Author: admin

[rating:4.0]

(Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010)

197 pgs

Scott Rodin offers a fresh approach to understanding leadership. There are, of course, numerous books that attempt to introduce a new perspective. Often they simply look much like other, older versions. However, Rodin does a great job of identifying a new approach to understanding leadership from a Christian perspective. He labels his view: Steward Leadership.

Rodin is the managing principal of OneAccord NFP, and senior fellow of the Engstom Institute. Previously he was the president of the Christian Stewardship Association as well as president of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

He begins the book with a confession: “Here is my confession. In my roles as a leader I have been mostly wrong” (11). He concludes: “The problem lay solely with my understanding of the nature of Christian leadership” (12). Rodin proceeds to describe what he terms, the “steward leader.” But he notes that servants of God have God’s anointing upon them. He states: “Without this anointing, we are continually thrown back on ourselves to make things work” (14). Rodin argues that it is when leaders assume responsibility, or ownership, of their organization that they tend to lead in their strength rather than in God’s. He warns: “By overestimating our worth, we help our people depend on us for everything” (16). He quotes Ralph Waldo Emerson who said, “Some leaders worry themselves into nameless graves, while here and there some forget themselves into immortality” (27).

Rodin lays out three “foundations” for a steward leader (29). He also identifies four relationships that are the sphere in which a steward works. These are: relationship to God, self, neighbor, and creation (34-36). He notes that sin distorts these relationships and makes them destructive and exploitative.

Rodin notes that steward leaders are free, because they do not bear the ultimate responsibility for the organization’s success. That is because they do not own the organization, or its people. Rodin argues throughout the book that there are no easy steps to becoming a steward leader. He tries to avoid making this book simply another “how to” manual. And indeed, this book, for the most part, focuses on principles rather than on how people can begin leading their organizations as a steward leader. He argues that, rather than trying to be the mastermind behind their organizations, “the one calling of the steward leader is joyful obedience” (62).

In entering the “born” or “made” debate on leadership, Rodin suggests: “I, therefore, contend that a steward leader is neither born nor made, but freed” (62). Rodin offers a helpful survey of secular leadership theory (70ff). This helps put steward leader theory into context.

Rodin also offers some correctives to the leadership teaching and methodology that has hampered the Church. He notes that, “the church of Jesus Christ is overwhelmed with men and women in leadership positions who have been called but who remain in bondage to an ownership approach” (87). Rodin observes: “Jesus came to be the Lord of our life, not our example of good leadership” (89).

Rodin offers a helpful analogy to going “deeper” with Christ that comes from his experience at the beach (95ff). People can experience the beach at a surface level, or an extremely deep level. It depends on us, and how much we want to experience it. He adds: “The rewards for going deeper are immeasurable and God wants that for every one of us . . . Jesus does not promise us safety. In fact he warns that going deeper will cost us everything” (97).

Rodin has some good quotes, such as: “Self reliance is the subtle dethroning of God fro the center of our lives” (99). He also states: “This is real freedom, to have confidence in the depths into which God has called you, to winsomely urge others to go deeper with you and to rejoice when some find even deeper waters than your own” (104).

Rodin does address the role of culture in organizations. He points out that “Systems and cultures will ultimately prevail, and so they must be changed to support the goals of the steward leader” (105). He also notes: “A strong, controlling personality may be able to shape culture initially, but it cannot be maintained by one person for long. Culture, by its very definition, involves a community” (107).

He also makes the interesting comment that “There may be no more dangerous person to an organization’s health than the leader who needs the job” (117). I also appreciated his comment that “One of the greatest bondages we can experience is the need to scurry around frantically and manage our reputation” (127). He also suggests: “We cannot sat that we value balance and then set goals and expectations that require our people to live unbalanced lives to achieve those goals” (128).

Rodin clearly has rethought the traditional view of Christian leadership and he obviously knows it dangers. He claims: “When you add the temptation to see the size of our kingdom as the source of our self-worth, you have the perfect storm” (141). He also asks: “When Christ returns, do you want to be held accountable for an abundant ministry or an abundant endowment?” (163). Finally, he suggests: “When plan are made as a result of listening to our own voices, they are accompanied by a certain anxiety about time.” (167).

I enjoyed this book. It is fresh and it truly does offer a different perspective on leadership for those who claim that Christ is the Lord of their life as well as their organization. The book is generally more philosophical and theological, than “practical,” yet it is brimming with relevant reflections and questions. For those looking for a fresh angle from which to view leadership, I recommend this book. It is one of the most God-oriented books I have read on leadership for some time.

by Richard Blackaby

[rating:4.0]

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012)

219 pgs

This is a good read. Ortberg is an engaging writer and he has done a great job with this book. Jesus can become so familiar to us as Christians that we forget, or overlook the enormity of his influence on our culture. Even in a society that is rapidly becoming more secular, the pervasive impact of Jesus continues to be inescapable.

This book is filled with gems and I won’t rob you of their impact by reporting them all to you in this review. Rather, I’ll just give you a few examples.

Ortberg points out that Jesus is unusual in that his influence increased after his death (11). For most leaders, their influence diminishes. Yet you might have concluded at Jesus’death that his life had been a failure: His enemies seemingly defeated him. His disciples betrayed and deserted him. It would have appeared that his place in history would soon be forgotten. Yet from that humble beginning, Jesus’ influence continues to impact every corner of the globe.

Conversely, Roman emperors such as Nero and Caesar, once thought to be so powerful, are now typically used today as names of Pizza places and casinos! (13). Interestingly, Ortberg points out that Jesus was seemingly on the outside of the law both at the beginning and end of his life (15). It is also fascinating the wide array of people who look to Jesus for their inspiration. People who are polar opposites on the political continuum or social scale, yet each looks to Jesus for their role model (18).

Ortberg then examines the impact Jesus and His Christian teachings have had on modern society. He looks at such things at Christianity’s view of women as well as children and people with disabilities. The Roman world could be extremely harsh on the weak and that makes Christian teachings on the helpless all the more radical for its day (28). The Bible was the first book to view people as being of equal value (41). Christianity revolutionized such practices as the humane care for inmates in prison (43). It also transformed the way society treated widows (55). Ortberg notes that in Asia there are 163 million more males than females (47). He points out that wherever Christianity flourished, baby girls were not put to death (57).

Ortberg makes the interesting observation that the second most translated book in the world is Don Quixote, which has been translated into 60 languages. The Bible has been translated into 2,527 languages (61). Christianity has also been the impetus fro everything from universities to time keeping. It also taught the revolutionary concept that people were created equal and that it was actually an honor to serve others (87). It also taught the revolutionary concept that forgiveness is better than revenge, and thus it helped preserve western societies from degenerating into destructive generation long bloodbaths.

Ortberg makes the interesting observation that Christianity was the first world religion to specifically appeal to every class and segment of society (131). Interestingly, he also points out that the word “hypocrite” is used 17 times in the Bible, and all 17 times it is used by Jesus (119). Clearly Jesus was opposed and bothered by the trait. Christianity also revolutionized the view of marriage. Humorously, Ortberg also suggests that Jesus is the only person to have his own Grammy category (Gospel music!). He goes on to suggest that Jesus affected such things as architecture, art, and music (160).

Overall I found this to be a refreshing and thought-provoking book. Some of the statements I’ll probably need to verify. But it is true that no person in history has exerted such a profound impact and yet, he did it in an entirely unorthodox manner. In a day when Christianity is often viewed as traditional and ultraconservative, it is thought-provoking to be reminded of just how revolutionary Jesus was.

Ortberg always writes in an engaging and stimulating way. I enjoyed this book and I recommend you read it.

by Richard Blackaby

[rating:1.0]

(Carol Stream, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, 2012)

195 pgs

Unleash! Follows something of a trend where pastors who have grown mega churches write a book. Perry Noble started Newspring Church in Anderson, SC in 2000. Today it averages over 18,000 people on seven campuses across the state. Noble speaks widely and his church and its satellites have become some of the most exciting places for young adults to worship.

Noble is unquestionably an engaging speaker, particularly for youth and young adults. However, I was not particularly impressed with this book. He has garnered an impressive list of endorsers including the likes of Andy Stanley, Rick Warren, John Maxwell, and Mark Driscoll. However, I suspect most of them endorsed this book because they were his friend and because they were impressed with how he has grown his church, more than because they thought this was a great book.

I should say that it is not necessarily a bad book. It just has a specific audience. Noble himself is a relatively new Christian. He shares candidly how he was addicted to pornography and had various sinful issues as a young man. He also is extremely honest about his struggles and growth through the years. His tone is clearly that of someone who is good at speaking to young people. It is obvious how he would be an engaging speaker to youthful audiences.

I have three primary comments on this book. First, it is a helpful book for a new believer or young adult Christian. His teaching is not deep or particularly profound. But he tells plenty of humorous stories and will keep the attention of a younger Christian reader. Some of his teaching seems a bit different, such as when he gives advice on how to know God’s will. He suggests you: 1) examine your possibilities (something an atheist does), 2) you consider your obsessions (something else an atheist does), 3) you consider your opposition (something few people do). It seems odd to suggest that considering those who oppose you is one of three ways to know God’s will! It would have seemed that, with only three points, there might have been a more helpful list.

Second, Noble can get a little on the edge. Even Andy Stanley alludes to this in his Foreword. Noble talks about passing out in the shower, passing gas, “peeing” in someone’s cornflakes, and “dropping the f-bomb.” You can certainly see evidence both that Noble is still relatively new as a Christian himself, and also that he has developed his craft speaking to youth audiences. For some readers, his plain speaking, to the point of crudeness, might be a little much.

Third, it isn’t a very “deep” book. That is fine if it is intended for a novice audience. It could serve as a helpful primer on the Christian life for young people. But for more mature Christian audiences, this probably will offer little that is new or insightful.

As I read this book I gained a new appreciation for what God had done in Nobles own life personally. It truly is phenomenal how God has used him to build such a large, dynamic church and to reach so many people for Christ. I also suspect that, should Noble continue to write, his books will gain a greater depth and breadth in the following years. For now, however, there are other authors who might have more to offer the serious Christian reader.

by Richard Blackaby

[rating:4.0]

(New York: Harper Perennial, 1988)

385 pgs

This review is somewhat unusual, as it is for a book that was first published in 1988. You may have already read it. But if not, then you ought to. My son Mike introduced me to this book after he was required to read it for one of his Ph.D. seminars. He said he thought I’d like it, even if it disturbed me. He was right.

Paul Johnson is an English historian and a prolific writer. I thoroughly enjoyed his British wit and sarcastic comments throughout! His breadth of knowledge is impressive and his writing style makes reading history pleasurable. While the book is getting older, his point as well as his warnings, continue to be well worth the read.

Johnson claims that ever since the advent of Jean Jacques Rousseau, there has been a host of intellectuals who felt it was their calling to ridicule the teachings of the Church, while simultaneously offering their own advice on how humanity ought to live. What Johnson charges these would-be reformers with has only been magnified in recent days. Every talk show and magazine provides ample space for self-described “experts” to pontificate on society’s ills. What is puzzling to those who take time to consider it, is that though these seemingly brilliant men and women may indeed be unparalleled in their knowledge of physics or brain cell research, or philosophy, it does not necessarily mean they equally insightful into issues related to the breakdown of the home, drug use, or the national economy. Yet interviewers delight in broadcasting their opinions. Perhaps they do so because these intellectuals are so confident they have the answers desperately needed by society, or perhaps it is because their opinions always generate fresh headlines and additional viewers. It is the modern influence of such intellectuals that Johnson aims his considerable literary weapons.

Johnson maintains that society has always been imbued with intellectuals, but in the past, men such as Newton or Erasmus accepted the basic teachings of Christianity and applied their vast intellects to understanding their world from Christian foundations. But, with the emerging of Rousseau, a new breed of thinkers emerged who rejected Christian beliefs and teachings and placed their own thinking as the source of society’s moral authority.

Johnson claims that it is only fitting that, as these intellectuals have leveled their fiercest critiques against Christianity and its proponents, that they be likewise subjected to the same intense scrutiny. Johnson introduces his book by saying; “This book is an examination of the moral and judgmental credentials of certain leading intellectuals to give advice to humanity on how to conduct its affairs” (ix). Johnson devotes chapters to various thinkers such as Rousseau, Shelley, Karl Marx, Tolstoy, Bertrand Russell, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Ernest Hemmingway.

Some of the highlights of Johnson’s survey are sufficient for this review. Most of those he surveyed were enormously vain and egocentric. They also tended to use (or abuse) people to accomplish their purposes. Yet, because they believed they had a higher calling than most mere mortals, the moral standards they prescribed for others generally did not apply to them. So, many of these people were serially unfaithful to their wives, yet they flew into a jealous rage if their spouse cheated on them.

There is also a pathological lack of concern for truth. Most of their autobiographies and memoirs are jammed with self-seeking falsehoods. Johnson rightly asks how people with so little regard for truth can be trusted with the well being of society. There is also blatant hypocrisy. For example, Rousseau wrote much on rearing children and the educational system. Yet he himself had all of his children carted off at birth to an abysmal orphanage so they would not disturb him as he engaged in great thoughts. Karl Marx wrote for the workers in factories, yet he himself never stepped foot in a factory and the only working person Marx every associated with was a house servant in his home whom he regularly exploited.

Many, if not all of those Johnson examines had disreputable personal lives. Most had multiple mistresses and spouses. Several were raging alcoholics and drug addicts. Many exploited people and could not maintain friendships with any except sycophants. Interestingly, Johnson points out that many of the intellectuals promoted violence to attain their goals, and, though they themselves shunned physical conflict, their writings and speeches often incited others to murder and even genocide. By the time you finish reading Johnson’s depiction, you don’t like these people. Yet tragically these are the people whose thoughts have dramatically impacted modern society. Johnson will open your eyes to how our society is being shaped by people whose own moral and spiritual lives are in ruins.

While Johnson does his best to remain objective, it becomes clear at times that he thoroughly despises his subjects. Perhaps the evidence he uncovered left him no choice. You are also left wondering if you can trust one intellectual who condemns others. Later in Johnson’s life it came out that he himself had been involved in an eleven year-long affair of his own. His former mistress eventually blew the whistle when she became offended at Johnson’s moralizing about others.

Nevertheless, Johnson raises a significant, and extremely relevant point. It has long been known that wars had been fought, and people assassinated because of what was being taught in seemingly ivory towered university classrooms. People who thought that innocuous college professors had no influence on society were merely deluding themselves. However, this is one of the most compelling studies to expose the spiritual and ethical wasteland from which so many of these writers espouse their views. Reading this book will certainly affect the way you listen to the next talking head you watch on a television news channel.

by Richard Blackaby

[rating:5.0]

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005)

176 pgs

Although this book is slightly dated (2005) its insights and observations of the impact of the media on our message is almost overwhelming. In fact, for those of us who have repeated the mantra “the media may change, but the message stays the same” will likely never repeat that message again after reading this book. Shane Hipps’ writing style is incredibly informative and incredibly engaging, almost spell-binding as he unravels the realities of media, both old and new, on culture and on the church. From the inception of our alphabet, to telegraph, photographs, TV and the internet, Hipps portrays a compelling argument for taking a second look at the outcomes media is having on how we do church. Not only do) his observations and conclusions impact how we DO church, but they inform on what church has become and where it needs to make course corrections.

For those of us who wholeheartedly embrace every new innovation of modern technology and thrust it into our ministry, this book will help us take a sobering second look at purposes and outcomes of adding new media innovations in our ministry. Drawing heavily from Marshal McLuhan (60’s media guru) much of Hipp’s observations and critiques are dead on for the church today. In particular are the four questions that McLuhan proposed when evaluating any particular media, which he proposes is an extension of one of our human senses: 1. What does this media enhance? 2. What does it reverse (look like in the extreme)? 3. What is it making obsolete? 4) What does it retrieve (or is it based upon from the past)? He gives the example of surveillance cameras. They enhance our vision; taken to the extreme they subvert our own personal privacy and promote feelings of vulnerability; they retrieve the medieval city wall which protects and imprisons citizens; and make obsolete neighborhood watch groups and oral testimony. These questions apply to the media of print, websites, graphic designs, even preaching.

What Hipps clearly suggests is that new may not necessarily be better when it comes to the church. There are always certain things that are sacrificed when the media changes that we may or may not even notice. For example, our online classes, video projected preachers, and emails are counterproductive to building community and instead promote isolation and individualism – the opposite of what a church goal should be. We think they are more “efficient” but instead they are undermining what the church is for.  We may choose to send an email to a church member saying, “I am praying for you” because it is efficient and expedient, but what they need is a phone call and a prayer, or even better, a visit from a friend who will pray for them.

He further suggests that we consider again McLaren’s assertion that the media is the message when it comes to presenting the Gospel. Simply put, you cannot separate the message from the media, and the media actually changes the message. Even the “Gospel” changes depending on where it is presented. In South America the Gospel focuses on freedom from oppression. In North America the Gospel is about repentance and freedom from sin. In Asia it is about the power one has in Christ. It is presented in each place according to the cultural needs of the society. But there are certain limitations media has when presenting the message of the Gospel, and the media can seriously limit the message as well.

The end of the book is less compelling, but still thought provoking as the author seeks to apply some of these concepts to the church. I can say my thinking has been profoundly changed regarding media since reading this book, and I whole-heartedly recommend it to anyone who loves asking “why are we doing this?” instead of blindly jumping on the latest bandwagon.

by Tom Blackaby

[rating:4.0]

(Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale Publishers 2008)

401 pgs

I admit that this is the first book on “end times” theology I have read. That being said, I am not quite sure this book is actually about the end times (applying every part of Revelation to modern events) as it is about explaining the relationship of Ezekiel’s chapters 38-39 to contemporary politics and world power’s. Perhaps I don’t fully understand what “end times” prophecy is all about, but regardless, the contents of this book were somewhat riveting if not intriguing when viewed from “the third lens” of the Bible. Whereas Rosenberg’s other books are fictional accounts based on Bible prophecy, The Epicenter is non-fiction dealing with specifically Ezekiel’s prophesy.

A quick internet search of Rosenberg indicates, “Joel C. Rosenberg (born 1967) is an American communications strategist, author of the Last Jihad series, and founder of The Joshua Fund. An Evangelical Christian, he has written five novels about terrorism and how he says it relates to Bible Prophecy, including Gold Medallion Book Award winner The Ezekiel Option, along with two nonfiction books, Epicenter and Inside the Revolution, on the alleged resemblance of biblical prophecies and current events.” Rosenberg is a controversial figure in the Christian community because of his various eschatological positions, and he is a controversial figure in society because of his exposure of Islamic goals and strategies. He has been interviewed by CNN as well as other major news agencies, spoken to military leaders at the Pentagon as well as government leaders over the years in an advisory capacity.

The reason I read the book primarily is because it is outside my normal genre of reading, and I had a desire to understand more of where such writers are coming from. I have to say I enjoyed reading accounts of conversations, news articles, and historical events as they pertain to the Bible (according to Rosenberg). The book is chalk full of information including primary accounts of conversations with international leaders and quotes from well-known political leaders. I particularly enjoyed  learning about the Temple Mount, current plans for recreating the Temple and temple articles that are already fashioned to be consecrated for use in a Third Temple.

I particularly enjoyed learning about both Jewish and Muslim perspectives on the past and the future and what a Christian response should be. Rosenberg makes many assertions and connections to modern Middle East policy and activity with the prophecy God gave to Ezekiel (38-39) which, to me, seem plausible and believable. That being said, I am well aware of the myriad of prophetic writings that have come and gone over the last century without fruition.

It would be easy to get bogged down in the many transcripts and recollections of speeches, or the long explanations of historical events, but the book did have a flow to it that allowed me to read it in basically two sittings. Having not before read anything like this, my thinking has changed and my senses will be looking for continued activity from Russia and Iran in particular after having read this book. I am not a conspiracy theorist in any shape or form, however, I am also not blind to the reality of politics and international intrigues having lived overseas for extended periods of time and travelled now in 40 countries.

Because this book was last printed in 2008, it is somewhat dated, but does relate information up to many of the recent international events pertaining to Israel and the Middle East including Iran’s insatiable desire to gain nuclear weapons, which may already have now occurred. However, the imminence with which it suggests serious international clashes to occur are now going on 5 years. No timelines were given and not guarantees offered as to when future events would unfold.

What Rosenberg ends with is God’s ultimate control over world affairs and His will that will be accomplished regardless of what decisions are made by mankind. In other words, we are not the determiners of our destiny, God is. But Christians should be aware of the signs of the times and “be about our Father’s business” in the meantime. Intriguing book, well written, well researched, and God-centered.

by Tom Blackaby

[rating:4.0]

(Grand rapids: Zondervan, 2012)

350 pgs

There is no question that Andy Stanley is an outstanding communicator. Son of the extremely influential pastor, Charles Stanley, Andy has developed into one of the most influential pastors in America today. In his book, Deep and Wide, Stanley offers interesting, candid, and at times, thought provoking insights into what led him to develop the popular North Point Community Church in North Atlanta. In his latest book, Stanley presents much to think about. And, whether you ultimately agree with all he says, this book is helpful in addressing critical issues for today’s church.

Having read James MacDonald’s book, Vertical Church, before reading this one, I would suggest readers do the same. I believe both present their cases well, for their particular perspective. MacDonald argues we are too driven by pleasing people and not enough concerned with pleasing God. Stanley argues that churches are not sensitive enough to unchurched people and they need to make adjustments to make visitors feel more at home. Both points have merit. Regardless of which perspective you lean toward, both books will make you think.

Stanley is a master at sound bites, and he has a number of them in his book. He begins by saying, “As leaders, we are not responsible for filling everyone else’s cup. Our responsibility is to empty ours” (11). His fundamental point is this: “I think every church should be a church unreligious people love to attend” (12). Stanley models one thing well: He is clear on his and his church’s mission, which is to make his church one that unchurched people enjoy attending. Stanley’s argument is that, if unchurched people keep coming, they have a chance of having God’s word penetrate their heart. He claims: “We don’t grade ourselves on size. We grade ourselves on how attractive we are to our target audience” (15). Even if you do not agree with all of his points, reading Stanley’s book should drive you to be more intentional about what you do believe.

Stanley grew up in the traditional First Baptist Church of Atlanta with a famous father as pastor. When First Baptist Church purchased land to the north of downtown, they asked Andy to launch a satellite campus that would eventually merge with the main campus once it relocated north. In 1992 they launched the new congregation with 700 people (31). Soon it was running over 2,000 adults. Andy reveled in discarding traditional church trappings and intentionally reaching out to the unchurched. However, things came unraveled for Andy during his parents’ high profile divorce. Andy recommended to his father that he resign his church and to allow the congregation to re-issue a call to their now divorced pastor. However, Charles viewed that suggestion with suspicion, wondering if his popular son was trying to supplant him (39). This caused untold hardship and sent the father and son into two years of weekly counseling to try and preserve their relationship (40).

Ultimately, Andy resigned his church and launched North Point Community Church in 1995 (47). 1500 people showed up at their organizational meeting (47). The rest, as they say, is history. Throughout the book, Stanley shares his rational for the unique type of church he developed that has been unusually effective in reaching unchurched people.

Stanley notes that the early church was “fueled not by what they believed, but by what they had seen” (51). He also charges: “Say the word ‘church’ today and very few people think ‘movement’” (54). He argues that most churches focus on their members. He notes: I grew up around people who believed the church was for saved people who acted like saved people” (73). He notes that the problem with that perspective is that it simply fills the church with hypocrites

Interestingly, perhaps, for a church of its size, Stanley says he embraces “the glorious mess” (78). They keep policies and rules to a minimum. They also break a number of traditional rules. They promote people into leadership roles quite early and without formal leadership training. He claims: “We put people into leadership roles too early, on purpose” (79). His point is that people don’t really know what they need until they are in the middle of that need. His church lets people get into the deep water so they recognize their need to learn how to swim. They also allow unbelievers to assume leadership roles (80). You can join their church Online without ever talking to anyone in person (81). The church also supports non Christian charities in their community led by non Christians. Stanlely believes churches isolate themselves too much from their community and try to reinvent the wheel at times. However, to be baptized you must be willing to have a five minute video made that is shown to the congregation (81).

Stanley’s point is that as many barriers as possible ought to be removed from people coming to church and hearing the Gospel. He comments: “Becoming Jewish would require surgery. If you think membership standards are high in your church, think again” (88). His philosophy of ministry comes from Acts 15:19 where the early church sought to make it as easy as possible for Gentiles to come to Christ. Any unnecessary obstruction was removed.

Stanley insists that you can be intentional about making unchurched people feel welcome without having to compromise your message. He has built the discipleship of their church in an untraditional manner. There are five “Faith Catalysts” that are emphasized. These are:

1. Practical Teaching
2. Private Disciplines
3. Personal Ministry
4. Providential relationships
5. Pivotal Circumstances

Stanley makes some strong points for these being an intentional part of a church’s programming. He suggests: People are far more interested in what works than what is true” (114). His point is that preachers often pride themselves in being doctrinally correct, but people see no relevance to their lives with what is being preached. He argues: “If people are more interested in being happy, then play to that. Jesus did” (115). He is arguing that Jesus connected with where people were, and then drew them to where they needed to be. He also offers the intriguing question: “What is it like to be on the other side of me?” (116).

In defense of utilizing unbelievers he argues: “Before you judge me, every church has unbelievers involved in their ministry. The difference is, we do it on purpose, and in most cases we know who they are” (128). He has a number of important comments such as, “The sermon begins in the parking lot” (157). And, “If you don’t define what excellence looks like for your staff and volunteers, they will define it for themselves” (163).

Stanley offers an apologetic for being seeker sensitive that can be controversial at times. He notes: “To seek and to save the lost, you must first capture their attention” (173). He also argues: “It’s the presentation that determines interest in the content” (176). Concerning presentations he explains: “A great presentation is one that makes a well-known text come alive through illustration and fresh application. Face it, David always beats Goliath, and there will always be ten commandments. The only thing that changes is the presentation” (175). He confesses; “We’ve gone to great lengths to protect our audiences from presenters who aren’t engaging” (178). One interesting approach is to separate those who are good at content or logistics from the presenters. Some people present well but are shallow on content. Others have deep insights but are boring communicators. Stanley urges church leaders to let people play to their strengths and to avoid areas they do not do well. He also acknowledges that he spends a great deal of time crafting sound bites (183). He wants to communicate in a way that causes people to keep thinking about what they heard long after the service is over.

Stanley makes the key observation that “The approach a church chooses trumps its purpose every time” (194). In defending himself from critics who claim he is “selling out” the Gospel, he argues: “Does this mean we tailor the content to non Christians? Nope. We tailor the experience to non Christians. There’s a big difference” (197). He goes into detail about the template he uses to design the service each week. He suggests: “A template doesn’t put your team in a box. Your team is already in a box” (199). He adds: “Your current template is perfectly designed to produce the results you are currently getting” (201).

In their services, they begin by making it comfortable for unchurched visitors. He notes that “comfort” takes precedence over “theological” at this point (210). In his services, the band might begin with a Beatles song or something that is familiar to unchurched people. He argues that it is not fair to invite unbelievers to church and then ask them to do something for which they feel uncomfortable, such as worshipping (215). He points out that many people do not like to sing, and song leaders need to be mindful of that (217). Stanley agrees that their approach cannot cause people to accept the message. Yet he claims: “But our whole approach to sowing the seed of God’s word does not determine whether the seed will take root, it does determine whether an individual is open to returning the next week for another round of sowing” (221). Stanley observes of the high drop out rate of young people in church; “but there’s no mystery as to why they drop out. I’m convinced they drop out because nothing compelled them to stay” (230-231).

He makes some statement that will raise eyebrows, such as; “Content isn’t everything. It’s the approach that makes all the difference” (233). He does comment that, “Every innovation has an expiration date” (265). What is “cutting edge” today will be old fashioned and behind the times tomorrow, yet there will be church leaders who cling to those methods because they worked once. Stanley also observes: “In 100 percent of the cases, the leaders who can’t get their people to change, can’t articulate their visions either” (271). When it comes to change, Stanley quips; “Date your model and marry your mission!” (284). He also notes that many churches hire pastors or teachers or chaplains, but not leaders (294). He suggests: “But knowing the Bible does not a leader make” (295). He claims that there are leadership skills that greatly help in ministry. He points to the Apostle Paul as a highly ambitious and skilled leader who was the most effective in the New Testament (296). I am not sure if Stanley is tongue in cheek when he suggests that the former untrained fishermen were bound to Jerusalem until the risen Christ called Paul to shake things up in the early church. Stanley also says, “We say silly things like, ‘It’s not your ability that matters; it’s your availability!’ Really? You wouldn’t choose a surgeon based on that criteria would you?” (297). I am not sure I agree with Stanley here. I know what he is addressing when people blithely assume they can provide mediocre effort but get divine results. But the difference between a surgeon and serving God is that God guides you and empowers you when you are doing His work. I don’t know that we necessarily select a surgeon and a minister in exactly the same way.

In the final section, Stanley seeks to challenge the existing church to transition to being more outward focused. He points out that once the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost, “the church left the building” (313). He also urges churches to stop praying for protection and to start praying for boldness (312). He makes the great point that “If you want to know what Jesus meant by what Jesus said, pay attention to what Jesus did” (298). Stanley concludes by asking a compelling question: “Are you really content to spend the rest of your life doing church the way you’ve always done it?” (311).

Overall, I enjoyed reading this book. Stanley is a great communicator and he says things in a way that makes you think. He gets a little too “home spun” at times, using the word “heck” a little too often. But there are perhaps three major issues that need to be considered.

First, Stanley’s model is very much about a performance, attractional model. He readily admits that the major event of the church week is the weekend service. But developing a home run experience for unchurched people who are used to being entertained means putting enormous pressure on the staff. It also suggests that the primary tool of evangelism is the service rather than through the average believers who have been disciple to evangelize their friends throughout the week. While Stanley is correct to urge ministers to be at their best, most ministers cannot compare with Stanley as a communicator. You can only broadcast Stanley’s sermon into so many auditoriums on Sunday!

A second and more fundamental issue is whether the Sunday service ought to be primarily driven by unchurched people. Stanley believes we should not pressure unchurched people to worship when they are uncomfortable doing so. A valid question would be whether unbelievers are even capable of worship. Which begs the question: If worship is the lifeblood of believers, then why would you forfeit their prime worship time so you could accommodate people who cannot worship anyway? This is a complicated issue. Stanley is correct in that too many churches are utterly insensitive to outsiders in their services. But should the Sunday morning service be primarily about the guests? If your mature Christians are focused on making unbelievers comfortable, when do they worship? To often the church confuses evangelistic services with worship services. This is why I think it is good to read this book and Vertical Church in tandem. There are strong points to be made for both perspectives.

Finally, the focus on presentation as more important than content raises some questions. Certainly ministers could learn much from the masterful way Stanley uses presentation. But one wonders what the apostle Paul would say about this. He acknowledged that the foolishness of the Gospel was powerful enough to transform lives. Nevertheless, Stanley has also demonstrated that churches ought to be intentional about how they present their message.

This is a book that presents the “seeker driven” model well. Even if you do not agree with everything he says, there are plenty of helpful nuggets here to help make our ministries more effective. I’d recommend people read this book and then think carefully through the issues presented. I am going to rate this book quite high, not because I agree with everything Stanley says, but because he offers plenty of things to think about as well as some solid advice worth implementing right away.

by Richard Blackaby

[rating:3.0]

(Kingsford, New South Wales, Australia: Matthias Media, 2009.)

196 pgs

This book is about discipleship. It offers an interesting perspective on why the church is doing such a poor job of training Christians to mature spiritually. The authors are Australian, and minister from that context, yet they raise important issues that are extremely relevant to the North American, as well as the international church.

The framework for this book is the analogy of a trellis with a vine growing on it. For a vine to grow fully, it needs a trellis to sustain it. But, a trellis cannot produce fruit. Only a vine can do that. Structure is helpful, but it can never take the place of the vine. The authors suggest that most churches are a mixture of trellis and vine. There is usually plenty of structure and programming, while there is typically vine work occurring as well (8). The problem is that trellis work tends to take over from vine work (9). In part, trellis work is more visible and can appear more impressive (9). They suggest that, “The concentration on trellis work that is so common in many churches derives from an institutional view of Christian ministry” (10). They note that as we get older, “We start to tire of vine work, and take on more and more organizational responsibilities” (10).

The authors suggest that the Great Commission mandate to “make disciples” is “the normal agenda and priority of every church and every Christian disciple” (13). They argue” It is binding on all Jesus’ disciples to make others what they themselves are—disciples of Jesus Christ” (13). The thrust of the book is this: “structures don’t grow ministry any more than trellises grow vines, and that most churches need to make a conscious shift—away from erecting and maintaining structures, and towards growing people who are disciple-making disciples of Christ” (17).

Throughout the book, the authors point out how the church needs to adjust its efforts directly into growing people, rather than programs. They are not opposed to programs that are effective, but they argue that far too much effort is put into “trellis” work, while the vines are neglected and producing far less fruit than they might have, had they been properly tended. They point out that the church focuses on holding “events” in which it is hoped people will attend. But events do not necessarily grow people in their Christian maturity (18). The church also tends to use people rather than growing its people (19). The church often focuses on filling gaps in its program staffing rather than training new people to serve where God is calling them (20). The church also gives inordinate attention to solving people’s problems rather than helping them make progress spiritually (22). The church also focuses its efforts around the work of ordained clergy rather than on developing teams ministry (22).

The authors suggest that, while there may be limited seats around the board table or on the church staff, “if the real work of God is people work—the prayerful speaking of his word by one person to another—then the jobs are never all taken. The opportunities for Christians to minister personally to others is limitless” (27). It is here that the book makes a significant contribution. If churches could train their people to minister to those around them and to meet whatever need presented itself, the impact of the church would be explosive. However, simply recruiting people to help the church run its programs will never turn the world upside down.

The authors make the curious claim that “it’s interesting how little the New testament talks about church growth” (37). They also note: “It is somewhat surprising that the New testament contains relatively few exhortations for ordinary believers to speak the gospel to others” (49). However, they also note: “The Christian without a missionary heart is an anomaly” (52).

The heart of the book occurs as the authors discuss “training.” They claim: “The heart of training is not to impart a skill, but to impart sound doctrine” (71). They explain that, “a right understanding of the gospel always leads to a changed life” (74). They explain that, “training is parenting” (75). As we disciple, or train other believers, we are functioning in their life much like a parent would raise up and train a child. They posit that trainees need to “see into the heart of their trainers (76).

The authors suggest there are four stages in the growth of the gospel in someone’s life. These are: outreach, follow-up, growth, and training (84). The book provides a helpful chart where the reader can plot where people are in their Christian growth (87). They argue that, rather than focusing on maintaining the trellis, Christian leaders need to be investing directly into the training of others. They suggest that, “training is the engine of gospel growth” (90).

The authors make the noteworthy claim that sermons are “necessary but not sufficient” (93). They note that as pastors have assumed the role of CEO, they have forsaken their primary call to make disciples (96). They claim: “Churches don’t make disciples; disciples make disciples” (117). The authors argue that if pastors would strategically invest their time in training others, over time, those they trained would then train others and the ongoing impact would do far more to expand the church than if the pastor invested himself in church administration. They offer suggestions on how to be on the look out for those who are prepared to be trained. They call these, “people worth watching” (127). They make the interesting observation that in the Bible, we do not generally find references to people “feeling called” into the ministry (133). They point out that typically it was the elders in the church who observed people in the church who showed promise for church leadership and they invited that individual into greater service (133). They claim that people are not “called” into ministry or secular vocations, rather, “God calls us to himself” (130). They argue that every disciple is called to make other disciples. They acknowledge that, while God may lead some into secular work, our highest calling is to make disciples (139). The authors advocate “ministry apprenticeship” where, before ministerial candidates are sent to seminary, they serve in an apprentice role in the church where church leaders can train them and give them valuable experience (143). At this juncture the authors tap into the extensive materials and programs they have developed for such a purpose so that the book seems to veer into some self promotion. However, they conclude by making the case that the goal is not to grow churches but to make disciples (151). They point out that training must be relational and that it takes time (151).

Overall I found this book made some helpful observations in the field of discipleship. I am not sure that I agree that the heart of training is teaching “sound doctrine.” While that certainly is important, I think it also includes correct living. When Jesus called His disciples, they did not simply sit around discussing sound doctrine. He lived among them and taught them how to live, to relate to others, and to preach and teach. While it is true that sound doctrine can lead to godly living, it often requires good role modeling as well.

I liked the concept of pastors taking on a select group of people and training them, even if it meant setting aside other administrative duties. Too many people have discarded their calling to disciple in their embracing of administrative roles. We too often take no notice of those around us who would thrive spiritually if we would take time to train them.

While I do not necessarily agree with everything said in this book, it will make you think about how you are doing discipleship and how you are personally investing in the lives of others.

by Richard Blackaby