Similarities between the Bible and the US Constitution
- Both are standards for laws and ethics
- They are sources of authority
- Politicians swear on both of them
- Liberals misinterpret them
- Conservatives over-analyze them
- Both were written by men who fear the Judeo Christian God
- Both were written in a time of slavery but signify nothing condemning owning another person.
- A lot of people have a general idea about it, but don’t actually study it.
- Bringing it up in a conversation is sure to get the response, “Here goes the Fundy again.”
- People constantly misquote and misrepresent both.
Probably the most obvious and ominous similarity to the Bible and the Constitution is that they are extremely divisive. There are very strong feelings on both sides of the equation. A political liberal responds to the Constitution suggesting that it is archaic and outdated, therefore not relevant for today. The Christian liberal says the same about the Bible. The political conservative (not the neo-cons) suggest that the Constitution provides the essential barriers for government as the authoritative platform for everything. Any time anything is proposed they quickly go to the Constitution to see if it is legal. The Christian conservative treats the Bible similarly. Sometimes to the extent that they won’t act on anything because they’re always learning and never coming to conclusions. (II Timothy 3:7)
Somewhere along the way the lines have become blurred. Conservative Christians have a hard time distinguishing the differences between their faith and politics – seeing them as one in the same. Some conservative politicians (Rick Santorum) would rather appeal to the abstract principles than the constitution which provides the definitive parameters that assure freedom and liberty like “all men are created equal, [that they are] endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The same arguent is used in conservative and liberal politics for different agendas – using the abstract as a means for definitive authority (Newt Gingrich and Barak Obama). There are those who play the Bible against the constitution and suggest that the constitution is not complete enough and they want to institute moral legislation or social reform. Micah wrote about this yesterday in his very thorough explanation of the role of government in society.
There seems to be another common similarity between the Bible and the US Constitution. People think they’ve got a pretty good idea of what they think it says or what they think it means and they have stopped studying it. Then whenever someone points out errors or misrepresentations they quickly ignore them, write them off as extremists, or falsely label them. Ron Paul is a good example of this. You may not like him, but one thing is undeniably true, he is a student of the Bible and the constitution. In a resent debate when Mitt Romney was asked a question about the constitution he deflected the question to Ron Paul. The point is, there are very few people who are truly students of the Bible or the Constitution and they are getting attacked by both sides – liberals and conservatives.
So in reality, what we have is one major problem. Politicians and Christians are not answering to any authority. Conservatives and Liberals alike are off the reservation so to speak. They are not studying their authority, they are not tolerant of definitive criticism, and they continue to function outside of the realm of authority and liberty. Therefore, conservative and liberal Christians and politicians are not all that different than each other. They may argue and debate over morality and ethics, but the truth is they are breaking the same system that is set up to maintain morality and ethics.
There are quite a few similarities between the Bible and the US Constitution. So much so, some people can’t distinguish the differences. But there are quite a few differences worth noting as well.
Differences between the Bible and the US Constitution
- One is primarily concerned with the ethical rights of all – The other is primarily concerned with the moral depravity of all and the redemption of Jesus Christ
- One concerns regional earthly jurisdiction – The other, global spiritual jurisdiction
- One contains inspiring insight – The other is inspired foresight
- One, The words of a nation under God – The other, The Word of God over all nations
- One is the basis for a Democracy – The other is the basis for a Theocracy
“The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool.” -MLK Jr.