Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot
So it doesn't matter whether it is a car, or a nice house, or a old bicycle, or a broken-down little hut, or one grain of rice, or a huge feast. If you have it, it was part of God's plan.
No, that is a fundamental misunderstanding of Christian doctrine. Generally, the world is not as God wishes it, because of the Fall.
Buddhism has nothing in particular against material possessions, but is clear about the craving for them:
Grass is to be sought for by those in need of grass. Firewood is to be sought for by those in need of firewood. A cart to be sought for by those in need of a cart. A servant by him who is in need of a servant. But, Headman, in no manner whatsoever do I declare that gold and silver be accepted or sought for.
The problem of wealth is attachment, certainly.
Thus a man can be very, very enlightened, or very, very unenlightened, and at the same time, he might have many, many material luxuries, or none at all. In the Buddhist framework, the real measure is the measure of your attachment to your material possessions, rather than the price tag or market value of your material possessions.
Let's go over it again: the Buddha is not going to give you a BMW because you want a BMW, and manifest it. Such visualization would be the purest form of attachment.
Additionally, although Buddhist thought includes a fair measure of idealism, it has nothing to do with LOA style solipsism:
Later when Fayan decided to leave Dizang, the old teacher walked him out to the front gate and said, "You always say that the three worlds are only mind and that the myriad things are only consciousness. Is that true?" Fayan said, "Yes." Dizang pointed to a rock in the garden and said, "Tell me, is this rock inside your mind or outside your mind?" Fayan said, "It is inside my mind." Dizang said, "Why do you carry a rock around in your head?"
Buddhism, and other religions and philosophies, may teach that the world is a hybrid of subjective/objective, or that the ultimate source of being in consciousness. Neither Buddhism nor Christianity nor any other traditional philosophy teaches:
Mind always takes precedence over matter, such that mental energy predictably can manipulate events;
YOUR mind is the only one that matters, in that the universe gives what YOU want, regardless of what others want;
People receive misfortune in their lives because of their own manifestations in this life.
In order to accept LOA, you accept a world view that the world revolves around you, and that the universe responds to your whims (many religions accept the universe might respond to the whims of a select few of exceptional virtue or enlightenment, but not a general principle of ordinary magic emanating from every person, as opposed to the merciful discretion of an independent higher power). No traditional metaphysics will support that notion.
That doesn't mean that LOA isn't true, or that it isn't a new kind of metaphysics.