Biblical Law vs. Common Law? (Part 2)

In the first part of these posts I argued that Common Law isn’t contrary to Biblical Law but it is a natural extension of the Bible that allows us to live with and interact with those who have no respect for the Bible.

And while I do have respect for the Reconstructionists and what they’re trying to do, I must continue to disagree with them. I’m bothered by this movement to use the Bible as a guide to everything we do. The Bible isn’t primarily a guide to this life, it is a guide to life everlasting. There are all these books and pamphlets, “what does the Bible say about…Economics? Math? Astronomy? Education? Changing a Tire?” (Okay…that last one was totally made up, I confess). And in one sense, it is good for us to consult the Bible and use it as a measure for the rest of life. But on the other hand, I think that type of thinking trivializes the point of the Bible. Here’s an example. Last fall I did an 8 week class on economics for my sisters and a couple other children from our church. I occasionally took examples of economic principles from the Bible. Such as the principle of saving and not consuming everything…the story of Joseph in Egypt was a perfect story for that. And that was fine, but I used the Bible sparingly in our classes. Why? Because the story of Joseph isn’t about how we should save some money for a rainy day. The story of Joseph has a much bigger scope and is about so much more than a principle for allocating our money. The story of Joseph is a picture of salvation. It points us to Christ, and if we’re so caught up in reading all these little details into the Bible, we miss the glorious message. In other words, if we’re consulting the Bible about chemistry, math, economics, politics, etc…we’re missing the forest for the trees. The purpose of the Bible is tell us the Good News, to tell us of our sin, of our need for redemption, of the Savior who gave His life for us, and of the Way to eternal life.

Leave a Reply