I Know Oh Oh What's that, Luke? Oh, gee. What's that, Luke? Yeah, I'm not lying. I'm not hungry. All right, Steve. Take care. And we're rolling. I bet you, thank you. One, two, three. Bop. All right. And we're rolling. I bet you. Bop. Bop. What's that? My boy. Hey, man. What's that? Three minutes.


I'm Salvatore Bobonis and today's lecture is Inequality, Trends, and Social Policy. Over the last 30 years, inequality has been on the rise throughout the developed world. When we look across member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the OECD, we see rising inequality in country after country. There are annual ups and downs, there are blips due to changes in data collection methodologies, but the overall trend is clear in nearly every OECD country, rising inequality. In fact, using the most widely used measure of inequality, the Gini coefficient, inequality is risen from a level of 28.28, 28% of the way towards total inequality up to 31% of the way towards total inequality. So this is a big shift when measured across 30 or more countries. The one country that stands out as being the clear leader in inequality, as in so many other things, is the United States of America. In the United States, inequality has risen unbelievably since the mid-1970s. This chart shows GDP per capita in the United States, the black line, since 1860, more than a 150-year history of continuous growth. You can see the big disruption that occurred with the Great Depression and World War II, but other than that big disturbance, growth is continuous 1.8% per year all the time for the last 150 years, and in fact, since the end of this chart, the U.S. economy has resumed growth. There's been no crisis of growth in America. There has, however, been a crisis of inequality. Despite the fact that growth has been continuous, growth in incomes stalled in 1972, and typical incomes. This graph uses median male worker incomes, but this is true no matter what indicator of income you used. Typical incomes have stagnated now for more than 40 years, going on 45 years of no growth at all in incomes. Before 1970, income consistently rose faster than GDP. That is to say, ordinary Americans were getting a bigger and bigger slice of the expanding American pie. Since 1970, the American pie has continued to grow at the same historical rate as always, but the slice going to ordinary Americans has shrunk and shrunk and shrunk. If you were to extend trend growth, the modern 20th century growth in incomes for ordinary Americans up through today, the average income of an ordinary male worker today, instead of being $35,000, would be more like $70,000. This is real money. When people say, well, what has inequality really cost anybody? No one's lost any money. Well, if the historical trends that held before 1970 had continued to hold after 1970, the typical American male worker would now have double, double the income that he actually does. There's your subprime mortgage crisis right there. If ordinary Americans had twice as much income as they actually do, they would have been able to afford those mortgages. We wouldn't have had the global financial crisis. Ultimately, the global financial crisis was the inequality crisis. You can see this in a whole range of statistics. I'll show one that's particularly dramatic. In the United States today, the middle 60% of households earn just over 46% of the total household income in the country. In Mexico today, the middle 60% earn slightly higher percentage than in America. That's right. Mexico's middle class is slightly larger than America's middle class in terms of its own society. Now, we've always thought of Mexico being a poor and highly unequal country compared to Mexico being, compared to the United States being a rich and relatively egalitarian society. Well, today in the 2010s, America is just as unequal as Mexico. Now, contrast that to the late 1960s and early 1970s, America used to be just as equal as France and Australia are today. America has gone from being just like France 40 or 50 years ago to being just like Mexico today. The change has been that dramatic. And United States has been pulling its friends down along with it. So here is the income share of the top 0.5%. These are the famous Piketty data from Thomas Piketty's database. Incomes of the top 0.5% in the United States and the United Kingdom, and United States equality maxed out in 1973 on this metric. In other words, the United States reached minimum ever inequality in 1973. For all of history, as far as we can tell, the country was becoming more and more equal until this point when it reversed and started up towards the huge concentration of incomes in the very rich that we see today. Well, in the UK, that turning point was in 1978. And if we look at the country's culturally most similar to the US and UK, 1978, 1981, 1986, 1987, the closer a country is to the United States in culture, language, society, the sooner the domino fell. And these dominoes began falling all over Eastern Europe with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 through 1991. Under American tutelage, Russia and then all the countries of the post-Soviet sphere implemented flat income taxes.  A flat tax means that no matter how much money you make, you pay the same percentage in tax. US advocates of flat taxes have been have been talking about it for generations that they don't want to progressive income tax. They don't want a tax that equalizes income inequality. They want a tax that replicates income inequality. Well, they couldn't get it in the US. They couldn't get it in Western Europe, but they got it in Russia. And not just in Russia, flat tax regimes all across Eastern Europe in the post-Soviet space except in Poland. Notably, Poland is the only post-Soviet country that put in a progressive Western style income tax. It was one of the most aggressive post-Soviet countries in maintaining some semblance of a welfare state and building a modern social democratic welfare state. And it's been one of the few post-Soviet countries that joined the European Union to keep its own currency and thus keep currency independence. And Poland, maybe not surprisingly, has been one of the very few countries in the OECD to experience declining inequality in the most recent decade. So levels of inequality in Poland certainly rose dramatically in the early 1990s with the collapse of communism. But Poland got this problem under control with a modern progressive income tax system, with a modern social welfare state, and as a result got its inequality problem under control, brought it down, and not coincidentally has had the most successful economy in the post-Soviet sphere. All those other countries that went with high inequality, flat tax models, have performed more poorly or have performed not as well as Poland on standard metrics like GDP per capita growth. Contrast Poland with Germany. In Germany, inequality has risen dramatically since 2000. What happened then? The Bundesfuhrarbeit, the deal for work. Germany's unions made a deal with the employer associations and the government that they would not press for wage increases, for wages to keep pace with rising productivity. Essentially in 2000 Germany's union said, we make enough, and wages have not risen since. Productivity has risen since, but wages have not risen since. When I went giving, having conversations and giving lectures around Europe in 2010 and 2011, people in places as diverse as Finland and Austria told me that their biggest problem was low German wages, that they were trying to maintain some semblance of dignity for workers, but low German wages were making that increasingly impossible. Now, since 2000 it hasn't just been Germany. In the Netherlands and in Scandinavia we've seen the move towards flex security, which is no kind of security at all. It pretty much means the gig economy. Workers don't have regular jobs. In Germany they made a deal that workers would keep their jobs, but have low wages. In Denmark in the Netherlands and to a lesser extent in Sweden they made a deal that, well, workers would lose their jobs in exchange for maybe getting higher wages and maybe not. No surprise inequality has risen dramatically in Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark over the last 10 to 15 years. Well maybe this is necessary. I mean we might say that rising inequality is just a feature of the 21st century and there's nothing you can do about it. You know if we want growing economies it's an evil we have to accept. Well I have a friend who says his favorite think tank is even the IMF. That's right, not just the IMF. Even the IMF has come to the realization that inequality is harming growth. According to the IMF's own analysis, in almost every OECD country, rising inequality has been responsible for reducing the growth rate. In their analyses only Ireland, France and Spain have seen some benefits from rising inequality. Now this is the think tank that pushed high inequality models on the world for the last 40 years. Even the IMF now admits that in most countries in most of the cases where it's pushed for higher inequality social models it's been the wrong move. Those high inequality social models have actually harmed growth, not helped growth. Rising inequality is not inevitable. Inequality is risen in specific places and specific countries for specific reasons and specific policies can be used to reverse that rise. We need to revisit systems of taxation, rules around the welfare state, the privatization of state-owned enterprises, education systems that primarily benefit the rich we're able to pay. CEO pay dynamics, there's no reason for CEOs to make 400 times as much as their workers. The corporate governance that allows those high CEO pay packages to happen despite shareholders unwillingness or desire for exactly the opposite. Corporate welfare programs that take government money and shower it on corporations instead of using it to support citizens. Competition policy, which has led to situations in which companies have more power than either their employees or their customers. And most of all the wage-setting mechanisms and institutions in countries that can either be mechanisms that favor workers and thus favor lower inequality or they can be mechanisms that favor employers and thus favor higher inequality. We can and quote-unquote even the IMF admits that we should reduce the trend towards rising inequality, reverse it and bring about more equal societies for the future. Thank you for listening. You can find out more about me at salvatorbobonus.com where you can also sign up for my monthly newsletter on global affairs.


Sergeant James Waddell, 4CB Echo Company, squad leader. I'm from Mumford, Alabama. I'm an automotive technician. I diagnose and repair vehicles. I've been in the Marine Corps for going on nine years. June will be nine years for me.  It makes you more effective in your job field and your career, whatever you choose to do. You have more drive, more motivation to go out and seek greater responsibility and greater things, which can help you be much more competitive when it comes to work and your ability to start a career. I joined the reserves because I kind of understood the benefits of the reserves more so than active duty for my career goals. I've wanted to work on cars since I was a little kid, so that helped out a lot being able to come to the Marine Corps and gain the skill set and the mindset that I have and then being able to actually go pursue the career that I want to while still being able to be a Marine. I would highly recommend to join the reserves after you finish your time on active duty because it allows you to continue to serve your country. You still get the benefits of being a Marine, but you're also able to pursue that career that you've always wanted to go after. It's given me the opportunity to be able to travel across the country and be able to go across the world to Japan and Okinawa. It's been a phenomenal experience. I've been very thankful for every minute of it.


A Bemidji church was struck by lightning, causing its chimney to partially explode during today's severe weather storm. St. Philip's Catholic Church and school was hit on the south side of the building around 9.45 this morning. Father Chuck Huck was inside his office on the other side of the building when a parishioner ran in to say the chimney had been struck. Luckily no one was near the area at the time of the explosion. It's an act of God. It's nature. We just don't know when that might happen to any one of us. I am so thankful it hit the chimney and nowhere else. This can be repaired. Father Huck says he'll be talking with the church's architect to see what repairs can be made to the structure. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Another note out this morning from Morgan Stanley, saying that Tesla should face competition from Apple. Yeah, you know, I read that. I mean, Morgan Stanley's been doing a lot of very creative thinking about Tesla, and I think that's important because Tesla is not bound by the four walls of automobiles as obviously trading as a tech stock. I think that piece is ahead of itself. It's a nice theory. I don't like to invest on theoretical investing. I like to invest on harder facts and numbers, so I'm having trouble with that, but I think it's a good something to noodle on, but not to take action on.


is changing. For 20 years, we've fought in pervasive environments. We embedded into expeditionary wings, groups, and squadrons to dominate the interdomain. Airmen who were crowdsourced from around the world arrived from separate units, shook hands, and went to work with their new teammates. We grew accustomed to operating from large fixed spaces protected by robust air defenses. And were supported by uncontested logistics and uninterrupted command and control. Our gunfighters drove the retrospect of time, meaning we controlled the odds tempo. We deployed, we deterred, and we engaged on our timeline. In wars of the future, we won't have such luxury. Thus, our way must change. Wars with tomorrow's adversaries will be unpredictable. To meet this challenge, Air Combat Command is transforming the way we organize, train, and employ combat forces. First, our home station wing organization proved a construct of a standing A-staff, supporting the wing commander to ensure we're ready for crises before crises emerge. Second, the Air Force is migrating away from readiness degrading, ad hoc expeditionary deployments to a sustainable, predictable, capacity-based, Orban Force generation construct to maintain readiness. This will change our deployments going through a 24-month cycle of four windows, available to deploy, reset, prepare, and ready to maintain unity of effort in our aviation units and align with the combat-oriented maintenance organization model. We transitioned from integrated ops and maintenance to fighter generation squadrons that partner with a complementary operation squadron. This TOMO model enables the two units to work together to establish unity of effort before a deployment. If an emergent national security challenge arises, gun fighters will deploy as a certified lead wing an immediate response force that's organized, trained, and equipped to deploy forward. As the lead wing, we will aggregate agile combat support airmen into a high-performing team that's ready for combat before combat, allowing us to rapidly deploy and deliver the base operating support needed to generate combat power. With any change comes new challenges and expectations. Gun fighters are multi-capable airmen, trained to excel outside their primary duties to recover, rearm, refuel, and launch aircraft. Our lead wing, when established forward, will be optimized to aggregate and disaggregate Air Force capabilities and facilitate close coordination with numbered Air Forces, Majcon, and Joint Task Force staff. Applying these changes, we will deploy with agility, agile combat employment means minimizing our time with an enemy rank, striking hard and fast, agile and predictable for us, deadly and unpredictable for added standards. Crisis and competition are the norm, so we will be ready for crises before crises, ready for combat before combat. We will establish unity of effort before it's needed. Our win, why and how has changed. Our world has changed, and we must change to meet that challenge or lose.


Hello everybody Andrea here. So let's talk about desensitizers. So do you have a patient or you're probably thinking about several patients where they come in and their teeth are just simply cold sensitive likely due to gingival recession. I don't want you to just tell them to stop rushing too hard. Okay, that's true. They have to stop rushing too hard if that's the issue, but you want to help them while they're there. Okay, don't just sort of tell them the easy way out. We'll stop rushing too hard. Here's a sensitive type of toothpaste. There you go. You should be applying a desensitizer on those areas of gingival recession to really help to coat that area so they hopefully don't become more sensitive plus the sensitivity that they have now you're basically putting a coating over top. I tell my patients, it's like a car wax for your car. You're covering the whole surface to protect your car. So your tooth against the outside elements, whether that's a good analogy, I don't know. But then I also tell somebody if I'm talking to a female, it's like a good hair conditioner for your hair, you need to protect your hair you will start to notice if you don't use a hair conditioner the difference it makes. Same thing with a desensitizer. A desensitizer, I apply at every single appointment for them when I see my patients whether that be three months, six months, nine months, I will take the time to reapply. I have had patients tell me that it works wonders that it works amazing. So I'm going to show you guys the desensitizer that I use. I used to use a gluma desensitizer I believe you have to like hear that sorry I can't remember because it's been such a long time since I've used it, but I found it just didn't work for a lot of people maybe in 10% of patients, plus it was very expensive. So I was on the hunt for something that worked better and I found something so I really like oral science. Just a little note as well they're not paying me to do the video. Okay you guys, I don't get paid to do reviews. So you truly know that this is an honest review of mine, not saying that I wouldn't be opposed to getting paid to doing it but I'm just not at this time. So Crystal in office desensitizer I will leave the link for you guys on the bottom. This is amazing. They even have a video of how to apply it. Let's see, I haven't actually watched the video yet. I'm sorry guys I'm just kind of showing you. So it's like tonight fast forward too far. I'm going to turn the sound off while I talk actually that's not a bad idea. So if you guys can see the video okay you literally apply it with a micro brush notice how it's a very thin micro brush actually I should make this bigger for you guys, sorry. So that's how you apply it with a very thin micro brush over the areas of gingival recession. You do not have to like hear it. The key about this one is it's not a simple sweep across it's like a padding because you want it to work with that tooth enamel with the dentin that's likely exposed and just really help to have that overall protective coating over it and they even have exactly how to use it. It does say here to use a large a larger micro brush or a cotton pellet but I found with cotton pellets. It just simply would soak up too much of the liquid so then I would be going to apply it to the tooth. And there wouldn't be any liquid on there so I'd have to add more of the actual drops which gets expensive which is fine if it works, but I just found that with a micro brush as they had shown here in the video. It worked just fine. So this is the website guys I'll leave the link for you on the bottom but this is the best desensitizer that I have tried I won't go back to anything else. You might be wondering do I charge for desensitizer you know what, to be honest, I don't. I probably should start charging for it because it's about what's the price of this I don't remember it's been a while since I bought it because a little bit goes a long way. I want to say $200 or $300 doesn't have price here. I haven't logged into my account so it might not have a price. Okay, so it says it's 9899 so actually cheaper than I thought. Do I charge my patients for it I do not but I suppose I really could. Typically in a dental office the desensitizing code is $45 I believe but it's also not comfort by a lot of insurance companies so this is where it gets tricky. Do I charge people who have insurance and it's covered for it but then they don't charge other people that's not right. Or if a patient tells me they can't afford it do I just basically say okay well this will really help your teeth. Oh well I'm not going to put it on so that's kind of my ethical dilemma. That's just why I don't charge it if somebody has sensitive teeth I put it on. If they're not covered for it well they don't have to worry about it, but as I'm doing this video I probably should charge $10 for it so at least I'm making some money against the cost of the bottle. You know I don't want to say everybody can afford $10 because that's not true, but I also find that if patients are really that sensitive and something like works for them, they will pay the price for it. Think about yourself if you were in pain like from your teeth being so cold sensitive, and then we can put a thin layer over it to make you not sensitive anymore, then you would probably pay for that right. So I probably will start charging for it after this video, but let me know you guys if you have any questions you don't like your this desensitizer it does work right away. It's amazing if the patient says that it didn't really work for them it just means that they need another coat as with anything for some things for the patient and works right away. Other times it takes a couple applications the next time you can always have them come in and reapply it again a couple weeks later. I'm a mobile dental hygienist so I would not just go to somebody's house to reapply it, unless they're really close to another patient or something because I clearly don't need all of my equipment to just apply the desensitizer. I do have patients that see me every three months, just put on the desensitizer because it does work that amazing. I also want to mention you guys with the desensitizer I really like to recommend a toothpaste that's also sold by oral science it's called remin. I'm going to find that for you guys right now just to show you. I like to recommend this toothpaste to because what this actually does I'm sharing my screen right now is this has the same components that's in the desensitizer in a toothpaste. So it's like they're constantly reapplying that protective coating. Now this contains xylitol you guys so it does not contain any sodium fluoride varnish so I do also like to suggest a mouthwash with the fluoride. So they're still getting the benefits of that so that's kind of another video you guys. I talked more about that too. I'm just going to show you the mouthwash that I recommend along with this toothpaste just to really help because yes this might help their sensitive teeth but if they don't have a toothpaste with any sodium fluoride in it well they're not getting the benefits of the anti carries activity right so their sensitivity might be better but they're they're getting cavities well that's certainly not helping. So just to show you guys quickly sorry I apply or I'm sorry I give them I suggest this opti rinse 0.02. Oh they have a larger size now I just noticed. Anyways sorry I did not know they had a larger size. This one I do recommend because this has xylitol and sodium fluoride. Again you guys oral science isn't paying me for doing this video these are just the products that I do honestly use. So thank you for watching and I'll see you guys in the next video.


So, let's think about reactions with high and low activation energies and what that means. Imagine two identical flasks of some reactant sitting on the lab bench. I'm going to draw an energy diagram on the left and a Maxwell-Boltzmann diagram on the right for each of them. The two flasks are at the same temperature, so they must have identical Maxwell-Boltzmann distributions. In the first flask, I'm going to mix up the reactant with something else and it's going to undergo some reaction which happens to have a very high activation energy. So the energy diagram for this reaction could look like this. And on the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, the activation energy would be up here somewhere. And you can see that in this case, only a tiny proportion of molecules have sufficient energy to successfully react, so this reaction will proceed slowly. But now, consider mixing in the second flask this same reactant with something that will cause a different chemical reaction, one that has a low activation energy. The energy diagram for this reaction looks like this, and the activation energy would be somewhere here on the Maxwell-Boltzmann diagram. And you can see that because the minimum energy required is now much lower, a much greater proportion of molecules in the sample have sufficient energy to react, and so this reaction has a high rate. It proceeds quickly. So let's go back to our original question. What is necessary for a reaction to occur between two molecules? The essence of it is that they must collide with the right orientation and energy, and the chances of that happening vary greatly depending on the reaction and the conditions. As we said, many collisions may happen before two molecules collide energetically enough to surpass the activation energy and react. If successful collisions happen frequently, then the reaction will proceed quickly, which is the same as saying that the rate of reaction is high. If successful collisions are rare, then the reaction is very slow. In other words, the rate of reaction depends on how frequently successful collisions occur. So to get to the heart of the matter, we should now rephrase our original question and instead ask, what affects the chances of a successful collision occurring? And it turns out that the variables that affect the chances of a successful collision occurring are surface area, concentration, pressure, temperature, and the presence of a catalyst. And in the next video, we'll see how they do that.


Hope you had a great functional company now I'm Marcus Hawk. I'm concentric and today I will talk about free all the things So maybe show a friend who knows about the free monad Okay, the free applicator Less hands who knows about the free monoid Okay, perfect because you're here to learn what it is and Basically, we will talk about free whatever you want whatever type class you want to free So I will show you a technique how to do that So the goal is as I said to explain this technique We will apply this technique on different examples so you get a feel how to do it yourself And I hope that you can have a take as a takeaway that you yourself can do this at home find a type class and free it Okay, so let's go Here's the definition and it says a free functor is left adjoint to forgetful functor, right? That's easy What's the problem? It's like the monad meme Okay, here's another definition. I call I I came across when I searched for free and it says a free thing Let's call it free a on a type class that we call a is the a itself So a monoid is a monoid a monoid is a monad and a function We let's call it inject returns it takes an X of type a and returns a free a And it has to obey some rules such that for anything. Let's call it B and a function f from a to B They exist the unique homomorphism G such that decomposed with inject is the same as that So basically what this says is that the G function and the inject function have to be the inverse So inject brings you into the structure and G brings you out again. Okay. This is still very complicated So here's a more much more simple definition that I think Hits the point pretty well a free X is the minimal structure that satisfies the laws of the type class X and If you don't get this yet Don't worry because there's an easy mechanical recipe to how to free type class And it's basically four easy steps that we will repeat in the following slides First we define an AST for the type class operations. We add an inject operator We will see that in a moment We write an interpreter for it and then we check the laws Okay, but before we begin why should I care about free at all, right? Okay, so first of all you get a nice API that is based on the type class That means if you have a free monad every user that knows how to use a monad can use a DSL If you have a free monoid everybody who knows how to use a monoid can use a DSL and so on You can basically then use your free X as if it was a monad That's what I said and you can lift your DSL operations using this inject clause We will see and you get back your program as a data structure And this is really cool because you can optimize the program you can analyze it and you can interpret it in different ways So your your user may not have thought about executing a program in parallel and he just doesn't care But you can do that Okay, some disclaimer What I'm going to do is also called the deep embeddings approach or the initial encoding or the data structure representation and it's different from the final Techless approach Finally Techless would also have been possible for this talk, but especially later when we go into program optimization This is much more cumbersome For some type classes there are also different sets of minimal operations like for monad there at least three different sets of like you can have flat map and Return and you can have return join and bind and this technique actually works for every minimal subset And if you want you can try this at home with different subset I've just chosen one arbitrarily more or less because I can show something cool with it and This talk might include some hand waving at its but it's for your own good and hopefully you wouldn't know this Okay, so let's go into freeing the monad first So here we have the monad type class that has the pure function instead of return and The flat map function that given an FA that is wrapped in this higher kind of type constructor And a function that is gets the a returns an f of b You probably know this type last by now. Hopefully And as you might know if you have been in George talk There are also have to be in some laws for the type class and for the monad. We have three laws We have left identity Which says that when you lift something into the monad with pure and you flat map over it This should have be the same as just applying the f purely and If you have an FA and you flat map over it with pure this have no effect at all and There's also the associativity law which looks a bit a little bit strange with flat maps, but you just have believed me on that There's just associativity Okay, so we know the type class we know the laws yet go to the recipe So the first step as I said is to define an AST of the operations So we go on and we create a seed after a class that we call free And we have one class pure that captures the pure operation and we have one note in our AST That is called flat map and just captures the argument that our normal flat map function would take So we have an FA of type 3 of FA and a function that goes from a to a free of FB and Then we add one more case that I called inject. You can also call it pure or whatever you want Okay, not pure because I'm already using pure, but there are different names for it And then you can have a monad instance for our data structure and Whenever we call pure on our monad we just capture that in the pure note and Whenever we call flat map, we just capture it in the flat map note So in essence, we are just building up an AST when we are using the monad of the free function of the free monad Okay, and then we need something as a next step to go back from our free monad into the land of the normal monads so for that we write a function that is called run free and It takes a natural transformation that translates this higher-kinded F into some target monad that is here called M So here you can see that M has a context bound for a monad and Then it takes the free monad also as an argument and what we do is we just pattern match on the instructions And if it's a pure note, we translate it into the target monad's pure If it's a flat map, we translate it into the target monad's flat map and run free recursively down the two notes And if it's an inject we actually call our natural transformation And this is the part where you reduce your DSL into the target monad as well Okay, so we have our structure we have our free monad and now we need to care about the laws and As you might remember there is a associativity law for free monad's I just had it on this slide here again And when you look at our structure if you translate this to the AST You can have two expressions one and two the one is the flat map of the first equation of the left-hand side of the equation And the second one is the right-hand side equation So obviously this is not equal right, so we are violating the laws that means it's not the free monad Okay, so as a programmer you can argue that okay It's not really the free monad but after interpretation if your target monad is lawful nobody will notice and The metametrician or the category theorist will tell you know this is not the free monad So there's also a kind of a trade-off between enforcing these laws via construction I'm just taking this as a as a problem, but ignoring it and getting rid of it during interpretation But let's see what we can do here in our case So we have this flat map operation for our free monad monad instance and Instead of doing the normal flat map. We can actually do some optimization So we have the left identity law which tells us that whenever we flat map over a pure note We can just purely apply the F. So let's just do that in our flat map implementation here And we can do the same thing for the flat map Where it says that if you have the so that we are already in a flat map and we are flat mapping again And then the associativity law tells us that we can transform this into this Equivalent version and we can just reason this by the laws if you have been in George's talk, you might Recognize this so here's actually the equation again So we just applied the left hand side which has two inner flat maps And we just transformed it to the right hand side with a nested flat map Okay, so maybe a small quiz. What about the other identity law can't we just optimize when we flat map with pure? Does anybody have an idea? Can we do this or is that problem? Yes, it's a problem So actually the problem is that we would have to pattern match on the left hand side And we would have to determine that the function is a pure But we cannot compare functions for equality. We cannot take that as a pure function So we can actually we have to ignore that the law we cannot enforce this in our structure Okay, so as you have as you can see laws are not boring They allow us to do refactorings without changing the program meaning and they also allow optimizations Because for example in this case by doing the associativity to the right we can have a stack-safe free monad Because if you look into the structure instead of building up nested flat map notes that we have to burst down and up again We can now have a outer flat map note We recurse into FA and we have a function and then we apply this function and we get back a new note So effectively what we have reinvented here is trample lining for our free monad and will be stack safe And we didn't even think about this Okay, so for with this we are basically done with a free monad So we we have a DSL with monad expressiveness. We can use this to embed our own DSL We have context sensitivity. We can do branching in our DSL loops fancy control flow But this is not a free monad talk So if you want to learn more about this you go have to go to a free monad talk and Said what we will do is we will go and free the functor and Again, we will do the same four steps. So we define our ST at the intake clause Right our interpreter and we have to check the laws Okay, so here's our functor type class. It's easier than the monad We just have one function that is called map and given an f of a and a function from a to b it returns an f of b What are the laws? Well, we have the identity law which says that when we are mapping with identity over it They should have no effect and we have the composition law that says when we map twice This should be the same as mapping once using the composition of the functions Okay, so again, we we create an AST. We call it free functor There's two cases one is the FF case from our type class and there's one additional case for our inject Okay, that's basically it. That's a free functor, right? That was easy The next step is to minimize the structure again and we have to ask ourselves. Can we get rid of anything? So if you look at our structure again, and you look at the inject case You could actually replace this with F map Because the inject case just has an FA of type FA and the FM also has an FA here type FX But it can be just renamed and then we just have to fill in this F with something and We can write a smart constructor that fills this F with identity So we can just get rid of the inject case completely and we have a more minimal structure Okay, so Does anybody see a problem with this code snippet and as a hint if you're on our program You should immediately see this if you think from our perspective any ideas So we have a superclass, but we have just one subclass. What's the case of a superclass if you only have one subclass and We should check if we could get rid of this one superclass Okay, so and for this we have to ask ourselves. What role does the super trade or the superclass currently play and Currently it serves just a purpose that the free functor has two type parameters and the F map has three And so to get rid of this mismatch. We can use a type member Put the X into an existential type member and just get rid of the superclass completely So this is even better because we only have one node the F map node and The inject just gets a little bit more complicated because we have to instantiate the the type member and If you look closely at this it might get familiar depending on how deep you are into category theory And if you rename it, it's just co-yonida And it already sounds much cooler than just freeing the functor and then you can just write the functor instance for our free functor or we let's call it co-yonida and This is basically the mitigate the next mechanical step and then you run your free functor By mapping over it and just applying the function that was composed inside Okay, that's basically it we freed the functors So what do we get? Well, we get in DSL with functorial expressiveness. What does that mean? Yeah, well, we can only map But what we get for free is map fusion So our DSL users can map as often as they want and they don't have to care about intermediate structures Or whether they have can do a map map future optimization on their own we take care of that for them and What's even more interesting is that functors can often be composed with other structures giving them map fusion as an addition So for example, there once was a free monad that had in a composition with a free functor just to get map fusion for free on free Monads Okay, that was a free functor. Let's go on to free the monoid And again, we look at the type class So the monoid has two operations the first is called empty and the second is called combined You are probably familiar with that by now And if we blindly follow our approach, we start with the structure of the free monoid Then we have the empty case the combined case and our added inject case Should be quite familiar by now And we have three laws. It's left identities. So empty combined with X So the pipe plus pipe is just an infix combined should be only the X and the same for the right-hand side so this essentially just says as empty is as boring as you want it to be and We have the sociativity law Which says it doesn't matter in which order we evaluate this expression whether we first evaluate two plus three and then plus one Or whether you evaluate one plus two and then plus three the order doesn't matter Okay, so now let's try to enforce those laws on our structure and even through monoid is actually simpler than the functor and the Monad it will be a little bit more complex to enforce those laws and We have to make one almost arbitrary decision. You will see in a moment. Why I made this choice We will associate to the right. We could also have associated to the left, but we will get a little something out That is a little different Okay, so to fix associativity we have to And decide as I said for left or right and then we have to forbid the other one So what is okay in our case would be to have a combine With a left-hand side is an inject and then on the right-hand side that can be more combines But we cannot allow that on the left-hand side. There is an inner a combine because this would be left associativity Okay, so we can solve this by having another trade that just says this is a not not a combine So this is basically just a marker and then in the combined case We say the left-hand side has to be a not combine So this can either be an inject or an empty, but it cannot be a combined because combined does not extend not combine Makes sense Okay, so this would get rid of the associativity for combining, but we could still do combine of empty and empty so we have not only one empty we could have two mts and To minimize our structure, we can ask ourselves. Can we get rid of this duplicate mts or can we get rid of empty at all and It's not possible to get rid completely as we will see in a moment But we can limit ourselves to have only one empty in our structure and For this we have to restrict our combine to not only forbid on the left-hand side The combine function might be forbid combine or the empty That's what empty can be only on the right-hand side and combine as well And again the goal is to have the minimal canonical structure for our free monuate Okay, so if we do this we have on the left-hand side of combine only the inject case and Then we have our case class inject that doesn't inherit anything But if you look a little bit closer now inject is kind of silly because it's just wrapping things up. It's just identity So we can get rid of we can basically get rid of it completely So even better we have one structure one constructor less in our AST Okay, so let's try this structure and write the monuate instance So for the empty case we return the empty node and for the combine we pattern match if it's an empty We return the right-hand side and if it's a combine we combine the head with a recursive call on the tail Okay, this might start to look familiar again Does anybody see a familiar structure? Maybe look for a moment Okay, we maybe it helps if we rename everything a little bit Do you now recognize it? so we basically just reinvented the normal single link list and If you associate to the right you get the normal list if you associate to the left you just get the back what single link list Okay, so for this with this we freed monoids and We get a DSL that we combine stuff with which is pretty handy most of the time It works beautifully with folds for example map reduce. It's just if you just use monoids and folds. It's beautiful And we can also for example interpret our program in parallel Recursing down the the nodes of our AST because of associativity So this gives a lot of freedom to us when we have programs that our DSI users have written Okay, it seems like this approach works pretty well So now that we can free basically anything we just need a new nail for our hammer and When I thought about this I remembered an old blog post by Chris Duccio Which talked about free objects and he used free Boolean IGEPRAS as an example So this is a good example and we have our recipes. So let's just apply our steps to Boolean IGEPRAS And if you're not familiar with them a Boolean IGEPRAS has basically a true case the false case Which you know from normal Booleans and then the not that negates the and and the or From this you can basically build your normal Boolean IGEPRAS using other ones that can be derived from this like X or NAND or whatever you want Okay, but let's just apply our normal steps again So our AST looks a little bit more complicated this time we have the free Boole case and we have a case object for true and false and We have cases for the not the and and the operator which all just capture their arguments and Again, we have our edit inject case Okay, so now we just need an interpreter for our Boolean IGEPRAS. We will step will skip the optimization in this case and If you want to interpret our free Boolean IGEPRAS That is given as FB. We need a function that also goes from a free Boolean of A So here's the A need a function from A to B to get rid of this and The target is another Boolean IGEPRAS So we say that the type B has to be a Boolean IGEPRAS We have a free Boolean of A and a function that maps this A's to a Boolean IGEPRAS as well So when we tear down the structure We better imagine our operations if it's true We turn the target true if it's false return the target false if it's inject we use our actual function Well, this is where we have to translate the holds in our DSL that some user would have written Into the target Boolean IGEPRAS as well and for the other cases we just recurse down and use the target Boolean IGEPRAS operations and There were nice animation for that Okay, that was simple although it was a little bit boilerplated by now because it's always the same pattern We will skip trying to cope the loss basically because I don't know how to do it And it's much more involved than Monoid because there are a lot of laws for Boolean IGEPRAS But as long as the target we are interpreting in two is lawful at least morally this is okay So what's more interesting is what can we do with our new discovered structure and as reminder our DSL users can do and anything that the normal Boolean can store like true false and or XOR implies and then or whatever you Boolean operation you want Okay, so here's the example that I came up with Let's imagine that we want to write a new website search basically a new Google because we need that and For this DSL that our users can use We have this search ADT Which has different key different key bits for our DSL and it can search by term It can change search whether something is after a date It can check whether something will cross in the text or whether it course in the US in a URL and After it's leaking in some syntactic sugar our DSL users can basically write predicates or searches like this So we can say that there has to be the term functional programming It has to be indexed after 2018 1 1 There has to be there there should not be the term Java or spring in the website and The URL should contain functional conf So what our users are building up basically is the AST that looks like this So we have the end of the term node Then we have invested and that has the after note another end with the not and the or and then at the Leaves all are just our DSL operations. If you look closely Okay, now we just need a type that we can run our predicate against and for our domain Let's imagine that we have stored website case classes that contain Handily some terms URL the index at date and the full text of the website So all our predicates will be run against this site Okay, we know how to chew down our free bull I've shown that on previous site, but we do not yet know how to interpret our search DSL and For that we have to create a new function. I call it evil search that takes a free bull of search and The site and returns a boolean and what it does is it uses an inner function that I call net That goes from our search to a boolean and Then we can better match on the term and check whether our actual site. We are checking against Concerns the term T here where there was indexed after the date we specified Whether the full text contains the string we have given it and whether the URL contains the the word we have expected and Then we just call our teardown operation the run free boole to get rid of all of the AST and we will get back through our folks So what you can for example do is if we go through all sites We can filter them and evil call evil search on them and we will get back all sites matching our predicate Okay, so let's get back to our predicate that we've seen on the previous slide so if you have a site like this here and You have our predicate you would basically iterate over this you would check that for the term note Whether the term is in fp or Bangalore. So this would often be true But that was indexed out of the first of 2018. This would also be true Whether the term Java is in there. This would be false whether text spring is in there This would also be false and in the URL should be functional con and this should be true So basically you will get back AST that looks like this after eliminating your your DSL and Then you can tear this down to basically true or false at the end Okay, so this is like the basic usage of free Boolean Agapra But that's actually a lot more interesting stuff that you can do with this For example, you could short circuit or do other optimizations So for example here if we go to if we would have faults here You could just forget about all of the right-hand side. We don't have to evaluate all of that You could also do like eliminate double navigation Perform some canonical forms of the Boolean and an or You could partially evaluate the predicates So we will see this in a moment for example imagine you don't have all of the information required to evaluate your predicate fully Then you can partially evaluate it and maybe just load more information or send it on to another party And what you can also have which we are not show today is you could have a core language like our search Predicate that is barely low level and then you could have a higher level language that is a little bit richer and For example encapsulates the term matcher with it's like just taking a string and you could replace that with is fp website and Translate this into your primitive language as term has fp Okay, but let's talk about the optimization first. So this is pretty easy here's like one Simple step in the optimization case You could apply this apply this as a fixed point and just optimize your whole program And what we do is we just look at some basic patterns So for example if we find a double negation We can just forget about the double negation if we have an aura that has a left-hand side of or the right-hand side of true We can just short-circuit and the same for the end case But there are more things you could also just recognize whether there is an X or and stuff like that But the more interesting case is partial evaluation and As I said just imagine you have my totally have a part of the information that is required to reduce the brady-cade For our problem you could imagine that the full X full text of the index website is there is stored somewhere else and You would like to avoid loading the full website if possible So the idea is to evaluate as much as possible if we can reduce it to true or false Okay, that's perfect. We don't have to load the text Otherwise, we might have to fetch it or maybe send it on to another system that can retrieve the full text So for this let's create another case class that is just called site metadata That has only the terms the URL and the index at so the full text is missing here and Then we can write another function that is called partially and instead of taking a full website It just takes a site metadata and our normal search predicate So from the user's point of view, this is unchanged and it returns an option of mboolian and the option is basically the semantics of If it's some then we could evaluate this and if it's none, we just didn't know what to do We didn't have the required information So in our case for the term after and in URL case we can do the evaluation and for the index We just have to say none. We don't know how to do that and after we have this we can write our partial evaluator That just is like our normal evaluator But it takes instead of an A to B here it takes an A to option B Which fits the signature we have written on the previous slide and then it just tries to evaluate everything Here I'm using an either sneakly for the short circuit thing You can think about this if you want to or talk to me in the hall but it's a little bit tricky and then we can just recrust down with this partially evaluator and whenever you can Evaluate something you just replace it with a value and otherwise you have to go on and do more okay, so let's go back to our basic predicate and Here's the same site, but without the full text and we can evaluate everything to to true Except for the intact spring So basically we can get rid of all of this, but we have to keep the index We can rid of the or because this is false So this reduces to only the index node and we have to keep the knot So what we can get out of this after running our predicate is a new predicate That is reduced to only not intact spring So we just have a smaller program now and if you look at the same predicate, but a different website and Evaluate this you can for example see in this case for a website spring IO there's the terms Java and spring and was indexed at some other date and We can also already evaluate the term case up here to false and If you have an end node and the left-hand side is false or any side is false You can just short circuit everything and it's false So we wouldn't even have to go down into those trees here Because we already know that the result will be false anyways, and we don't have to fetch our full text of the website Okay, so we freed our Boolean I get brass with this I think this is a very good example of an underused free structure that you can use to build very nice DSLs for some problems and You can do partial evaluation on it. You can do a whole program optimizations, which are very funny You can serialize the AST because there are no function inside of it So you can serialize it to Jason with Cersei basically boilerplate free and just use the lies it on D zero lies it on the other end What's even better is that free bull actually has a traverse instance and our partial evaluator is just a traverse with an either and You can even do even more stuff with that But actually that's probably the content of a different talk So here are some resources. This is the blog post by crestucula that inspired the free Boolean part you can find the source code on my github and Otherwise, I hope that now you have feel inspired to go forth and free all the things. That's all I have. Thank you


which is of growth and development. Just before we jump into chapter four, one point that I want to make was, see we talked about different kinds of structures. And we might want to find out, like every time we come across a church, we might want to find out which category does this church fit in. But also, you know, let's remember whatever category a particular church fits in. The actual question that we should be asking is whether the people are a part of the body of Christ. So it's very much possible that a certain structure that we don't approve of, in that structure also there can be those who are born again. They are part of the kingdom of God. They are part of the body of Christ. So we mustn't just judge people on the basis of their denomination or on the basis of certain church structure that they have adopted. So it's just something for us to remember that we mustn't discriminate just on the basis of the denomination. Actually, a question to ask is whether they are born again and they are a part of the kingdom of God or not. So I think that is the more important question. So having said that, we can move into the next topic here. OK, stages of growth and development. So just the way we see a little child grow into an adult go through various stages. Every church also goes through different stages. And we must bear that in mind. If you observe the church in Jerusalem that had its own progress, so you found that it was born on the day of the Feast of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out. And the church started growing very rapidly because the Holy Spirit was working among the people. There were signs, wonders that were taking place. And as part of their discipleship strategy, the house meetings were the primary weighing which they could minister to their own people. So house meetings were happening in the early church. They would also meet at the temple. And that's what we read about them. We see that the initial leadership was provided by the apostles. And eventually, they found that there are things that need to get done. So they would need deacons. So deacons came on board. We find persecution starting up in Jerusalem. And because of that, the church gets scattered. So it's the believers who go to various regions. And later on, we read about how these believers could have been the reason why some churches were placated. So wherever the believers went, churches got planted. And then later on, we find the apostles also stepping out on missionary journeys and planting churches. Then eventually, we see that the ministry teams emerge from the Church of Jerusalem. And they step out. This church grows rapidly. And it does well. And in the long run, the Church of Jerusalem becomes that base church to which the other churches connect. They ask for decisions from the leadership of the Church of Jerusalem. So it becomes a very prominent church. There are other aspects also you see happen here. You see that there are certain conflicts that come up. But the apostles handle them pretty well. You would see that the doctrinal issues that come up, the apostles handle that well. But then you don't really see the involvement of all the apostles in missions. At least you don't read about it. You only read about a few of them stepping out. And eventually, you don't read about the Church of Jerusalem a whole lot also. So that's a little bit about the Church of Jerusalem. And everything began from the Church of Jerusalem. Now, I told you that during persecution, believers went to different places and they had planted churches. So one of the churches which got planted is the Church of Antioch. And why is the Church of Antioch important? Because it is a model that shows rapid growth. It shows team ministry. And it's a multicultural church. So something different from the Church of Jerusalem. The pastor of the Antioch Church, Nobannibus, could be considered as that key leader. And we know that later on he brought Paul to minister together with him. And we see the team ministry unfolding. So you have other teachers in the church. You also have Agabus, who comes in, who is in the prophetic office. So the five-point ministry offices are functional in the church. And you read about the growth of the church. In a matter of a couple of years, the church is thriving. And they're doing very well. Believers are being strengthened. They are being equipped and raised up in this particular church. You also notice in the Church of Antioch that at a time when they heard about a need in the Church of Jerusalem, the Church of Antioch kind of wants to send aid. So in addition to the spiritual ministry that is going on, they also engaged in some sort of a social work to help the other, the mother church. Then eventually you have apostolic teams that are stepping out of this church. So there is a connectedness. They go to the Church of Jerusalem when it's time to make that decision about the Gentiles and the rituals, some of the patterns that the Gentiles should continue to follow. But after that, you don't really read too much about the Church of Antioch. We only read that teams stepped out from the Antioch Church. So you had the missionary journeys of Paul. And we know that Paul and Barnabas had a very sharp conflict that arose. And it didn't go well because both of them, after that, went there two separate ways. And you don't also read about Paul and Barnabas continuing to provide leadership to the Antioch Church. Now, we don't know if they already had stronger leaders develop and they kind of handed over the church to those people. And Paul and Barnabas, they stepped out in their primary calling of their lives, which was to be in the apostolic calling. All this is what you read about the Church of Antioch. Now, in both of these churches, you're seeing things unfold. You see the birth of the church. You see leadership emerging. You see the equipping of the church. You see the movement of the leaders and the mission of the church. Eventually, both the churches seem to have moved on to a more apostolic role. When I use the word apostolic, I mean, don't get hassled or what is that. It simply means extending the kingdom. Extending the kingdom of God to new territories. That's what it means. So you find both the Church of Jerusalem sending out leaders to new territories. And similarly, the Church of Antioch also sending out teams to new territories. So these are the stages that we observe in these two churches. So having this in our minds, the churches that we are a part of, we will talk about the normal stages of growth that any healthy church would go through. The first stage is the pioneering stage. So for a church planter, this is a crucial stage where the person would establish commitment to a territory. Now, how is the territory chosen? Generally, it's by a word from God. Maybe God has spoken in our hearts and said, OK, I want you to go to Bangalore and I want you to plant a church there. So generally, it happens that way. But also, it could be because of a need which arose and God kind of moved you in that direction. A pastor who was ministering in a certain place left, and now your church leadership suddenly approached you and said, we know that you have been groomed for something like this, and here is an opportunity. Would you like to go to this place where there is no pastor? Would you like to take over? So sometimes it may happen as a result of us responding to a need. But generally, God puts it on our hearts and we know that this is the place where we have to go and we have to plant a church. So this is the pioneering stage. So any individual who is going to plant a church, they have to demonstrate commitment to the territory. So you're clear about it and you go to that place and you kind of plant yourself over there and do whatever it takes to be established over there. All right, so that is how it all begins. Then you lay the groundwork. The groundwork is primarily spiritual nature. We have studied when we did prayer and intercession, when we talked about the believer's authority, that in a given region to establish the kingdom of God, we engage in prayer, we engage in intercession, we engage in worship. As we do this, the spiritual atmosphere is kind of primed to continue God's work there. So you wait on the Lord, maybe you're not doing it alone. I know of certain church planting movements where they go as teams and as a team, they do this. And I know one particular pastor, he was sharing this testimony, how he decided for six months, he wouldn't preach. For six months, they only gathered for prayer, intercession, worship, because they were laying the spiritual groundwork in that area. So this team did only that for six months and only after six months, slowly, they kind of started having their services. So you do the groundwork initially. Along with the spiritual groundwork, you may want to build bridges with the ministers in that area, maybe there are already some churches that exist and then we will talk more about this later. So I won't go into details of it, but you basically kind of establish a good relationship an honest relationship with people around. And yeah, so then they are also accepting of you doing the work in that place. And you begin to understand the dynamics of the place. So you may want to do some out-preachers initially to kind of know how to reach people, how to win souls for the kingdom of God. So all this goes into your pioneering work in a given place. So the phase, the pioneering phase is actually the foundation-laying stage of ministry. And it is said that when you want to build a tall building and a strong building, you have to really dig deep. Unless the foundation is deep, you cannot have a tall building, is it? If you have a shallow foundation, it can only take, I don't know, ground floor, first floor, but if you're thinking of building a strong building, let's say 16 floors, then you don't, you have to go really deep, have that foundational pillars in place and that goes for the church as well. So you lay a very strong foundation spiritually in terms of the vision, the clarity of the vision. So many of these things and some working with people, you know, the way you're gonna build the team and all of that. So you lay a strong foundation and a deep foundation if you want to establish a long-term work. Okay, so that's about your pioneering stage. And then the work will move on to the administrative or the organizational structural stage. Okay, now put in timelines again. Now you might ask, okay, how long should it be? Again, it is completely dependent on the direction of the Holy Spirit. There are people who take a year to just pray and worship and think and write out the vision and all of that, okay? But there are people, they know, they're very clear, their entire lifetime, professionally, maybe they were doing something else, but all along, God was speaking, they have the vision, they just kind of launch out. Two weeks, they might engage in something like the pioneering activities and then slowly they might actually start off their services. Okay, so it depends. You have to be led by the Holy Spirit. There's no correct or wrong way of doing it. Okay, so we'll quickly take Hope's question and then I will move forward. Hope you have a question? I'm not sure. I think it doesn't know that is... Five is six. Yes, yeah. Okay, okay, all right, fine, fine, then we'll continue. All right, so the next stage would be the administrative organizational stage. So this is the time when you put your systems in place, you know, what Abraham asked earlier. So what are these systems? These systems could do with how your team is going to look, okay, your structure, what will be the leadership structure of your team?  We would like to emphasize on the gifts of the spirit. So certain key things that God is putting on your heart and saying, hey, this will be the main thing that your church is going to be ministering on. So you work on all of that, you receive it from the Lord, then you put it all down, okay? So these will be our areas of emphasis, okay? Then other aspects, organizationally, how are you going to run this? So there will be things like registering your church, there will be, you know, establishing a good connection network with other ministers of God. So you kind of define all that, how are we going to do all these things? And then, you know, you might want to put other important systems in place, for example, your Sunday services. So what will be the normal format? So you would put that in, cell groups, like what will be the discipleship model of your church? What are you going to choose? So broadly, you put down, okay, this is how we're going to do this, this is how we're going to do our preachers, this is how we're going to do, you know, X, Y, and Z. So the important thing is to, you know, come up with these systems early on, at least the broad structure can definitely be fine tuned a little bit as you go further, but put systems in place in such a way that what you are doing when you have very few people is what you will be doing when you have, you know, a large number, maybe 5,000, 5,000 plus, okay, for example, I will tell you, I still remember, you know, when I was freshly like on the pastoral team, I was a volunteer pastor, you know, seven years ago, and maybe a decade ago actually, and we had this meeting with Pastor Ashish, and you know, I was just kind of new in the pastoral team at that time, and he was sharing, he noted on the phone, he said, look, this is our pastoral structure, okay, senior pastor, pastoral team, then ministry team, side group leaders, so you know what, it hasn't changed, it's the same, there's a lot of other changes that happen inside that structure, but it's the same, so it's good because, you know, if it was different back then, and then now it suddenly changes, and then it changes again in two years time, it's a lot of confusion, but I'm just giving you one example, right? Similarly, the cell group idea, it's the same, like from the time I joined church to now, maybe a little bit of tweaking has happened, but we primarily, you know, we had adopted that G2L model, and sort of a modified version is what is going on till now, so when you put those things in place, it's a lot easier, so the church can keep growing, even the church service format, I don't think any major changes have happened, like I've been in this church for maybe about, I don't know, 17, 18 years now, but it's the same, right? Even when we kind of, you know, have our smaller congregations, we use the same format, so it's easier, when a pastor and a pastoral team define these things early on, even if the numbers grow, you know, things remain the same, so and that's very helpful, and if the team can put it down, nothing like it. And another important thing, you know, godly standards and guidelines, this needs to be established, so again, I've noticed, you know, pastor right from the start, I first joined as a volunteer, also we had like a guideline document and you know, about certain standards and our principles, values, those things don't change, okay, those things remain the same. Today, when we induct volunteers in our branch locations, the values remain the same, right? So what happens? The church is growing, but you can maintain the values, you can maintain the standards. So for a person who is pioneering, and they come to this stage of setting the processes in place in an administrative organizational way, if you put it down once, it's very helpful, people can follow them and of course, you can keep adding good things to it as you go along, but the primary standards remain the same, right? Things like, you know, we talk about excellence, we talk about teamwork, we talk about integrity. So these things remain the same. Even if new people join, it's very easy because they just have to get oriented in a meeting and then they know, okay, these are the values, this is the way to do things, come on, let's do it, right? So the church can grow to 50,000, but you still have the same values that you're passing on to the 50,000 people or one million people. So it's good for a pastor to kind of set that in order. So the administrative organizational structural phase when you put all these things in order. Now, new ministries, how can you have new ministries growing out of the church? You could have people from the same church stepping up and addressing an area of need or there is an area of need, okay? And you don't have people in the church to minister. So you might want to trust God to bring those people in, okay? So yeah, it's done in various ways. We'll touch on that later maybe. So that is your administrative phase. The important thing is to put people, put structure, put processes, systems, and also the right people in the right areas of ministry. So why are you doing all this? Basically you're creating an environment for effective growth, that's all, okay? And the church would grow from 50 people to 100 people to 200 people, to 500 people, to 5,000 to 10,000. It's easy for the church to keep growing, okay? If you have these things in place. So after starting off, you put the structure in place, then comes the pastoral team stage. Pastoral team stage is nothing but you know the, let's assume senior pastor founded the church. Now certain systems are in place, people have started coming. Now as people are joining the ministry, God when he gives you a vision, right? He puts that in the hearts of others also. And definitely God will connect people with the same common vision. And you identify those people and when you identify a certain grace on people's lives, you kind of groom them into leadership, okay? So the senior pastor grooms them into that place and this team now has a shared vision. They're all moving in the same direction of growth and expansion. So the good thing is this pastor develops a team, okay? And then he's able to do much more because we are aiming for growth. We are aiming for growth, one person cannot do everything. So you definitely need more people partnering together with you. So develop a team. So that would be a pastoral team stage. And one point which pastor has put here, he has written, the more trust you give, the more faithful your leaders will be. So that's from his wisdom. So I'll just leave it as it is. Then the next stage here would be the equipping stage. So under the equipping stage, now that you have a pastoral team in place, you're concentrating on the believers. You're concentrating on the saints because remember I told us from Ephesians 4, we are instructed to equip the saints for the work of the ministry. So you're focusing on the church, focusing on teaching the church, focusing on training the church, focusing on mobilizing the church. So we would disciple them. We would teach them about supernatural ministry. And we would equip them on how to do ministry, training in ministry. So that can be provided. So when we do this, what happens? The people catch the mission. The people are equipped. The people recognize their calling. The people recognize the grace on their lives. And the church, the entire church is able to make an impact, okay? Where God has called them. So it's not just the pastor anymore. The pastor is investing into the people. And the people are the ones who are stepping into their roles of ministry. They are serving and they make an impact in their region and various other parts of the world. So it becomes more like a mission of church, okay? So that is your equipping stage. Just pouring into the congregation. Now, if we have done all these things, then that apostolic aspect that I was talking about, basically new territory, okay? So this pastor who has a pastoral team, he has built up the church congregation to mature them in God. The pastor himself can move on to a more apostolic role, okay? So he could be guiding the pastoral team and he could, you know, the pastor team could be doing more of the ministry with regard to the church, but he could be serving in other aspects, that are available for in the city-wide region or like a national level, there are certain ministries, right? So the pastor could be engaging in those things, but he's very much a part of the church, but primarily your activities, like your pre-chain, teaching, member care, those kind of things are being done by the pastoral team because there's a good pastoral team serving over the church. So the senior pastor has moved on to more of new territory, getting new territory for the kingdom of God, more of a kingdom, expanding the kingdom mindset, okay? And similarly, since the people have been equipped, they've been raised up, we can expect the people also to be willing to step out. You know, the way we saw the church of Jerusalem, eventually the apostles stepped out to serve other churches. From the church of Antioch, you had, you know, Barnabas and team, fallen team go out and plant new churches, right? So from this church, initial church, we can come it as the base church, okay? Several teams can go out making an impact over the city and the region. So these are all the, these are some main stages that a church would go through, all right? So I'll just read it out for you once again. So what are the stages of growth, pioneering, where you go, you do the groundwork.  Then you have your pastoral team stage, where you establish your team, like your nurture leaders. It's more about developing leaders. Then you have your equipping stage, where you equip the congregation. And finally, you have the apostolic stage, where both the senior pastor, as well as the congregation are able to do more for the kingdom of God. So a couple of other aspects that we will touch on in the growth of church, the growth of the church. See, when we lead a church, right? There are many stages that the church will go through and various transitions as well, okay? So the pastor has to be mentally prepared for these things. And it's going to take a lot of wisdom, a lot of anointing, a lot of grace to lead a congregation through all these stages. Now, see, we are attending Bible college. So you have an idea of some of the terms that I'm using equipping, pioneering, you know, you have an idea, but a pastor is leading a congregation. A lot of people may not understand, you know, the direction that the church is taking. So it's not easy, it's not easy, because everybody has their own idea of doing church. You know, if a pastor makes a decision in line with, okay, we are going to be a supernatural and an apostolic church, and he's making decisions in line with that, the people who don't understand, right? They might look at the pastor very differently and say, what is he doing? Why is he making these decisions? So taking the people through the stages, through transition, you know, it is a tough task and you really need to be connected with God and have that grace to do that and continue to care, nurture the people, love the people through all of this and never lose the mission, never lose the vision because you want to be salt and light, you want to make an impact, you know, you have to keep the focus, okay? So it's going to be a challenging journey, but of course, God is there with anyone that he has called to do this work. So a couple of pointers. So, you see, I can share my knowledge, but I wouldn't classify myself as a pioneer in any sense because, you know, I am part of the pastoral theme and I have observed, I think, I have a stashish from Paul in the category of a pioneer who has founded, you know, all people's church. So he's writing out of his experience, but I can talk from my observation, okay? Because it's a lot easier for someone like me who's leading a, you know, as an associate leading a branch church, of course, in coordination with the senior pastor, it's different for me, but I can share from my experience. So he talks about constantly moving people forward. Now, I told you the journey that a pioneer pastor makes can be very difficult, okay? And people are usually comfortable in any given setting. Now, if you want to move them to another setting, you want to do things differently. For example, you know, there's one location and then you propose that we can have two locations, right? Or we are opening up two locations, right? People may not like it. They'll be like, why, there's already one location. Why do you want to open up another location? But it's going to take grace to move them forward and say, dude, this is God's vision for us. Thankfully, I think for APC, from the time I joined, pastor's been saying five locations, five locations, five locations for, you know, over a decade now. So it wasn't a surprise when, you know, these locations actually started and services were conducted. So that was always part of the vision. So just an example, constantly move people forward. So in line with the vision, when you propose some new things, people may not want that transition. People are resistant to change. So it's going to take grace to keep people moving people forward. Okay, then it says here, yeah, bridging across two levels. So here he talks about how people also need to go through, like in that personal journey, need to go through the stages of growth. Now, when believers come in, they might be in the stage of, you know, toddlers and babies where milk is good enough, you know, that keeps them comfortable. But when you start to provide solid food, you know, there's indigestion because they just cannot take it. However, how do you take people along in the vision that God has given? Stage by stage, step by step, okay? So now when the church starts at the pastor knows, oh, okay, this is the direction God wants us to go, we want to be an apostolic church. We've left with the believers, they will be strong enough, they will step out and do the work of the ministry. So when the person starts the church and encourages those who have joined the church, say, okay, come on, you serve, they will be like, why should we serve?  They might come from that mindset, but little by little as the pastor preaches the word and shares with them, doesn't look, this is what we've seen the word of God.   Even the people are growing from babies to teenagers to young adults to adults. So at some point when the pastor says, okay, mission teams, let's step out, they have the same understanding because the pastor has also kind of bridged that gap between the levels from where they came to where they are at. So, you know, that kind of work goes in and yeah, the pastor has to keep the vision and keep moving people forward. And also, yeah, he talks about you lead the change, okay. So lead the change means sometimes, you know, you have to make those choices and decisions that make people uncomfortable, yet you have to take on, you have to step forward and do it anyhow, okay. For example, I think there was one point, this was in 2008 and I've heard pastor share about this. There was a time where evening meetings were conducted and it was called the outpouring at that point and it was a great time of people worshiping the Lord and God's Holy Spirit, you know, ministering to people. It was just like, I think it went on for several days. I don't know exact number of days, but it just went on, right. And I've heard him share that people had questions about how long is this going to go on? Why should we do something like this? You know, what is happening? What does it need to worship like this? So, but he had made a decision, okay, this is what the Holy Spirit is doing in our congregation and we are going to, you know, make provision for this kind of worship. So, you know, they kept it going despite the questions, despite the, you know, comments of people. So, a leader needs to lead the change and say, hey, we're doing this and this is why we're doing this and, you know, hopefully people will catch up. Okay, so another key that he puts across here is right people in the right place at the right time. Okay, and this cannot be overemphasized. Those of us, you know, from the corporate world, we know how important this is. It can be the right time. It can be the right place, but if you have the wrong person, then, you know, it can be chaos. So, again, it's going to take a lot of grace, wisdom to identify people in positions of responsibility and leadership and a leader has to be careful about that. Then adapting to the challenges at the new level. So, you know, it's a very risk-taking kind of a job when you wanna see the church grow. For example, if, you know, you're teaching about the prophetic. Okay, and people have now understood that the Holy Spirit imparts gifts to us and every believer can flow in prophecy. Now for the people who heard it for the first time and they are still kind of getting a grip on this truth, the application of the prophetic could be all wrong initially, maybe, right? So, some people might use, or that says the Lord for everything, or God told me, God showed me this, so I'm doing this, without even knowing how to check the prophetic word or how to test the prophetic word, okay? But as a pastor, you are determined to take people on that journey of moving into the next level. Okay, yes, we are meditating on the word. We have studied all these basics. We will open ourselves to the work of the Holy Spirit. The church will experience growth in the area of the gifts of the spirit. You know, it's like a risk only because once you take them to the next level, some people might not know how to use that truth initially, right? And there can be chaos, but that's a risk that the pastor is willing to take. Yeah? So, whatever we move people to the next level, there can be challenges at every level, but the pastor would need to know how to navigate through that difficulty or challenge, okay? So, yes, we will pause for a minute just to clarify any doubts that we may have. I will take up what Beth has written here. She says, regarding the apostolic function stage, won't there still be a need for internal care as new believers are continuously being added to the church who individually need equipping ministry or community? Yes, yes, Beth, definitely. That's a very good question. Yet, the church is in that stage, but remember we said that the pastor, hopefully by then, has established a good pastoral team and he has also defined his role, okay? So, it's not like he has taken his hands off of caring for the church, okay? And it's not like the pastoral team doesn't exist anymore to take care of the people. So, all those ongoing nurturing tasks will continue, all that will keep going on while the pastor moves on to other things as well, okay? So, does that make sense? Great, yes, good question, Beth. Yeah. So, yeah, Klaus, I think I have any thoughts from your side as you've heard about the levels that a church grows through, you could think about it. You could think about it. All right, so now we will just move on to the next chapter here. Let me see, I will cover as much as I can. The next chapter is about what makes a strong local church. So, some of us could define a strong church by the size of the church, okay? That may not be the best indicator because let's assume people come in to a church and they make that journey of growth. So, as the numbers are increasing, if the people are mature in the word, in their gifting, their calling and all of that, then yes, it's a strong church. But if the numbers are increasing and the people remain as babies, you know, it'll just become like a big nursery, okay? And we all know how much effort it takes to take care of the younger kids, okay? So, that wouldn't make a strong local church. So, a strong local church is a church where, you know, it's fulfilling God's mission and people are also fulfilling their own calling, their purpose in life, their growing in the Lord. So, we want to see people grow as well. So, numbers, yes, but more about the spiritual maturity. And remember when we began talking about the local church, we said that that is the mission of the church, isn't it? What is the mission of the local church to disciple the people? And as I think it's Ephesians 4.13, it says that you bring people to maturity, okay? So, that's what is happening before the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. People are being brought to maturity in Christ Jesus. So, what are some of the key aspects that make up a strong local church? So, the first one that is mentioned over here is a strong vision, right? Strong leadership with a God-given vision. So, a vision is very important. Because without a vision, what happens? There's no direction. Without a vision, scripture says, people perish, okay? Or in other words, when there is no vision, our efforts are all over the place and we end up becoming unproductive. So, what would a person who is going to plant a church need? What is that one thing that person needs? The answer is vision. If there is no vision, then, you know, you wouldn't, you would do something, but that will not be effective for the kingdom of God. So, a vision is the key thing, okay? And scripture also says that if a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into the ditch. So, the leader must have a clear vision and the leader must align himself to that clear vision. He has to start moving towards that vision and also start communicating that vision to the people. How often should one communicate the vision to the people? As often as possible. So, one observation, I don't know if you have made that, but Sunday services, when the video announcements are played, the vision of the church is, you know, it's spoken there, right? Like all people's church, our vision is to be sought and like the city of Bangalore, you know, nation of India and to the nations of the world. So, that is the vision. And how often is it repeated? As often as possible. Otherwise, the church will not know the direction in which it needs to move. If only the pastor knows, and the vision is only in the pastor's mind, then how will the church follow? So, strong leadership with a strong vision is the first precursor for a strong local church, okay? Yes, so vision is important. A strong leader. Now, to talk about a strong leader, define a strong leader, I think that's an entire course for you, right? On leadership, so we won't get into that, but you understand who a strong leader is. We need a leader who is leading from the front, leading as an example, and that's very important. What if, you know, the church lacks a strong leader? A scripture tells us that this is the tactic of the enemy where, you know, he knows that if a shepherd falls, the sheep will be scattered, okay? So, how to get the entire congregation if you can get the leader, right? But if you can't get the leader, if the leader remains strong, then that person can continue to serve the purposes of God and establish a strong, long-lasting work for the glory of God. So, very important, number one vision, okay? And a strong leader with a strong vision, that becomes a necessary thing for a strong local church. Oh, okay, we've run out of time here. So, we're gonna stop here, but we'll come back to this. So, some really interesting insights in this chapter and the next as well. So, if you can, please do read up and come. I mean, I don't know, if you have questions now, we won't be able to take it up because we've run out of time, but you can please jot it down and we can begin with questions in the next class. Is that okay, class? Is that fine? Fine, man. Yes, yes, okay, great, great. All right, thank you, everyone. I know you have another class to catch. Could somebody quickly pray and then you can leave? I can pray, ma'am. Yes, yes, hope, please go ahead. Thank you, Father, for your goodness. Thank you for this day that you have given us. We lend a lot, help us to put into practice what you have been through today. I pray for your grace for all of our students and even teacher with teachers, we pray for Pastor Nancy, your Lord, continue giving her wisdom and your mighty Holy Spirit. May you guide her and may we learn more and more in full measure. In my name of Jesus, we pray that God we are going to make us understand what we want us to know as we are saving you in our local churches. We praise you and we honor you. In my name of Jesus Christ, Father, we pray and believe. Amen. Thank you, Hope. Thank you so much and thank you, everyone. Bye for now. God bless you. Thank you, Pastor. Thank you. Thank you. Bye. Bye, God bless. Bye.


Recorded books presents Black Fox by Matt Braun. Narrated by me, George Waddell. CHAPTER I The wagon lurched along a rutted trail from a distance its swaying motion a mere wavering speck in the vastness of the rolling plains. Stretching to the horizon, the unbroken terrain shimmered hypnotically in the heat waves from the sun. Though hills obscured broad valleys beyond, and from the crest of any given hilltop, the viewer observed nothing more startling than an identical series of stunted elevations. Three days' journey to the west lay the trackless reaches of the true plains, a barren waste devoid of trees or vegetation. Once a man had sampled the inhospitality of that land, the undulating landscape of north-central Texas came almost as a relief. Still there was a stark emptiness to the rolling plains, which made the occasional creek or shallow bottomed river all the more appreciated. Here a man could rest in the shade of the massive oaks and woolly cottonwoods, fringing the prairie tributaries, and escape the relentless heat, too. Braced against the jarring impact of the wagon, Allen and Britt Johnson clung precariously to their seats as a team of sorrows gingerly traversed the pitted track which skirted their browses' river. Roads were as yet a luxury in the frontier regions of Texas, and when traveling by wagon, the choice between trails or cross country was determined more by habit than any real sense of convenience. Shifting in their seats as the wagon wheels struck a solid bed of rock, the two men stared wordlessly at the twisting track unraveling before them. Since they had been traveling steadily for two hours, conversation had gradually given way to the resigned silence of those who preferred to endure a jolting wagon without complaint. Occasionally they sighted a house set back away from the river, but the ramshackle dwellings hardly seemed worthy of comment. Neither of the men was especially garless at any rate, sharing a somewhat taciturn disposition. Between them a distance of some ten miles lay the juncture of Elm Creek and the browses, and after an uneventful morning on the trail it seemed apparent that nothing remarkable had happened to the settlers along the way during the winter. Lucking anything of significance to discuss, they both felt more comfortable with the silence, the quiet of strong men whose companionship had withstood the test of time and no longer required the crutch of idle conversation. Although Allen and Britt bore the same surname and both dressed in the coarse linsee of frontiersmen, the similarity between them ended there. Allen was of medium height and raw-hide lean, with the sandy hair and deep-set eyes which instantly marked unbroken generations of Anglo-Saxon heritage. When he spoke his voice betrayed the soft inflections of a native-born southerner, and something about his manner evoked the cultured gentry of magnolia-studded cotton plantations. While strangers could only surmise those who knew Allen intimately were well aware that his family had once belonged to the Southern aristocracy. The dissipations of a wasteful father who subscribed to the theory that gaming rooms and bordellos presented a greater challenge than the pastoral life ultimately brought the family to ruin. Shortly afterward the elder Johnson died from the residual effects of his debauchery and Allen resolutely determined to seek a new start for the family in the frontier. Unroot, his mother also died, and with her passing an era had ended for the once distinguished family. Of all the Johnson's Britt's life was least affected by the sudden change in fortune, for Britt was black, a former slave, and what a man had never possessed could hardly be rested from him by the caprice of fate. Born to parents who were themselves the children of slaves, his heritage was a curious blend of savage courage fused with docile servitude. As if a predator cat had been crossed with a cream-fed tammy, the mutation that resulted was neither wild nor tame, much like trained tigers who have surrendered their freedom for a warm cage and full belly, but as once a race of warriors had grown obedient to the lash and humble beyond all understanding. Unlike his fellow blacks, Britt had been graced with a master of enormous compassion. Opposed to slavery solely on the basis of his essential inhumanity, Allen found the degrading of another human being the most repugnant aspect of plantation life. On his 21st birthday, Allen inherited Britt as a manservant. He immediately renounced the legacy by declaring his newly acquired slave. Sample complete. Ready to continue?