Originally posted by SwissGambitIt's been awhile since I read the original documents, but I don't recall ever seeing the words "separation of Church and State".
...separation of Church and State.
The American Colonists were strongly motivated to come here by a desire to worship God in their own way. In England, they were forced by the King to follow the dictates of the Church of England.
That is exactly why the government should remain as neutral as possible when it comes to matters of religion. When gover ...[text shortened]... ould also not want a teacher of another religion teaching my children to pray to Mecca on a rug.
The founders of this new country made it clear they did not want government to meddle in the private affairs of their citizens, and this included their right to worship. People trying to restrict religion have been using the phrase 'separation of church and state' as though it exists in the original documents (it doesn't) and have been using this in an effort to restrict religious freedom... which runs counter to the original intentions of our founding documents.
It was never intended to be an iron wall of separation to keep religious people from participating, it was intended to impose negative freedoms on the government so as to keep government from meddling in our private affairs. On the surface it sounds innocent enough, but this so called doctrine of 'separation of church and state' has now evolved into an excuse for governing bodies to gain access to churches and tell them what they may or may not teach... and don't tell me this can't happen, because it's been happening for more than a few years now.
Originally posted by lemon lime"Separation of Church and State" is just a summary of one of the ideals in the First Amendment of the Constitution. There's a reason you don't see those exact words - in a law, they want to spell things out a bit more.
It's been awhile since I read the original documents, but I don't recall ever seeing the words "separation of Church and State".
The founders of this new country made it clear they did not want government to meddle in the private affairs of their citizens, and this included their right to worship. People trying to restrict religion have been usi ...[text shortened]... and don't tell me this can't happen, because it's been happening for more than a few years now.
I disagree that there have been any serious restrictions of religious freedom. I also have never advocated for 'keep[ing] religious people from participating'.
I also disagree that the government is 'gaining access to churches and tell[ing] them what they may or may not teach'. If you mean that they may not endorse political candidates if they wish to maintain tax exemption, then I think you're overstating the case - big time.
Originally posted by SwissGambitAnd indeed many are....
Christians should be the strongest supporters of separation of Church and State....
Only people who need official support for their views, and who MUST force their own views on to others, need protection for their specific religion.
IMHO the main and primary reason why I support this separation is that without it, if a adherents of a particular religion become the majority (e.g. Islam) it would then become the official State Religion.
Anybody who wonders what the situation would be like in such a country, should merely look at any Islamic country, and evaluate the "freedom of religion" practiced there.
28 Jan 14
Originally posted by RJHinds/facepalm
The separation of Church and State is a lie and trick of the devil. We want freedom to practice the Christian religion, no other kind of religion. Other religions are a lie and trick of the devil. We want the Christian religion in government not the other way around. The Satanic British government was controlling the Church of England. That is why my an ...[text shortened]... ey fought for freedom from such an oppressive government that did not allow freedom of religion.
28 Jan 14
Originally posted by lemon limeI don't know of anyone who truly sees that as one of the goals of the separation of church and state.
It was never intended to be an iron wall of separation to keep religious people from participating
I am a firm believer in the goal of the separation of church and state and I wouldn't suggest that it is a goal to keep religious people from participating.
The goal is that no matter who is participating the laws of the nation should not be uniquely governed by religion or a specific religion.
I see it as basically that when you create a law it must have a rationale and purpose that is not to advance religion.
28 Jan 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou follow anyone who puts up a fairy tale video of creationism or world wide floods. You don't fool anyone, you are a TOTAL follower. The last time you had a thought of your own was when you were deciding on left breast or right breast as an infant.
Yes, a follower of Christ. That is what is called a Christian.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by JS357
Cancel my subscription to the resurrection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
I got some friends inside
The Doors, "When the Music's Over"
Everybody wants their ideology's tenets to be expressed in the laws, including the non-religious.
Cancel my subscription to the resurrection
You can't do that. The resurrection of the dead is not by some subscription. It is a mandatory rendezvous everyone has with judgement. (Not necessarily at one time, but all the dead are involved.)
"Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming in which all in the tombs will hear His voice and will come forth: those who have done good, to the resurrection of life; and those who have practiced evil, to the resurrection of judgment." (John 5:28,9)
Send my credentials to the house of detention
I got some friends inside
If you know people in God's detention house and they were truly your friends, they are hoping that you do not come to that same place.
See Luke 16:27-31. The rich man detained in the punishing section of Hades did not want his five brothers to be in that same place where he now found himself.
"And he said, Then I ask you, Father [Abraham], to send him [Lazarus] to the house of my father - for I have five brothers - so that he may solemnly testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment."
The Doors, "When the Music's Over"
Everybody wants their ideology's tenets to be expressed in the laws, including the non-religious.
Reply
That may be true somewhat. But certainly many of us know it is impossible to carry out the legislation on the level upon which the Holy Spirit - the life giving Spirit of Christ enables man to walk in the realm of Christ's nature.
"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)
The New Testament salvation is expressed in something very internal, very subjective, very personal yet also very corporate called "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus."
It is the law of life. Like any living things has its own law. The law of the dog involves barking. The law of a cat involves catching mice. This is just to give you an idea.
The salvation of Christ is to firstly install the law of His life within your innermost being. It regulates things from within on far far more a subjective and effective level than any outward governmental legislation can reach.
29 Jan 14
Originally posted by PsychoPawnAre you aware of the activities of the ACLU, and how they have used this idea of 'separation of church and state' to go after Christian groups, and impose limitations on churches? They are very selective in whose civil liberties they are willing to go to bat for, and who they will target for filing complaints against.
I don't know of anyone who truly sees that as one of the goals of the separation of church and state.
I am a firm believer in the goal of the separation of church and state and I wouldn't suggest that it is a goal to keep religious people from participating.
The goal is that no matter who is participating the laws of the nation should not be uniqu ...[text shortened]... that when you create a law it must have a rationale and purpose that is not to advance religion.
Agenda driven groups like the ACLU are usually more discrete and not so openly brazen in order to avoid criticism, but they act as though they are above criticism. The reason for this arrogance, and why they are able to get away with being so openly prejudiced, is because they have had more than enough backing from anti-Christian groups and lobbies (and sympathetic judges)... so they don't feel the need to hide the fact they have been intentionally targeting Christian groups and churches. This shows you how much power they have, and they have been using this power and their interpretation of the phrase 'separation of church and state' for needlessly harassing Christians.
Originally posted by lemon limeAre you aware of the activities of the ACLU, and how they have used this idea of 'separation of church and state' to go after Christian groups, and impose limitations on churches?
Are you aware of the activities of the ACLU, and how they have used this idea of 'separation of church and state' to go after Christian groups, and impose limitations on churches? They are very selective in whose civil liberties they are willing to go to bat for, and who they will target for filing complaints against.
Agenda driven groups like t ...[text shortened]... terpretation of the phrase 'separation of church and state' for needlessly harassing Christians.
Show me one case where the ACLU has imposed a limitation on a church. Can you give me some examples where the ACLU has targeted christian groups?
Are you aware of the numerous times the ACLU has defended christians?
We aren't discussing the ACLU though are we? So why do you even bring them up?
29 Jan 14
Originally posted by SwissGambitNo wonder that economy sucks. Taking God out is the number one reason.
...separation of Church and State.
The American Colonists were strongly motivated to come here by a desire to worship God in their own way. In England, they were forced by the King to follow the dictates of the Church of England.
That is exactly why the government should remain as neutral as possible when it comes to matters of religion. When gover ...[text shortened]... ould also not want a teacher of another religion teaching my children to pray to Mecca on a rug.