Separation of Church and State

[stovebolts]

I find it remarkable how those words have changed in meaning since they were first written by our founding fathers.

It seems anymore that the idea of separation of church and state is no being defined to mean that you can't have religious beliefs anywhere near government. In other words, government is to be secular in thought, not religious.

The idea I got when I was a young kid in school was that when our founding fathers created this great nation, they wanted it to be ruled by the people, for the people and they saw how in their time, and from previous historical accounts where the Church was the governing authority of a nation. I am speaking of the "Church of England" specifically.

In short, I believe that the separation between Church and State was intended to keep the Church as a institution from having direct governmental authority. Unfortunately, the separation of Church and State seems as if it means that our children can't pray in school etc.

 

[Kidron]

I find it remarkable how those words have changed in meaning since they were first written by our founding fathers.

.

Ive good news for you.
The "founding fathers" never wrote that phrase in the Constitution.
That phrase was penned in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson to some Baptists, and it was later twisted and distorted to actually reinvent the 1st Amendment.
The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom.

So what has happened is.......TJs letter has been used to replace and subvert the 1st amendment.



K

 

[for_his_glory]

Isaiah 9:6, 7
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

This is a nation that has lost it's first government (God) and needs to come back to the full authority of the one who should be governing the nations.

 

[stovebolts]

Ive good news for you.
The "founding fathers" never wrote that phrase in the Constitution.
That phrase was penned in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson to some Baptists, and it was later twisted and distorted to actually reinvent the 1st Amendment.
The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom.

So what has happened is.......TJs letter has been used to replace and subvert the 1st amendment.



K

Interesting and thanks in advance! I didn't know all that but would like to read a little more on it. Do you have a reliable source you can point me toward?

I liked what you said, "The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom." Yet it seems as if it is being twisted to oust all religion affiliation... well, unless your running for president or some other office, then your always touted as a "christian". That makes me think, and maybe you know. But has there ever been a president that didn't claim he was a christian?

 

[stovebolts]

Isaiah 9:6, 7
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

This is a nation that has lost it's first government (God) and needs to come back to the full authority of the one who should be governing the nations.

I believe that God is still governing this nation. Actually, I think he governs all nations.

As a Christian, I accepted Christ into my life, and I accepted the Bible as authoritative. I cannot force my yoke upon a non believer because they are not bound to the lifestyle I have embraced. As a US citizen, I have the privilege to voice my beliefs, and to vote my morals and ethics just like any other US citizen. The way I understand it, our government is for the people, by the people and it's majority rules. While Christians principals may be fading from the majority, we still have a voice. Jesus said that we shouldn't be surprised.. the world hated him first, of course they are going to hate us.

 

[jasoncran]

jeff the states were still allowed to have state demonations. not that im for that.

 

[greatisthelight]

I am all for the separation of Church and State but what I do not like is when people ban things like Prayer from schools.

 

[Vic C.]

Ive good news for you.
The "founding fathers" never wrote that phrase in the Constitution.
That phrase was penned in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson to some Baptists, and it was later twisted and distorted to actually reinvent the 1st Amendment.
The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom.

So what has happened is.......TJs letter has been used to replace and subvert the 1st amendment.

K

Spot on.

Interesting and thanks in advance! I didn't know all that but would like to read a little more on it. Do you have a reliable source you can point me toward?

I liked what you said, "The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom." Yet it seems as if it is being twisted to oust all religion affiliation... well, unless your running for president or some other office, then your always touted as a "christian". That makes me think, and maybe you know. But has there ever been a president that didn't claim he was a christian?

Jeff,

I thought this was well known, but here you go, Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist church association:

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/religiousliberty/a/danburybaptists.htm

 

[Furz]

Unfortunately, the separation of Church and State seems as if it means that our children can't pray in school etc.

In every morning, there also was the school prayer in Germany where I went to school. A cross hung on the wall in the school class. And in the religion class we learned how a good Christian had to behave.
For over 20 years this has not existed any more.
Which of the legislators had to change into laws has this decision of the supreme court of justice of Germany taken good and bad (called oneself "constitutional court").
Good was: More independence in the thinking and behavior, more democratic behavior, no church rules which relieved one of the thinking.
Bad was: Acts of violence in schools and on the streets. disrespectful of young people to the older. Homosexuality as a school lesson in History or education.
America is a religious country with many problems which are partly connected with the religion.
Because the religion was often abused to refuse American citizens their civil rights (afro-americans, women and homosexuals, for example). Therefore I think that a separation from church and state make sense in the USA although I keep a ban on the school prayer for too much.

 

[Furz]

The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom.

I have a question on it:

What is if a religious community spreads hate for other religions or people in the USA? And disturbs the funerals of soldiers and ther deceased families and friends?
I think of the WBC of the "parish priest" Fred Phelps there.
Why does a state permit such a mad rush? Something like that disturbs the inner peace of people and the nation anyway, or what?

 

[Stan53]

Ive good news for you.
The "founding fathers" never wrote that phrase in the Constitution.
That phrase was penned in a private letter by Thomas Jefferson to some Baptists, and it was later twisted and distorted to actually reinvent the 1st Amendment.
The 1st amendment actually explains that the Government cannot mandate religion/denomination affiliation, nor can it keep anyone from enjoying religious freedom.

So what has happened is.......TJs letter has been used to replace and subvert the 1st amendment.

It actually reads;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

​

Particular attention should be paid to the last portion of this amendment.

 

[Kidron]

[/FONT]


It actually reads;

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

​

Particular attention should be paid to the last portion of this amendment.

Good point..^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

also there is this in the Declaration of Independance....

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security".




B

 

[stovebolts]

Spot on.



Jeff,

I thought this was well known, but here you go, Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptist church association:

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/religiousliberty/a/danburybaptists.htm

Hey, I was too busy skipping school to pay attention back then

Thanks!

 

[Mike]

I have a question on it:

What is if a religious community spreads hate for other religions or people in the USA? And disturbs the funerals of soldiers and ther deceased families and friends?
I think of the WBC of the "parish priest" Fred Phelps there.
Why does a state permit such a mad rush? Something like that disturbs the inner peace of people and the nation anyway, or what?

Furz, the Westboro Baptist Church is a cult wrapped around one family's perversion of scripture. Don't make the mistake that secularists do in allowing them to define believers in America. As for why the state permits it, I believe the WBC has found a way to subvert the intent of the law.

Every nation on earth has errant zealots that do harm in the name of religion. Every nation has secularists who want to rid the influence of believers. You described that influence on Germany in your previous post.

Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

The great pillars of all government and social life are virtue, morality and religion. This is the armor, and this alone renders us invincible.

I don't believe anyone is calling for a theocracy. We are saying that the original penners of the U.S. Constitution never intended that God be stripped from our government.

 

[Milk-Drops]

I think the seperation of church and state is actually a good thing, but I do agree that it has been used as an excuse by some groups to unreasonably remove religion from certain aspects of our lives.


However prayer is not banned in school, a child can pray whenever they want as long as they aren't making a scene or a massive distraction out of it. ( such as making sure they can be heard praying by others around them, disrupting the class with it, or going into convulsions from tongues, etc.). I really don't understand what the huge draw is to have Teacher led prayer ( what is actually not allowed). Having an authority figure tell a child or teen to pray, in my opinion, takes away the personal aspect. I just don't see the point, other then to reisntill a specific beleif system into the chilldren.


I however don't mind Christian culture when its in public. Like, I don't mind the ten commandments on court houses, when a congressmen claims to be inspired by god, people being open about their faith, etc.


The only times I really get agitated is when laws are trying to be enforced that will only benefit Christians or similar religions at the expense of other groups. ( Same marriage bans, Blue laws, building theme parks with tax payer money basses on biblical sources, etc.)
I don't have to reference Separation for those, I just have to reference that someone else's religion is being endorsed over another.


Just my 2 cents.

 

[stovebolts]

Thanks Meatball subs,

You mentioned the 10 commandments and that's a great example. The way I see it, the 10 commandments are not the church, so they shouldn't be restricted from government.

When I see the word Church within the context of this topic, I think of an institution which holds a certain level of authority such as the Church of England, or the power that the RCC held in centuries past. In my opinion, the Church has no business as an institution having a direct authority within government because that kind of authority always breeds corruption.

That being said, one cannot strip the influence of the Church out of government since our basic laws are also contained within the Biblical texts. So I don't see the separation of Church and state as a separation of Christian morals and State as I've seen many people successfully argue to get the 10 commandments taken out of courtrooms etc.

 

[Grazer]

I think this stems from the times where the church pretty much ran the country, set laws etc. If you weren't the denomination of the church at the time, you either conformed or were punished. Now, rightly in my view, we have laws in place preventing that from happening.

Re: the prayers issue. Allowing children to pray at school is very different to getting them all into a hall and they all pray, regardless of their religious beliefs. The latter is not something that should be encouraged, the former is definitely something that should be. I can pray privately at work either quietly at my desk or I can go to a room in another part of the office.

 

[Elijah674]

I have a question on it:

What is if a religious community spreads hate for other religions or people in the USA? And disturbs the funerals of soldiers and ther deceased families and friends?
I think of the WBC of the "parish priest" Fred Phelps there.
Why does a state permit such a mad rush? Something like that disturbs the inner peace of people and the nation anyway, or what?

The problem with the thread, is that no Bible 'Documentation' is given for what the Christian has confessed to. And of the two one is a Christian & the other is not. Rom. 13 has clear language for what Caesar is to be involved in & what Christ teaches that neither are not to be. (and clearly God has Blessed the USA because they have Seperation of the two as He required)

Mark 12

[14] And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?
[15] Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.

[16] And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
[17] And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

And do not become confused for who the Christian is required to put first even if threatened with 'legal' death! (that of 666)

Acts 5

[27] And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,
[28] Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.
[29] Then Peter and [[the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men]].

And where did this take place but in the N.T. & with the needed power of Caesar to even execute Christ. It was they who CRIED OUT WE HAVE NO KING BUT CAESAR.

--Elijah

PS: And by the way, if Rom. 13 is studied?? One will find that even this is clearly seen as the [SECOND] table of stone, of the ten. (see in Matt. 22:35-40 for how Christ divided them!)