PoliticsAccording to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture by Wayne Grudem

PoliticsAccording to the Bible: A Comprehensive Resource for Understanding Modern Political Issues in Light of Scripture Reviews

• 
  Mark Sequeira

  I respect Wayne Grudem but this book should be titled, "Politics according to the far right Republican Party. Sorry. I am a conservative but I am also a thorough-going Biblicist and political activist (in the good, community-sense trying to bless others and expand the Kingdom of God in visible and invisible ways that God would own!) and I must say, IMHO this book is just an atrocious mess.
  
  
  
  I wish I could be more gracious - but writing a book in admitted response to the recent growth in readership of Jim Wallis, Shane Clairborne, etc. by Christians AND labeling it 'Politics according TO THE BIBLE.' is unforgivable.
  
  
  
  This is a huge over-sized book of some 600+ pages and is full of very specific rules 'according to the Bible' versus principles and then application. One only needs to turn to the SPECIFIC ISSUES: Chapter 15: Special Groups - J. Native Americans (American Indians) pg 547 to get a basic idea of where we are going.
  
  
  
  In this chapter we discover the problems of Indian tribes and the solution: Abolish tribal land protections and assign all the land to individuals (regardless of former treaties) who can then sell that land to natives or non-natives. We are told that the solution to native issues is progress and self-improvement (at least economically) and that is largely based on individual ownership. Indeed, Native Americans are actually cursed because they are breaking Old Testament laws based on Individual Property rights! Based on his own words, "As I have argued in chapter 9 (see pp. 261-68), the Bible teaches a system of private ownership of property, not tribal ownership or governmental ownership. So in this case I think it is right to recognize that these tribal traditions are in direct conflict with the teaching about property in the Word of God." (Now I must say, as someone who has worked in other cultures, has studied cross cultural ministry and contextualization...As someone that can respect other cultures yet look at those things within culture that harm or hold societies back from the Kingdom of God, I think this analysis is sadly lacking. I challenge Doctor Grudem and you, the reader, to actually study Indian history and culture studies as well as their relations with the U.S. Government (even as humble as Dee Brown's 'Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee') before proclaiming that the main problems Indians deal with can be solved through assigning land titles to individuals among tribal peoples.
  
  
  
  We are then told that we have no time to go into any of these principles in detail but it would all have to be worked out by the tribes themselves with the U.S. Government (presumably by forcing them to do just that - for their own good!). Would this then mean the assimilation of Indian peoples? Yes. He admits. Except they should have a 'Disneylandesque-center' in order to remember their heritage.
  
  
  
  Next, we are told we must reform the Indian courts and basically abolish them since they can be in opposition to our hallowed U.S. Court system. Once again, we are told, "this reform would remove some measure of tribal sovereignty over the areas in which Native Americans live. But, once again, the choice is clear: will Native Americans cling to their traditions-which are trapping their people in poverty and economic despair, and in alienation from the prosperous society that surrounds them-or will they abandon some of these traditions for the good of their people?" Then he actually has the audacity to say, "If they take seriously the Bible statement that a civil government ruler should be 'God's servant for your good' (Rom. 13:4) then they should implement these reforms, because they clearly would bring good to their people." Meaning the same court system and government that they could never trust to not steal their land or shoot their people or reneg on their word?
  
  
  
  Clearly, in his chapter on self protection, Doctor Grudem believes that we have the right to protect ourselves, yet the Native Peoples do not have that same right since they were in rebellion against God when we decided to start killing them due to our own misunderstandings and cultural arrogance.
  
  
  
  This book has so many American cultural assumptions that it is practically unusable. I didn't know that we had American civil proclamations in the first century Jewish and Roman context but don't put it past the Holy Spirit to write the Bible for US since we already possess so much cultural arrogance that we can't imagine the Bible being written for first century believers or indeed believers that wouldn't recognize or even understand our variety of church and state and western democracy and individualism.
  
  
  
  I wanted this to be a good book. I've read probably 20-30 on politics and Jesus or the Bible. This is clearly one of the worst for anyone looking for a place to begin or anyone looking for Biblical principles.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  Adam Calvert

  While I appreciate that Grudem presents the reader with a lot of thoughtful research and analysis in well presented style, tone, and sincerity, I have a very difficult time in seeing how this book lives up to its title.
  
  The book is definitely about politics from a Christian perspective - Grudem's Christian perspective. But it is certainly not a standard on politics "according to the Bible."
  
  As far as I’m concerned it really seems like the book presents the Republican platform baptized in proof-text Christian Scriptures.
  
  The great things about this book are the very detailed explanations of how our government is supposed to work (concerning how it was originally set up), how it's currently functioning, and some of the difficult issues that are dividing the nation. There really is a great deal of reference material in here and some truly sobering facts.
  
  The down side to the book was how a Christian is actually supposed to respond. He argues that Christians should have significant influence in their government, and he presents some texts that indicate as much. And that is great! But he approaches the Scriptures with a very pick-and-choose attitude as to which texts actually apply to politics.
  
  Particularly disturbing was his dealings with the very school of thought that can actually do much more than simply criticize the current government situation but that can truly offer a substantial alternative with solid authority behind it - the school of thought known as Theonomy.
  
  Grudem was very un-scholarly in his approach in dismissing theonomic principles when it comes to politics. His arguments were basically:
  
  (1) Theonomy doesn't recognize a separation of church state (p. 66) a straw man argument if there ever was one - anyone who has actually read up on theonomy knows that there is a very clear separation of church and state (see Greg Bahnen's Theonomy in Christian Ethics, pp. 389-420).
  
  (2) Some of the Old Testament laws are "severe" (with a negative connotation) and "should not be used as a pattern for governments today" (p. 84). I find this very odd since even the New Testament says that the Old Testament laws are "just" laws (Heb. 2:2) as well as "holy, righteous, and good" (Rom. 7:14) and that the Old Testament does display them as a pattern for a godly government (regardless of age - Deut. 4:8). Why he warrants Old Testament laws to be a bad pattern is beyond me.
  
  (3) And finally, the all-so-impressive argument "most or all recognized leaders in the evangelical movement in the United States have clearly distanced themselves from [the theonomic] position" (p. 23) - as if that's even an argument. Oh how I wish this kind of logic was around when Martin Luther was teaching the Bible to the masses - "We probably shouldn't pay attention to what he's saying since most or all recognized leaders in the Roman Catholic Church have clearly distanced themselves from his position on justification." In reality, theonomy simply says God's Word is authoritative. But once we take that authority away it becomes a slippery slope.
  
  Either way, in the case of Grudem in this book, for someone who opposes theonomy so strongly he did sure like to use the Old Testament when it was convenient to his case. But I feel that this only continues to show the world the inconsistency of the evangelical Christian faith in America. We want to evangelize but not make disciples (who wants to teach doctrine? we know they're going to heaven, they prayed the prayer). We want to use the Old Testament as a pattern for societal justice, but only if it's convenient to our own cause.
  
  Example: there shouldn't be an estate tax, and the government shouldn't have so many regulations on the free market; but we shouldn't have such "severe" penalties for crimes like kidnapping, rape, murder, adultery, homosexuality, and we should be allowed to go anywhere in the world to spread democracy whether other countries like it or not.
  
  This is truly Republican principles supposedly backed by the authority of Scripture. The problem is, as Grudem points out, Scripture does not authorize an estate tax nor intrusion in the economic marketplace. But contrary to what Grudem supposes, neither does it authorize a nation the normative prerogative in policing the world. Yet it does authorize “severe” (although the Bible doesn’t call them severe but just (Deut. 4:8; Heb. 2:2) laws for crimes like kidnapping, rape, murder, adultery, homosexuality, etc.
  
  Abandoning theonomic principles (that is, God’s Word should be the standard for ethical norms), Grudem’s main supposition behind his book seems to be whatever seems practical to him in light of what he particularly likes about Scripture or the way things work.
  
  For instance, he likes the idea found in Scripture that education of children belongs to the parents and not to the state. So he presents a case for the option of homeschooling and private schooling (p. 247-248). Yet even then it’s just the “option” for those two - he seems okay with the government taking money from private citizens to support state-sponsored schools (p. 249-256).
  
  But he also likes the idea of the government "enacting laws against the production, distribution, and sale of pornographic materials" (p. 242). While pornography is clearly wrong morally (Mt. 5:27-28), God's Word does not authorize the government to make laws restricting it's uncoerced adult production. That is not a Biblical view of government and its purpose - but since Grudem particularly likes the idea of laws restricting pornography, he upholds it as being “Politics According to the Bible.”
  
  There were certainly some good parts in the book. If I wish to be fair (which I do), I must admit that. The best part for me personally was his research on the issues (massive references throughout the book), and his clear explanation of the government's separation of powers (or the separation that is supposed to be there) and how to get those powers back in balance.
  
  But when the foundation is sand, the structure will fall (Mt. 7:24-27). And so while I do think it’s a good reference work, I certainly can’t endorse it as a book that is truly “Politics According to the Bible.”
• 
  Mark Glidden

  The title of this book is very misleading. There ought to be a subtitle stating "If you are a Fundamentalist and have removed all trace of conscience". This book is such twaddle that it almost defies any sort of serious attempt at criticism. It's cold in it's approach towards so many sensitive issues, but most painfully, so unashamedly polarizing in the way it deals with literally every single political issue we face in the 21st century. Grudem is infuriating in his self-righteous espousal of Biblical principles as a basis for an ultra-conservative political stance, so much so that one often gets the impression that he would be better suited as a Bible Belt Republican rather than a "theologian". Let us pray that this book might, in future, become known as an obscure and outdated text, and that when dealing with political issues, Christians might remember only two quotes from the Bible, both taken from Our Lord: "Judge not, lest you too be judged" and "Love one another".
• 
  William

  It is always harder to build a position than tear it down, and none is harder than building a coherent political position, in my opinion. Nonetheless, this book has some serious faults as many people have already noted. Dr. Grudem offers a helpful outline of significant subjects with which to work. It offers a good range of important topics, and at least offers a position on each subject worthy of consideration. The topics chosen are legitimate, and is therefore a good list of topics for one to consider while establishing their own political views.
  However, my biggest disagreement with the book is that it fails to seriously interact with other authors, viewpoints, and historical precedence, and lacks a reflection on hermeneutical method, perhaps leaving the author vulnerable to sociocultural factors that can twist biblical application. Along with other Grudem books, it continues to be a large methodological misfire, pulling texts from Scripture without consultation with others to check the author's biases, and calling "Biblical." There isn't a reference in the book about Grudem's Prolegomena. Evidence of this is the fact that it is curiously reflective of the Republican party's platforms, which is surprising since I imagine the Republican party has not given much credance to the Bible as of late. This is an issue with all Biblical-Theologians who do not consult with church history as a tool for guidance. Not enough credence is paid to the fact that they are products of their environment, and in their biblical reading, they will reflect their time and convictions, which is no different from eisegesis.
  This book contains a string of topics not coherently associated or have a strong flow of ideas. For this reason, I would pair this book with extensive additional reading exploring the relationship between Christ and Culture, an historical perspective of the party system in the US, Constitution with the Federalist Writings (Anti-Federalist writings for bonus points) and a fuller treatment on economics, for beginners ("Poverty and Wealth" by Ronald Nash, "Socialism" by Mises). I like Grudem's book for some of the recommendations found in it, such as "The Death of Common Sense." After that, I would engage in the major philosophical political works of the western tradition (Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Augustine, Aquinas, Machiavelli, Calvin, and the enlightenment philosophers [Hobbes, Rousseau, Locke], John Stuart Mill, John Rawls, and some critics of classical liberalism, such as C. S. Lewis). I think reading some introductions to political philosophy would also greatly benefit the reader, as well. Consider, too, Abraham Kuyper, Russel Kirk, G. K. Chesterton, and Edmund Burke. Read a book on Natural Law ethics.
  I believe it is necessary for the Christian to read extensively and beyond the Scriptures because, although the Scriptures are our sole ultimate authority, God has given grace to all fallen men, and has bequethed them beneficial and good ideas that have aided human governance until Christ's return. This was true in Genesis 4:17-22, and it is true now.
  Ultimately, the most value this book offers, in my mind, is two: an introduction to ideas to the complete political novice, and as a case study into how the naively biblicist twenteeth-century mind reasons.
  
  -My seperate additional thought on politics in general and unrelated to the book-
  
  The political genre is a serious subject whose worst student is the lazy mind. The political genre can feel like an endless pile of books and writings that must eventually be lined up with current events. This can feel demoralising to the student who has limited capacity to read. Nonetheless, it should be encouraged to read politics broadly. It is a wholesome project and a lifelong process. Don't do it alone, for it is a burden too heavy to bear.
  God speed.
• 
  Chase Austin

  
  
  "I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5)
  
  As citizens of a democratic nation it is our civic duty to be well-informed on the pressing issues at hand, so that our decisions or votes convey our personal beliefs of what we would have the government accomplish or not accomplish. As a Social Studies teacher this is how I explain civic duty to my students, what I cannot share with my students is that I am an evangelical Christian and my faith in Jesus Christ as well as obediently following the bible, the inerrant word of God directs me on not only how I live my life but also how I vote and participate in our government.
  
  Starting with Matthew 22:20-21, Dr. Grudem uses scripture to clearly explain and persuade what the bible says and how it should be properly applied to past and current issues such as abortion, role of government, National Defense, proper scope or limit of government, the environment, education, the economy, homosexual "marriage", taxation and much much more.
  
  This is an important book for believers and non-believers alike, one of the arguments that is used over and over again in this book is that using reasonable persuasion regarding a topic is not the same as forcing your beliefs on someone. In fact in a democracy, conversation and persuasion are effective tools for change and hopefully this book will offer sound edification and persuasion for anyone who turns its pages.
  
• 
  Sean McGowan

  This book was very useful. The section on the Supreme Court as well as the various discussions on the issues makes it well worth the read.
• 
  Eric Abisror

  This was a very good book on politics. It was helpful to read all the way through, but can easily be a reference book as well.
• 
  Katie Marschner

  This is an excellent resource. Grudem literally writes about every subject imaginable when it comes to politics. He does an excellent job making his points Biblical.
  
  There were a couple things I think he got wrong. One being the gospel. He has a much broader view of the gospel than I do...believed the gospel is something that we do rather than something Christ had fully accomplished.
  
  The other thing I differ with him on is his view of Israel. He is not a dispensationalist, so naturally his view of Israel's position today would differ from mine. He believes that God's covenants to Israel transferred to the church, and the church has replaced Israel as God's covenant people. However, he still holds a very high view of Israel and believes nations should still support Israel. His reasoning is just different from where I land on that topic.
  
  Abortion, homosexuality, capital punishment, tariffs, personal injury lawsuits, borders, role of government, foreign policy, judges, rule of law, the supreme court etc are all covered in this book, as well as numerous other topics.
  
  I listed to the audio version of this book. It was read well, however, I wish I had a hard copy. It would be much easier to find the topics i wanted to freshen up on again later with a physical copy of this book. The audio version does not have chapter headings at all, just chapter numbers which will make it hard to find topics later.
  
  I definitely recommend this one if you are interested in politics at all. He does a great job looking at political issues through the lense of the Bible.
• 
  Jeff Noble

  I had no idea this book would become such a compelling read. It’s BIG but I highly recommend it for all Christians. When people say they “don’t like politics,” they don’t realize how naive that statement reveals them to be.
  
  Our grasp of the multiple issues necessary for human flourishing, government, peace and development of society IS politics. To hate “politics” is to hate humanity. You can’t have one without the other. Having no government is not n option, especially since scripture clearly teaches that God established governments, laws and that they have foundational role in all of human society.
  
  Grudem clearly communicates and distinctive biblical vision and perspective on issues as wide ranging as the economy, foreign affairs, war, racism, economic principles and justice.
  
  This book will make you uncomfortable as you realize your uninvolvement or apathy has significantly contributed to the current mess of culture we find ourselves in. It will also remind you of our biblical hope in King Jesus who is above all earthly authority and through whom we can influence our current political leaders and policies.
• 
  Stacia

  Excellent book! I only wish there would be a revised version that could be released as A LOT has changed in our country's politics since the book was published over 10 years ago!
  
  I highly recommend this book to all Christians, even if just using it as a reference to be referred to in pieces. It is well researched with 100's of footnotes and a plethora of Bible verses to support his reasoning.
  
  
• 
  Marco

  Não gostei do livro. Na verdade esperava mais. O livro, além de ser bastante introdutório, apresenta um visão cristã da política pouco bíblica, assumindo uma visão muito americanizada ou republicana dos assuntos. Somado a isso, o livro também apresenta algumas ideias socialistas, bastantes perigosas.
  
  Este é o tipo de livro escrito por um bom teólogo, mas que têm mais boas intenções do que conhecimento do assunto. Política não é a praia do Grudem e este livro é a prova disso.
• 
  Martin

  Much more politics than Bible. (Will elaborate later).
• 
  Jordan Mills

  Great, a bit too conservative for my enjoyment, but still great
• 
  Bryce Beale

  As a political conservative, there is not much in this large tome I would not consent to. It was written in 2010 and so most of the illustrations and concerns are drawn from that context.
  
  Politics has been on every pastor's mind--really, everybody's mind--this past year. How should a Christian think about politics, what is the intersection of fatih and politics, and how do I interact with those I disagree with politically? For that reason, I thought the conclusion of Grudem's book its most helpful part. He is realistic about the future, but also optimistic (in a bit of a charismatic way, but I can look past that).
  
  Grudem does address one question that has been burning on my mind and on the minds of many other moderate conservatives in the church: does the Republican party basically overlap with the Christian faith? Grudem answers that while he does at times disagree with the Republican party (for example, on its overspending), almost every major political view he has formed from the Bible aligns with the Republicans, not the Democrats.
  
  I don't entirely disagree, yet I don't entirely agree either. It seems to me that before 2016, the Republican party could claim the moral high ground on most issues and therefore an overlap between Christianity and the Republican party felt more tenable. Four years of an immoral Republican president--with many really great policies, I must add!--has unsettled many younger evangelicals on the conservative side of things. How closely can I align my faith with the Republican party when it too, although it excels in several important moral areas like abortion and marriage, is the sort of thing that can produce and support and defend and loyally follow a leader who is more-than-usually materialistic, proud, and sexually immoral?
  
  Some might hear this as advocacy for believers joining the Democratic Party--but it is definitely not that. The moral failings of the Democrats have not changed, they have only worsened with time. That party still, within its very platform, fights for the death of the unborn and the advancement of sexual rebellion. I also think the economic leanings of the Democratic Party are fairly disastrous, like Grudem does.
  
  But where does that leave me? In a two-party, adversarial system of government, I find myself mostly aligned with the Republican worldview and set of policies, but not completely. It is a generalization to say that Republicans remind me of the Pharisees of Jesus' day, while Democrats remind me of the prostitutes and tax collectors, but there is something to that generalization. Jesus' politcal view was summarized as, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (Matt. 22:21; Mark 12:17; Luke 20:25). And that is the most important point: if I compromise on a moral issue for the sake of my own Party's stance on any given issue, then I have given to Caesar what belongs to God. Or again, if I begin to align so closely with my Party that it becomes difficult to distinguish between it and the voice of God, then I have bowed the knee to Caesar, not God.
  
  Lastly, I think the church has been hit particularly hard on the issue of race because of our national history. Issues like abortion are quite clear and easy--it is wrong to kill an innocent person, end of story. But moral, political, and even--I grieve to say it!--theological conservatives in the history of the United States largely got race/ethnicity wrong. There were exceptions, but not enough. Very sadly, many theological liberals in the North had a better view of slavery than their more orthodox Southern counterparts. Spurgeon is one of those exceptions who condemned slavery, but I have to admit that if he had lived in the Southern United States instead of London, I don't know that he could have continued as a preacher (he received death threats and his books were burned in the South).
  
  To take my cue from Grudem's optimism, I do think this period of intense Christian political crisis has resulted in far more discussion about an issue we previously took for granted, and therefore will help the true church to hammer out a healthy, orthodox view on race/ethnicity, much like the early church spent centuries and rivers of ink trying to understand a right view of the Trinity. May God our Shepherd give us all the humility to follow his word contra mundum and contra nos when necessary, and the hope to persevere in uncertain times.
• 
  Nanette

  A Must Read. Period.
• 
  Bruno Matias

  Uma excelente introdução. Recomendo!
• 
  Ryan

  Great reference book for those wishing to connect biblical faith and politics
• 
  Jonathan

  The buyer should beware: for virtually all of the issues Grudem lines up with the conservative Republican side. He states this unapologetically upfront in the book's introduction. He believes he is siding with Republican policies simply because they align with the teachings and principles in Scripture. Christians who are politically liberal will find this a hard pill to swallow. Nevertheless, Grudem does give arguments and the politically liberal Christians will need to deal with those arguments (and his counter-arguments to liberal arguments) and not just go ad hominem or give a knee-jerk response. On several occasions now I've had conversations with Christian democrats who are too dismissive of Grudem's book. They read a section here or there, find out Grudem takes the conservative side, and dismiss the book as moronic. They end up repeating arguments that Grudem interacts with and refutes in the book or else they end up misrepresenting what Grudem is arguing or has said. To give just one example, one person, call him "Bob", said Grudem was ignorant of an issue because he (Grudem) didn't mention a certain person in the book. Turns out Grudem does mention that person. Bob just hadn't read the book carefully enough.
  
  For the *overall* quality of the book I would give it four stars. Overall, the book is a good presentation of a Christian approach to politics both in theory and practice. It will provide a great reference for someone who wants to know why a Christian should care about politics, what type of political values the Bible might support, or what a Christian (or perhaps in some cases simply a generic conservative) argument might be on any given issue, from CAFE standards on automobile mileage to faith based organizations or any other political topic you might imagine. The book can be used in this reference sort of way by both conservatives and liberals. Want to know why those crazy Christian conservatives think we should be able to have guns? Want to know how they might try to justify that in light of the Bible? Turn to page 226.
  
  Nevertheless, I've given the book only three stars. Why? Due to some poor arguments and a question regarding the book's title in relation to the nature of arguments that occupy a large section of the book I have to give it three stars. These aren't major faults in the book, I think the question regarding the book's title is a bigger issue than some of the poor arguments, but they do detract from the value of the book nonetheless. Truth be told, I'd give the book 3.5 stars if that were possible. As it is, I give it three.
  
  To give just one example of a poor argument: early in the book Grudem addresses the question of whether all earthly governments are evil and demonic. He first sets up the case that governments *are* evil. In the process, he cites a reason given by Greg Boyd: the devil claims to have authority over all earthly kingdoms in his temptation of Jesus in Luke 4. To counter this reason, Grudem points out that Jesus said in John 8:44 that "there is no truth in [Satan]." Thus, Grudem concludes, "...we have a choice: Do we believe Satan's words that he has the authority of all earthly kingdoms, or do we believe Jesus' words that satan is a liar and the father of lies?" (36). But this looks like a stretched understanding of John 8:44. It doesn't seem plausible to understand John 8:44 as saying that all propositions spoken by Satan are false. Can Satan not say that he is Satan or that I am human or that Jesus' name is Jesus or that 2 + 2 = 4 or that there is a God or that God has spoken or that there was such a thing as a tree in the garden of Eden? In which case, how did he tempt Eve to eat from a tree if it involved Satan implicitly asserting the tree's existence? Therefore, I don't think that John 8:44 alone will give us reason to dismiss Satan's claim to authority in Luke 4.
  
  As I said, this is just one example. There are others that I think are poor for different reasons. But I don't think these poor arguments dominate the book or even take up a large minority. For the most part, Grudem gives good arguments although never as rigorous as they could be if more space were given to the issue in question.
  
  Finally, I said there was a question regarding the book's title in relation to the nature of arguments that occupy a large portion of the book. Grudem states in the introduction that he will be using three types of arguments: arguments that draw from direct teaching on Scripture, arguments that draw from broader principles drawn from Scripture, and, finally, arguments drawn from facts in the world (see page 17). The question arises from the third type of argument and whether it is appropriate to call your book _Politics *According to the Bible*_ when it addresses issues like what sort of regulations should auto-manufacturers be held to or issues regarding farm subsidies. These are issues that can be tied back to the Bible only in the broadest of senses and, as Grudem himself admits, there is a lot of room for disagreement here. Granted that we could tie the issue of farm subsidies to some biblical principles, would anyone think it appropriate to title a book _Farm Subsidies According to the Bible_? I doubt it.
  
  Nevertheless, Grudem does try to keep the biblical principles in mind and I think the majority of the book concerns itself enough with the first and second type of arguments that the presence of this third category of arguments doesn't totally ruin the credibility of the book's title.
  
  Whether you are politically liberal or conservative you'll want to pick this book up and, if not read it all the way through from front to back, use it as a reference. If you are a liberal and you use the book in a reference manner you'll want to be careful about arriving at hasty conclusions or generalizations. Some issues are taken up more than once in different sections. Some of the arguments Grudem makes relate back to earlier arguments in different sections. The introduction should be read in its entirety... some of the problems that politically liberal Christians expressed to me would have been cleared up just by reading the intro.
• 
  José Matheus

  Assim como o outro livro que li dele, esse é bastante introdutório. Como li a versão em português, talvez não tenha percebido tanto o aspecto tão proeminentemente político (Republicano, no caso) do livro, apesar de ser possível sim encontrar varios traços disso. Tem conclusões duvidosas, e um embasamento não muito consistente. Gosto da parte sobre influência expressiva no governo, entretanto, apesar de discordar de umas pequenas coisas. É essencial recuperarmos essa perspectiva de influência, e por isso as 3 estrelas. Não vejo grandes problemas no 1º capítulo, o da influência positiva é bom. O dos princípios acho as discussões rasas, e o de Cosmovisão, complicado. O apêndice sobre avivamento é difícil de ler.
• 
  Noah McMillen

  The title of this book is a bit misleading, though Grudem is clearer in his intention for the book within the writing itself. Grudem is not laying out what the Bible clearly teaches on politics but instead lays out basic principles from the Bible and then argues for his perspective on many key political issues based on these Biblical principles, adding pragmatic arguments and data for support, mostly aligning with the Republican Party. As a result, I strongly disagree with him on some points, like immigration laws, but agree with him more often than not.
  
  I thoroughly enjoyed the first part of the book, “Basic Principles,” and I praise the method in which Grudem argued his views, even in areas where I disagree with him.
• 
  Jean

  Grudem gives compelling arguments, supported by Scripture, for many social issues that Christians struggle with these days. This book is very long! I only got to Part 2 - Chap. 6 before it expired at the library. I listened to the audio version and don't care much for the narrator. But my husband thought he was good.
• 
  Abel Saraiva

  Tem aspetos básicos do tema que são bem desenvolvidos, contudo, há outros aspetos que são defendidos com pouco respaldo bíblico para tais afirmações ou textos dúbios quanto à aplicação. Num ou outro ponto acho que a argumentação não foi suficiente.
• 
  Braley Chambers

  Honestly, most of this was better than I thought it would be.
  However, at points it definitely seemed like Grudem was just trying to baptize the GOP agenda and call it “Politics according to the Bible”.
• 
  Pedro Pamplona

  Aqui está um livro que todo cristão deveria ler, principalmente no Brasil. Grudem é simples e direto. Cada vez que leio seus livros fico mais fã do seu trabalho como teólogo e escritor.
• 
  Kingsley Layton

  In a world that expects subjective morals and situational ethics, this is a must read for any Christian running or involved in running in politics.
• 
  Willy Robert

  Muito bom, realmente faz jus ao nome: Princípios Básicos que todo cristão deve conhecer...
• 
  Lucas Souto

  Considero essa obra fundamental para nossos dias. Em uma era marcada pela degradação intelectual, Wayne Grudem surpreende com um excelente conteúdo implícito nesse livro, e nos motiva a sermos influentes em todo âmbito social. Estou maravilhado e muito edificado. Recomendo!