I think some people will find fault with LoA simply because it's easier to be sceptical than just accept. Like with religion or rather spirituality, sceptics would rather nitpick than just accept that not everything can be explained or understood.
It's also ego-driven because they somehow feel important or intellectually superior to those who operate on faith alone. Sure, it's important to question. It's through questioning that we learn and grow, but isn't it just easier to let go at a certain point?
If everyone had to question and try to comprehend everything in life, there wouldn't be any time left for the truly important things in life, like love and joy.
As for the materialism argument, I think it's a case of holier-than-thou. Wherever the link between poverty and spirituality came from, it is warped. I don't believe that we would be given the keys to abundance without being able to enjoy it. People who believe it is better to be poor usually just stand on their soapboxes and preach about the virtues of poverty. It's the rich who give their money away to help end poverty and suffering. It not saying all rich people are generous, but a lot are. What are the soapbox preachers doing except preach?
It's not really money than people want or even the things that money can buy, but rather the emotions and feelings that those things bring. My ultimate goal is FREEDOM - the freedom to do what I want, when I want, where I want. Money is the currency for the freedom I want in this life.
That's my opinion.
|