It's funny. Before I even opened this, I had what Jesus said about rendering to Caesar in mind.
It seems clear that a great many Americans do not know this, but Separation of Church and State is not a mandate in American Law. If you read through the Constitution, you will not find Separation of Church and State there. Separation of Church and State is a concept that was written in a letter by Thomas Jefferson and was the school of thought behind some of the laws that were adopted into the Constitution.
Where it came from was a people group, mostly European, who had fled to the New World - which became these United States - to escape from the Church throughout Europe that ruled most of Europe. They didn't have a government making their rules, laws, and regulations, they had a corrupt church making their rules, laws, and regulations. And basic human rights were denied in many of those rules, laws, and regulations.
And so, the whole concept behind Separation of Church and State is that the church has its place, and government has its place, and the two entities should be separate entities not interfering with the way either of the 2 entities operate. In other words, the church should not tell the government how to govern, and the government should not tell the church how to function as the church.
I get a sense that this is pretty much what Jesus was saying too when He said "Render unto God what is God's and render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's."
2006-10-04 09:52:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Carol L 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
render unto Caesar that which is his. It means almost the same as "As ye sow so shall ye reap" except that it is the encouragement of the masses to show the true face of policy's designed to inflict the will of the few on the many. Caesar was responsible, as the leader of the Roman empire, for the debauchery committed in its name. Jesus felt Caesar should reap the full fruits of this debauchery in the form civil disobedience and outright rebellion. As far as a separation of church and state goes, Jesus didn't care for either church or state as both were counter intuitive to his teachings concerning peaceful co-existence and free will.
2006-10-04 09:49:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
""Render unto Caesar..." meant that we should give to the government what is owed it, such as the paying of taxes and obeying its laws EXCEPT when those laws conflict with God's.
Jesus did teach a form of separation when he said at John 15:19 that his followers were no part of this world.
2006-10-04 13:47:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by LineDancer 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's", referred to money.
The Separation of Church and State came from a letter from
a congressman to Congess I believe. It's not in the Constitution
itself.
The Constutution says Congress can make NO LAW regarding
the free expression of religious belief. This was to keep any
particular CHURCH from using the Power of the State, (military),
to impose a main belief on the citizenry.
Today, true to the nature of humans. Emotionalism, one extreme
to the other. The State is imposing on the Church.
2006-10-04 09:46:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by zenbuddhamaster 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
It means render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars, so yes , he did advocate separation of church and state. ie, there should be no such thing as a state run church.
2006-10-04 09:41:20
·
answer #5
·
answered by bbjones9 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
No, he became only answering a trick question with a trick answer. it truly is all made very, very, very sparkling in case you study the textual content, i ought to upload. Did I factor out that it truly is made sparkling in case you'll only study the textual content in question? properly, it really is! don't have self belief the crud you hear on some ignorant internet website. verify it out for your self. and do not study a verse; study the total component, or you aren't any more getting the total tale. you recognize, in case you study an complete e book in the Bible, it really is going to take you possibly some hours, and also you'll learn some thing. Sorry if this sounds sarcastic. i'm no longer being sarcastic; i'm only putting ahead that in case you opt for to benefit, think about to make a extreme attempt. Any wag can study the rubbish off some internet website and pretend they recognize some thing. to benefit calls for attempt. there is not any way round it.
2016-11-26 02:49:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
(KJV)
Mark 12:12 And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.
Mark 12:13 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.
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?
Mark 12:15 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.
Mark 12:16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
Mark 12:17 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.
this is JESUS way of answering questions of foolish and tricky evil men.
you will notice he did not really say anything except that ceasar's money was his money, but GOD'S THINGS ARE GOD'S.
we are flesh and we are also spirit. flesh man must pay his taxes or go to jail, but you must give your love to GOD for your spiritual being to survive.
i'm not just another pretty face, you know!
A TIP,SKIPPY: you'll learn more if you read all the verses and go to bluletterbible or a strong'sconcordance to learn the real meanings of those verses. do not be a 1 vs chalie. it will take you 600 years to get them all read!
2006-10-04 11:17:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by the_shepherd's_child 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I find the first three answers to this unsatisfying. The first thing I thought of when reading your question title was the Render unto Caesar line, so I think that (a) your question is apt; (b) none of the previous responders have addressed it at all. My take on it is that the answer to your question is "Yes."
2006-10-04 09:41:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes, Caesar represents the State or government
2006-10-04 09:40:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sugar 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
I'd say the quote is an endorsement of separation of church and state. Religious types say it isn't, simply because they want their religion to be held above all others, and the only way to do that is to allow religion in the public square. It's not that they don't understand their religion. It's that they don't let what it actually says interfere with what they want to do. And that is textbook hypocrisy.
2006-10-04 09:45:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tommy 4
·
2⤊
1⤋