Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I share this author's passion for missions and generous giving. In a sense, this book is the antidote to Osteen anthropology--and in that sense, I adore it! At the same time, however well-intended his purpose, the author has rested his arguments on poor exegesis and an incomplete survey on Scriptural teaching on wealth. More on that to come, but first a mention of some basic facts: 1) Americans have both sent and funded missionaries at a level unprecedented in the history of the Church. This is possible because of the American Dream with its free market capitalism. This cash flow rests on a consumer society. When I go to the fabric store to make a new dress for my child, I am helping the owner of the store and the original producer of the fabric to put food on their table. Would they rather have my business or my handout? If every Christian in my Bible belt town sold all their possessions to give them to the poor, we would create a larger segment of the poor through unemployment. Restaurants and businesses would have to close their doors. 2) The majority of world hunger has less to do with a lack of resources than it does with corrupt governments. This does not, of course, mean that we ignore the poor or spend our entire income on ourselves. The Bible is clear that we are to share our resources, and that the desire to get rich--simply for the sake of getting rich--leads to all sorts of heartbreaks. So, what does the Bible say about wealth? First, I'd start with what it does NOT say about wealth. To use the story of the rich young man as a lesson on stewardship misses the point. One must read the entire account in its full context to see this, not quote just those verses convenient to our agenda. For starters, it is preceded by the account of children coming to Jesus. We can imagine that they did not come asking what they must DO. Their innate trust led Jesus to say, "The kingdom of God belongs to such as these." Then, along comes the rich young man who falls at Jesus feet with a description of all the boxes he had checked off his religious list. Is there any box left which he must check to earn enternal life? Jesus gives him an answer which reveals the depravity of his sin and his need for God's grace! He then turns to his disciples and addresses them as, "Children" (sound familiar?) and talks about the difficulty of a rich man entering the kingdom. BUT--and this is what Platt fails to mention--he finishes this by saying, "What is impossible with men is possible with God." His disciples don't quite get it--Peter argues for all they've done! And Jesus affirms their sacrifice, but this sacrifice is not the saving act. It is God who does the impossible, creating a path to righteousness that we could never attain on our own. While Platt has the occasional caveat that we can't earn salvation and that we are not all required to "sell all our stuff," the overall impression of the book, page after page after page, is that if we don't sell all our stuff, we are somehow falling short. (In fact, if anyone feels that their salvation is somehow on the line after reading this book, I highly suggest reading through Galatians.) Other exegetical problems lie with things like the assertion that God "hates" sinners, pulled from the psalms (the psalms are properly read as our words to God, a cathartic practice for our cleansing and healing, NOT for teaching doctrine; unless, of course, we think that God affirms dashing the heads of infants against stones). Or saying that people are going to hell because we haven't brought them the gospel, rather than because of their own rejection of the general knowledge of God given through the world itself. Or saying that all people are called to foreign missions ("Are all apostles?" 1 Cor 12:29). Meanwhile, if you are going to write on stewardship of wealth, you've got to give the whole picture. Wealth is not inherently evil (note Abraham, Joseph, Job, Daniel, Lydia, etc.). As we saw above, our ability to send missionaries is furthered by the cash flow of a consumer society. Rather, wealthy people are called upon to give willingly, cheerfully and generously as need arrives. This is quite different than saying "You must downsize your house" (after all, one family's downsize is another family's dreamhome!) This is not to say that God couldn't call someone sell it all, or even downsize, for the cause--in fact, I'm very willing to believe that he sometimes does, and I personally must always be open to that call--but this is not the norm. In fact, particularly generous giving is described as a special gift not given to all, "We have different gifts, according to the grace given us... if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously..." Romans 12:6,8 Do I see problems with materialism in America? Absolutely. If a Christian is spending beyond his means to the point that he can't share a portion of his income, then he needs to reasses his stewardship. (I'd suggest reading Affluenza.) My biggest problem, ultimately, is that this book "inspires" us to take the gospel based on some sort of survivor-guilt. We do not take the gospel to prove anything to God, ourselves, or anyone else. We do it because Christ's love compels us. "We have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. 2 Cor 4:2.