Politics According to the Bible - Wayne Grudem

[Eoghan]

Has anyone read this one? It was mentioned on Talk Radio this morning as a noteable contribution.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

It was mentioned on Talk Radio this morning as a noteable contribution.

Interesting. What show?

 

[Eoghan]

Interesting. What show?

It was Denis Prager, but rather than discuss Denis have you read the commended book?

 

[RamistThomist]

I reviewed it here
https://puritanboard.com/threads/politics-according-to-the-bible-wayne-grudem.96473/

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

It was Denis Prager, but rather than discuss Denis have you read the commended book?

Sorry, I was just surprised to hear that a Christian book was being discussed over the radio. But no, I have not read Grudem's book.

 

[Kinghezy]

Sorry, I was just surprised to hear that a Christian book was being discussed over the radio. But no, I have not read Grudem's book.

It may have come up because he (https://townhall.com/columnists/way...to-mark-galli-and-christianity-today-n2558657) waded into the CT article editorial calling for Trump to be removed (https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...l-trump-should-be-removed-from-office.100499/)

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Dr Peter Sanlon, who was actually converted through my current church, wrote a critical review of the abovementioned book in Themelios. It is years since I have read the review myself, but I recall Dr Sanlon saying that he found the book's approach crudely partisan.

Edit: just scanning through the review, it is obvious that he was less than impressed with some of the argumentation. He says in the conclusion, "Politics represents not the Bible's view of politics, but a snapshot of late-American libertarian capitalist political philosophy. There is much I like about that political posture; it has contributed great good to the world. But it is far from free from the effects of sin and has contributed ill as well as good."

 

[RamistThomist]

Dr Peter Sanlon, who was actually converted through my current church, wrote a critical review of the abovementioned book in Themelios. It is years since I have read the review myself, but I recall Dr Sanlon saying that he found the book's approach crudely partisan.

Edit: just scanning through the review, it is obvious that he was less than impressed with some of the argumentation. He says in the conclusion, "Politics represents not the Bible's view of politics, but a snapshot of late-American libertarian capitalist political philosophy. There is much I like about that political posture; it has contributed great good to the world. But it is far from free from the effects of sin and has contributed ill as well as good."

It might appear to be capitalist partisanship, but Grudem is a bit more nuanced than that. He explores the Laffer curve on economics and develops his argument that way.

 

[arapahoepark]

Dr Peter Sanlon, who was actually converted through my current church, wrote a critical review of the abovementioned book in Themelios. It is years since I have read the review myself, but I recall Dr Sanlon saying that he found the book's approach crudely partisan.

Edit: just scanning through the review, it is obvious that he was less than impressed with some of the argumentation. He says in the conclusion, "Politics represents not the Bible's view of politics, but a snapshot of late-American libertarian capitalist political philosophy. There is much I like about that political posture; it has contributed great good to the world. But it is far from free from the effects of sin and has contributed ill as well as good."

Its utterly fascinating how many think ideas of libertarianism are harmful, let alone new, because they haven't read virtually anything on the topic.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

Its utterly fascinating how many think ideas of libertarianism are harmful, let alone new, because they haven't read virtually anything on the topic.

I have read Mises, Hayek, and listen to Stefan Molyneux and other libertarians on almost a daily basis. Also, I have read Libertarian Theologians such as R. J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Gary DeMar, et al, and even wrote a book in the past defending that outlook.

 

[RamistThomist]

I should also mention I am not a Libertarian. (What's Aleppo?). I do think Grudem's analysis of the Laffer Curve and the fact that government regulations harm small business (and African American small businesses) is irrefutable.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I should also mention I am not a Libertarian. (What's Aleppo?). I do think Grudem's analysis of the Laffer Curve and the fact that government regulations harm small business (and African American small businesses) is irrefutable.

I have not read the book, but that assessment does seem to ring true.

 

[RamistThomist]

I have not read the book, but that assessment does seem to ring true.

This is a good summary
https://tifwe.org/10-values-wayne-grudem-says-will-enable-a-nation-to-overcome-poverty/

 

[arapahoepark]

I have read Mises, Hayek, and listen to Stefan Molyneux and other libertarians on almost a daily basis. Also, I have read Libertarian Theologians such as R. J. Rushdoony, Gary North, Gary DeMar, et al, and even wrote a book in the past defending that outlook.

It wasn't directed at you actually, but Sanlon's quote, particularly the latter part. Sure, its not free from the effects of sin. Duh. While, I don't care much for Grudem his review was utterly biased and ignorant.
Apologies for getting worked up.

 

[Eoghan]

I recall discussing the Laffer Curve with my MP. He was of the opinion that government debt was like a business overdraft (except it never gets repaid) and the Laffer Curve showed there was a "sweet spot" where the government maximised tax revenues!

I was shocked but upon reflection not surprised. One of the radio commentators mentioned that the constitution (or was it the declaration of independence) was primarily theological.

 

[RamistThomist]

I recall discussing the Laffer Curve with my MP. He was of the opinion that government debt was like a business overdraft (except it never gets repaid) and the Laffer Curve showed there was a "sweet spot" where the government maximised tax revenues!

I was shocked but upon reflection not surprised. One of the radio commentators mentioned that the constitution (or was it the declaration of independence) was primarily theological.

There is a sweet spot on maximizing tax revenue, but it is lower on the curve than Big Govt types like to admit.