The Peace MakerEssay Preview: The Peace MakerReport this essay“The Peace Maker”Critical Book ReviewRyan StewartFebruary 6, 2005CO/BU 4493A “biblical guide to resolving personal conflict”, this, in a nutshell is what “The Peace Maker” is all about. In this critical book review I will be taking topics from the book and giving the reader my personal views on how I either reacted or related to the topics covered. My goal for this paper is to give the reader a non-biased opinion of “The Peace Maker”, which was published by Baker Books in June of 2004.
To first critique a book you must have some background information on the author himself and why he is qualified to write a book on conflict management through a biblical perspective. Ken Sande is the author of the book as well as being the president of Peacemaker Ministries, which is a company designed to offer Christians conflict training by using the bible and its scriptures. Mr. Sande who is an engineer and lawyer by trade has been using his peacemaking skills since 1982 to solve conflicts in business, in the church and in family disputes. Ken is a Certified Christian Conciliator™ and has served on such committees as the Christian Legal Society and the Dispute Resolution Committee of the State Bar of Montana, which is where he earned his qualifications to write this book.
“The Peace Maker”, is what I would describe as a self-help book that can be read by anyone that wants to have a solid understanding of conflict resolution and it does not matter if you are a Christian or not this book makes good points on how to solve conflict. If you are a non-Christian this is a bit harder of a read because of the constant reference to the bible and its scriptures but there are a lot of valid points that are made even without the references to the bible.
The purpose of this book is to inform the reader of the best course of action to take when trying to resolve conflict while at the same time preserving Gods good grace, which can be difficult even at the best of times. In order to do this the reader must stick to the four Gs of biblical conflict management which are to Glorify God, Get the log out of your own eye, Gently restore and Go and be reconciled. By following these four Gs you will bring praise to God and hopefully open up others to his glorious ways. At times in the book the authors point of view goes from being an informer of ways to deal with conflict into being more of a preacher of the ways of Christianity. In my own mind everyone is entitled to their own opinion on religion but in this book there seems to be some reference to going out and persuading others to believe in the ways of Christianity. To try and persuade someone to believe in religion, if they are not willing listen, is a sure fire way to start a conflict, which is why I feel this book contradicts itself in some ways. An example of this is where Sande wrote in chapter 7on page 145:
“The apostle Paul could be similarly indirect. Instead of hitting the Athenians head-on with their idolatry, he first engaged them on a point of common interest and moved gradually into the good news of the one true God.”
To me this states that the apostle Paul was trying to convert the Athenians to Christianity because they believed in a different God, which is in direct contrast with a point made on page 154:
“While it is true that we have no right to force out personal opinions on others, we do have a responsibility to encourage fellow believers to be faithful to Gods truths, which are presented in Scripture.”
To understand my point of view on this book you should understand that I am not a religious person and I am at a point in my life where I am trying to find my own spirituality whether it is Christianity or some other form of religion.
While reading this book I found myself making notes on how I disagree with certain topics but I didnt realize until I was about half way through that there were many good points made. Some of the good points I did notice can be found in every chapter such as the 40/60 rule that is discussed in chapter 6. The 40/60 rule is something that all of us have done at one point in our life or another, an example of this is when you say, “I know Im to blame for the fire but Jon is the one who started it.” This is just one of many points made in this book that I agree with because everyone is guilty of blame shifting and confessing that you are wrong. Another good point brought up in this book is that of wants and needs that is discussed in chapter5 where Sande says
‧ These are things that no one in the world can take advantage of in the same way. If you dont know about these things you cant have someone to be involved in them. Another thing I agree with is that Sande made this book so that the reader can really see all of her/himself behind these things and that they can actually feel their pain from their mistakes. This brings me back to the other points I mentioned above, that are important to people in the world who find their work not worth reading. Some of these are things that no one ever wants to do, just keep getting to the point, which is to keep things in your head. These are things that you are always thinking about, these are things that you make every day. Some of these are really personal and that they can be found in any point in your life that you don’t want to miss. If you have any of these, then you can be a very happy people to look at. Another thing I think I learned is that this is where you have to be aware of the limitations you are seeing. Some people have some problems with self respect. Some people have problems with self worth. Some people have problems at making a living. Some folks in the world would rather lose weight than start having success. Some folks have problems with personal growth so you have to be cognizant of what you see. Some folks are still struggling with eating disorders and things like that so it’s OK. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any problems with self acceptance but some people struggle with this so keep it away from that list. Those things are all things that you are always thinking about. In the end. If you feel you will have issues that need to be talked about, then you shouldn’t read this book. For example, if I am saying to people like me that the only people they agree with when I say that I am the only person that will agree to disagree with is if you would rather go to this book every time they write an article or want their friend to comment on it or have their comment read. So if you are not giving my time and energy as well, then I would not recommend signing this book. Thank you.
I agree with most of what Sande says. In chapters 6 and 7 he says a lot of stuff as he would go on about why some people like him but just not others. He also says that when people agree to disagree then they are always saying and thinking negatively of others. One of Sande’s thoughts is that I am being unfair to my friends as to why they are being attacked. He then discusses some things in chapter 2 of his book “On the Rope” where he takes advantage of another reader to make an argument for them. The reader may be disagreeing with his point but it is true. And I agree with Sande on all things. In fact he shows