Dave Ramsey and Financial Peace University: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Part 2
Read Part 1.
Author’s note: This critique has been specifically focused on the appropriateness of Financial Peace University as a financial counseling program in a local church. It does not evaluate Ramsey’s TV show, radio program or books, none of which I have ever seen, heard or read.
For all the benefits of Dave Ramsy’s Financial Peace University (FPU), I found several troubling problems with it. I addressed the good and the ugly in Part 1 of this essay. Now let’s look at the bad.
The Bad
When I mentioned to a friend recently that I was writing a review of FPU, he responded with enthusiasm that Dave Ramsey had changed his life. He explained that through FPU he had gotten out of debt, was saving for retirement and living a much more frugal life. When I indicated that my review was not likely to be favorable, he was surprised and a little defensive. Because he is theologically astute, I asked him about what I perceived to be the major flaw of FPU—the distortion of the gospel. He responded as I think many Christians would if asked that question: what distortion? I think it very likely that many Christians could attend FPU and not notice anything wrong with its message. The reason this is true is because most Christians do not have a firm conviction that the gospel ought to be central in any discussion regarding an issue of the Christian life. The gospel for many is about evangelism, not money, or sex, or parenting, or leisure.
A truly Christian viewpoint, however, sees everything through the lens of the gospel. This flies in the face of so many Christian attitudes toward everyday life, whether it be money, music, the arts, technology, or any host of cultural issues. The typical Christian response is to find some scattered verses and weave together a loose tapestry of references organized by his preconceived notions. To be truly Christian is to approach the issue from the standpoint of the gospel, and here is where I find FPU to be downright lacking.
Discussion
1 in 6 Americans Infected with Herpes
Body
Discussion
Apologetic Methods: What Are They and Can't We Agree?
Reprinted with permission from Paraklesis (Spring, 2009) courtesy of Baptist Bible College
As Christians today, we face a daunting task. More than ever the people who surround us follow the gods of other religions, materialism and secularism, or the Christian God only nominally. The task of making a case for Christ is greater than ever.
But when we turn to books on defending the faith we wonder at all the disagreement. How can believers who agree on so much doctrine disagree so vehemently over apologetics? We in the ministry have to understand the issues ourselves so we can help our people interact with apologetic writings and defend their Christian faith. If there is a mist in the pulpit, there will certainly be a fog in the pews.
Defining Apologetics
Apologetics is the defense of the Christian faith. But how should we do it? Should we go positive or negative? Negative apologetics refutes charges against our faith, while positive apologetics makes a case for our faith. Should we be hard or soft? Can we prove our case for the faith (hard), or only show it probable (soft)? Consequently, can a person rationally reject Christ (soft), or is he being irrational (hard)? Is apologetics simply evangelism, or can it include “pre-evangelism”—removing obstacles and preparing the way for the gospel? Is apologetics just for unbelievers, or also helpful for believers?
These are a few areas of debate among apologists. If we don’t understand these issues we’ll be lost when we try to interact with books on apologetics. A recent book examines five apologetic strategies (Steven B .Cowan, ed., Five Views on Apologetics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), but we can put them in two broad camps: evidentialism and presuppositionalism.
Discussion