Here’s my questions after reading the Grudem article
Why do so many Christian leaders - who preach a gospel of salvation and transformation through the grace and mercy of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit ALSO believe that societal improvement can come through coercive laws enacted by immoral leaders?
Why do such Christians have trouble distinguishing between the relative levels of immorality and moral danger between Trump and Biden? Because their answer to the charge that Trump is immoral and dangerous is simply to say that Biden is also immoral and dangerous so that issue is canceled out of consideration. Why is Joe Biden’s sincere and observant Catholic faith completely dismissed while Trump’s obviously performative and rarely observant Protestant faith assumed to be genuine?
Why do so many Christian leaders believe that even if America could be threatened/coerced through laws to eliminate all abortion, sexual immortality and coddling of irresponsible poor people while rewarding the responsible citizens with freedom of worship, child education, gun ownership and low taxation that a better, more godly society would be the result? The Pharisees were not practicing abortion, sexual immorality or coddling of the poor and Jesus didn’t seek to think this made them admirable or godly leaders. They had pretty good control over the education of their children and how they worshipped. But this didn’t produce a people who recognized the Messiah when he came.
Why do so many Christian leaders have trouble accepting that you can’t get the results of the cross without the way of the cross? Grudem wrote a long article that included terms like “Bible”, “Christian”, “Evangelical” and “law” but did not once mention Christ or the cross. Apparently Jesus and the cross have nothing to do with Christian political engagement. How does Grudem’s pragmatic political assessment in any way reflect Christian virtue or the foolishness of the cross, or the sacrificial love for God and neighbor demonstrated therein?
Why the phrase “insufficient care for factual accuracy”? Grudem has no problem condemning many sins, but he can’t bring himself to name the sin of “lying”?
It is worth a conversation whether the economy was better under Trump and how much credit he deserves. Barrons did an 11 point survey in June 2023 with this conclusion “But how much credit or criticism does the president really deserve? The answer will be central to the 2024 presidential campaign, which has already kicked off and might well become a showdown between the current and immediate past residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. So, with former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden touting their respective economic records, Barron’s took a look at how various aspects of the economy fared under each administration.
The economic record, for both, is mixed. Trump inherited a healthy economy from former President Barack Obama that was eight years past the 2007-09 economic downturn, and steadily expanding. In the period under study, job growth chugged along and inflation was tame. But wages were flat, and increases in the gross domestic product and job creation were more or less a continuation of trends that began in the Obama years, rather than a direct result of any changes that Trump made. Trump had one major legislative victory in his early years: a suite of tax cuts on companies and individuals passed in 2017. The measures helped boost the stock market and fueled investment and demand, but also drove up the size of the U.S. debt.
Biden took office as the economy was still recovering from the Covid pandemic shutdowns, and the steady flow of stimulus aid passed under both his watch and Trump’s fueled a major spending boom. That helped job growth soar to record levels in each of the past two years, but also drove up inflation and forced the Federal Reserve to begin rapidly tightening monetary policy—steps that could spark a recession in the months ahead.” --
You beat me to it. The economy in the first half at least of any presidential term in the US is the result of policies from the prior presidential term. It’s a huge ship that doesn’t turn quickly. Massive tax cuts produce short term gains at long term expense. And in fact, the massive Trump tax cuts are the height of hypocrisy, as Republicans claim to care about the deficit when out of power while showing no concern about it when they are in power.
Also the Afghanistan debacle was a shared one between Trump and Biden - Trump actually negotiated the terms and wanted to do it even sooner.
And Foreign Policy was less gracious with their take on Trump and the Balkans, “The Trump administration fell short on both counts. It trivialized the complex political issues between Kosovo and Serbia and sought to claim quick credit for resolving ancient animosities in time for a campaign speech in North Carolina. Meanwhile, it snubbed allies and sent confusing signals, often trampling on the very democratic principles Washington had spent more than two decades promoting in the region.”
Here’s my questions after reading the Grudem article
Why do so many Christian leaders - who preach a gospel of salvation and transformation through the grace and mercy of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit ALSO believe that societal improvement can come through coercive laws enacted by immoral leaders?
Why do such Christians have trouble distinguishing between the relative levels of immorality and moral danger between Trump and Biden? Because their answer to the charge that Trump is immoral and dangerous is simply to say that Biden is also immoral and dangerous so that issue is canceled out of consideration. Why is Joe Biden’s sincere and observant Catholic faith completely dismissed while Trump’s obviously performative and rarely observant Protestant faith assumed to be genuine?
Why do so many Christian leaders believe that even if America could be threatened/coerced through laws to eliminate all abortion, sexual immortality and coddling of irresponsible poor people while rewarding the responsible citizens with freedom of worship, child education, gun ownership and low taxation that a better, more godly society would be the result? The Pharisees were not practicing abortion, sexual immorality or coddling of the poor and Jesus didn’t seek to think this made them admirable or godly leaders. They had pretty good control over the education of their children and how they worshipped. But this didn’t produce a people who recognized the Messiah when he came.
Why do so many Christian leaders have trouble accepting that you can’t get the results of the cross without the way of the cross? Grudem wrote a long article that included terms like “Bible”, “Christian”, “Evangelical” and “law” but did not once mention Christ or the cross. Apparently Jesus and the cross have nothing to do with Christian political engagement. How does Grudem’s pragmatic political assessment in any way reflect Christian virtue or the foolishness of the cross, or the sacrificial love for God and neighbor demonstrated therein?
Why the phrase “insufficient care for factual accuracy”? Grudem has no problem condemning many sins, but he can’t bring himself to name the sin of “lying”?
It is worth a conversation whether the economy was better under Trump and how much credit he deserves. Barrons did an 11 point survey in June 2023 with this conclusion “But how much credit or criticism does the president really deserve? The answer will be central to the 2024 presidential campaign, which has already kicked off and might well become a showdown between the current and immediate past residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. So, with former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden touting their respective economic records, Barron’s took a look at how various aspects of the economy fared under each administration.
The economic record, for both, is mixed. Trump inherited a healthy economy from former President Barack Obama that was eight years past the 2007-09 economic downturn, and steadily expanding. In the period under study, job growth chugged along and inflation was tame. But wages were flat, and increases in the gross domestic product and job creation were more or less a continuation of trends that began in the Obama years, rather than a direct result of any changes that Trump made. Trump had one major legislative victory in his early years: a suite of tax cuts on companies and individuals passed in 2017. The measures helped boost the stock market and fueled investment and demand, but also drove up the size of the U.S. debt.
Biden took office as the economy was still recovering from the Covid pandemic shutdowns, and the steady flow of stimulus aid passed under both his watch and Trump’s fueled a major spending boom. That helped job growth soar to record levels in each of the past two years, but also drove up inflation and forced the Federal Reserve to begin rapidly tightening monetary policy—steps that could spark a recession in the months ahead.” --
You beat me to it. The economy in the first half at least of any presidential term in the US is the result of policies from the prior presidential term. It’s a huge ship that doesn’t turn quickly. Massive tax cuts produce short term gains at long term expense. And in fact, the massive Trump tax cuts are the height of hypocrisy, as Republicans claim to care about the deficit when out of power while showing no concern about it when they are in power.
Also the Afghanistan debacle was a shared one between Trump and Biden - Trump actually negotiated the terms and wanted to do it even sooner.
And Foreign Policy was less gracious with their take on Trump and the Balkans, “The Trump administration fell short on both counts. It trivialized the complex political issues between Kosovo and Serbia and sought to claim quick credit for resolving ancient animosities in time for a campaign speech in North Carolina. Meanwhile, it snubbed allies and sent confusing signals, often trampling on the very democratic principles Washington had spent more than two decades promoting in the region.”