  I have mentioned the Sarbanes Oxley law, which is an American law, but which contains wording that is similar to those in various other American laws, stating that, if you do significant business with an American company, you are deemed to have accepted that this law applies to you.  The law assumes that you have deemed to have accepted that this law applies to you even if you don't even know that this law exists.

An additional issue with FISMA is that it really only says and specifies that you need to apply appropriate protection to any information management system.  The protection that you need to apply needs to be appropriate to the importance of the information contained within the system.  The details of what particular programs are important, and what the protections for these systems are are related in various additional standards, such as the National Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (NIACAP)‏, the National Institute of Standards and Technology outline ((which tends to also apply to non-government systems), the Defense Information Technology Systems Certification and Accreditation Process (DITSCAP)‏, and Director of Central Intelligence Directive 6/3.


Security frameworks (SF) series:
Next: TBA
Posted by at No comments:

SF - 2.09.0 - Common Criteria

SF - 2.09.0 - Common Criteria

The Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation is International Standard ISO 15408, and is generally known and referred to simply as the Common Criteria.  However, it should be noted that it is not a security framework.  It is not even an evaluation standard.  It is a framework for the specification of evaluation, particularly for security products.
 
To explain this oddity, one need only look to ISO 9000 which is the international standard for quality.  Except that it *isn't* the international standard for quality.  It is a framework for discussion about quality and specification of what your company does in terms of quality.  I have discussed this with people who are ISO 9000 certified, and put it to them that it is perfectly possible, according to ISO 9000, to create a specification which states, essentially, that we make shoddy products, and we don't care.  All of them agree that this is perfectly possible, as long as you describe it in the proper format and jargon.

The same thing is possible with regard to the Common Criteria.  In fact, this has basically been proven.  Microsoft certified Windows NT Server, Version 3.5, and, if you actually go through all the details of that specification you will find that it says, essentially, we make a not very secure workstation, and we can verify that as long as you believe everything that we tell you.

Nevertheless, the Common Criteria has created some very valuable materials and even concepts.  One of the concepts is the division between functional security requirements and assurance security requirements.  This is made evident in the fact that the Common Criteria is essentially divided into three parts.  Part one is a general introduction, contains a number of interesting discussions, and is something that I advise everyone to obtain and read.  Part two establishes the idea of the protection profile, which is the description of the secure device or entity which you wish to create or evaluate.  This allows you to specify the functional requirements of the device.  The third part of the Common Criteria is that which is that allows you to establish the assurance requirements for the device under consideration.  It establishes seven evaluation assurance levels, with increasingly rigorous requirements for the assessment and determination of adherence to the protection profile.
 




Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, June 11, 2026

SF - 2.06.0 - COBIT

SF - 2.06.0 - COBIT

Cobit is a certification, primarily intended for those in the information security audit field, created by the organization ISACA (which was formerly the information systems audit and control association, but decided to go with the acronym rather than spelling out the name of the organization).  It was very popular, around twenty years ago, even with those who were not working in the field of audit themselves.

There are approximately 135 items in the Cobit checklist, but they're grouped into four phases or domains.  These phases are planning and organization, acquisition and implementation, delivery and support, and monitoring.  Those who are familiar with the quality control community and standards will recognize the PDCA, or plan/do/check/act structure initiated and proposed by Walter Deming.

An interesting aspect of Cobit is that when you look at it carefully, you will notice that there is almost no technical material involved in the process.  Cobit is primarily concerned with documentation and the ability to prove that the controls that you state are in place are actually in place.


Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

SF - 2.03.0 - ISO 27000

SF - 2.03.0 - ISO 27000

I suppose I should start the actual frameworks with the ISO 27000 family.  Yes, there is an ISO 27000 standard, but it is actually just a guide to the rest of the ISO 27000 family.  This is a family of security frameworks addressing a huge range, by now, of various aspects of security.

But the ISO 27000 family really started with ISO 27001, and ISO 27002.  And to discuss that, we should really start with British Standard or BS 7799.  There is a British standard for pretty much everything.  There is in fact a British standard cup of tea.  British Standard 7799, originally, was a checklist of approximately 133 items (although it was further broken down into a total of five hundred controls).  As the limitations of checklists became evident, that original British Standard 7799 became BS 7799 part 1, and there was a more principle oriented British Standard 7799 part 2.  This caught the attention of the International Standards Organization, and they created a standard with principle orientation, which was numbered 27001.  However, a lot of people liked the checklist orientation, and so there was subsequently created a 27002 with the 133 component checklist.  So British Standard 7799 part 1 is equivalent to ISO 27002, and British Standard 7799 part 2 is equivalent to ISO 27001.  I hope that is all quite clear.

British standard 7799, and ISO 27000, and ISO 270001 all refer to information security management systems or ISMS.  This is kind of a way to identify people who learned security through either the British Standard or the ISO 27000 family: the reference to ISMS.

As I have mentioned, there is an ISO 27000 standard itself.  This is one of the relatively few standards that you do not have to pay for, since it is an umbrella to the overall standard family and covers ISMS fundamentals and vocabulary.

However, as I say, ISO 27000 is a family.  There are a number of additional standards associated with the family; an implementation guide, guidance on metrics, risk management, dealings with certification agencies, audit, information security governance, critical infrastructure, and dozens of additional topics.



Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, June 10, 2026

SF - 1.09.0 - weaknesses

SF - 1.09.0 - weaknesses

As previously mentioned, none of these security frameworks can be recommended without reservation.  All of them have weaknesses, and the weaknesses tend to be similar for every security framework.  Keep these weaknesses in mind as you consider the various security frameworks, and consider which one may help you to improve your security posture, in your particular situation.  Remember, at all times, that none of these is perfect.

One of the most common limitations in all security frameworks is that of the limitation of the content of the framework.  Security frameworks are built by people, and people tend to think that what they face, in terms of security protection and vulnerability and threat, is the most important.  No security framework addresses all areas of security.

You would think that the checklist type frameworks have the advantage in this area, since they are grouping lists of security controls, and therefore touch on a wide variety of processes and threats.  However, remember also that those frameworks that concentrate on the principles of security require you, in your work, your enterprise, and your situation, to address the specifics of the security problems you face, and the protections that you need.  Therefore, in a sense, those frameworks concentrating on principles, rather than individual controls, have the advantage in requiring you to address the specifics that you face.

One of the problems that you will come across frequently, if you explore a range of security frameworks, is that of the definition of secure.  Or, not so much the definition, as the emphasis that a particular security framework may put on one type of security over another.  This may not correspond with your particular needs.  I remember one particular meeting, where two people, sitting next to each other, faced wildly divergent security requirements.  In the case of one, absolute confidentiality was crucially essential.  This particular enterprise dealt with very detailed aspects of businesses, and sometimes businesses that were in competition with each other.  Any breach of confidentiality would have been catastrophic to the trust relationships necessary with their clientele.  On the other hand, this particular agency was a government office, and therefore speed of the processes, and availability of responses, was not necessarily something that anyone expected.  Next to him was someone who dealt with emergency management.  Nobody wanted to actually broadcast details of an emergency, but, given emergency communications, they did have to do so on occasion.  So confidentiality was a rather minor consideration for them.  But, dealing with emergency management, and particularly emergency communication, this particular office was absolutely vital, and it was absolutely crucial that, when someone picked up the phone and called them, somebody on the other end actually answered the phone, and relatively quickly.  Availability was absolutely crucial.  Therefore different frameworks may approach the different types of security, and the different requirements of different types of security, in very different ways.  Ensure, when you are considering a security framework, that it matches your emphasis on your need for your particular type of security.

I have mentioned best practice, and a number of the security frameworks concentrate on this idea of best practice.  Sometimes they present themselves as a best practice in terms of security frameworks.  The thing is, how do you define best?  Are you talking about the most common practice with the widest variety of enterprises?  Are you talking about something that will address the widest range of threats?  As previously noted, none of the security frameworks will address all the threats that you may encounter.  Be very careful when a security framework mentions best practice.  Definitely do not simply accept this as the one that you need, without regard for any other.  Perhaps the best practice is simply to ignore all mentions of best practice.


Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, June 9, 2026

SF - 1.08.0 - framework types

SF - 1.08.0 - framework types

Security framework types

One of the problems with writing, and particularly structuring, this particular presentation is in trying to determine the different types of security frameworks that exist.  The thing is, there are almost as many types of different frameworks as there are different frameworks.  Those who created different frameworks saw the weaknesses in other frameworks and so created a different type or a different structure of framework to address the failings that they saw with other frameworks.  Therefore each group that tried to create a framework was creating something new and therefore creating, in a way, a different type of framework.

A number of security frameworks could come under the general category of governance.  Governance is, of course, just another way of saying management, and so these tend to address the management of security, or of the organization overall, in a variety of ways.

Most of the governance frameworks tend to be of the breakdown type.  Breakdown doesn't necessarily refer to failure, but rather to the fact that looking at security for an entire enterprise is an enormous task, and can be quite daunting When approaching it for the first time.  So, therefore, we take what some refer to as the salami slicer approach, and try to carve the Enterprise up into smaller pieces which can be assessed more easily.  So, an entire enterprise will be broken down into divisions, and possibly departments, and possibly individual offices or agencies.  When you look at these smaller chunks of the enterprise, they may themselves be subdivided into things like processes.  Once you get down to a small enough size, you can then start to address the issues of security for these smaller units, on a manageable size, rather than looking at the enterprise as a whole.  Having come to certain conclusions in regard to the security requirements and protection requirements and tool requirements for these smaller units, you can then start repackaging the organization back into an integrated whole, and looking for areas where, for example, certain security tools or processes may address the needs of a wider variety of the different units within the enterprise.  This, of course, gives you a sense of the priorities to approach security tools and processes for the enterprise as a whole.

Some of the security frameworks, as mentioned, are of the checklist type.  Most of the checklists are lists of controls and therefore the checklists tend to be of the nature of questions like have you a control for this particular type of situation or vulnerability.  Checklists are easy to use and really only have limitations in terms of are they complete enough for your entire enterprise.

Some security frameworks are directed specifically at the field of risk management, risk assessment,  and risk mitigation.  There are certain security frameworks, like OCTAVE, which are specifically directed at the field of risk management.  However, various business and financial frameworks, which we tend to use widely in the field of information security, are also appropriate for this field of risk management.

Risk management is, I suppose, one example of the class of security frameworks that are oriented towards a specific process.  The frameworks that are specifically directed at the fields of audit and assurance are similarly examples of process-oriented types of security frameworks.



Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, June 8, 2026

SF - 1.06.0 - Financial Frameworks

SF - 1.06.0 - Financial Frameworks

The financial industry and community has a more mature risk analysis then do we in the rather new information security community, so some of the financial industries frameworks are often used as security frameworks in dealing with risk analysis.  These include the Sarbanes-Oxley law in the United States, the COSO standard (again from the United States), and the series of Basel international agreements.

(You have to think that the framers of the Sarbanes Oxley law were having a bit of fun.  The two salient sections of the act are section 404 and section 302.  These are, of course, the return codes for "file not found" and "file found" results in HTTP.)

The reliability of reported finances are the primary purposes of these financial frameworks, but this relates pretty directly to information system since information systems are generally the source of the financial reports.

These frameworks also deal with internal controls, and internal controls are a major component of information system controls. 

These controls also consider the problem of insider attack and fraud.  This is an ongoing and fairly intractable problem and these controls are one of the major sources of protection against them.

We will consider COSO in more detail at a later point in this material.



Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, June 6, 2026

SF - 1.03.0 - metrics

SF - 1.03.0 - metrics

Metrics

I need to talk, at least a little bit, about metrics.  Firstly because an awful lot of security frameworks will either demand or provide you with metrics.  Secondly because of the close tie between security and management.  And particularly the statement that what you can't measure you can't manage.  I'm not really sure that I entirely agree with that statement, but it has a lot of merit to it.  An awful lot of people will want metrics to indicate that the security efforts that you make with regard to a certain security framework will in fact improve the security posture in some measurable way.

Of course, as soon as we talk about metrics we start to talk about KPI, or key performance indicators.  This is just really metrics by another name, but management types tend to really appreciate key performance indicators.

In regard to the key part of key performance indicators, I should recommend a book by the name of "PRAGMATIC Security Metrics," by Brotby & Hinson.  Pragmatic is not just a description in the title of this work, but an acronym, pointing out that the security metrics that you choose should be predictive, relevant, actionable, genuine, meaningful, accurate, timely, independent, and cheap.  I highly recommend this work as it points out that not everything that you can measure really gives you any information about how you should manage.  The book itself will provide more details on all of the terms that I have just listed, and I highly recommend it for anyone in really any field of management, but particularly security.

I really enjoy the game of curling.  I appreciate the complexity and strategy of the game.  I tend to tell people that it's like playing chess, if the chess pieces are forty pounds each, and you put them on the board by throwing them down a sheet of ice to a position over a hundred and forty feet away.  No, I am not changing the subject.  If you watch curling on television, the commentator will give you statistics for the players.  But what does it mean if someone has a hit rate of 67%?  What does it mean if a player has a draw rate of 73%?  Operationally, you should either place the stone where it's supposed to be, or not.  That's either a one or a zero.  But, I suppose tactically, have you hit the other stone at precisely the right spot to push it out of the way, or did you get it 67% close to the precise spot?  When you draw down the ice, have you placed the rock perfectly, or is it 73% likely, strategically, that your opponent will not be able to draw around your stone and mess up a subsequent activity?

In terms of management and communication of extremely complex technical information, in an extremely complex and difficult situation, I always recommend that the master class in regard to communication of this sort was the Dr Bonnie show during the pandemic.  The information was delivered, more or less on a daily basis during the high point of the pandemic, not just in terms of the numbers, but in terms of what they meant.  One example was the effectiveness of the vaccines, as they started to come along.  The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were recommended, because they both had an effectiveness rate of 90%.  AstraZeneca was to be used only as a kind of a last resort, since it only had an effectiveness of 60%.  Presumably this meant that 60% of those who got the AstraZeneca vaccine did not contract the disease during the testing period.  However, AstraZeneca could, quite reasonably, have claimed an effectiveness of 89%, since 89% of those who got the vaccine, whether or not they got covid or not, did not become very ill and did not require hospitalization.  In fact, AstraZeneca could, also reasonably, have claimed an effectiveness of 100%, because no one who got the AstraZeneca vaccine, during the testing regime, actually died of covid, and therefore 100% of those who got the vaccine survived.

Hopefully this goes some way to pointing out that metrics alone, in isolation, are not necessarily the final word on the effectiveness of security.  Security metrics are indicators, and generally very valuable indicators of what is going on.  But you have to understand the implications of the particular metric.  Not everything that can be counted counts.




Security frameworks (SF) series:
Posted by at No comments:

Security Frameworks SF - 0.00.0 - intro and ToC

Security frameworks
SF - 0.00.0 - intro and ToC

(You can thank the Technology Forum of the Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia for this one.  They asked me to do a presentation, and chose the Security Frameworks presentation [that I hadn't done in a while], which reminded me that I had never dictated the text and resources of this presentation out in full.  So, here it is.)

Security frameworks is a rather vague description, and advisedly so.  That is because there are so many different options in terms of security frameworks: so many different types of security frameworks.  All of them have advice or guidance that can be used to improve your security situation or processes.  None of them, unfortunately, are a one-size-fits-all perfect standard for the creation of a security program.

An awful lot of security frameworks are guidelines, or guidance, towards improving your security posture.  Some stick to the basic principles of security, reminding you of areas which you need to examine.  A number of the frameworks will be standards, of one type or another.  Some of them are fairly generic standards, and so it's hard to distinguish them between from guidelines and principles.  However, others are standards for particular operations or systems, such as the data security standards specifically for the payment card industry.

Some of the frameworks are actual frameworks, and are either structures, or breakdown structures, for examining your existing Enterprise and the security operations and processes within it.

There are a number of security frameworks which basically consists of checklists.  I tend to refer to the checklist style of frameworks as the "135 checklists," since, for whatever reason, most of them have approximately 135 items in the checklist.  There can be a bit of leeway with a few items either more or less, but it has been astounding, over the years, how many of these checklists clock in very close to the 135 item number.  A number of the checklists frameworks either originated as, or have been folded into software of some type, so that the software will walk you through the items on the checklist, and allow you to determine which of these items you have, and which you should examine for inclusion in your own security systems.

A number of the security frameworks will style themselves as either a collection of "best practice" items, or the "gold standard" in security frameworks.  Best practice tends to be the gold standard in terms of a buzz phrase for getting someone to buy into your framework, while gold standard tends to be the best practice in terms of convincing people that your framework is the top of the line.

Some of the security frameworks are targeted at a specific process, even though they may provide guidance for security as a whole.  Sometimes these particular security standards are audit guidelines or outlines.  Sometimes some security frameworks result from legislation or regulation mandated by the government.  Some are reporting standards for a particular industry or a particular process.  Finally there are certain security frameworks that relate to product evaluation.

As noted, all of these frameworks can provide you with guidance in a number of areas.  Unfortunately, none of them are able to provide you with a perfect security situation all on their own.  It is important to know the range and variety of security frameworks so that you can choose a security framework which will complement your existing security situation, and provide you with the greatest opportunity for improvement of your security situation.

In a number of these reference articles I will be including links to certain portions of the full CISSP workshop, which also functions as an introduction to the field of information technology in general.  This link is to the video on security frameworks.


Security frameworks (SF) series:
Introduction and ToC: https://fibrecookery.blogspot.com/2026/06/security-frameworks-sf-0000-intro-and.html (this one)


Security frameworks (SF) series:
Introduction and ToC: https://fibrecookery.blogspot.com/2026/06/security-frameworks-sf-0000-intro-and.html
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, June 3, 2026

Non-promotional announcement

Rob Slade is not necessarily proud, or ashamed, to announce that he is still retired.

He has not received a promotion.

He has not been a particularly long time in any position.

He has not been awarded any special citation or honour.

He is still enjoying sporadically researching stuff he finds interesting, and hopefully the postings he makes about it are either interesting or helpful to some of you.

You don't have to be jealous that you are not doing what he is doing.  He hopes that you enjoy doing what you are doing, and predicts that, if you keep enjoying your work and doing it, someday you can post a similar posting.



(Which is mostly about "highlights" and "best life" postings on social media.)
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, May 20, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.22 - Authenticity - True Self - job interview tricks

CoSMI - 1.0.1.22 - Authenticity - True Self - job interview tricks


In a long lifetime, with many career changes, I have spent far too much time in job interviews.  I have also received a great deal of advice on job interviews, and how to affect them in your favour.  I have come to believe that an awful lot of this advice is absolute nonsense.

A great deal of advice that people give you about job interviews and about preparing resumes turns on the proposition that you should present yourself differently than you actually are.  People will tell you that companies are on the lookout for go-getters, and so, regardless of what you are actually like, you should present yourself as a go-getter!  Of course, if you present yourself in this way and the company hires you, thinking that you are a go-getter, then when you get the job, the company will expect you to go and get, regardless of what your skills actually are.

It's basically the same as if the company wants a morning person because they need somebody for the early shift.  You get the job by presenting yourself as a morning person, even though you are really a night owl.  On the job, you are continually coming in late or being absolutely useless for the first few hours of your shift because you are absolutely exhausted from being up late the night before.  It's not your fault that you are a night owl.  That is the way that you were made.  But it *is* your fault for presenting yourself incorrectly.  You're not happy, and the company's not happy.

One aspect of this problem is that it is not just the candidates for the job who are being told tricks for job interviews.  An awful lot of the job interviewers are also being told that they have to have tricks for the job interview.  They have to have group interviews, or confrontative interviews, or trick questions to fire at candidates at random times during the interview.  Tricks are always shortcuts, and a form of cheating, and cheaters never prosper.  Using interview tricks doesn't work any better for the companies than it does for the candidates. It just means that you end up with the wrong people in the wrong jobs, and then nobody is happy.

Really, this is just another way of saying the same thing that I have been saying all along.  Be yourself.  Be true to yourself.  Don't change just because somebody says you need to be something else.  If you need to be something else in order to do what you think you want to do, then you shouldn't be doing that.



CoSMI series:
Next: TBA
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, May 18, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.21 - Authenticity - True Self - don't change

CoSMI - 1.0.1.21 - Authenticity - True Self - don't change

2 Corinthians 10:12
We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some who commend themselves.  When they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are not wise.


When I say "don't change," I don't really mean it.  It's impossible to stay the same: you're changing all the time.  Everything you do affects you, generally speaking.  Everything that you do teaches you something, so you are constantly learning, and therefore you are constantly changing.  So it is impossible not to change.

What I really mean is, don't change just because you are or are becoming an influencer.  Even that is impossible.  As you are becoming an influencer, you are learning things, and therefore you are changing, but be careful how being an influencer is changing you.  The first step, of course, is to know who you are.  Therefore, keep on with the exercises and efforts to ensure that you do know yourself, and that you are aware of how you are changing while you are learning to be an influencer.

I suppose that the best way to illustrate what I am trying to point out here is to go whole hog and take the most extreme form of influencers.  As far as I can tell, those who are doing the most outrageous things with regard to being an influencer on social media are those who are sharing how they live with their family.  They are sharing how they do their parenting.  They are sharenting, as one person put it.

Sharing tips and tricks about how to parent your children is quite okay.  Parents have an extremely difficult job, and they can use all the help they can get.  All of the valid tips and tricks that you can pass along to other parents is great, but that is not what sharenting does.  Or, at least, that is not the only thing that it does.

For one thing, you are displaying your children.  Your children don't have any choice in the matter.  You, at least, had informed consent from yourself, and presumably your spouse, when you decided to go into the share-hunting business.  You decided that you were going to give up your privacy in order to obtain celebrity and possibly an income, but your children don't have that choice.  You didn't ask them if they wanted to be on social media all the time.  You didn't ask them if they wanted to be filmed being born.  You didn't ask them if they wanted to be filmed having their diapers changed or being bathed or just living their lives while you film them.

But the thing is, is it really their lives?  Those family influencers who are at the top of the charts are known to bribe their children in order to play with the right toys that sponsors want to have filmed.  The children no longer get to choose which toys they play with or which games they play, but have arbitrary restrictions imposed upon them, or at least are bribed to do so.  If a child does something cute accidentally off camera, then maybe the child will have to re-do that for the camera.  Possibly when the children are older, they might have some choice in the matter of whether or not they are going to participate.  However, by this time, their lives have been molded by the fact that they are being filmed and are being presented.  In some cases, these children have known no other lives.  How can they be expected to make any kind of informed decision about whether or not they're going to be part of social media when they have never *not* been a part of social media?

Maybe you think you will never get to that point as an influencer.  Maybe you think that the type of reviewing and opining that you do is on a much lower level, but are you really allowing social media to dictate aspects of your life?  Do you really want to wear *those* particular clothes, or are they clothes that your sponsors want you to wear?  Is this particular fashion one that you chose, or that somebody else chose for you?  Can you really present your own opinions, honestly, when you know that sponsors may not send you anything more if you don't give a positive review for this particular product or service?

Be careful how you change yourself under social, and social media, pressures.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, May 15, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.20 - Authenticity - True Self - who you truly are

CoSMI - 1.0.1.20 - Authenticity - True Self - who you truly are

Galatians 6:3-5
If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves.  Each one should test their own actions.  Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, for each one should carry their own load.


The privilege of a lifetime is to become who you truly are.
― Carl Gustav Jung

Gloria was never interested in acting of any sort.  A lot of people tried to get her to participate in amateur dramatics, particularly musicals or light opera because of her singing voice.  Even when I was roped into a church Christmas pageant, she had no interest in participating in the acting herself.  She frequently said that she had spent so long figuring out who she was; why should she try and pretend to be someone else?

I suppose that I should have been more sympathetic to her position than I was.  As a teacher, I tend to use a fair amount of drama to make the material interesting, and I tend to do a fair amount of acting in order to present myself forcefully when I am, in reality, an introvert.  But I suppose that it is only now that I am trying to put this material together that I am recognizing how difficult it is, in our world, to be truly one's own self.  To be true to yourself and who you are.  To actually know who you are, in order that you can be yourself.  As Carl Jung said, it's a privilege to be yourself.  It is a privilege to know who you are, and to be able to behave in your own manner without interference from other people or society overall.  There are so many pressures on us to behave in some other way that is not ourselves.

But above all, in order to be, never try to seem.
― Albert Camus, Notebooks, 1935-1951

I suppose that it should not be a surprise that Albert Camus made such a statement.  He is, after all, the father of existentialism.  Trying to figure out the truth of your own existence, and not to add anything extra and false.  Be who you are, don't just pretend to be something.  Because if you aren't being who you are then you are trying to be something that is false.

This is all the more important when working in social media.  After all, there is the truism that on the Internet nobody knows that you are a dog.  Nobody knows who you are, so you can present yourself in any way that you want to present yourself.  You can, in fact, present an entirely false picture of yourself.  But, if you aspire to the position of an influencer, why would you do that?  You are trying to convince people to follow your advice.  Why would you start by start trying to get people to trust you by lying to them?

Find out who you are and do it on purpose.
— Dolly Parton

And, as has been previously pointed out in this series, finding out who you are is not necessarily easy.  It takes work.  Particularly since there are so many people, and so many pressures from society, that are trying to convince you to be something other than you are, and to behave in certain ways that aren't necessarily consistent with who you actually are.  So, do make the effort to find out who you actually are.  And then, be that person.

There is also the saying that you should always be yourself, since everybody else is already taken.  Yes, it's a bit of a joke, and it sounds silly.  But, in reality, it's very profound.  And also very important.

To thine own self be true

It's kind of weird that in the play Hamlet, it is the character of Polonius who gets one of the most powerful lines.  Polonius is a dried up old character, and doesn't seem to be too important, other than the fact that he gets killed while he's spying on someone, which is only important because it sets up an important fight at the end.  But he's the one who has the great line, "to thine own self be true."  This is so important.  And, yes, I know that I haven't said anything terribly profound in this piece, and just have repeated over and over again that you need to be your own self.  But it's just that important.  If you try to be someone else, you are going to fail.  You are going to be unhappy.  And you are going to be unhappy because you have tried to do the wrong thing.  You have tried to be the wrong thing, rather than being true to yourself.

To put it in Christian terms, God created you the way that you are.  You need to act the way God wants you to act.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, May 14, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.11 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - psychological testing

CoSMI - 1.0.1.11 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - psychological testing

Jeremiah 33:3
Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know.


There is one area of psychology that might be a little less susceptible to subjectivity, and that is standardized testing.  There are a number of tests in psychology that are standardized over a large population.  Some of these tests might be of limited use to you, such as intelligence tests, but there are also tests of character traits, as well as other tests that might help you to get to know yourself in a variety of different ways.

Sometimes a battery of these tests might be offered together for one fixed price.  Generally speaking, you will find these offerings if you search on things like career counseling.  Unfortunately, while the tests are standardized, the advice that you might get once you have the results of the tests may vary.

The results of some of these tests might be quite complex.  They might give you insights into your own character, but some of them can be very complex, and you almost need training in order to understand the results.  Some of them, on the other hand, can be quite simple.

One tool that I have found quite useful over the years is an extremely simple matrix that relies on you asking yourself only two questions.  The first question is would you rather deal with tasks (or problems), or would you rather deal with people?  The second question is, do you consider yourself to be an active person, or are you more passive?  The results of the answers to these two questions gives you four options, task active, task passive, people active, and people passive.  You can group the answers into a 2 by 2 four-part matrix, but you don't have to.  You can simply think of the four options.  The four options tend to tell you what type of person you are.  Task-active people tend to be managers and drivers of activities.  Task-passive people tend to be analytical and possibly researchers.  People-active personalities tend to be those who are entertainers or salespeople.  People-passive personalities tend to be the people who are the glue that holds society together.  They are those who care for others and make sure that others are feeling all right, without necessarily pushing themselves forward into a specific position in order to do so.

This matrix not only can identify you and tell you something about yourself, but it can also be used as a tool for resolving certain types of conflict.  For example, a task-active manager may be someone who is impatient with the details that a task-passive analyst may be attempting to provide to them.  In that case, there might be a conflict.  In order to resolve the conflict, the task-passive person should be prepared to reduce the facts and details to be presented to the manager into as small a space as possible.  They should also be prepared, as quickly and forcefully as possible, to explain why the details that they do have to present to the manager must be considered in order for the manager to make the proper, informed decision.  Similar types of conflicts can be addressed in the other quadrants of the matrix.

This matrix is extremely simplistic, and some would say that it is too simplistic to be effectively used as a guide to behavior and activities.  However, I am simply using it as an example of the type of psychological testing that I can here explain quite quickly, but which gives you an example of how psychological testing might be useful to you in a variety of situations.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, May 13, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.10 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - psychology

CoSMI - 1.0.1.10 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - psychology

Psalm 32:8
I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go;
    I will counsel you with my loving eye on you.


I have to be careful here.  I have to point out that I'm neither a psychiatrist, a psychologist, nor do I have certification as a counselor, nor do I even pretend to be a life coach.  I do have quite a bit of background in courses in psychology.  If you are in college or university, I would highly recommend that, whatever other course of study you are taking, you take courses in psychology.  Studying psychology will be a benefit to you regardless of what other career you plan to pursue.  Whatever you are going to be working on, you are going to be working with people, and understanding how people work is going to be very useful to you.

Particularly if you want to know how *you* work.

That said, a bit of background on various aspects of psychology and psychological counseling.

Psychology, as a field, is only a little bit over a century old.  It got its start with psychiatry.  Psychiatry is based on a number of theories which a number of people now feel are rather suspect, and which don't appear to be particularly effective as compared to other kinds of therapies.  It is where this all started.  Psychiatrists also have to be trained as medical doctors, and psychiatrists are the ones who can prescribe certain psychiatric medications.  Psychologists do not have to be medical doctors.  Psychological counselors, generally speaking, have at least a master's degree in the study of psychology, as well as certification as psychological counselors.  There are some who have less formal education, but still have certification as counselors.  There are those who advertise themselves as life coaches, and there is no requirement for any formal study at all.  Life coaches are just people who set themselves up as life coaches.  Caveat emptor.

Generally speaking, if your family doctor says that you need some kind of psychological counselling, he will refer you to either a psychiatrist or a psychological counsellor.  In this case, part of the cost of the counselling sessions will be covered by medical insurance.  Otherwise, if you just wish to talk to a psychological counsellor yourself, you are going to have to pay for the counselling.  Even if you are referred by your family doctor, psychological counselling, in actual practice, tends to cost more than medical insurance is willing to cover.  Certainly, if you are paying for the psychological counselling yourself, that can be quite expensive.  Unfortunately, there is very little to say that the quality of the counselling that you receive is going to match what you pay for it.  Psychological counsellors, although they tend to take similar training, still will have preferences in terms of the way that they think psychological problems should be addressed.  This may or may not be consistent with what you want to do with regard to psychological counselling.  Once again, let the buyer beware.

Having pointed out all the possible problems with psychological counseling, you may be wondering why on earth I am even bothering to recommend it.  Counseling can provide you with insights.  Psychology can provide you with insights.  I have taken many courses of study in a variety of fields of psychology over the course of my career.  Over the course of a lifetime with depression, I have also had a lot of experience with a lot of different varieties of psychological counseling.  Sometimes I have simply found out that I am, basically, an unhappy person.  Sometimes I have found out things that helped me in a variety of ways.  Sometimes I have done my own psychological research and study and found out some very useful tools and techniques.

There is value in psychological counseling, but there are, unfortunately, no guarantees.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, May 12, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.09 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - Mindfulness

CoSMI - 1.0.1.09 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - Mindfulness

Deuteronomy 18:9
When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there.


You don't have to do all the work yourself, as you would have to do if you simply followed introspection.  You can get psychological counseling.  We are going to talk about that, but first I would like to talk about mindfulness.  I would like to talk about mindfulness first because it is a potentially useful tool, but secondly, if you do go for psychological counseling, it is extremely likely, in the current environment, that they are going to set you on the path of mindfulness anyway.  It's very popular right now.

I do not want to recommend mindfulness unreservedly.  Originally, mindfulness came from a weird variant of Eastern mysticism known as Transcendental Meditation that arose in the 1970s.  It became very popular for a while, and then sort of fell out of favor.  Except for the mindfulness part, which sort of lived underground for a while, and then, as I pointed out, became popular once again in psychological counseling circles.  But its origin does give it certain problems.  Particularly for those that I am addressing in this particular series, who are, after all, Christian.  Eastern mysticism is not terribly consistent with Christian theology and philosophy.  Although mindfulness has been semi-sanitized by various people who have tried to extract it from its Transcendental Meditation origins, it's surprising how often the philosophies of Buddhism, Hinduism, and other Eastern philosophies and religions pop up.  If you examine the materials on mindfulness carefully, you will find that the concepts of Nirvana and attempting to achieve a state of nothingness come up a lot.

(I should tell a story that will point out just how pernicious this danger can be.  I attended a session where they were discussing Transcendental Meditation and the potential risks.  One person challenging the presentation said that he used Transcendental Meditation just for the purposes of aiding studying and wasn't taken in by the mysticism parts of it.  The presenter asserted that even if you didn't think you were being taken in, you were being affected by it.  "No, I'm not," said the challenger.  "Yes, you are," said the presenter.  "No, I'm not," said the challenger.  This seemed to be pretty pointless until the presenter said to the challenger, "All right, if you are not being affected by the mysticism, then tell us your mantra."  The mantra was an aid to meditation given during Transcendental Meditation, just simply a word that the meditator would repeat.  However, the philosophy of Transcendental Meditation said that the mantra was a secret and should not be disclosed to anyone.  The challenger, even though there was no point in not disclosing his mantra, would not do it, thus proving the presenter's point that he was, in fact, being influenced by the Eastern philosophy behind the practice.)

You don't have to go for psychological counseling in order to get training in mindfulness.  If you just do a search on the Internet, you will come up with all kinds of people and websites who are willing to train you on mindfulness.  An awful lot of them, of course, will want you to buy books or take courses or otherwise pay them.  However, there are courses out there that will teach you about the basics of mindfulness without charging you anything for it.  Go and find these sites, but remember they are going to vary in quality.  Anything that you find on the Internet should be taken with a grain of salt.  Possibly a whole bag of salt.

The online sites that are going to be useful to you will assist you with the business of sitting in silence, and then asking yourself the kinds of questions that we have already started to explore.  Think about how you feel.  Think about why you feel that.  First of all, just examine your own feelings: physical sensations, what do you hear, how comfortable do you feel, what do you feel emotionally.  Use this to learn more about yourself.  The better mindfulness sites will guide you in asking these questions and in examining the answers that you get from this practice.

As I say, for a Christian, the practice of mindfulness is not without its risks.  Please do be careful.  I have not yet experienced a mindfulness site that is not contaminated with Eastern mysticism and philosophies in one way or another.  I cannot unreservedly recommend it as a practice.  However, it can help you if you do it carefully and prayerfully.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, May 11, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.08 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - introspection

CoSMI - 1.0.1.08 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - introspection

Psalm 139:14
I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.


I have suggested the simplest aspect of getting to know yourself, that of just sitting with yourself, in silence.  And, I suppose, I have suggested the next step, for some; that of not being afraid of just sitting with yourself in the silence.

But, of course, this may not give you all the answers you need.  As a matter of fact, it's pretty much guaranteed that it will not give you all the answers that you need.  So you need to do some introspection.  Introspection is the more analytical part of sitting alone with yourself.  You start to ask yourself the same questions as I suggested that you ask your family and friends.  What type of person am I?  What is it that I am afraid of?  What is it that brings me joy?  What is it that I want?  And don't be afraid that you'll mess things up if you ask yourself "what do I want right now."  Like sitting with yourself in silence, introspection takes time, and practice, and it will take many sessions before you really start to see that you were getting some benefit out of it.  I don't want to scare you off, but it may actually take years.

But once you start, you will find that you do start to get some answers.  And then you question those answers.  What is it that brings me joy?  How do I achieve that joy?  What do I need to do in order to make it possible, more often, to obtain that Joy?  And so forth.

All of this; the silence, sitting in silence, getting away from the distractions of the world, not being afraid of the silence, asking your family and friends, and introspection; is intended to allow you to start to know yourself.  As was pointed out earlier, knowing yourself is essential to authenticity, and ensuring that you remain authentic in your postings as a social media influencer.

Depending upon how far along on your own prospective path, and journey to knowing yourself; and also depending upon how far along in developing your own prayer life, you may find that this practice of introspection becomes a part of your prayer life.  While you are asking questions of yourself, and about yourself, you may find that you are asking God for answers to the same questions.  You may also find that you are asking God how God would have you change and develop.  This is quite okay.  You may also find similar things happen during your Bible study, where a verse will "jump out" and speak to you, your character, or your activities.

But this is only the first and simplest step.  There are other, more formal steps that you can take in order to know more about yourself, and therefore ensuring that you remain authentic.  We'll suggest a couple of them.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, May 10, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.07 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - friends

CoSMI - 1.0.1.07 - Authenticity - Know Yourself - friends

Proverbs 17:17
A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for a time of adversity.


But you don't have to rely entirely upon yourself.  You don't have to sit in silence forever, waiting to figure yourself out.  There are people who can help you.

Your family.  Your friends.

Ask them.  Now, I say "them," advisedly.  Don't just ask one friend.  Ask multiple friends.  Ask your friends who you are.  Ask your family who you are.  Friends may be slightly more reliable than family.  Family, in particular parents, pretty automatically have certain things that they want you to be.  They may be aware of this, and they may fight against it, but they do have things that they would prefer that you be, rather than certain other things.  Sometimes your family, and even your parents, can fight their way past their expectations, and give you an honest assessment.  So ask them.  Take their answers with a little bit of salt, but they are the people who know you best: who live with you for the most time.

So ask your family and friends.  Ask acquaintances.  Ask people who have only known you for a short time, and ask them what kind of a first impression you make.  Since you intend to be an influencer on social media, there are going to be an awful lot of people who encounter you for the first time, and it's very valuable to know how you come across to people who don't know you very well.

Ask if you are a serious person.  If you are a funny person.  If you are a thoughtful person.  If you are a reliable person.  Ask all of these questions about yourself.  About how other people see you.  (I should note that this should not be the only topic of conversation: you should ask about the other person for a good amount of the time that you spent talking with them.  It's only fair.)

If you have aspirations to be an influencer, you probably have some idea of what an influencer should be.  And you probably hope that you have some of the characteristics of an influencer.  So there are things that you hope that you are, that your friends may not identify in you.  In fact, they may say that, no, this characteristic that you consider to be very important for an influencer is not present in your character at all.

Do not panic.  And, in terms of panicking, do not immediately try to create this characteristic within yourself.  Do not try to learn how to present yourself in such a way that it appears that you have this characteristic, whether you have this characteristic or not.  That is not going to be successful.  There is the old joke about sincerity being vitally important, and once you can fake sincerity you've got it made.  But it's a joke.  It is not career advice.

The thing is, if you don't have that characteristic, well, you don't have that characteristic.  There is no point in trying to fake it.  If you do try to fake it, you will come across as inauthentic.  It may take a while for people to see through you, but, the longer it takes, the more they will turn against you when they finally realize that you have, essentially, been lying to them all along.  So don't try to fake it.

But the other part of not panicking is, you may be wrong.  You may be wrong in that this characteristic, that you think is vitally important to an influencer, may not be all that important at all.  It may not be a significant factor in the success of any given social media influencer.  So just keep on doing your best, and presenting yourself authentically, and your authenticity will probably outweigh the lack of whatever characteristic you think you should have, and you don't have.

The other way that you may be wrong is, well, your friends and family might be wrong.  You may have this characteristic, only not to a major extent.  You may have this characteristic as an underlying component of your personality.  And, when it becomes important, if you remain authentic, if you remain honest, and present what you know to be your true self, then that characteristic will come to the fore when it is needed.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, May 9, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.06 - Authenticity - Know Yourself (part 2)

CoSMI - 1.0.1.06 - Authenticity - Know Yourself (part 2)

Psalm 139:1
You have searched me, Lord, and you know me.


As I say, not all of you will be afraid of this.  But, some of you might find it very frightening.  Why is it that you find the silence so frightening?

In fact, we do find silence frightening, very often.  We are used to the constant noise distraction that the world throws at us.  The police understand that silence is frightening.  This is why, when they questioning suspects, they sometimes simply sit in silence.  They know that the silence is more terrifying than any threats that they can make, and they know that, if they wait in silence, then, in order to fill the silence, the suspects may start talking, and may say a lot more than they intended to.

But this is, perhaps, a little bit distant from your situation as an influencer in social media.  So, why do you find silence so frightening?

Is it possibly because you are used to the world telling you who and what you are?  Is it possible that you are used to the fact that the world is constantly whispering who you are, what you want, what you need, and all kinds of other information.  And if that information is gone, even if it is disinformation, do you really exist?  Maybe that is the frightening question or the frightening part of the question?

If so, we can address that problem.  It isn't really a problem.  If you sit and wait, and don't allow yourself to be frightened, you will start to feel who you are.  You will start, I grant, very slowly, to feel what it is that you want, rather than what the world wants you to want.  You will start to realize your own ideas, rather than the opinions that the world would like you to have.  Don't let the initial fear terrify you.  This will pass.  Unplugged from the world, even if only for a little while, you will start to realize who you are.  You will start to know yourself.


CoSMI series:
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, May 8, 2026

CoSMI - 1.0.1.05 - Authenticity - Know Yourself (part 1)

CoSMI - 1.0.1.05 - Authenticity - Know Yourself (part 1)

Psalm 26:2
Test me, Lord, and try me, examine my heart and my mind


In the first sermon in the related series on social media influencing, I opened with an endorsement of authenticity.  And got an immediate response asking how one can be authentic on social media.

So I guess I have to back up a bit, and start earlier in the process.

To be authentic is to be true to yourself.  Which then begs the question of how to be true to yourself.  So the first step is obvious: know yourself.

At least it is obvious to *me*.  The thing is, I'm really old, and I have more than seven decades of experience at this.  Maybe it isn't obvious to those who haven't spent as long at it.  They might think that they already know themselves.  Or, they may have taken the first step, and realized that they don't really know themselves.

And you never really *do* know yourself.  Not completely.  It is a life long process.  Mostly because it is hard.  Secondly because you keep on changing, and, every time you change, you have to unlearn something about yourself that you thought was correct, and relearn the new bit.

Another reason that it is hard to know yourself is that the world keeps on blaring noise at you, and particularly about who and what you are.  And often this noise is quite wrong.  The world has reasons for feeding you this misinformation.  The world wants you to buy things, so it tells you that you need them, or want them.  Maybe you do, but very often you don't.  But the world keeps on repeating the message that you do, so it's hard to decide what is truly you.

A first step, although not necessarily *the* first step, is to cut out the noise and distractions, as much as you can.  Some people suggest that meditation is a good start, but an awful lot of the people who are promoting meditation are also trying to sell you something, so I'm going to suggest something that is even simpler.  Just sit in the quiet for a while.  Turn off the TV.  Turn off the radio.  Turn off the social media.  Turn off the ringer on your phone, or, better yet, turn off your phone for a while.  Don't be afraid of missing out: believe me, social media will still be there when you get back.

Don't think that you are going to get some kind of inspired insight on the first try.  Believe me, the first time you try this, it may terrify you.  As a matter of fact, for an inspired insight, that's not too bad.  The realization that just simply sitting, by yourself, in the quiet, without the world constantly bombarding you with messages, is terrifying.  Just think about that for a minute.  What is so frightening about that?

At any rate, this is going to take a while.  You are going to have to try it a number of times.  Each time, finding a little bit more about yourself.  How do you feel?  Why are you feeling that way?  What does this teach you about yourself?

And this is only a first step.


Posted by at No comments:

CoSMI - 1.0.0.02 - Can a Christian Be an Influencer part 1

CoSMI - 1.0.0.02 - Can a Christian Be an Influencer part 1

Mark 16:15
He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation."


In trying to prepare sermons for this particular series, I have had reactions from different people that this is impossible.  It is impossible, inherently impossible, for a Christian to be an influencer.

Obviously I don't agree with this position, but I think it's important to address the points that these people have made.

Jesus said that in order to follow him, we have to deny ourselves.  Paul says to the Philippians that they should do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit.  I think those who feel that it is inherently impossible for a Christian to be an influencer see influencers as primarily self-centred.  Not necessarily solely selfish, but definitely centred on themselves.  Their opinions, their reputation, their brand, and the way they present themselves to the world.  However, if that position is accurate, then it is impossible for a Christian to be an actor or a popular singer or really any position that puts them at center stage.  That would seem to include the position of a mass evangelist.  Was Billy Graham wrong in being an evangelist?  Was Mother Theresa wrong in trying to use her influence to advance the plight of the poor?

Most of us, in most denominations of Christianity, accept that we have a professional clergy and professional song leaders.  Therefore, we are having people who take center stage and do so on a regular basis and do it to the glory of God.  Gloria was a soloist.  She knew, from the age of twelve, that her voice was a gift from God and was to be used in God's service.  She frequently said that she considered God to be her booking agent.  When she was asked to sing, she always said yes.  She said that the requests came from God and that her voice was to be used in God's service.  She said that when she sang in Christian service, she always knew and felt strongly that there was at least one person in the audience who needed to hear that song.

So, can you be an influencer on social media if you are a Christian?  Can you be a Christian social media influencer, apart from trying to be a SMevangelist (social media evangelist)?

It would seem to me that we not only can, but that we must.  We are told to go into all the world and preach the gospel.  Cyberspace is now part of our world.  Social media is part of cyberspace.  Therefore, it would be not merely careless, but negligent, to abandon cyberspace to those who are either opposed to, or apathetic about, Christianity.  There is a risk to us, to our faith, and to our character, so we must take precautions.  But, if this is our calling, we must go.

There is, of course, always a danger, as there is with any aspect of life.  Vanity and conceit cannot be allowed to rule, and it would seem that pride and overconfidence are definitely dangers and sins that are not merely present in any activity on social media, but particularly the province of those who have ambitions as influencers.  Envy is definitely one of the sins that is going to be associated with social media.  Anger is also a sin that is omnipresent in our current social media platforms.  Therefore, yes, there is a great deal of danger for anyone who has any ambitions to be an influencer on social media platforms.  But, as I have said, we may be negligent if we simply concede it to those who do not wish Christianity to thrive.


Posted by at No comments:

CoSMI - 0.0.1.00 - introduction and table of contents

CoSMI - 0.0.1.00 - introduction and table of contents

Mark 16:15
He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation."


Is it possible, as a Christian, to aspire to be a social media influencer, even in secular topic areas?  Is it inherently contradictory to have an ambition, as a Christian, in a field that is so completely self-centered?  What are the dangers and risks to your character and faith from such an ambition?  How can you ensure that you, yourself, remain authentic, and that your postings authentically reveal who you are?  Is admitting that you are a Christian going to damage your social media reputation or brand?  Is working as an influencer in social media going to damage your reputation as a Christian?  What do you have to watch out for in terms of your own topics and opinions in your social media work, in order to avoid damaging the reputation of Christianity?

Many people these days aspire to a job, and even a career, as an influencer in social media.  If you are a Christian, you have to ask yourself all of the questions above, and many, many more.  This series is going to attempt to address some of those questions, and assist in guiding those who wish to get into this particular field to do so safely.  Safely for you, your faith, your brand, and even, one might say, your immortal soul.


Topics and table of contents:


Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, May 5, 2026

Sermon - CoSMI - 1.0.0 - Can a Christian Be an Influencer part 1

Sermon - CoSMI - 1.0.0 - Can a Christian Be an Influencer part 1

1 Corinthians 12:4
There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them.


In trying to prepare sermons for this particular series, I have had reactions from different people that this is impossible.  It is impossible, inherently impossible, for a Christian to be an influencer.

Obviously I don't agree with this position, but I think it's important to address the points that these people have made.

Jesus said that in order to follow him, we have to deny ourselves.  Paul says to the Philippians that they should do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit.  I think those who feel that it is inherently impossible for a Christian to be an influencer see influencers as primarily self-centred.  Not necessarily solely selfish, but definitely centred on themselves.  Their opinions, their reputation, their brand, and the way they present themselves to the world.  However, if that position is accurate, then it is impossible for a Christian to be an actor or a popular singer or really any position that puts them at center stage.  That would seem to include the position of a mass evangelist.  Was Billy Graham wrong in being an evangelist?

As a matter of fact, in taking this position, it would seem to be the case that one could not be a preacher of any kind or a song leader.  And there are, after all, certain denominations who take that position.  Quakers, or the Society of Friends, do not have anyone at all leading their services.  The Brethren do not go quite this far, but they do not have professional ministry or those who lead the singing on a regular and professional basis.

But these groups are in the minority.  Most of us, in most denominations of Christianity, accept that we have a professional clergy and professional song leaders.  Therefore, we are having people who take center stage and do so on a regular basis and do it to the glory of God.  Gloria was a soloist.  She knew, from the age of twelve, that her voice was a gift from God and was to be used in God's service.  She frequently said that she considered God to be her booking agent.  When she was asked to sing, she always said yes.  She said that the requests came from God and that her voice was to be used in God's service.  She said that when she sang in Christian service, she always knew and felt strongly that there was at least one person in the audience who needed to hear that song.

So, can you be an influencer on social media if you are a Christian?  Can you be a Christian social media influencer, apart from trying to be a SMevangelist (social media evangelist)?

It would seem to me that we not only can, but that we must.  We are told to go into all the world and preach the gospel.  Cyberspace is now part of our world.  Therefore, it would be not merely careless, but negligent, to abandon cyberspace to those who are either opposed to, or apathetic about, Christianity.

There is, of course, always a danger, as there is with any aspect of life.  Vanity and conceit cannot be allowed to rule, and it would seem that pride and overconfidence are definitely dangers and sins that are not merely present in any activity on social media, but particularly the province of those who have ambitions as influencers.  Envy is definitely one of the sins that is going to be associated with social media.  Anger is also a sin that is omnipresent in our current social media platforms.  Therefore, yes, there is a great deal of danger for anyone who has any ambitions to be an influencer on social media platforms.  But, as I have said, we may be negligent if we simply concede it to those who do not wish Christianity to thrive.

I have mentioned Billy Graham.  He very definitely achieved a very large measure of fame, and used that fame to influence people, and even politics.  The same can be said of Mother Teresa.  Of course, for every Billy Graham that we have, we can find a number of counter examples in televangelists who have achieved fame, and riches, and have then achieved notoriety, as they fell into sin.  There is a definite danger, and anyone who works in any area where fame and celebrity are part and parcel of the activity must beware of the dangers, and definitely take strong preventative action against them.

In regard to keeping yourself safe from the dangers of sin, in approaching the ambition to become a social media influencer, it would seem that the first and most effective preventative is honesty.  Be honest with those that you are influencing; your followers on social media.  But definitely be honest with yourself.  Are you doing this for the right reasons?  Are you willing for your reputation to suffer as a result of identifying yourself as a Christian?  Are you willing to trash or diminish your social media and influencer reputation in order to share the gospel with someone who hasn't heard it?  Are you willing for your influence, as an influencer, and your own celebrity to be secondary to your responsibility to follow what God would have you do, and say, rather than what may be popular on social media?

This issue of honesty is something that we have to examine very specifically in the next sermon, on authenticity.



Sermon - CoSMI - 1.1.7 - Can a Christian Be an Influencer part 2 - TBD



Posted by at No comments:

Monday, May 4, 2026

Sermon 15 - Iisaak

Sermon 15 - Iisaak

Romans 13:7
Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

1 Peter 3:15
But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect


I'm trying to learn the Nuu-chah-nulth language.  To learn a new language is not simply to learn vocabulary, syntax, and grammar.  The language, in many ways, carries the culture.  What words mean, and the emphasis and priority putting put on certain of those meanings, tells you a lot about the people who use that language.

I learned a new word recently.  It's called iisaak.  It means "respect."

But, as is usual, it doesn't just mean respect: it has other meanings as well.  Translating from one language to another is like that.  The word Naas, for example is the word for God, but it's also the word for creator, and it's also the word for sky, and it's also the word for heaven.  Multiple meanings for the same word, at least in terms of what we think a word should mean.

Anyway the word iisaak means respect.  But it also means observe.  And it also means appreciate.  And it also means to take wise and thoughtful action.  All in one word.

And, if you think about it, isn't that what respect is?  If we respect someone or something, do we not observe it?  Do we not note the behavior of the person that we respect, and even try and emulate it?  Do we not observe what they do and say, and learn what we can from it?

And if we respect someone, don't we appreciate them?  Don't we appreciate every minute we can spend with them?  Do we not resent when other people take their attention from us?

And taking wise and thoughtful action.  Isn't that in there as well?  If you respect someone, do not you consider your own actions in comparison with theirs?  Do we not try and emulate their thoughts, and their wisdom?

Kelly, who taught me this word, uses the variety of meanings to make a framework for conflict resolution.  And for dealing with a variety of problems.  I think it's an excellent idea.  For one thing, conflict resolution should always be based on respect.  But the additional meanings do allow you to build a framework, and a process, that can be very effective for resolving conflicts and problems: first observe, and make sure that you understand what the problem actually is; then appreciate the valid points on the other side; and then take wise and thoughtful action to resolve the issue.  I think it's a terrific framework.

And, of course, it also makes for a terrific sermon.  We need to respect God.  And that means that we need to observe, and appreciate, and take wise and thoughtful action with regard to God.

First off, we need to observe.  God has revealed himself to us in a variety of ways.  To begin with, there is God's word: the Bible, the scriptures.  We get to hear God speaking directly to us.  We get to hear, pretty plainly, what God wants to tell us.  How he expects us to act.  What it is that he expects of us.  And, of course, even within the scriptures, God has revealed  himself to us, very particularly, in the person of Jesus Christ.  This is a revelation, a very special revelation, for those of us who believe.  It is the most direct, personal, and plain revelation to the world.

But God reveals himself in all kinds of ways.  The heavens declare His handiworks.  The Earth is full of his glory.  The atheists like to raise the problem of pain as a proof for the non-existence of God.  The problem is, we say that God loves us, and that he is all powerful.  Well then, say the atheists, why does pain and suffering exist?  If God was good he would want his creatures to be happy, and yet there is suffering.  So, either God is not good, or he is not all powerful.  This is the problem of pain.  Well there are a number of answers to the problem of pain.  But the atheists have another problem: the problem of beauty.  If God doesn't exist why is the world so beautiful?  What is the purpose of having such amazing glory all around us for no particular reason?  Why is there an absolutely gorgeous sunset pretty much every day.  And, since I tend to be up most earlier than most of you, I can also tell you that the day starts off pretty much the same way: absolutely glorious.

And observe the provisions that God makes for us, and for every living creature as well.  God provides for us in so many ways; such prolific ways; such a variety of ways.  God takes care of us.  But there is such beauty in the universe!  The wonders of the orbits of electrons in the smallest atom and the structure of the cosmos overall like a giant soap foam, made up of galactic clusters.  Look at the smallest weed wildflower growing in your patch of lawn.  Consider how beautiful it is, just as it is.  And then take a lens, and look at it more closely.  Consider the structures in veining and the amazing design of the individual pedals themselves.  And then go even deeper, if you can find a powerful enough microscope, and consider the beauty and art that goes into the cells, and the channels that fluids flow through in order to nourish the plant and give it life.  And all of this beauty, that could have been just simply functional, for no particular reason at all.  At least no reason if there is no God who does not want us to see the beauty of his creation.  And all of this may be provided for one single planet of people: us.  All this amazing provision, just to keep us alive.  And entertained?

And do we appreciate it?  Do we appreciate the beauty, the grandeur, and the provisions?  Are we properly grateful for the fact that God keeps us alive minute by minute?  He maintains the world.  He maintains the universe.  He maintains us.  He feeds us.  He feeds everything, and in some weird and wonderful ways.  He provides us with life.  And then, even though we are ungrateful, and selfish, and disobedient, he saves us.  He provides salvation, as well as life.

Do we appreciate the beauty?  Do we appreciate the provision?  Do we appreciate that God, the creator of the entire universe, and any other universes that there are if you believe that there are other universes, wants to be your best friend?  Wants you to live with him forever?

Do we respect God enough to appreciate all that he has done for us?

And then there is the thoughtful and wise action.  Give thought to the respect that is due to God.  Give thought to all that we have to appreciate, which is provided by God.  And then, give thought to the fact that our respect for God, the appropriate respect for God, and our appreciation for all that he has done for us, must prompt us to action.  And that action must be thoughtful.  Yes, our appreciation may prompt us to throw our hands in the air and praise.  That is all well and good.  But is that all that we owe God?  Thoughtful action would indicate that we need to do something more for God.  Therefore, we need to determine, or at least try to determine, what it is that God would have us do.  What action God would have us take.

Fortunately, God has provided us some help in this regard.  He has given us his word, the bible, the scriptures.  He has shown you, oh man, what it is that he requires of you.  God has provided us the law.  God has provided us the words of the prophets.  God has provided us with stories and histories and wisdom, and even his son as an example for us as a rabbi for us, as a direct statement to us of what it is that we are to do.  And so, we should emulate that example.  We should look into those stories and give them careful thought, and then take action based on what we read there.  We need to take action.  We need to, as closely as we can, do, and act, in the way God would have us act.  This is the thoughtful action that we would take we need to take.

And we need to take action, rather than doing nothing.  Failing to take action is not wise.  But, in addition to action, and addition to giving thought to what actions to take, we need to study wisdom.  We need to be wise in our actions.  We need to give thought, we need to ponder wisdom, we need to ponder the words of God and consider and root them deeply into the way we work and the way we think, and we need to use that wisdom to guide our actions.  It is not enough simply to observe.  It is not enough simply to appreciate.  It is not enough to give thanks, no half matter how effusive.  And, it is not enough to take action, simply any action.  The action must be thoughtful, and the action must be wise.  And, given all that God has done for us, the wisdom must be the best that we can give.  The thought must be the best that we can give, so that the action is the best that we can give.  God deserves the best.  To do anything less is to lack respect for God.  To demonstrate a lack of respect for God.  To demonstrate that we have failed to show the proper respect for God.


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)