PLEASE buy this book for your pastor--but don't read it yourself!

I've known for many years that being a pastor is a tough job.  For most of my life, I've known that only from the outside, watching many of my pastors succumb to various forms of death.  It's obvious that Satan knows the "smite the shepherd and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered" principle very well.

You have probably seen the frightening statistics about the number of pastors who bite the dust.  If you've been a Christian very long, you probably have seen it first hand in your own church.  Only 1 pastor in 10 will actually retire as some form of minister. 

But since I became a lay elder in my church a year and a half ago, I've gotten to know the temptations and pressures of pastoring from the inside.  Granted, the pressures I've experienced are very low compared to what vocational pastors face, or even what a lay elder at a larger church might encounter.  Still, this position has exposed areas of sin in my own heart that other life challenges didn't.

That's why I have been profoundly touched by Paul Tripp's latest book, Dangerous Calling.  Not only does he expose, with scalpel-like precision, the very sins I have been wrestling, and not only does he explain in horrifying detail where those sins will lead if unaddressed, but he also gives great hope and encouragement by pointing back to the cross where my sins were conquered by Jesus.

Paul Tripp was a pastor for a number of years and fought the sins and pressures his book describes.  Then he taught in a conservative Christian seminary, and became alarmed at the way young men were being sent out into the ministry unprepared for the heart-battles they would be facing.  He now believes his mission is to be "a pastor to pastors".

This book is both stringent and kind, both passionate and compassionate.  He writes personally, talking directly to his reader ("you", not "they") and sharing many sins from his own life.  You can tell it's the product of tears.  The urgency in his tone, the realization that in his eyes this is life or death stuff he's writing about, keeps you turning the pages.  It's kind of like a long letter from your dad.

Dangerous Calling from Crossway on Vimeo.

The title of this blog post is not a joke.  Please, please, please, whether you think your pastor walks on air or whether you think he's a jerk, give him this book.  (Or, if he's not a reader, get him the DVD set.)  It may very well be the instrument God uses to save your pastor's marriage, children, or ministry.  It might even be the salvation of your church.  (Before you object to my terminology, look up 1 Timothy 4:16.)

But as strange as it sounds, I would recommend that you not read this book yourself. You want to be able to tell your pastor when you give him the book, "I haven't read it, but I heard it is really good."  If he knows you read it first, it will ruin the whole book for him.  He'll wonder whether you gave it to him because you saw in him the sins the book describes and he'll see your face staring at him from every page.  Also, it would be easy for a non-pastor to become more jaded towards his pastor after reading this book.  One reader described this book as "bathing in razor blades".  Congregation members who emotionally abuse pastors could use this book to tear their pastor apart even worse.  Trust me, the Holy Spirit does not need your help to rub the message of this book in.  If your pastor can read this book and remain unmoved, you probably should look for a different church.

Buy the book, give it to your pastor, and ask God to bless him with repentance and you with compassion.

The "$10,000 Federal Government Grant" Scam

Today I received a phone call from a woman in a 'boiler room' who said that my name and phone number had been selected by the US Federal Government to receive a $10,000 grant.  This is not the first such phone call I've had.  Of course, I knew that it is a scam.  The US Government is certainly profligate in its spending, but not to that extent!  Although the woman claimed to be calling from a government office in Washington DC, her West African accent leads me to believe she was probably calling from the world headquarters of fraud, Nigeria.

A quick Google search showed that many other people have been receiving similar calls.  Some people have taken the time to play along with the story until they are asked to send a small amount of money ($150ish) via Western Union or another money transfer service.

I took a different tactic: I told the caller she is a liar and that she needed to turn to Jesus in repentance and trust if she wanted to avoid hell.  I said this with a gentle voice.  What surprised me was how brazenly the woman continued to assert that she was telling the truth.  We continued to go around and around for several minutes: me pointing her to Jesus, her asserting her innocence.

Come to think of it, I guess we are all like that before Jesus saves us.  Although we might admit to sin when caught, normally we justify ourselves; we think we're basically good people compared to others.

The Joys of Missionary Life

Last year we met the Georges at a 5 day training in Bible storying by Simply the Story.  Sometimes we tend to romanticize missions life.  I hope you'll take time to read their latest two blog posts (links below).  They are short and have pictures.

http://www.georgesinmoz.blogspot.com/2012/11/trip-to-kenya.html 

http://www.georgesinmoz.blogspot.com/2012/11/more-drama.html

Kind of puts a different perspective on things doesn't it?

Now, for a completely different (but actually very similar) portrait of missionary life, please take 15 minutes to watch this great video.

Never the Same from Pioneers-USA on Vimeo.
The Sawi were headhunters and cannibals when a young couple named Don and Carol Richardson arrived in their village carrying their seven-month-old boy Steve—and a message that would change the tribe forever. The year was 1962, and Steve—and later, three more children—spent their youth among the Sawi, learning the language and embracing the culture in ways that would shape the rest of their lives. Their story was immortalized in the best-selling book Peace Child and a feature film of the same name, inspiring a new generation to take the gospel to the remaining isolated tribes of the earth.

Fifty years later, Steve joins his father, Don, and two brothers, Shannon and Paul, to visit the Sawi village where they grew up. Journey with Steve as he travels to the swamps of Papua, Indonesia, to introduce you to the Sawi, and explore the impact of the gospel among a previously unreached people group.

So where's the similarity between the Georges and the Richardsons?  The Georges seem dogged by repeated problems, while the Richardsons are seeing incredible fruit from their ministry. 

First,  Don Richardson and Tim George both brought young families from American comforts to live in an underdeveloped society.  Don was just 27.  How many "20 somethings" do you know who would want to do that, much less who would actually have the skills and character to last in an environment as hostile as what the Georges and Richardsons face(d)? We need to raise the bar of training goals for our youth (before they hit their 20s) if we are going to produce more Don Richardsons.  If our goal is to produce youth who can make enough money to live comfortably, we are not going reach the United States with the gospel, much less the unevangelized regions of the world.

Second, remember that 50 years ago, Don Richardson had never read Peace Child.  He didn't know he would be famous one day as a "successful" missionary.  He took his family clear around the world to the Sawi without knowing whether there would be any fruit whatsoever.  Missionaries motivated by anything less than love for Jesus quickly either burn out and go home, or compromise to achieve "results".  Jesus gets honor whenever we present the gospel, regardless of the response of the hearer; His honor is the greatest result we could ever want.

Join me in praying that in another 50 years the Georges will be able to visit thriving churches which they helped start.  But that either way, they and the thousands of other missionaries around the world will be faithful to honor Jesus regardless of the response they see.  That they each may someday hear the words, "Well done, good and faithful slave.  Enter into the joy of your Master!"

Book Recommendation: Counterfeit Gospels

Most of my recent book reviews have been just that, book reviews.  This one (although I got it free from Moody Press in exchange for reviewing it), I am actually recommending that you buy.  If you don't need it, you'll know someone who does.  And no, Moody didn't make me say that!

It's essential that we get the gospel right, because the gospel is what gets us to God.  No surprise, then, that there are so many seductive 'artificial gospels' available today.  Like artificial sweeteners, they have delightful taste, but no nutritional value.  Trevin Wax warns about six of these in Counterfeit Gospels.

It is probably one of the most organized books I've ever read.  Wax breaks the gospel down into three main elements (using a 3-legged stool analogy).  He spends a chapter on each of these three.  Then he describes two counterfeits that tweak each 'leg' of the gospel.  So the table of contents looks like this:

Part 1:
1. The Gospel Story
2. The Therapeutic Gospel
3. The Judgmentless Gospel

Part 2:
4. The Gospel Announcement
5. The Moralist Gospel
6. The Quietist Gospel

Part 3:
7. The Gospel Community
8. The Activist Gospel
9. The Churchless Gospel

Each chapter about a fake gospel (chapters 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9) follows this pattern: an explanation of why this fake is a fatal deviation from the truth, how it has infiltrated evangelical thinking, why the imitation is so attractive, and how to guard our hearts against it.  And, unlike some authors on this subject, Wax does not come across as a theological witchhunter, out to blast the heretics.  His concern and tone is pastoral.

If you've been reading people like John Piper, Don Carson, Tim Keller, Al Mohler, and Mark Dever, you probably won't find much "new" in this book.  Yet, Wax does not come across as merely an echo.  He blends personal anecdotes, clarifying analogies, and clear, accurate summations of theological truths in a way that is uniquely his. 

But one negative: I still have not figured out why the cover is a photo of spent matches. 

Could you prevent a robbery?

A friend posted the following true story to his Facebook page recently.

Unfortunately as good as police are, they typically arrive at the scene after the crime has been committed and someone is seriously injured or dead. Protecting ourselves and loved ones is our responsibility.

When we had a power outage a few years ago, our power was out due to severe storms for 6 days. Many of the homes in our development were vacant but a few of us stuck it out with generators and gas fireplaces. One night at 11pm with our neighborhood pitch black, a Honda Civic drove to the end of our cul-de-sac and four individuals not from our neighborhood got out of the car. There was no phone service either from land line or cell. I stepped out of my doorway with my Glock and flashlight and informed the individuals in a loud voice that I was armed and prepared to defend my home and family. They all piled back into the little Honda and sped away. I had not only saved my family from possible home invasion but my neighbors as well.

The next day our phones came back up and I called the Sheriff and told him what had happened. He told me that there were numerous reports of robberies and break-ins those last few days and there were not enough law enforcement available to respond. He told me that how I handled the situation was completely appropriate and wished that more citizens were able to defend themselves in a reasonable and responsible manner. It is important to note that not a single shot was fired and no one not even the thugs were harmed in this encounter. There was no doubt their intention was to break into several homes in our cul-de-sac. I can only imagine what position we would have been in if these four individuals had burst into our home finding my wife and I defenseless. You would be surprised how many crimes are actually prevented by simply possessing a firearm without having to fire a single round.

To be honest, I'm not sure I would have the guts do what my friend did.  I admire what he did, and wish I was like him  I get so nervous at even the hint of conflict that I think I would more a liability than an asset in a situation like this.

What about you?

Discipleship Essentials: A review of The Radical Question and A Radical Idea by David Platt

David Platt's books Radical and Radical Together are excellent.  I highly recommend both of them.  But for people who are too busy to read good books, here's a book with essential excerpts from both.  Nice hardback binding, big print, quick read, high impact.

In the first half of the book (the part based on Radical) Platt lays out the cost of following Jesus (everything we have) and the rewards of following Jesus (everything He has).  It's a stark challenge to the American pursuit of success and comfort.

The second half challenges us to not only be followers of Jesus ourselves, but to disciple others to follow Jesus too.  We multiply through discipleship, not programs, buildings, or talent.  He uses true stories to show that the teachings of Christ and the apostles are still uncomfortably possible for us today. 

Short, stirring, simple.  May this little book hit its mark and free many Christians from wasted lives.

I got my copy for free through WaterBrook Multnomah's "Blogging for Books" program.  I was not required to give a favorable review.

Voting Romney = Voting Wrongly?

I have something of a history of voting for neither major presidential candidate.  As I recall, I did not vote for Bob Dole or Bill Clinton in 1996 (and 2012 feels a lot like 1996, only worse).  In 2008, I voted for Chuck Baldwin rather than Barack Obama or John McCain.  I also have a habit of picking (very conservative) losers in the presidential primaries.

This trend of protest voting seems to be gaining momentum.  More and more people are buying the logic that it's better to vote for no one than to vote for the lesser of two evils.  Doug Phillips promotes this philosophy with great intelligence and passion.  Here's an example from his ministry's Facebook page:

1. The Scriptures are still the only rule of action for Christians.

2. The duty of believers at the ballot box is the same today as it has always been. We may only select leaders who meet the Scriptural requirements for civil magistrate. Leaders need not be perfect, but they must be qualified.

3. The obedient response of the elect of God to the Lord Jesus Christ and His law-word, not partisan politics or the results of presidential elections, is the key to national blessing.

4. The results of the presidential election, regardless of who wins, will work together for the good of the elect of God.

5. God is still on the throne.

Bonus Observation: The great and beautiful hope of tomorrow is the obedience of the Church in the face of opposition and challenging political scenarios. There is more hope for God's blessing on America if the people of God do what is right before the Lord, then if if they check their consciences at the ballot box to gain a perceived short-term victory. Perhaps God will save the city "if there be but ten..."

Here's an even more explicit warning blast from Phillips about Romney:

Report on the {First}Presidential Debate from Doug Phillips: It was a tragic day for America as our nation sat and watched two committed socialists, representing the Democratic and Republican parties respectively, argue between each other over which was the most committed to government interference in the private sector, wealth redistribution, and statist intervention in the economy. Tonight we learned that both candidates believe that social security is a success, that the government is responsible for education, and that the market will only work with heavy government regulation. Historically, presidential debates are shallow in terms of constitutional analysis of issues, but tonight's debate may have set the standard as the most constitutionally illiterate presentation by opposing primary party candidates for president in a national debate in the history of our nation. Tonight, (in case anyone needed reminding) Mitt Romney proved that he could be every bit the neo-Marxist that president Obama has become. What he may have lost in the first part of the debate through his petulant nit-picking, Governor Romney made up in the second part of the debate by unnerving President Obama, who clearly appeared to lose his edge as the evening closed. But the event was more of a clash of personalities then a debate over policy. Both peas were from the same pod, and the difference between the candidates on the issues raised tonight were little more than micro-degrees, with times that honest observers must admit that Obama appeared every so slightly to the right of Romney, and other times, vice versa. In sum: No Bible believing, Constitution-loving American should be proud of what happened tonight. Prediction: Liberals will like Romney much more after tonight's debate. But so will a large body of Christians to whom what Romney has said, done and advocated is irrelevant. The Evangelical political lobotomy is almost complete. His name is not Obama, and any facts pertaining to his radical socialism, statist agenda, pro-abortionism and pro-homosexual advocacy that get in the way of that truth must be ignored or stamped out.

I agree with much Phillips says.  Because of Republican loyalty to party rather than principle, conservativism fared better under Bill Clinton than under George W. Bush.  The GOP may again become the "Dem lite" party if they regain the White House.  More importantly, no matter which man is elected, we will still have a man who embodies the average American man.  A man who claims to be a Christian, but isn't; a man to whom the Bible is errant and fallible; a nice fellow who ultimately cares more about what is expedient than what is right in God's eyes; a man who does not argue "if" but "how much".  The only hope for positive political change in the US is for professing Christians to repent and get right with God. 

But Phillips is not the only one thinking deeply about these topics.  Here is a Roman Catholic apologist, John Martignoni, explaining why he thinks voting for Romney is not wrong:

President Obama agrees 100% with the Democrat Platform when it comes to the “right” of a woman to abort her child. He has on a few occasions spoken to Planned Parenthood conventions and made it very clear that there isn’t an abortion that he wouldn’t support. He even pledged to Planned Parenthood that he would make passage of the “Freedom of Choice” Act – which essentially removes any and all state restrictions on abortion (parental consent laws, 48–hour waiting periods, laws requiring women see a sonogram of their baby before the abortion, and so on) – as one of the highest priorities of his administration. Thankfully that hasn’t happened…yet.

His administration has gone so far as to sue at least one state to force them to reinstate funding for Planned Parenthood – the largest abortion provider in the country. Also, he is 100% in favor of the Health and Human Services regulations, which are a part of Obamacare, that would require all Catholic hospitals, Catholic businesses, and most Catholic organizations to pay for abortion, contraception, and sterilization in the health care plans they provide to their employees – trampling all over the religious freedom rights of Catholics.

While a state senator in Illinois, Barack Obama was the lone vote against a bill that would require doctors to give proper medical care to infants that were born alive after a failed abortion. It was, essentially, a vote to allow infanticide when a baby survived an abortion.

Now, Mitt Romney does not have a stellar record on abortion. It seems he has gone back and forth a bit. He has however, made a pledge during this campaign with the following provisions:

1) I am pro–life and believe that abortion should be limited to only instances of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother.

2) I support the reversal of Roe v. Wade, because it is bad law and bad medicine. Roe was a misguided ruling that was a result of a small group of activist federal judges legislating from the bench.

3) I support the Hyde Amendment, which broadly bars the use of federal funds for abortions. And as president, I will support efforts to prohibit federal funding for any organization like Planned Parenthood, which primarily performs abortions or offers abortion–related services.

4) I will reinstate the Mexico City Policy to ensure that non–governmental organizations that receive funding from America refrain from performing or promoting abortion services, as a method of family planning, in other countries. This includes ending American funding for any United Nations or other foreign assistance program that promotes or performs abortions on women around the world.

5) I will advocate for and support a Pain–Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.

6) And perhaps most importantly, I will only appoint judges who adhere to the Constitution and the laws as they are written, not as they want them to be written.

7) If I have the opportunity to serve as our nation's next president, I commit to doing everything in my power to cultivate, promote, and support a culture of life in America.

Now, the first point above is not really a “pro–life” position. But, if we can limit the number of abortions to only those associated with rape or incest, we will have eliminated around 99% of the abortions in this country. We can then start working on legislation and education campaigns to eliminate the remaining 1%. So, while this position is not a pro–life position, it is much less of a pro–abortion position than President Obama’s. It is the lesser of two evils.

The other six provisions, however, are indeed pro–life provisions. So, you have one candidate who is a pro–abortion extremist, and one who is pro–abortion, but much less so, in certain respects, but pro–life in other respects. You clearly have a situation where, on the issue of abortion, one candidate is the lesser of two evils. And, we are allowed, when there is no other viable alternative, to vote for the lesser of two evils.

Now, the prudential question becomes, can I trust Mitt Romney’s pledge to do these things? After all, he is a politician and he has seemed to flip flop before on this issue. I don’t know if you can trust him or not. However, I know that with President Obama, we are absolutely assured that a pro–abortion mentality will dominate his administration – that has already been demonstrated over the last 3 and a half years. With a Mitt Romney administration, there is at least a chance, that some babies lives – either in this country and/or in other countries – will be saved by his policies. I’m not a big fan of Mitt Romney (he was my 5th favorite out of the 6 main candidates on the Republican side), but I personally have to vote for the potential of pro–life policies being implemented vs. the absolute no hope of pro–life policies being implemented.

Also, this is where I factor in such things as Romney’s running mate – Paul Ryan – having been a pro–life Catholic for many years. This is where I factor in the Republican vs. Democrat Platforms. The Republican Platform does not have a plank advocating abortion “rights,” while the Democrat Platform does. So, even if Mitt Romney is not very pro–life in his heart of hearts, he is a politician. And, he knows that the pro–lifers are very important to his election and, if he is elected, to his re–election. If he is elected, and he reneges on the above–mentioned pledges – he is up the creek without a paddle and I believe he knows that. Which, will give him incentive to work on fulfilling the pledges he has made.

I find Martignoni's reasoning ultimately more compelling than Phillips this year.  As someone else has said, "Whenever humans are running for office, you are voting for the lesser of two evils." I will vote for Romney.  I will not rejoice no matter which man wins.  But I will pray that God will help me to see and repent of my own sins.  And I will pray for the return of the King.