Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 3
Bercot argues the Navigation Acts were “a huge boon” to the colonies (lumber, shipbuilding, sailors, and New England fishing), even claiming that by 1775 one-third of all British ships were built in America; how does the chapter’s economic detail challenge the instinct to interpret government restraint as automatically tyrannical, and what does it reveal about God’s ability to bring unexpected benefits through policies we might not like?
Another way to ask: How do the chapter’s economic facts challenge the idea that any government limit is automatically “tyranny”? What might this show about God bringing good results from policies we don’t like?

Direct Answer Bercot’s economic details challenge the reflex that trade regulation automatically equals oppression by showing the Navigation Acts created major opportunities for colonial industries and labor. The transcript implies that even policies people dislike can produce surprising “boons,” so Christians should be cautious about labeling every restraint as tyranny.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says “in the end, the first Navigation Act was a huge boon to the colonists in America.”
  • Because many English ships were built with “American lumber,” the act helped “American lumber and shipbuilding industries… thrive.”
  • Specific claim: “By 1775, one-third of all British ships were built in the American colonies.”
  • The Acts created “ready demand for American sailors and ship captains.”
  • Fishing rule: fish sold in England had to be caught by “English fishing vessels,” which included colonists, becoming “a huge boon to the New England fishing industry.”
  • He adds it gave colonists “an advantage over European competitors” since colonial goods were “more affordable” to English buyers.
Discussion Follow-ups What would it change if Christians judged policies by their real effects rather than by how they feel? How do we stay humble when a policy we oppose ends up helping people?