How Do You Kill 11 Million People? by Andy Andrews

I have just finished reading Andy Andrews' newest book How Do You Kill 11 Million People? with the subtitle "Why the Truth Matters More Than You Think." The book is only 84 pages from cover-to-cover and can easily be read in less than 30 minutes.

I am making several quotes from the book available here with the page number associated. These are direct quotes and no further commentary from me.

The past is what is real and true, while history is merely what someone recorded. There is a difference." Page 7

How do you kill eleven million people? Lie to them Page 21

"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think. Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." Hitler Page 32

"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than a small one." Mein Kampf, Hilter's autobiography Page 32

In the long run, it is much easier to undo the policies of crooked leadership than to restore common sense and wisdom to a deceived population willing to elect such a leader in the first place. Any country can survive having chosen a fool as their leader. But history has shown time and again that a nation of fools is surely doomed. Page 42

Have you noticed that if any one of us lies to them (government), it is a felony? But if any one of them lies to us, it is considered politics. Page 44

Frankly, I believe candidates from both parties have lied to the American people. Page 53

In Germany, they were certainly a nation of mislead people. They assumed that the leaders in whom they had placed their faith would put their best interests at the forefront. Page 55

My point is that each of us must stop blindly believing everything someone with an agenda says. Page 59

On the occasion of our nation's one-hundredth birthday, in his centennial address to Congress in 1876, President James A. Garfield issued a warning widely reported in the press at that time. He said, "Now, more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature." Then, he added, "If [one hundred years from now] the next centennial does not find us a great nation... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces." Pages 62-63

If you want to test a person's character, give him power. Great leadership is a product of great character. And this is why character matters. Page 65

Sermon Notes from Sunday, February 26, 2012

Sunday, February 26 I began a two-part mini-series on why church leadership (elders, pastors, bishops) can be "Male Only." Here are the notes from the first part of the sermon. Sunday, March 4 I will preach the second part. Click here for part one notes.

GOLD CITY returns March 4

GOLD CITY returns to our area for another house-filling, Spirit-leading concert. Last year they were here and sang to a packed house at First Baptist Church, Killen. They are coming back!!

Sunday, March 4 - 6:00 p.m.

First Baptist Church, Killen.

And even better (like last year), this is a fund raiser for Legacy Christian Academy. This private, Christian school is a joint ministry of CrossRoads Baptist Church, First Baptist Church Killen and other supporters in this area. We currently have 55 students from K4-Grade 6. Next year we are adding Grade 7.

There is no admission charge but again it is a fundraiser for LCA.

108 year old lady talks about laughter, gratitude and her music

Anthony Robbins interviews Alice Herz Sommer, 108 year old, living in London who still practices three hours a day her piano. She is not a follower of the Lord Jesus and thus has a very humanistic viewpoint of life. But the lessons she talks about as she was a Jewish survivor of the Nazi camps includes her attitude of laughter, gratitude and her playing the piano.

Recovering the Lost Art of Note Taking by Michael Hyatt

I spend most of my work-life in meetings. Note-taking is a survival skill. Yet, I am surprised at how few people bother to take notes in meetings. Those who do sometimes express frustration at how ineffective the exercise seems to be.

Photo courtesy of ©iStockphoto.com/webphotographeer

In this post, I’d like to expound on why I think you should take notes in meetings and then offer a few suggestions on how to do it better.

1. Note-taking enables you to stay engaged. The real benefit is not what happens after the meeting but during the meeting itself. If I don’t take notes, my mind wanders. I daydream. As they say, “the lights are on, but no one is home.” However, when I take notes, I find that I stay more alert, focused, and actively involved. My contribution to the meeting is thus more likely to add value to the topic under discussion. This is why I take notes even if someone is officially taking minutes.
2. Note-taking provides a mechanism for capturing your ideas, questions, and commitments. Not everything can be resolved in the meeting. Some ideas require incubation. Questions require further research. Commitments require follow-up that cannot be done until after the meeting. Regardless, note-taking provides a way to capture the content of the meeting, so that I can processes it after the meeting.
3. Note-taking communicates the right things to the other attendees. When someone takes notes, it communicates to everyone else that they are actively listening. It also communicates that what others are saying is important—it is worth making the effort to record their insights. If you are in a leadership position, it also subtly establishes accountability. Your people think, If the boss is writing it down, he probably intends to follow-up. I better pay attention. As a leader, your example speaks volumes. If you take notes, your people will likely take notes. If you don’t, it is likely they won’t.

But how can you more effectively take notes? There are numerous note-taking systems. Here is the one I use:

1. Use a journal-formatted notebook. If you have something else that is working, great. Stick with it. If not, I recommend one of the Moleskine notebooks. The name (officially pronounced mol-a-skeen-a, although it can vary) comes from the French spelling of ‘moleskin,’ which the oilcloth covering resembles. I have used the Large Ruled Journal for years and never go anywhere without it.
2. Keep your meeting notes as a running journal. I give each new meeting (or topic) its own heading, along with the current date. The notes run continuously until I fill up the journal. Then I begin a new one.
3. Use symbols so you can quickly scan your notes later. I indent my notes from the left edge of the paper about half an inch. This allows me to put my symbols in the left margin. I use four:
• If an item is particularly important or insightful, I put a star next to it.
• If an item requires further research or resolution, I put a question mark next to it.
• If an item requires follow-up, I put a ballot box (open square) next to it. When the item is completed, I check it off.
• If I have assigned a follow-up item to someone, I put an open circle next to it (similar to the ballot box but a circle rather than a square). In the notes, I indicate who is responsible. When the item is completed, I check it off.

Here’s a slide I use in my speaking when I teach this method:



4. Schedule time to review your notes. This is the secret. I scan my notes immediately after the meeting if possible. If that is not possible, then I do it at the end of my workday. If I miss several days, I do it during my weekly review. Regardless, I take action on those items that I can do in less than two-minutes. Those that will take longer I enter into Entourage (or Outlook for you PC users) either as a task or an appointment.

Note: I originally wrote a version of this post several years ago. However, it was buried deep in my archives. I think it is as relevant now as when I wrote it. So I have dusted it off and published this new version.

Question: What do you find helpful when you are taking notes? You can leave a comment by clicking here.

Disclosure of Material Connection: Some of the links in the post above are “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will add value to my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

A Closer Look: The Message and Lifestyle of the Apostles

by Ed Stetzer

I've written on apostles on two occasions-- consider the meaning and the usage today. Today we take a closer look at the term apostle-- both what it means and who they were. In his short essay, Michael J. Wilkins provides a clear, biblical understanding and application of the term.

The apostles of the New Testament lived through what is arguably the most significant era of human history. They experienced the personal entrance of God into history in the person of Jesus Messiah, and their lives were permanently changed. Their transformation catapulted them into the entire then-known world with the message of what they had experienced--the arrival of the kingdom of God and salvation in Jesus' name.

The term apostle has a significantly different meaning than the word disciple. "Disciple" is the term used to designate all those who have believed in Jesus and have followed Him as their Savior. The title "apostle" designates those who have been commissioned to be leaders of the church and Jesus' representatives with the gospel message. From out of the large group of His disciples, Jesus chose the Twelve to be sent out as His apostles (Lk 6:13-16).

Therefore, coming from the verb apostello, which means "to send someone away to achieve an objective," the noun "apostle" indicates a "sent one" or "messenger." It occurs in the NT in at least four ways.

Four usages of "Apostle" in the New Testament

First, the term is used especially to refer to the "twelve apostles" who were eyewitnesses of Jesus' earthly ministry. They were first sent out to Israel with the gospel message of the arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:1-7), and after Jesus' death and resurrection they were sent out with the gospel message to make disciples of all nations (Mt 28:18-20). They witnessed Jesus' resurrection appearances, which Luke tells us demonstrated the reality of Jesus' victory over death and the certainty of the kingdom of God in this age (Ac 1:2-3). They were among the first to receive the filling of the Spirit at Pentecost (Ac 2:1-4), and their preaching of the gospel established them as the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). After Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus and killed himself, another eyewitness of Jesus' earthly ministry and resurrection, Matthias, was added to the Eleven (Ac 1:21-26).

Second, the term apostle also refers to those who saw the risen Lord and were commissioned by Him for ministry (cp. 1Co 9:1). This is the sense in which Paul identifies himself as an "apostle of Christ Jesus" (1Co 1:1; 2Co 1:1; Col 1:1). He was not one of the Twelve (e.g., 1Co 15:3-11; Gl 1:17-19), but Jesus granted him a unique apostleship to the Gentiles (Gl 2:8-9).

Third, the term apostle can have the more general sense of "missionary." This was the case for Barnabas (Ac 14:4,14), perhaps Timothy and Silvanus (cp. 1Th 1:1; 2:7), and Andronicus and Junia[s] (Rm 16:7). The last may have been a husband-wife team; they were commended by Paul for spreading the gospel along with the other apostles.

Fourth, the term apostle sometimes referred more broadly to "messengers of the churches" who were sent out to perform certain tasks (2Co 8:23). This includes among others, Epaphroditus, who was sent as a messenger to minister to Paul by the church at Philippi (Php 2:25-30).

These different types of apostles had different roles, but what they had in common was either their encounter with Jesus in His earthly ministry or in His risen and ascended ministry, or else their being directly commissioned by one who had met these qualifications. And their transformation in understanding Jesus' identity as God incarnate, offering salvation to the world, became the foundation of their message. The Twelve and Paul are dramatic examples.

Diversity and unity among the Apostles

The Twelve displayed a remarkable personal diversity. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John were partners in a successful fishing business on the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:9-11). Matthew was a hated tax collector (Mt 9:9-13), seen as a traitor because he worked for the Roman occupying government extracting as much tax as he could from his own people. Simon the Zealot was a revolutionary who was willing to die for the cause of liberating Israel from Rome. In normal circumstances these men might be ready to stick a knife in each other, but their individual encounters with Jesus transformed them into a cohesive unit dedicated to declaring Jesus to be the only way to eternal life (cp. Jn 6:67-69).

Peter's preaching at Pentecost is an example of his dramatic transformation from one who denied Jesus to one who fearlessly preached to the multitudes in Jerusalem. His message was clear: "Repent . . . and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. . . . Be saved from this corrupt generation!" (Ac 2:38,40). For over 30 years Peter traversed the ancient world proclaiming the same message, until finally the Roman government executed him. But Rome couldn't silence the message, for the church continued to proclaim the gospel fearlessly in the face of persecution.

The apostle Paul was a former Pharisee (Php 3:4-6). The Pharisees were well-known critics of Jesus (Mt 12:14), and Paul himself actively persecuted the church as a Pharisee (Ac 22:3-4). But after his encounter with the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus, Paul was radically transformed from an enemy to one who gave the rest of his life as a servant of Jesus. Paul's own testimony of what produced the transformation
is found in his letter to Titus. He speaks of his former life of foolishness, malice, envy, and hatred (Ti 3:3), but then says:

"But when the goodness of God and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us--not by works of righteousness that we had done, but according to His mercy, through the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit. He poured out this Spirit on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that having been justified by His grace, we may become heirs with the hope of eternal life" (Ti 3:4-7).

The apostles seem an unlikely group to be used by Jesus to establish the church and proclaim His message of salvation and transformation. But what empowered them was not their own charisma or powerful preaching, nor an ambition to create a movement. Rather, it was the operation of the Spirit that caused their transformation into the image of Jesus, which then impelled them to proclaim Jesus' glorious message of salvation and hope of change to the entire world.

Michael J. Wilkins
Ph.D., Fuller Theological Seminary

Sermon Notes from Sunday, February 5, 2012

Here are the notes from this past Sunday's sermon "The Church is Built on Leadership - Elders/Deacons."

Radical is not so "Radical"

The word "radical" is popular today among us at CrossRoads due to David Platt's book Radical that we studied last fall.

However, last week at a conference at Southwestern Seminary, Ft. Worth, TX Rick Warren (as reported in Baptist Presson Feb. 6) said this:

"What was so radical about the Radical Reformers?" asked Warren, a graduate from Southwestern, during his presentation. "Today, the word 'radical' means 'extreme,' 'over-the-top,' 'edgy,' 'out-of-bounds,' 'extravagant' and maybe even 'hip.'"

However, Warren pointed out, the word radical means "of the root," as portrayed in most areas of life: In Botany, for example, "radical leaves" on a tree are closest to the root; in mathematics, "the radical is the root of the equation;" and in grammar, "the radical is the root with all prefixes and suffixes removed," he said. In most areas of life, Warren said, "radical" does not mean "extreme."

"It means 'rooted,'" he said. "And what we need today are radical reformers who are rooted in Christ, rooted in the Word, rooted in the church and rooted in church history, because what we have today is a generation growing up that is rootless. They are fatherless, and they are rootless, so they get blown around like tumbleweed."

Like the Radical Reformers of the 16th-century, Warren called Christians to return to the root, "to the New Testament" and to the "apostolic church."