The Bible according to Right-Wing Politics

By Nigel Tomes, Dec. 31, 2012 Wayne Grudem’s latest book is called “POLITICS According to the Bible.” It ought to be titled, “The Bible according to Right-Wing US Politics” or “Theology according to the Tea Party.” Here’s why: Dr. Wayne Grudem is a respected theologian; he’s Professor of Theology & Biblical Studies at Phoenix Seminary in Arizona, USA and General Editor of the ESV Study Bible. Dr. Grudem is author of the best-selling US theology textbook, Systematic Theology (1994) which sold over 350,000 copies in 8 languages. Here we review his book entitled “POLITICS According to the Bible” (2010). Rather than “POLITICS According to the Bible,” this volume ought to be titled, “The Bible according to Right-Wing US Politics” or “Theology according to the Tea Party.” That’s my frank appraisal of this book which purports to provide Scriptural support for American-style democracy, free enterprise capitalism, private property, small government, gun ownership rights, and a host of other right-wing policies. A US Patriot No doubt Prof. Grudem is sincere when he asserts, “I see these positions as flowing out of the Bible’s teachings rather than positions that I hold prior to, or independently of, those biblical teaching.” (p. 13) He honestly feels his views arise from examining “Political issues in the light of Scripture.” Yet Wayne Grudem is also a self-confessed American patriot, who (coincidentally?) finds “biblical support for the idea of patriotism” (p. 109). This is evident from his admission, “I focus primarily on the US, because that is the country I know best, the country I am proud to be a citizen of, and the country I deeply love” (p. 16). Perhaps this helps explain why, when Prof. Grudem addresses political questions in the context of Scripture, the Bible invariably produces conservative answers. Let’s examine a few examples: Bible Backs Private Property Grudem asserts that Scripture supports personal ownership of private property. Property rights are a fundamental assumption of the Bible, he says, “The Bible regularly assumes and reinforces a system in which property belongs to individuals…” (p. 262). The commandments not to steal or covet your neighbor’s possessions imply “these things belong to my neighbor.” Based on this, Grudem rejects communist and socialist notions of collective ownership. Grudem also warns against, “the regular tendency of human governments is to seek to take control of more and more of the property of a nation that God intends to be owned and controlled by private individuals.” (p. 263) In his view, the Bible echoes US conservatives’ fear of a government tyranny encroaching on the rights of individuals. Gurdem quotes the prophet Samuel’s warning to Israel that a king will tax, take, and enslave them (1 Sam. 8); he interprets this as biblical endorsement of the notion that big government is evil. But that is a peculiar American notion which Grudem inserts into Scripture. Read in context, Samuel warned Israel of the downside of a monarchy as opposed to a theocracy—direct government by God. It’s quite a stretch to read this as advocating small government versus large government. Grudem also warns against the “erosion of the right to private property” due to US government actions. He asserts that “threats to private ownership of property are increasing at the highest level of government” (p. 265) Examples are government bailouts of banks and auto makers (GM & Chrysler), plus “excessive environmental regulations” (p. 268). It seems Grudem opposes (almost) every restriction on private property rights. But is this consistent with the Bible? Inalienable Land in the Jubilee Scripture does not endorse unrestricted private ownership of all property. For ancient Israel, land was a notable exception. Contrary to current practice, land couldn’t be permanently sold; it was inalienable. In Leviticus God says “The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine …In all the country you possess, you shall allow a redemption of the land. If your brother becomes poor and sells part of his property, then his nearest relative shall redeem it.” (25:23-25) If the original owner found the means, he could also repossess his land. If not, “In the [50th] jubilee year the land shall be released, and he shall return to his property.” (Lev. 25:28) No Unrestricted Property Ownership These provisions were important in Israel’s largely agricultural society. Individual’s property rights were restricted in ways they aren’t in the US. In Israel there was no unrestricted individual property ownership of land; it was owned by the family line. This meant that one generation couldn’t sell off this family asset to the detriment of their descendents (children, grandchildren, etc.). The Jubilee provision also implied that inequality wouldn’t continually increase; every 50 years the “reset button was pressed,” land reverted back to its original owners. Clearly the Bible supports some restrictions on property ownership rights. Yet Grudem ignores these biblical statutes and their implications for society. If the US retro-actively recognized land as an inalienable asset, Native Americans would go from the bottom to the top wealth quartile. But that’s a possibility Dr. Grudem isn’t willing to contemplate!   Grudem’s God is a Republican Grudem quotes the slogan, 'God is not a Republican or a Democrat.' But, based on his analysis, it seems his God is a Republican. He concludes that “the policies endorsed by ...the Republican Party are much more consistent with biblical teachings.” (p. 573). He also thinks “that the teachings of the Bible ...mostly support the current policies of the Republicans.” (pp. 573-4) In my view this is largely because Dr. Grudem reads conservative values into Scripture. Take free market capitalism as an example. Bible Backs Free Market Capitalism Grudem alleges that Scripture backs free market capitalism. He states that “several principles from the Bible ...indicate that the free market is a much better solution than government control.” (p. 278) These include “The Bible’s emphasis on the value of human liberty... argues for a free market system” (p. 276). Plus “the Bible’s teaching that... government is to punish evil and reward those who do good and enforce order in society. It is not to own the property or businesses of a nation,” (p. 275) supports this notion, Grudem says. Free Market Capitalism--“God-given” Grudem views the market system as “God-given,” saying “Here is what I mean by a free market: A wonderful God-given process in human societies through which the goods & services that areproduced by a society (supply) continually adjust to exactly match the goods & services that are wanted by the society (demand) at each period of time, and through which the society assigns a measureable value... through the free choices of every individual in that society rather than though government control.” (p. 276) This description belongs in an Economics 101 class and dates back to Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (1776). But neither Adam Smith, nor today’s economists, claim divine-endorsement for the capitalist system; Grudem does! He repeats Adam Smith’s version of the free market’s “invisible hand” by which self-seeking individuals (inadvertently) end up producing what’s best for society. As Grudem says, “They seek their own self-interests, but in a free market that is achieved by best providing for the interests of others.” (p. 278) So, free market capitalism gives us the best of all worlds! Government Health Care System Fails Based on this wholesale endorsement of “God-given” free market capitalism Grudem opposes virtually all restrictions on private companies; he opposes government interference in markets--for e.g., in the US health system (p. 278). He opposes the “Obama-care” health reforms (pp. 313-5). Scripture never addresses this issue; nevertheless Grudem asserts that “a government-controlled health care system would fail to provide enough of the services that people want, leading to the rationing of health care...leading also to long waits for certain services (as seen in...Canada or England for e.g.” (p. 278). Dr. Grudem fails to point out however that life expectancy—a good measure of overall health—is higher in both Canada and the UK than in the US. In 2010 life expectancy was 80.7 years in Canada, 80.1 in the UK, but only 78.2 years in the US. Hence people can expect to live (on average) 2.5 extra years in Canada. Plus, the Canada-US gap has been growing. Despite the criticism of Grudem and his peers, Canada seems to be doing something right! Free Markets Not Always Best Unrestricted free market capitalism produces society’s best outcome only under restrictive conditions. For e.g. all the costs of production must be borne by producers. “Externalities” such as air or water pollution mean that producers underestimate the real costs of production to society as a whole. Hence their products tend to be under-priced and over-produced. Likewise if additional costs are imposed on others by the purchaser of a product (e.g. cancer-causing, 2nd-hand smoke) government regulation can be beneficial. Grudem fails to acknowledge such real-life situations. In fact he’s critical of US government actions to safeguard rivers and wilderness areas (p, 268). But these are cases where private ownership probably doesn’t reflect all the costs or benefits to society, both presently and in future generations. Hence unrestricted free markets outcomes are unlikely to match society’s best interests in these cases. Ignoring these possibilities, Grudem gives a cavalier, across-the-board endorsement to capitalism’s free market system. Grudem’s Bible is an American Book Grudem says, “I am well aware that the Bible is not an American book” (p. 16). Yet, in his hands, the Bible becomes a very American book; it endorses an exclusively American view. It is “America first” and everyone else a distant second. This is evident when immigration is analyzed. Grudem argues that the Bible enjoins governments “to seek the good of these they rule…This means that the immigration policies of a nation should be designed to bring benefit to that specific nation” (p. 471). This statement is not innocuous; it means the benefit to existing US citizens ought to decide which immigrants are accepted into the US. Under this criterion, the benefits to the immigrants themselves are irrelevant. This is an Ameri-centric view; it’s not a biblical view. The Bible says God loves the world (Jn. 3:16). That means people from all nations, not just US citizens! Grudem applies his Ameri-centric criterion to call for tough immigration measures. He would require “immigrants from every nation to learn English well.” The fact that 20% of the US residents don’t speak English at home is viewed as a problem; out of “care for the future of Spanish-speaking people” Grudem asserts, “we should require that they [US Hispanics] speak English” (p. 477). His view is “Anglo-centric” as well as “Ameri-centric.” A Global View of Migration I contend that a biblical view of immigration would consider its effects on all nations of the world (Jn. 3:16). Jesus commended the attitude, “I was a stranger and you welcomed me” (Matt. 25:35). This is not inconsistent with Grudem’s emphasis on the superiority of free market outcomes; let’s take that as given. When analyzing global trade Grudem calls for the elimination of tariffs (taxes) on exports & imports (pp. 535-6). This is the standard free market prescription for removing barriers to international trade in goods & services. The same free market economics advocates removing restrictions on the movement of “factors of production”—capital and labor (skilled & unskilled workers). Greatest Global Economic Distortion Consider the current global situation: Less developed countries have millions of workers (many skilled & educated), but lack the capital (financial & physical) to enable their workers to be productive enough to escape poverty. Meanwhile developed nations have abundant capital, but are often short of certain types of worker. There’s an economic imbalance here. Economic studies show that the economic costs of global restrictions on workers’ migration are huge. Michael Clements summarizes this research, saying, “Large numbers of people born in poor countries would like to leave those countries, but barriers prevent their emigration. Those barriers, according to economists’ best estimates to date, cost the world economy much more than all remaining barriers to the international movement of goods.” [Michael A. Clemens, Economics & Emigration, Center for Global Development, Working Paper #264, Aug. 2011] Research finds that the greatest single distortion in the global economy is the binding constraint on emigration from poor countries. The estimated gains from eliminating these mobility barriers range from 50 percent to 150 percent of total world production (GDP). That’s $30 to $ 90 trillion US dollars [Clemens, Table 1]. These are potential gains from allowing free markets to work—the system Grudem endorses as “God-given.” “Give me your tired, your poor...” This is a case where a global view contradicts Grudem’s Ameri-centric view which is anti-immigration. I contend that a biblical view would reflect God’s concern for the whole world, not just the welfare of today’s US citizens. Accepting the free market view and applying it on a global scale, Grudem ought to endorse the elimination of restrictions on global migration. Of course enacting this would lead to huge people flows out of poor countries (e.g. Africa) and into developed countries, including the US & Canada. But the willingness to receive a huge influx is an important part of US heritage embodied in the Statue of Liberty (1903): “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me...” I believe this attitude reflects a more biblical view than the Ameri-centric attitude of Wayne Grudem’s, “POLITICS According to the Bible.” Conclusion Grudem’s POLITICS according to the Bible is a terrible book. Terrible because, rather than addressing US “political issues in the light of Scripture” (as the cover claims,) this book reads Right-Wing Republican values into the Bible. It ought to be called, “Theology according to the Tea Party.” The author selects a few Bible verses and, based upon them, interprets Scripture as endorsing conservative policy prescriptions. I consider it unfortunate that this volume will be used as a textbook to teach seminary & Bible college students. To the extent they are influenced, these future pastors and ministers of US churches will propagate the mistaken view that the Bible endorses Right-wing conservative values. This will inhibit the cause of the gospel, since it reinforces the popular mis-perception that in order to become a Christian, one has to endorse right-wing political, economic & social views. Nigel Tomes, Toronto, CANADA Views expresses here are the personal opinion of the author, not the views of the church