Two Ways to Sell a Book, continued…

Mike Leake

Yesterday I promised to “make the argument that biblical faithfulness and effectiveness are not synonymous, and conclude by urging you to focus on biblical faithfulness over against mere effectiveness.”  Promise delivered…sort of.

In one sense the above paragraph is ridiculous.  To be effective simply means to produce the intended result.  So, if your intended result is to be biblically faithful, and you are, then you are effective.  But that’s not what I necessarily mean by “being effective”. 

I’ll make this simple and not unnecessarily wordy.  You cannot control results in your church.  And if you think you can then they aren’t the type of results that you want.  There is not a formula that says if you follow this model then God will be pleased with your church and it will grow.  Yes, there are established means that God uses.  But there are men that have been ridiculously faithful (see Richard Greenham, who doesn’t even have a page on Wikipedia) and have seen little visible fruit (see the prophet Jeremiah or even Jesus). 

Speaking of Jesus I wonder what the back of his bestseller would look like.  Would it be filled with all sorts of buzzwords?  What would be his selling point?  Biblically faithful or producing mass results.  Perhaps one blurb could read:

“Jesus, once had thousands following him until he invited his audience to feed on his flesh.  Since then Jesus has a small band of loyal followers.” 

At the end of the day what Jesus was more concerned with was biblical faithfulness and not mass results.  That was the grid he used to measure his success.  And that should be our attitude as well.  Consider this from Paul:

I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.  So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.  He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor.  (1 Cor. 3:6-8)

Focus on faithfully planting and faithfully watering.  But this isn’t all the revolutionary is it.  Tomorrow I will present to you a chart showing the difference of focus between the biblically faithful model and the effective model. 

Taking Issue with Rapping Motions

Mike Leake

This is my first exposure to 5ptsalt.  Today he takes issue with Joshua Shank’s rap-motion at SBC 2010.  I showed the video a few days ago, but if you have not seen it you can do so here:

<\/param><\/embed><\/object><\/div>“;” alt=””>

From what I can tell here is the gist of 5ptsalt’s argument:

Thesis:

Joshua was “more set on promoting Acts 29 than presenting a serious, worthwhile motion”. 

Support:

“not being satisfied with the proper use of the English language”

not “maintaining some degree of decorum”

he rapped his motion to the “shame of everyone who has even a modicum of an education”.

he spoke like an “ignorant, uneducated brute”

Conclusion:

Shank is “silly and self-absorbed”, “degraded the very existence of the SBC meeting”, and is a horrible witness and only recognized as a pastor but not one really. 

——

I want to be upfront and say that I do actually wish that Shank would have made his motion and not rapped it.  It was fun as well as funny.  But I do think that it caused it to not be taken seriously.  And the content was actually not all that silly. 

However, I take serious issue with what 5ptsalt is asserting here.  It grieves my heart.  And I want to let you know upfront my motivation in posting this.  I am not simply trying to call out him as a person or merely this article.  My desire is to look at the issue, make an argument that his evidence does not warrant his conclusion or support his thesis, and in the end look at my own heart. 

The Ignorant and the Gospel

Timmy Brister gives us a back story to the intention behind this post.  Like it or not here is what the motion was about: “expressing appreciation and affirmation for the investment of the Acts 29 Network for their work in planting gospel-centered churches in the SBC?” 

So, maybe 5ptsalt is onto something.  Or is it possible that the aim behind promoting Acts 29 is to promote gospel-centeredness and to do away with all of the division and hatred towards Acts29?  I think that is closer to the intent.  What I think Brister, Mitchell, and Shank have in mind is promoting the gospel above our extra-biblical divisions.  (Yep, that just opened up the whole can of worms about whether we should be for or against A29). 

spurge Let’s just say for the sake of argument that the motion really was ignorant, brutish, improper, and shameful to the educated.  Doesn’t the gospel trump this?  Is it possible that having someone rapping a motion is actually a better gospel witness because of its display of the diversity within the body of Christ?  Do we really want to make the argument that ignorant, brutish, and improper people cannot make motions or lead churches? 

“Redolent of bad taste, vulgar, and theatrical.”  That is what a newspaper (and it was not alone) once said of Charles Spurgeon.  Spurgeon spoke the language of the common people.  Perhaps, Joshua Shank is doing the same. 

Looking at my own heart

But I am often guilty of this same thing.  I have certain things that I greatly dislike and some things to me seem like great issues that in the end probably are not.  I have to ask these questions of my own heart.  Do I have the attitude of Paul that is excited that the gospel is being preached, even if with wrong motives?  See Philippians 1:15, and this article. 

Do I have patience and grace with those that are doing things perhaps not the best or even most biblical way?  Do I have humility to say that I may be wrong—and perhaps I am not doing things the best or the most biblical way? 

Thankfully, Jesus used fishermen, tax collectors, zealots, redeemed prostitutes, former extortionist, and all manner of outcasts for his glory.  He even used wealthy and refined people too.  I’m thankful that his grace is big enough to cover my sin, and that his glory is great enough to overshadow and use broken vessels like me. 

The Point of “Two Ways to Sell a Book”

Mike Leake

Yesterday I said that there are two ways to sell books on church and ministry.  (If you haven’t read that post yet spend a couple of minutes and read it).  There are two ways to sell books because there are two different visions about church and ministry.  One vision is what I will call the Effective Model the other is the Biblically Faithful Model. 

Lest you be offended I am not intending to apply that those that are concerned with being biblically faithful are not also concerned with being effective.  Nor am I for a moment suggesting that those that desire to be effective are not at all concerned with being biblically faithful.  What I am concerned with is the ultimate aim.  Regardless of whatever lip service we might give at the end of the day what ultimately drives us is revealed by the words we use and the words we choose not to use. 

Real Words from Real Books

While yesterdays post may have been an exaggeration, many of the words I used came from actual books on church and ministry.  The selling point for one can be summed up by the word—effective.  The selling point for the other can be summed up by the words—biblically faithful. 

Now, I know that if you asked any of these authors if their ultimate desire is to be biblically faithful, they would all give a resounding yes.  I do not intend to question the heart or motive of any of these men.  But the problem is that while they would say that their ultimate desire is to be biblically faithful at the end of the day their work exposes that perhaps something else drives them. 

It has been my experience that being biblically faithful is simply assumed in many of these books.  It’s as if they say, “this is our foundation, duh!  Now, how do we grow this church for the sake of Jesus.”  So as a result the end becomes—how do we effectively reach people. 

And for proof that I am not just being a jerk look at the selling point on the books.  There is a marked difference between an option #2 book and an option #1 book.  And it is not just that they have different publishers.  They are different authors with different audiences and different visions for the church.  They have a different gauge for success and apparently so do their audiences.  One ultimately asks what is effective, the other ultimately asks what is biblically faithful.

The Point

I have a rather simple point in all of this.  I know that most of those that read my blog are people passionate about Jesus and the church.  Most of my readers want to see the church grow and want to see the church be healthy.  Many probably read some of the same books I do about church and ministry.  My goal in these posts is to convince you that we should focus our time and energy on being biblically faithful and let the Lord decide whether we are “effective”. 

In other words if you are a church leader I encourage you not to take an “effective model” type of book and try to implement it in your church.  Yes, it may “work” in their church.  Yes, it may even “work” in your church.  But just taking someone else’s “effective model” will short change you of the God-ordained process of patiently shepherding your people towards biblical faithfulness. 

Tomorrow I want to make the argument that biblical faithfulness and effectiveness are not synonymous, and conclude by urging you to focus on biblical faithfulness over against mere effectiveness…

Two Ways to Sell a Book on the Church and Ministry

Mike Leake 1 Comment

There are two ways to sell a book on church and ministry. 

Option #1:

On the back cover you read:

“__Guy that is obviously cooler than you  , became pastor of   Cool Name Church  in 1994.  This once struggling church now has 3,000 members, 12 multi-campuses, and is reaching world for Christ.  Through this book you will discover the effective tools for creating change, energizing people, and expanding your church.    Insert cool guys name  , will help you take your church from simply suck to success.”

And just for good measure you will see words like dynamic, thriving, transforming, practical, vision, innovation, (biblical will be on there somewhere, and maybe we can throw in a “Jesus” here and there), cutting edge, workable, make it happen, enhancing, inspiring, etc. smattered all over the back page.

You may even get a picture of a smiling dude that you just know has it all together.  And somewhere on the back cover or inside the book you will have blurbs from other pastors that have been effective, successful, and have created change also.  These guys tell you—read this book—and you’ll be innovative, dynamic, thriving, and a world changer. 

There is an offshoot of this strategy that takes some of the glam out.  It’s hip dudes that just want to love Jesus.  We just want to get back to church the way it was in the New Testament man.  But the end result and buzz words are often the same.  The people in the blurbs are different and have different shaped glasses, but the end result is still—be effective!

Option #2:

On this back cover you read:

“   Guy that is obviously smarter than you  , has thought a great deal about ecclesiology.  This book will address come of the most crucial issues facing the church today.    Smart dude looks at what the Bible says about the way a church should be structured.  His passion is to be biblically faithful, and to see you implement these biblical changes in your church for God’s glory.  The hope is that this book will change your life and ministry.”

You will see a few words like practical, helpful, etc. on the back cover but mostly you will see words like biblical, faithful, theology, pray for reformation, healthy, biblical priorities, pastoral, insightful, gospel, Scriptures, foundational, timeless, historical, biblical prescription, etc.

With option #2 it is an unspoken rule that you must have a blurb from John Piper, John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, C.J. Mahaney, or one of those guys.  Somebody from T4G has to approve this book.  And these guys will assure you that the book that you have in your hands is approved and is biblical. 

—–

Now obviously I have overstated these positions but there is something behind this that I want to mention for your consideration…tomorrow. 

© 2026 . All rights reserved.
Fashionista by aThemes
  • -
  • +