Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 3

Wesley later describes post-war America as having “universal scarcity” where even “necessities of life” and “wholesome food” were hard to obtain; how does the chapter pressure our modern assumptions that political independence and economic growth are signs of God’s favor?

Another way to ask: If America had severe shortages after the war, what does that say about the idea that independence and economic growth prove God’s favor? How should this challenge our assumptions today?

Direct Answer The chapter pressures the assumption by showing that political independence did not immediately produce prosperity; it produced collapse, scarcity, and hardship. The transcript suggests that tying “God’s favor” to national independence or economic growth is unreliable, because the Revolution brought suffering and economic devastation.

Support from Transcript:

Bercot says textbooks “hide…drastic economic devastation that independence and the Revolution brought.”
Wesley reports “nine parts in ten of their immense trade…were cut off at one stroke,” so “the fountain of their wealth was dammed up.”
He describes the result as provinces “no richer than the poorest parts either of Scotland or Ireland.”
Wesley says “universal scarcity took place” and there was “deep want…even of the necessities of life.”
He adds: “Wholesome food was not to be procured, but at a very advanced price…Decent apparel was not to be had.”

Discussion Follow-ups If independence can lead to scarcity, how should Christians measure God’s blessing more carefully? What might faithfulness look like when a nation gets what it wants and then suffers?

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 3 of 10