For those who want more (and much better) stuff on how shoddily “anti-Americanism” is targeted by scholars, Joel Garver, makes some trenchant comments. His conclusion is also incisive (see the original for links):

Grudem and Burk can hardly be unaware that a younger generation of evangelicals doesn’t necessarily (and certainly does not monolithically) embrace the kind of right-wing politics characteristic of an older generation of evangelical leaders. Is the point of these papers to defend a crumbling conservativism against a variety of newer evangelical politics?

And, if so, what does that tell us about the ways in which conservative evangelicalism has enmeshed itself with the success and fortunes of a particular sort of American political identity and, in doing so, has muted the church’s prophetic stance? Moreover, doesn’t the evidence embodied in Grudem and Burk’s papers tend to validate the very criticism that many younger evangelicals have voiced?

Note to self: Some time blog about ways in which I am happy that the younger generation is not continuing in the ways of Grudem and Burk and other ways in which I wish they could make a further break.

Another blogger, Ochuck, writes of Burk’s critique of the claim that Paul derived his rhetoric from the Gentile world. Like me, he points out that this is not the issue:

The problem with this is that Wright agrees. The paper Burk primarily interacts with to represent Wright explicitly affirms Paul as a Jewish thinker. Instead of reading Roman imperial-cult vocabulary onto Paul, Wright sees it as intended by Paul from Old Testament writings

Ochuck goes on to site evidence in Wright and then make a positive case from Scripture (which looks like it came directly from Wright). Definitely worth reading.

Superblogger Adrian Warnock also expresses surprise about Grudem’s Bush push:

What is interesting to me as a Brit is that I could never imagine a leading Christian in the UK endorsing a politician this robustly. And yet you are the ones who separate church and state – not us. I can’t make up my mind who got it right, but perhaps a nation where church leaders are allowed to publicly speak about their political views is more mature than one where church bishops still sit in the House of Lords, but Christians in the public eye are, in some unwritten rule they all obey, not allowed to express an opinion.

I’m kind of surprised that Warnock would describe the American scene of political partisanship as “more mature.”

Other responsed to Grudem can be found at the Boar’s Head Tavern and The World of Sven.