IMACHRISTIAN.NET

...the churches of Christ salute you! Rom 16:16

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home The Light Articles from 2005 Politicians In the Church

Politicians In the Church

E-mail Print PDF

Politicians In the Church

You may not agree, but we may need few politicians in the church. No, not the Democrat/Republican kind. The kind who understand what a Constitution is—its place and purpose, and how it is to be respected and interpreted.

But do you know what a constitution is? Sure you do. It is a body of fundamental law, in the form of stated law, principles, or established precedents, according to which a state or organization is governed. Such a document is the Constitution of the United States of America. Such a document is the New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. No, not in every particular of the latter, but essentially.

The biggie in conservative news right now is activist judges who make law instead of interpreting law. They are "bench" legislators, when their respect should instead be for the application of existent law.

Looking for a qualified candidate to fill Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat in die Supreme Court, the quest is this: "We are looking for a nominee who will uphold the Constitution as it is written, an originalist who looks at the text of the Constitution and interprets it in accordance with the original meaning given to it," Bruce Hausknecht, a judicial analyst said. "What that means in today's terms is a judge who doesn't add to or subtract from the Constitution based on what he or she thinks is necessary for society today. The Constitution doesn't 'evolve.'" How consistent it would be if everyone would hold the New Testament in the same respect as proposed for this humanly inspired document called the Constitution of the United States.

Just as there are differences in how the U.S. Constitution is viewed, there is also a difference in how denominationalism looks at the New Testament and how the church of Christ looks at it. A vast difference. Modern denominations don't necessarily feel the New Testament has evolved, a great number of them just don't care. It doesn't matter either way. "We'll do as we please" is the guiding star. This is clearly illustrated with the Texas Southern Baptist Convention voting a year or two ago that wives need not submit to their husbands. Never mind that Paul said, "Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing" (Eph 5:24).

Ah, but the church of Christ is different. When our brethren want to progress beyond what is written, instead of saying it doesn't matter, or "we don't care what the Book says," the usual justification for unscriptural things is sophistry and unreasonable argument. "The passage doesn't mean what it says." and neither does that other one." This also can be clearly illustrated.

Why do our brethren use women to teach their public assemblies in the Bible classes but not in the "main" assembly? Because they have argued away every scintilla of scripture against the practice. It doesn't matter that in both assemblies: 1.) Both are called for and arranged by the elders of the church; 2.) The public is not only invited, but urged to attend; 3.) In both, there is Bible teaching, singing, praying. Yes, there are some differences, but so far as Classes being assemblies arranged by the elders, with the public invited just as is the "main" assembly, it is so.

So while the religious people next door just say, "It doesn't really matter, and we don't really care. We live in an enlightened age. Women have die same rights as the men—what a man can do in the church, we ought to let the women do likewise".. .while they are saying this, the mainstream churches of Christ are instead arguing that the 1 Cor. 14:34-35 passages apply to a situation we cannot duplicate today (with the inspired prophets wives), or else they irrationally argue that the assembly they call Classes or Sunday School, where the public is invited and urged to come, and where it is identical to the main assembly in this regard—they irrationally argue that it is not a public assembly, thus the women can preach. Or if 1 Timothy 2 is under study, the sister can teach in this public capacity, but it must not be "over the man."

So, if these politicians can come up with a candidate to fill Justice O'Connor's seat, "a nominee who will uphold the Constitution as it is written, an originalist who looks at the text of the Constitution and interprets it in accordance with the original meaning given to it," and "a judge who doesn't add to or subtract from the Constitution based on what he or she thinks is necessary for society today," maybe our good brethren will learn a few things from this worldly man or woman about law, the interpretation of law, and the high regard in which such foundational documents as the Constitution are to be held.. .and thus, the honor and esteem in which the New Testament is to be held, —jj

 

Translate

Our Friends

User Login