Does God support the separation of Church and State?

[Esmeralda]

Please tell me what faith you belong to and why. I think this discussion gets pushed aside besides on several other aspects. Although I'd like to see what it this discussion could lead to. And finally, if you present that he does or does not please tell me if you're willing to support it or not support it and why.

Man created God. Therefore, it is only a question of does Man support separation of church and State. And that depends on where you live, basically. Some States are theocracies, some are not. I say allow each state to decide for itself and don't worry about any but the place where you choose to live.

Even if you aren't religious, I think you could appreciate an integrated church and state. Unless you look at insignificant things of life. In the end it will come back to more important aspects. What you say?

I think one doesn't need religion or spirituality to think more deeply. Quite the opposite in fact. Religious people seem to be the ones who look only at the insignificant things in life. Religious people seem to also be inherently limited in their world or universal view and have a deep sense of superiority over those who are not religious, believing they are superior morally and, apparently, based on your statement about 'insignificant things,' that they are the only ones thinking deeply about the human condition. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Rdean, thanks for the link. Now I get what Jwoodie was speaking of, I had no clue what he meant at first. Although, I don't think separation of church and state back then resembles what it means today.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Man created God. Therefore, it is only a question of does Man support separation of church and State. And that depends on where you live, basically. Some States are theocracies, some are not. I say allow each state to decide for itself and don't worry about any but the place where you choose to live.

Even if you aren't religious, I think you could appreciate an integrated church and state. Unless you look at insignificant things of life. In the end it will come back to more important aspects. What you say?

I think one doesn't need religion or spirituality to think more deeply. Quite the opposite in fact. Religious people seem to be the ones who look only at the insignificant things in life. Religious people seem to also be inherently limited in their world or universal view and have a deep sense of superiority over those who are not religious, believing they are superior morally and, apparently, based on your statement about 'insignificant things,' that they are the only ones thinking deeply about the human condition. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

You don't need religion to think deeply, anyone can think deeply, but about what? It depends what you're referring to. I don't believe I am superior to non religious folks. Quite the opposite. I don't believe in being limited in my world view but some aspects I believe are destined to be followed. What'd you mean by the human condition btw?

 

[Esmeralda]

Even if you aren't religious, I think you could appreciate an integrated church and state. Unless you look at insignificant things of life. In the end it will come back to more important aspects. What you say?

I think one doesn't need religion or spirituality to think more deeply. Quite the opposite in fact. Religious people seem to be the ones who look only at the insignificant things in life. Religious people seem to also be inherently limited in their world or universal view and have a deep sense of superiority over those who are not religious, believing they are superior morally and, apparently, based on your statement about 'insignificant things,' that they are the only ones thinking deeply about the human condition. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

You don't need religion to think deeply, anyone can think deeply, but about what? It depends what you're referring to. I don't believe I am superior to non religious folks. Quite the opposite. I don't believe in being limited in my world view but some aspects I believe are destined to be followed. What'd you mean by the human condition btw?

Wiki defines 'the human condition' pretty well:

The human condition encompasses the unique features of being human.

It can be described as the irreducible part of humanity that is inherent and not dependent on factors such as gender, race or class. It includes concerns such as the meaning of life, the search for gratification, the sense of curiosity, the inevitability of isolation, or anxiety regarding the inescapability of death.

The “human condition” is principally studied through the set of disciplines and sub-fields that make up the humanities. The study of history, philosophy, literature, and the arts all help us to understand the nature of the human condition and the broader cultural and social arrangements that make up human lives.[citation needed]

The human condition is the subject of such fields of study as philosophy, theology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, demographics, evolutionary biology, cultural studies, and sociobiology. The philosophical school of existentialism deals with core issues related to the human condition including the ongoing search for ultimate meaning.

Philosophy is a very extensive science in which people look at all aspects of the human condition, with as great if not greater depth than any religion, though religious study is also a part of philosophy, i.e.: theology. Depth of thought, the examination of human existence, the soul, etc. is not confined to theology by any means. Literature and art also examine the human condition, in depth and from many angles including the spiritual. Being religious is not the only way to consider the meaning of life and of all the possibilities and realities that may or may not exist, including the soul, the existence of God, life after death, etc. Religion just puts it all into one little box and presents it as an entity, whereas those who continue to explore think outside that box and do not dictate to others what the solutions are because it is all, in the end, speculation, hope and/or faith.

 

[LuckyDuck01!]

As an atheist, I have but to look at religion's history (including present day Islamic governments) to understand why it's important to keep the church and state separate. Once the government is heavily influenced by a religion, you end up with discrimination, persecution, imprisonment, torture and death. Present day Islamic governments are prime examples.

 

[Esmeralda]

As an atheist, I have but to look at religion's history (including present day Islamic governments) to understand why it's important to keep the church and state separate. Once the government is heavily influenced by a religion, you end up with discrimination, persecution, imprisonment, torture and death. Present day Islamic governments are prime examples.

Not all of them.

 

[rdean]

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
17. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's-Putting it in this general form, it was impossible for sedition itself to dispute it, and yet it dissolved the snare.

and to God the things that are God's-How much is there in this profound but to them startling addition to the maxim, and how incomparable is the whole for fulness, brevity, clearness, weight!

and they marvelled at him-"at His answer, and held their peace" (Lu 20:26), "and left Him, and went their way" (Mt 22:22).

The Resurrection (Mr 12:18-27).

12:13-17 The enemies of Christ would be thought desirous to know their duty, when really they hoped that which soever side he took of the question, they might find occasion to accuse him. Nothing is more likely to insnare the followers of Christ, than bringing them to meddle with disputes about worldly politics. Jesus avoided the snare, by referring to the submission they had already made as a nation; and all that heard him, marvelled at the great wisdom of his answer. Many will praise the words of a sermon, who will not be commanded by the doctrines of it.

Mark 12:17 Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him.

Clearly Jesus approved of the separation of Church and State.

Hilarious. I have no mystical beliefs and yet, I'm the only one who quoted Jesus.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

I think one doesn't need religion or spirituality to think more deeply. Quite the opposite in fact. Religious people seem to be the ones who look only at the insignificant things in life. Religious people seem to also be inherently limited in their world or universal view and have a deep sense of superiority over those who are not religious, believing they are superior morally and, apparently, based on your statement about 'insignificant things,' that they are the only ones thinking deeply about the human condition. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

You don't need religion to think deeply, anyone can think deeply, but about what? It depends what you're referring to. I don't believe I am superior to non religious folks. Quite the opposite. I don't believe in being limited in my world view but some aspects I believe are destined to be followed. What'd you mean by the human condition btw?

Wiki defines 'the human condition' pretty well:

The human condition encompasses the unique features of being human.

It can be described as the irreducible part of humanity that is inherent and not dependent on factors such as gender, race or class. It includes concerns such as the meaning of life, the search for gratification, the sense of curiosity, the inevitability of isolation, or anxiety regarding the inescapability of death.

The “human condition” is principally studied through the set of disciplines and sub-fields that make up the humanities. The study of history, philosophy, literature, and the arts all help us to understand the nature of the human condition and the broader cultural and social arrangements that make up human lives.[citation needed]

The human condition is the subject of such fields of study as philosophy, theology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, demographics, evolutionary biology, cultural studies, and sociobiology. The philosophical school of existentialism deals with core issues related to the human condition including the ongoing search for ultimate meaning.

Philosophy is a very extensive science in which people look at all aspects of the human condition, with as great if not greater depth than any religion, though religious study is also a part of philosophy, i.e.: theology. Depth of thought, the examination of human existence, the soul, etc. is not confined to theology by any means. Literature and art also examine the human condition, in depth and from many angles including the spiritual. Being religious is not the only way to consider the meaning of life and of all the possibilities and realities that may or may not exist, including the soul, the existence of God, life after death, etc. Religion just puts it all into one little box and presents it as an entity, whereas those who continue to explore think outside that box and do not dictate to others what the solutions are because it is all, in the end, speculation, hope and/or faith.

For humans it may not be the only way to look at life. But you also have unexplained things and constant changes to the human 'condition'. There's no answer for them. You're trying to say religion is limited, it was only limited when people didn't understand thoroughly science, etc.. But at the same time you people who are trying to understand it but may have it all wrong. But you cannot prove that God isn't behind the science.

 

[Glensather]

I don't think God gives a shit so long as you worship him and follow his commandments.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

I think he does. It's a lot more than a basic guideline.

 

[Esmeralda]

You don't need religion to think deeply, anyone can think deeply, but about what? It depends what you're referring to. I don't believe I am superior to non religious folks. Quite the opposite. I don't believe in being limited in my world view but some aspects I believe are destined to be followed. What'd you mean by the human condition btw?

Wiki defines 'the human condition' pretty well:

The human condition encompasses the unique features of being human.

It can be described as the irreducible part of humanity that is inherent and not dependent on factors such as gender, race or class. It includes concerns such as the meaning of life, the search for gratification, the sense of curiosity, the inevitability of isolation, or anxiety regarding the inescapability of death.

The “human condition” is principally studied through the set of disciplines and sub-fields that make up the humanities. The study of history, philosophy, literature, and the arts all help us to understand the nature of the human condition and the broader cultural and social arrangements that make up human lives.[citation needed]

The human condition is the subject of such fields of study as philosophy, theology, sociology, psychology, anthropology, demographics, evolutionary biology, cultural studies, and sociobiology. The philosophical school of existentialism deals with core issues related to the human condition including the ongoing search for ultimate meaning.

Philosophy is a very extensive science in which people look at all aspects of the human condition, with as great if not greater depth than any religion, though religious study is also a part of philosophy, i.e.: theology. Depth of thought, the examination of human existence, the soul, etc. is not confined to theology by any means. Literature and art also examine the human condition, in depth and from many angles including the spiritual. Being religious is not the only way to consider the meaning of life and of all the possibilities and realities that may or may not exist, including the soul, the existence of God, life after death, etc. Religion just puts it all into one little box and presents it as an entity, whereas those who continue to explore think outside that box and do not dictate to others what the solutions are because it is all, in the end, speculation, hope and/or faith.

For humans it may not be the only way to look at life. But you also have unexplained things and constant changes to the human 'condition'. There's no answer for them. You're trying to say religion is limited, it was only limited when people didn't understand thoroughly science, etc.. But at the same time you people who are trying to understand it but may have it all wrong. But you cannot prove that God isn't behind the science.

You cannot prove that God exists either. But, I am not going to debate with you the existence of God. Such a discussion is pointless, in my experience. It is a decision the individual makes, to accept or not the existence of a diety. No one can be argued out of it or into it. My point was that you seemed to make an assumption that religion/theology was the only way to think deeply about the human condition. I disagree, I believe philosophers do, writers do, artists do. They don't need to look at life through the scope of one or another of the religions or through spirituality to consider in depth, way beyond the superficial and insigificant, the issues involved in the human condition. That's the only thing I wanted to say. I have no desire to discuss with anyone or to question their personal belief system.

 

[Truthmatters]

render unto ceaser that which is ceasers

 

[rdean]

render unto ceaser that which is ceasers

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...ration-of-church-and-state-2.html#post7057416

There are multiple revisions to that quote and they all say pretty much the same thing. Easily ignored. Like "help the poor".

 

[Sunshine]

I'm not really sure that God is sitting on some throne somewhere wringing His hands over whether there is separation of church and state. The concept of separating church and state is a distinctly American concept. To say that God gives a flip one way or the other would leave a lot of 'splainin' to do about all the theocracies that are thriving in the rest of the world. In my view of God as a Cosmic Consciousness that perfuses every atom in the universe, God is and always will be involved in everything that happens in the universe. I don't see Him kicking the ass of any particulr religion or stroking another. Humans do what we will with what we have and generally what we do is a function of the teaching we have been given. Even deeply religious people hold out separation of church and state as a sacred value -for many and varied reasons. Getting the rest of the world to accept it is a horse of a different color.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Wiki defines 'the human condition' pretty well:



Philosophy is a very extensive science in which people look at all aspects of the human condition, with as great if not greater depth than any religion, though religious study is also a part of philosophy, i.e.: theology. Depth of thought, the examination of human existence, the soul, etc. is not confined to theology by any means. Literature and art also examine the human condition, in depth and from many angles including the spiritual. Being religious is not the only way to consider the meaning of life and of all the possibilities and realities that may or may not exist, including the soul, the existence of God, life after death, etc. Religion just puts it all into one little box and presents it as an entity, whereas those who continue to explore think outside that box and do not dictate to others what the solutions are because it is all, in the end, speculation, hope and/or faith.

For humans it may not be the only way to look at life. But you also have unexplained things and constant changes to the human 'condition'. There's no answer for them. You're trying to say religion is limited, it was only limited when people didn't understand thoroughly science, etc.. But at the same time you people who are trying to understand it but may have it all wrong. But you cannot prove that God isn't behind the science.

You cannot prove that God exists either. But, I am not going to debate with you the existence of God. Such a discussion is pointless, in my experience. It is a decision the individual makes, to accept or not the existence of a diety. No one can be argued out of it or into it. My point was that you seemed to make an assumption that religion/theology was the only way to think deeply about the human condition. I disagree, I believe philosophers do, writers do, artists do. They don't need to look at life through the scope of one or another of the religions or through spirituality to consider in depth, way beyond the superficial and insigificant, the issues involved in the human condition. That's the only thing I wanted to say. I have no desire to discuss with anyone or to question their personal belief system.

You misunderstood me, I wasn't making that assumption. You just came in and brought it up.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

I'm not really sure that God is sitting on some throne somewhere wringing His hands over whether there is separation of church and state. The concept of separating church and state is a distinctly American concept. To say that God gives a flip one way or the other would leave a lot of 'splainin' to do about all the theocracies that are thriving in the rest of the world. In my view of God as a Cosmic Consciousness that perfuses every atom in the universe, God is and always will be involved in everything that happens in the universe. I don't see Him kicking the ass of any particulr religion or stroking another. Humans do what we will with what we have and generally what we do is a function of the teaching we have been given. Even deeply religious people hold out separation of church and state as a sacred value -for many and varied reasons. Getting the rest of the world to accept it is a horse of a different color.

I wouldn't say it's distinctly a American concept, you can find little cases in ancient history. But it was the most clear concept.

 

[MHunterB]

I'm an agnostic-theist. I believe that God exists but is unknowable in the sense of definite attributes. I do not believe God to be a spaghetti monster orbiting the earth as what I know of God, does not represent the qualities of a spaghetti monster. I am obviously areligious because I believe that religion cannot adequately define God.

True religion do define god but man's interpretation of religion cannot define who god is. In the Christian religion there are many gods with many beliefs. But in reality only one true god and one true religion and every denomination believe their's the true one.

The bolded part is a lie the 'we own the One True TRUTH' crowd like to tell..... IN FACT, not all Christian Churches make that claim, nor do most non-Christian religions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm not really sure that God is sitting on some throne somewhere wringing His hands over whether there is separation of church and state. The concept of separating church and state is a distinctly American concept. To say that God gives a flip one way or the other would leave a lot of 'splainin' to do about all the theocracies that are thriving in the rest of the world. In my view of God as a Cosmic Consciousness that perfuses every atom in the universe, God is and always will be involved in everything that happens in the universe. I don't see Him kicking the ass of any particulr religion or stroking another. Humans do what we will with what we have and generally what we do is a function of the teaching we have been given. Even deeply religious people hold out separation of church and state as a sacred value -for many and varied reasons. Getting the rest of the world to accept it is a horse of a different color.

It would also call into question the relevance of faith altogether, or the existence of a deity overall.

 

[emilynghiem]

Please tell me what faith you belong to and why. I think this discussion gets pushed aside besides on several other aspects. Although I'd like to see what it this discussion could lead to. And finally, if you present that he does or does not please tell me if you're willing to support it or not support it and why.

Hi BIK I believe in the meaning of Christ as reconciling us with God by embodying the laws of universal truth, justice and love for all humanity.
While how I express this, I relate most to the natural laws and Constitutional principles which I believe come from the same God and are equally fulfilled in Christ as church laws.

So I find that there are different angles and orders that people invoke authority of either church or state laws, religious or secular, and I try to respect all those ways under the natural laws of Constitutional equal protections and inclusion of all people regardless of view.

Under that inclusion, then some people separate church and state by rejecting religion, or some by putting church first and state follows but is independent or putting state first as the default and then churches/religions are option under that. (SEE Poll on the thread
"Unequally Yoked" on addressing conflicts if people are under different authorities of law).
Others see separation as an excuse to defy authority, and do not believe in having conflicts but reconciling the govt with church laws so there is no violation.

Ultimately I believe that we have free will and right to consent under Free Exercise of Religion and protection against imposition of religious bias by govt; so I believe this calls for consensus on issues if govt is going to make policies that touch on religious/spiritual issues (including death penalty, marriage, immigration reform, abortion/termination of life, etc.)

If people can't agree, then by the 1st and 14th Amendment they should separate out their resources and policies in ways they agree do not impose on each other unconstitutionally.

in general I believe that faith in Christ Jesus means to live by the laws of Restorative Justice.

So people who do this, regardless of being Christian or atheists, under either secular or sacred laws or philosophies, are able to reconcile their beliefs freely where all people are included, protected and represented equally and no one is denied or discriminated against because of their views. The common issue is forgiveness in being able to reconcile and make corrections to work togeher to solve problems and conflicts, regardless of faith.

If people don't agree on the approach, of either retributive or restorative justice, that is where people definitely need to separate and not impose on each other's views of justice.

In short, I guess I believe in separating out by "political" beliefs equally as with "religious" views, and not have the state impose a biased policy; and keep the govt for policies and programs that ALL people agree to support/fund across the board publicly. I believe THAT would be consistent with Constitutional laws on equal protection, due process, religious freedom and equal access to "no taxation without representation." Anything of disagreement should be resolved first, and in case of religoius issues that cannot be made the same for all groups, then separate the funding/programs using an agreed approach and pay for these privately so no one feels unfairly excluded or forced against their beliefs.

I believe such a reconciliation process is in keeping with the faith in Christ Jesus as bringing Restorative Justice to unite people of all tribes, so this fulfills the Christian message of peace, salvation of humanity from sin and suffering, and establishing universal truth to set us free!

 

[emilynghiem]

in the Bible, (1) Jesus says to render under Caesar that which is Caesar's
and unto God that which is God's.

(2) And the gentiles who have not the law but by conscience do the things
contained in the law become a law unto themselves.

(3) Jesus says he governs the gentiles as a separate fold of the same flock. So those gentiles under natural laws are still under Christ governance, since Jesus as universal Justice fulfills both paths, but distinct from the sheep/believers under sacred laws of the church.

In general, the Golden Rule of Reciprocity which is found in every religion on earth, says to treat others as we would ask to be treated ourselves; and all of us would want our own free will and ways respected, the same way we let other people govern themselves by their ways.
This is part of free will and just respecting each other's cultures and authorities of law.

Romans says not to judge people if God gives them certain traditions to be considered holy or unholy.

I'm not really sure that God is sitting on some throne somewhere wringing His hands over whether there is separation of church and state. The concept of separating church and state is a distinctly American concept. To say that God gives a flip one way or the other would leave a lot of 'splainin' to do about all the theocracies that are thriving in the rest of the world. In my view of God as a Cosmic Consciousness that perfuses every atom in the universe, God is and always will be involved in everything that happens in the universe. I don't see Him kicking the ass of any particulr religion or stroking another. Humans do what we will with what we have and generally what we do is a function of the teaching we have been given. Even deeply religious people hold out separation of church and state as a sacred value -for many and varied reasons. Getting the rest of the world to accept it is a horse of a different color.

I wouldn't say it's distinctly a American concept, you can find little cases in ancient history. But it was the most clear concept.