You Are What You Love Reviewed

At this point I have to admit something to the people who read this blog something you already know, namely that I’ve been terrible at keeping up with the blog. The good news is that I’ve been slightly less terrible at keeping up with my reading list and I will try to get around to publishing more reviews of my books in the next couple of weeks assuming that my paying job and my church responsibilities don’t keep me away

I mentioned in my reading list that today’s book “You Are What You Love” was on many book of the year lists from people I greatly respect. I wanted to like this book simply based on the fact that the title sounds like something I would say both figuratively and literally (we’ll get to that). Ultimately, I think the book did have some very strong point but I did not like it, had to work like crazy to get through it, and I don’t think it benefitted me or would benefit most anyone in my little mission field much. Even so, I’ll start with the positives

I think the author and I would get along well and see eye to eye on many things, even things he covers in the book. He rightly and forcefully makes the case early and often that the Christian life is a life of “knowing” in a relational sense and not “knowing” in an academic sense. I think the one sentence that basically summarizes the whole book is found on page 127, “You might have bible verses on the wall in every room in your house and yet the unspoken rituals reinforce self-centeredness rather than sacrifice.” Indeed, this idea that how we actually live our lives reveals what we truly love most is part of his core message and a core message of the Bible. Why did Israel turn from God to idols? Ultimately it was because they wanted to. Maybe they thought God was unreliable, or the idols promised something better, or they didn’t want to wait for God. The bottom line was in the moment of that hope transfer from the one true God to an idol they wanted what they believed the idol promised more than what they believed God promised

So he goes on to point out all the ways God asks people to examine their desires and how the life of desire is more central to the souls of people made in God’s image than the life of knowledge acquisition. He blows up the idea you see in many conservative Christian circles “You grow by what you know” and he points out this means that the life spent following Jesus is “more about hungering and thirsting than of knowing and believing,” and I think that’s more or less right. He shows very well how that philosophy would play out in practical ways in churches and homes and youth groups. That emphasis and those specific applications can be appreciated by almost anyone who wants to transform life. It is in the unconscious “default setting” of our hearts that ultimately makes most of the choices in life, and thus we need to make conditioning that setting (which he calls telos) a major priority in becoming more like Jesus. These points are very strong in my view.

So why not a positive review and recommendation? I’ll list several reasons:

  • It’s important to remember that for books related to ministry in the church, I’m reading them in a totally different context than I did a few years ago. I am serving poor, minority, mostly under-educated people here. Not a single one of them could have gotten 10 pages into this book. It was written by a philosophy professor and it shows. If you’re a middle class, white, college educated, philosophy lover that serves people like yourself, than you’ll like this book way more than I did. It’s not just the concepts that are hard to tackle, there are far too many complicated words for no apparent reason which makes it difficult to read. Take “telos”. Why not just say “default setting” or the word the Bible uses, “heart.” Any term you pick is going to take some explanation, but it would have been nice to read this book without a dictionary. I could have used the word “pattern” instead of liturgy. There are at least a dozen more. The book is just not that accessible.
  • I am also underwhelmed at how far he takes this idea of “liturgy.” At one point I asked in my notes why he keeps doing this and then it finally occurred to me that it’s the whole point of his book. He believes that church liturgies – the doing the same things over and over routine seen in some church traditions – are somehow more of an interaction between God and people even though it’s really just the people doing the same things over and over. He equates these church traditions that stand out in our culture as somehow automatic evidence of transcendence. I think he goes way too far with this in a way a Baptist with the same core convictions would not go simply because of a different experience in Sunday gatherings. He is imposing his form of church on his notion of spiritual formation (although he argues he is not doing that).
  • Related to this, I am not comfortable with the way he praises liturgical forms of so called “Christian” traditions that do not hold to the core teachings of the faith such as Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodox. I’m not trying to start a fight, I’m only saying those groups do not believe the same things about how to become a Christian, how to grow as a Christian, or how Christian identity is expressed in a local church. It is mind boggling to me that he would promote them as examples.
  • Since he sees liturgies as transformational, he then takes the massive leap that if we just start doing a different liturgy we will become changed people. I just don’t think the Bible says that. I think, contrary to his earlier quote which I mostly like, discipleship is primarily about believing. It is about choosing to believe the truth or believe a lie. I would totally agree with Dr. Smith that the truths you believe show up in your practical life patterns, but I don’t believe that changing patterns changes hearts. A man who hates his wife and kids and believes they are the reason for everything bad in his life will avoid them. Having a family dinner every night is not going to change anything but that man’s schedule. Might God use something in that commitment to change the man’s heart? Only if he is operating from faith (what he believes) when he makes the change. That is what the bible says and what it means to walk by faith and not by sight.
  • And so my #1 concern with the book is what I see as an over emphasis on what amounts to religious externalism. The author wants us to believe that “rehabituation” is the key to a transformed life. If only people did different things, then their hearts would change. If only they were more committed to “transcendent” ceremonies and liturgies and traditional worship contexts then they’d really look like Jesus. The problem is that idea perfectly describes the Pharisees who Jesus condemned by saying “These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me.” All of their liturgy didn’t make them follow Jesus. The Bible just doesn’t seem to indicate that people change like that.
  • Even at just under 200 pages the book seemed long to me. I cover half of his concept in a sentence I say all the time to my church family and those who come to counseling: 100% of the people, 100% of the time, chase what they love most. I bet if he worked with Mez McConnell or someone else focused on less highly educated disciples he could get the book down to 120 pages and make it far more accessible at the same time.

 

I Need a Rest – NOT

A friend said something on FB yesterday that seemed a little off. He loves Jesus a lot and has been a blessing to me in many ways so I’m happy to give him the benefit of the doubt that he was just not as precise as he could have been.

Men w small kids:Your wife really needs a 4-hour block of time weekly to herself. Time to “be”not just grocery shop. Will u do this for her?

All I said was “We should be careful about using the word “need” for things God does not call a need. Things can be advantageous or beneficial without being a need.” It brought the predictable response that rest is needed and even the Bible supports the idea of taking a break. (The reality is that it seems like most of the time the Bible talks about “rest” it is referring to heaven either literally or allegorically.) These things have some truth to them but in a leisure soaked society it is useful to filter them through the Scriptures with some questions.

Am I spending and being spent for the Gospel?

Paul said his goal was to spend and be spent for the gospel (2 Cor 2:15). He said he did it gladly. This is a guy who was shipwrecked, stoned, beaten with whips, hunted and abandoned over and over. Was he looking for rest? No, he was looking to give every ounce of his being over to the cause of Christ and he was joyful in doing it.

A lot of people I meet who “need” a break are spending and being spent chasing the middle class, white American dream of a nice house, two or more cars, educational achievement, soccer camps, and whatever else they see on TV or Amazon Prime. People like this don’t “need” a rest in any biblical sense of the word. They need to use that same level of ambition on pursuing Jesus before they can claim any biblical basis for rest.

Am I seeking refreshment in the ways God has provided?

John 15 is one of my favorite chapters in the Bible. The basic idea is that Jesus is supposed to be the vine that provides us nourishment, life, and purpose. The way to access that is to abide in, or remain connected to, him. People who are exhausted because they are not abiding in Jesus should try that first before they start demanding rest.

Or consider Hebrews 12:3, Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. Here, the author of Hebrews says that one key to not growing weary (needing a rest) is to actively consider what Jesus endured as a fuel and motivation for further gospel centered action on our part. The verse before this says that Jesus endured dying on a cross for the joy he got from it. It’s hard for me to reconcile this with the “need” for resting from things like a job in an air conditioned office, caring for kids that love you, or even building up the body of Christ.

Is the rest I am seeking drawing me closer to Jesus or my creature comforts?

I’ve heard many people talk about how Jesus took times by himself to rest and that is certainly true. The overwhelming evidence of the New Testament is that when Jesus did this it was to get alone with his Father. For example in John 6:15 we read “Perceiving then that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, Jesus withdrew again to the mountain by himself.” Here Jesus got away not because he was focusing on himself but because he was focused on the Father’s mission for him. In Luke 6,  Jesus spends the entire night alone praying before calling the Apostles. His “me time” deprived himself of sleep before he deprived others of his presence. Even in the well known Psalm 23, David enjoyed the green pastures and still waters but he enjoyed the God who provided them much more.

What happens when my rest is interrupted?

I’ve been spending a lot of time in the Gospels and one thing that is impossible to miss is that Jesus almost never actually rested. Even when people notice how much he “needs” a rest and make provision for him, it is often interrupted. So in Mark 6, when people are convinced Jesus needs a rest and shuffle him off in a boat, how is he going to respond when the crowd literally runs along to shore to intercept him again at the other end? Is he going to pout or retaliate or whine about not getting his “me time?” No, he sees this crowd so hopeless and lost and gives up any idea of rest because of the great compassion he has for them. Rather than rest, he teaches them late into the night then organizes the biggest buffet in history feeding something like 20,000 people.

Am I letting God determine the right rest?

One of the concerns I had over the way my friend phrased his post was that he was dictating a particular type of rest that would be uniformly applied to all moms of young kids. Not only is this “need” impossible for any single mom to ever achieve, it just isn’t right to declare one particular type of rest like this because even if the Bible does say rest can be a good thing, it never gets very precise about what that looks like. God seems to know the right kind of rest and can supernaturally intervene to provide it. One comment from a dear sister made it seem like unless her husband had chipped in and helped her when she had four kids under four, God would have been utterly helpless to meet her needs. While I’m grateful this man cared for her well, I have to lovingly say her God is far too small if she can only imagine one way that he is able to provide for her well being.

If I believe in rest, what am I doing to make it possible for others?

I hinted at this above, but my friend’s comment is very  white, middle class. In my church context, very few moms of young kids have this option. I wonder for those that do, are you finding ways to use your blessing to be a blessing? Parachuting into a poor community is generally a bad way to minister, so are you going to find a semi-permanent way to serve these moms who almost certainly need a rest more than you do?

What I’m not saying…

I’m not saying rest cannot be helpful or that husbands should never look after their wives in this way. Looking after the well being of your wife is one obvious way husbands can love their wives as Christ loves his church. But doing that well means you will study your wife to see what it would look like to care for her in particular. Maybe my friend’s post is a helpful starting point, but it should not be an ending point. Based on the marriage counseling I’ve done, many stay at home moms would prefer a reliable 30 – 60 minute break when their husband gets home from work more than a single four hour block of time once per week. This is an issue that a married couple should discuss themselves rather than follow a well meaning but ultimately arbitrary mandate. And while you are having that discussion, talk about how you can serve those moms with young kids who may be divorced, abandoned, or widowed and have no husband to help them.

Of course it’s a Muslim ban

After spending a couple days on Facebook listening to really silly arguments about how President Trump’s moratorium is not a ban on Muslims I felt like I might try to add some common sense.

  1. The President is fully within his rights to issue this order. He may end it early or extend it at his sole discretion.
  2. He has consistently said the order is about protecting Americans from terrorism.
  3. He has consistently said the terrorism threat is from Islamic Extremists.
  4. According to the CIA World Fact Book, about 98% of those living in the countries covered by the ban are Muslims. If you exclude Syria, it’s 99%.

Objection: It’s not a Muslim ban because non-Muslims from those countries are also affected.

I use the old math, but I think 98% is a pretty big number. If I told you that I spent 7 hours and 50 minutes playing video games and 10 minutes checking email from work, the natural conclusion you would make is that I took the day off. You would be right. This is really not even close.

Objection: Obama did the same thing in 2011 and nobody called it a Muslim Ban.

Nobody called what President Obama did in 2011 a Muslim ban, because it’s not the same thing. After arresting two Iraqis on terror charges who had ties to terrorism in Iraq, the Obama administration slowed down the visa process for Iraqis. There was never a shutdown, and no person seeking a visa was ultimately denied one. This is different because of the scope of the ban, the amateurish way it was implemented, and the fact that there is no actual cause or trigger to do it other than a campaign promise.

Objection: He’s not targeting Muslims

The hypocrisy in this one is really amazing to me. The whole campaign, Trump said his opponent wasn’t worthy of being Commander in Chief because she wouldn’t even name the enemy. Trump repeatedly named his Public Enemy #1 as Islamic extremists not only in extemporaneous speeches but in written communication that was presumably thought out. Here’s what he published after his infamous Muslim ban speech.

“Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life.”

I would expect him to at least respect the intelligence of the public enough to admit that he’s just doing what he promised to do in the election cycle. If he was intellectually honest he would not have stopped at the seven nations and would have included places like Saudi Arabia, home of Osama bin Ladin and the vast majority of the 9/11 terrorists.

My friend Kevin Carson has posted a helpful article on how Christians ought to think about the ban and if you are interested you can read it here.

Prepared for a Purpose Reviewed

I came across this book at a local discount store and thought it would be a good addition to my 2017 reading list. It met several criteria from a list I was using to push me toward a more diverse set of authors: female author, minority author, memoir style. The author had the commendation of sources as broad as President Obama and Fox News. Plus, this was a crisis event that happened in my own metro area so it seemed something I might benefit from socially and professionally (my career is in crisis management).

I think I would enjoy the author’s company quite a lot. It’s clear from the book we share many values, but her background is so different than mine I think she would stretch the way I applied those common values. In doing some homework on her story, her daughter Lavita has had some noteworthy successes which is also a great testimony to the author (couldn’t learn much about her son). The details of her story of how she reacted  when she was the primary point of contact a gunman showed up at her school would be riveting. She as a resilient faith in Jesus that would be an encouragement to any Christian.

But this is a book review, so my job is to evaluate how good of a book this is. I think it’s middle of the road at best for a few reasons.

The author uses a somewhat common technique of bouncing from her life story to the crisis event. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Most of the times when she would flashback to her life story I found it interesting but totally unrelated to the crisis event. Since the title of the book is “Prepared for a Purpose” I was really expecting the connections to be frequent and obvious but in my opinion they were not. It was not until page 140 (of 219) when she talked about a time when she felt like things were so bad she wanted to die that I caught any connection between the two events whatsoever.

The other thing I think really distracted me about the book is how far out of her way the author went to try to make her boyfriend/husband seem like less of a jerk. I’m guessing we only got a fraction of the whole story in this book and it’s still enough to know I would have not liked this guy very much. I saw a Ted Talk type video with the author’s daughter and she described her dad as a notorious drug dealer. I was not surprised in the slightest. It’s pretty clear to me that while it was perhaps part of her preparation for this event, the actual substance of that relationship was pretty one sided. As a church leader, I was disappointed how much her church failed to protect her from him and had to wonder how much of that was because the church leader and her husband were related. Maybe there is more to the story that would change my opinion.

One struggle for me as I read a memoir written by a professing Christian is to take off my theological filter and just appreciate the book for what it is. That was true in this case. I’m not sure how much actual doctrine the author and I would agree on and I found myself frequently having to take a step back from my doctrinal filter. The wonderful thing for me is when I did that you got to see a lot of the author’s hopes, dreams and pursuits. I was forced to ask myself hard questions like “Since she seems like a smart and capable lady, why would she stick around with this loser?” She is pretty transparent in her life story so it’s not hard to piece together some of the forces that drove her decision making. In our ministry context we meet ladies who make the same decisions all the time and I am grateful for the reminder through this book that things that are obvious to me simply aren’t so obvious to others. Perhaps these ladies are more justified in their conclusion than I would initially think, or at least more worthy of compassion.

Overall, I think that is the best part of the book – getting the chance to see behind the curtain of Antoinette’s life. If she had never been the calming influence that may have saved dozens of lives in August 2013, that would still be a story worth knowing.

Code Name Verity Reviewed

It’s the worst time of the year. The time when I have to review a fiction book. I don’t even know how to review a fiction book. I read the Code Name Verity at the request of my daughter who says it is her favorite all time book.As I write this, I am even tempted to keep this introductory paragraph so long that I never have to write the actual review. I wonder whether that will work. I doubt too many people will find it compelling. I am running out of things to say. I give up.

I thought it was a good book. I don’t think I”d re-read it as my daughter has, but it was well written and the story line was pretty interesting. The setting is the end of WW2 and you don’t get too far into the book before you appreciate the amount of research the author did about the various aspects of history, culture, and war fighting of the time. I’m always heartened to learn non-fiction while reading fiction. In a wonderful twist, something I learned in the book showed up in an episode of Foyle’s War I watched the next day which had the effect of increasing my opinion of the book.

In terms of style and flow, the author takes an interesting approach by organizing the book into journals written by the two main characters. It’s a clever way to write – having your characters do the writing for you, and I imagine it’s harder to do this than it is to just sit down and write the book like I’m writing this review. Despite the format, the book is still filled with the kind of surprises you would expect to see in a thriller style book and there are plenty of plot lines you don’t actually grasp until the end of the book.

Even though the bulk of the content in the book is about two people’s involvement in the Allied war effort, the book is really about a friendship between Julie and Maddie. Their love for each other transcends their significant differences and I suppose that in and of itself is a heartwarming aspect of the book that would improve our world if modern readers would just believe it.

Since I have made it clear that I have no idea how to review a fiction book, I admit I cheated a little and read the NY Times review of the book. They admitted that saying anything about the plot could ruin the book for the reader. This is something my daughter understood well as she told told me nothing about the book when at the same time enthusiastically explaining why I should read it. The good news for me is that I now have an out to say much more about it. Wonderful how it works out that way.

I would recommend the book for anyone who enjoys spy fiction, especially of the WW2 period. It’s a “girl power” book without being one of those “shove it down your throat” girl power books bathed in pretension that are well hated and ignored by the very people who probably ought to read a few more girl power books.

President Obama’s Best and Worst

At this point it is probably too early to give President Obama a final grade as a US president. To make the list the issue had to be good or bad for a large segment (say 60-70%) of the population, not just his own party or the other party. For example, Democrats nationally have less power and influence after President Obama than they have in my lifetime. Since half of America would put that in the best column and half would put it in the worst, it’s the kind of thing I want to avoid.

Best of Obama

  • He actually did something on healthcare. With the run up to Obamacare, I did a lot of homework on the healthcare system in America. I wrote about it back in August/September 2009 if you are interested. It has lots of pretty sizable holes. While the actual bill that was created and its implementation has been almost universally seen as a disaster (even by Bill Clinton), I have to give him a lot of credit for actually doing something instead of just talking about it. There were a lot of injustices in the old healthcare system and Republicans did nothing about most of them when they had a chance. Had President Obama taken the approach I suggested and isolated specific issues he could have gotten most of what is broken fixed without all the horrible side effects Obamacare brought.
  • Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. This may be a surprise to some people and maybe it will prove to be a non-issue, but there really are a lot of areas in America that do not have reliable high speed internet access. This is a really big deal to the economic, health, and social futures of these people. Of course you can say if they want internet they should just move to the city, but if everyone did that we’d have no food,fewer vacation spots, and more unemployment. When you think about how those of us with high speed internet use it, and how often we use it, it’s pretty clear what an advantage it is. It’s good that he made spreading high speed internet a priority.
  • Being who he is.  I read many left wing authors like to say that the greatest accomplishment of President Obama was his wonderful personality and being the first black president. I think they are overstating it, but I do think it is important. The fact that something is irrelevant to me (which his skin color is) doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant. It could be that I am simply wrong or insensitive or undervaluing something.  important.  I loved reading the story of the time he let a little black boy feel his hair after the boy asked, “I want to know if my hair is just like yours.” To many Americans, representation matters and it is significant that a man of a very humble background and broken home rose to he highest office in the land.

Worst of Obama

  • Immoral foreign policy. It’s hard to imagine a foreign policy that hurt more people than his did. I’m not saying that he did it on purpose, I just think he came in being successful giving speeches and somehow he thought if you just talked to people nicely they would respond. He seemed unable to see that his action or inaction could have serious unintended consequences and refused to see that some people are just evil. He led Iranian freedom seekers to believe the US would support them and then did nothing, leading the government to imprison many of them. He told Syria that there would be consequences if they used chemical weapons and then did nothing. He attacked Lybia, destabilizing North Africa for no apparent reason. He is the only 8-year president who was at war from the first day to the last. His short sightedness in Iraq was almost as bad as George Bush’s point person there, and his policy there is what gave ISIS a chance to thrive. His misreading of the situations in the Middle East and North Africa greatly contributed to the refugee crisis, which handed the immigration issue to hard core right wingers and brought the world  Brexit and Donald Trump.
  • Hyper partisanship. More than any president before him, President Obama treated those who thought like him as friends and those who disagreed with him as enemies. He treated those with different views as “nothings,” as if they didn’t even exist. I believe that he more than any other one person has brought us to a season of contempt that was addressed in a well written New York Times article. When he did listen to someone with an alternate view, he seemed to do it as a photo op and then immediately ignored anythingo they had to say. Even his token Republican in his administration was fired when he disagreed with the party line. Anyone can argue that others were equally partisan, but the President has the opportunity to change the tone in ways nobody else can, and he simply didn’t do it. He spent eight years wagging his finger in the face of his political opponents saying things like “we won, get over it.” A good article addressing this in more ways can be read here. The unhealthy political climate we have now is due to President Obama more than any other single person.
  • Absence of accountability after scandals.  I have had to laugh at so many of my friends posting things about how President Obama served for eight years without a single scandal.  John Fund covers those well in his Jan 17 article so I will not retype everything we know about Solyndra, Fast and Furious, the Cambridge Police debacle, the Benghazi cover up, IRS targeting, the Black Panther voter intimidation, etc. I will say that President Obama is responsible for allowing each of the perpetrators to face no consequences. When bad behavior is not held accountable it creates more bad behavior because nobody is afraid of getting caught. The fact that Eric Holder could keep his job after Fast and Furious ended up killing U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry is beyond reprehensible.

Receiving the Kingdom like a Child

I was mentioning to someone yesterday that my blog has become a book review site. This is extremely embarrassing for a self-proclaimed non reader so I felt compelled to write a bit about the passage we will be looking at during the Living Stones gathering today, Luke 18:15-17.

In the passage, people are bringing their kids – even infants – to Jesus. The disciples around him seem to think the kiddos are a distraction from important work or something and try to keep them away but Jesus tells them to knock it off. But He doesn’t stop there. He uses the presence of the kids as an object lesson for a couple of really important points about following Him.

First, he says the Kingdom belongs to “such as these.”  The NLT captures the idea when it translates the phrase “For the Kingdom of God belongs to those who are like these children.” Jesus is not saying that the Kingdom belongs to these actual kids, but to people who resemble them in some way.

He explains it further in his second statement, “Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” Jesus is saying that the only chance to receive a place in His Kingdom is to do it like a child. How does a child receive stuff? I don’t think any of my kids ever was skeptical about a gift. I don’t think any of them ever suspected that when I offered to take them for ice cream that I was secretly going to take them to a trash dump. On Christmas morning not one of them ever pulled out the FBI’s bomb threat checklist to inspect the presents we had prepared for them. They received the gifts with joyful expectation and trust.

This passage is more than that though. When we look at where it is – placed right between the parable of the pharisee and the tax collector and the account of the rich young ruler. Luke wants us to see that part of receiving the Kingdom as a child is that we receive it consciously knowing that there is nothing we did to contribute to it. Unlike the pharisee in Luke 18:11-12 and the rich young ruler in Luke 18:20-21, these little children wanted Jesus knowing they added nothing to the process. Luke paints the picture vividly by telling us even infants were being brought. What did the 9-month old contribute to his encounter with Jesus? Nothing. And that’s one of the big takeaways from Luke’s presentation here. There is nothing the pharisee, the rich young ruler, or anyone else can do to make themselves good enough to deserve the Kingdom of God.

This is great news. It means that no matter how bad someone is, the grace of God in Jesus Christ is greater. Since we contribute nothing to the Kingdom equation, nothing we do can eliminate us. There is perhaps no better example of this than the Apostle Paul who called himself a violent persecutor of the church that hated God. God not only saved him from his sin, but raised him up to write half the New Testament. Why did God do it? Was it to show everyone how good you could be if you just put your mind to it? No, according to Paul. The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. (1 Tim 1:15-16)

The God of the Bible is patient with those who refuse His rule and opens His Kingdom to all those who will put on the humility and empty hands of a little child. If it sounds too good to be true, you need to know that it is really that good.