Jesus supported seperation of Church and State

[Farnan]

Yep,

Despite what Pat Robertson and some others would want you to believe, Jesus (and Paul for that matter) supported separation of Church and State.

Jesus famously did so in his statement: "Give unto Caesars what is Caesars and unto God what is Gods." But Paul did the same when he wrote against groups of Christians who believed they couldn't live under a pagan emperor, claiming even a pagan can do God's will.

The combination of Church and State didn't come until later when kings adopted Christianity for their kingdoms, which in my humble opinion is the worst thing to happen to Christianity.

Christianity should not lower itself to participate in something as low as government.

[gambit]

I think the point of Jesus' statement is to..
1) Emphasize on the point that human law is below God's law, so we should try to keep people in power away from thinking they somehow are the "leader" of a religion (and we all know how well that went, with the crusades and all)

2) Make sure governments aren't forcing people to be a certain religion, since this God fellow wants us to come to him via free will.

[Bovril]

I think it depends what you mean by Christianity. If you mean the ideas of the historical Christ, then probably the question is irrelevant, since he thought the eschaton (end time) was imminent, and consequently saw politics (and also mariage, possesions and so on) as little better than irrelevant.
If, on the other hand, you mean the religious traditions that spring from the group the historical Christ established there is rather more to say. First of all, we can say that there is no such thing as a logicaly necessary position on this issue for all Christians since there is not and almost never has been a single set of Christian beliefs.
Essentially then, this debate boils down to our own position on the role of religion in politics more broadly; in other words the seperation of church and state writ large. Christianity in itself need not come into it.

My personal intuition is that in a pluralistic state (i.e. every state in the world except perhaps the Vatican) there should be no legal role for religion in government, but that memebers of government should not be preented from representing religious opinion, or excercising their own religiously founded inclinations.

[C-Rob]

nice interpretation.

The combination of Church and State didn't come until later when kings adopted Christianity for their kingdoms, which in my humble opinion is the worst thing to happen to Christianity.

Christianity should not lower itself to participate in something as low as government.

Can't really come to God with your given free will when it's by the tip of a spear!

It also coincides with the "do not judge others" thing.

Also cements the fact that Jesus wasn't the military messiah the jews were hoping for.

[knight of virtue and valor]

he was not millitairy. its unfortunate that he jews wanted a messaih that would take on the whole roman army and win.

[Il Duce]

he was not millitairy. its unfortunate that he jews wanted a messaih that would take on the whole roman army and win.

They definitely could've used a Mohamed

[Primvs Sextvs Loverlord]

They definitely could've used a Mohamed

Mohammad (sw) didn't defeat the Roman empire. During the turmoil in Mecca, the Romans sent an expeditionary force which retreated when the Muslim army arrived. The caliphate can be accredited for the retreat of the ERE to Constantinople.

As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, I'd just like to add that when God revealed a system of state, economic and personal governance in His books, why would Jesus (as) say that the system of men can be given equal preference?

[Farnan]

he was not millitairy. its unfortunate that he jews wanted a messaih that would take on the whole roman army and win.

According to Christian belief he could, but that was not his purpose.

[knight of virtue and valor]

I know, I am a christain. I said would, not could. Mathew 26, verse 53, "Or do you think that I cannot now pray to my father, and he will provide me with more then twelve legions of Angels?"

[Каие]

I am genuinely ignorant of the revelation of God's constitution in the Holy Books, where is it?

[basics]

Farnan,

Your original post is quite correct if only because the hope of regenerate Christians is not of this world at all. Having said that Paul and His Christ both say to give Caesar what is his, which in other words means play your part in whichever part of the world you find yourself in or under.

So if any are called by their worldly masters to arms, it is my opinion that then we are rendering to Caesar what is his by right to ask and by the same right is expected of us to deliver. Does that abrogate our connection to God? Not in the least, in fact we are fulfilling what we are commanded to do.

[Dunecat]

Yeah, I don't know if "Give unto Caesars what is Caesars and unto God what is Gods" was Jesus supporting a 'separation of church and state'. State politics was not the message, I do think.

Really I would concern myself more with how the state is exalted even alone. Instead of state-advocated or regulated religion, it is replaced with religion of the state. "Patriotism", nationalism, a pride in unholy symbols and ideas, a pride in violence, concessions at the expense of Christian teachings. The state is venerated and idolized, with such feelings ritualized to suppress dissent and Christian social justice. Reason and faith is sacrificed on the altar of nation, state, and market worship.

[motiv-8]

The famous quote by Jesus was in reference to the the specific question of taxation, so let's not muddle the point by throwing in modern theories anachronistically.

[basics]

" The famous quote by Jesus was in reference to the the specific question of taxation, so let's not muddle the point by throwing in modern theories anachronistically."

motiv-8,

Not quite since Paul elaborated by telling new born Christians to stay in whatever employment they were in before their rebirth. The point being that in their new capacity to serve, even though their masters or rulers be evil, that evil can find no fault in them. So soldiers, or whatever, would remain that and be better soldiers, or whatever, than before.

And, if one considers that each of these is indwelt by God the Holy Ghost, then He Himself is not only ruling regarding their service but participating Himself in what they do. This may be a strange thing, but it is also a marvelous thing. That God Himself is among men even to this day witnessing by the behaviour of those that are His ensures the everlasting life that is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[motiv-8]

" The famous quote by Jesus was in reference to the the specific question of taxation, so let's not muddle the point by throwing in modern theories anachronistically."

motiv-8,

Not quite since Paul elaborated by telling new born Christians to stay in whatever employment they were in before their rebirth. The point being that in their new capacity to serve, even though their masters or rulers be evil, that evil can find no fault in them. So soldiers, or whatever, would remain that and be better soldiers, or whatever, than before.

And, if one considers that each of these is indwelt by God the Holy Ghost, then He Himself is not only ruling regarding their service but participating Himself in what they do. This may be a strange thing, but it is also a marvelous thing. That God Himself is among men even to this day witnessing by the behaviour of those that are His ensures the everlasting life that is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Paul told his followers to stay in their employment because he expected the End to be coming before he and they died. He didn't think it necessary or useful for people to do such things as change profession, get married (though he did say he preferred a man and woman get married rather than fornicate), and such. Paul certainly wasn't referencing a separation of Church and State.

[Farnan]

The term "Separation of Church and State" is modern, however the concept of accepting the dominance of a government not your own religion is what he is stating. Paying taxes to a non-Christian government states that you are part of the country. What the Pharisees were trying to trap him is by him saying you are not to support non-Jewish (Christianity didn't exist at this time) governments.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Please, please, pleeease for Christ's sake, don't try to interpret someone's words anachronistically to support your own arguments. It's a stupid thing really, and people should stop making this mistake over and over again. Jesus had no stance in this issue, as it wasn't an issue yet, lol.

[Mathias]

Jesus honestly believed that this world was going to end very soon, so I don't see why he would even bother having an opinion about such a thing, which is completely trivial if the world is going to end.