The only reference that Jesus made that directly relates to the separation of church and state issue is found in Matthew 22:15: "Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. 'Teacher,' they said, 'we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren't swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?' But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, 'You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.' They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, 'Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?' 'Caesar's,' they replied. Then he said to them, 'Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.' When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away."
What did Jesus mean by His statements? Did He mean that the church should stay out of the state's business? When Jesus stated, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's," was He admonishing the people of His Kingdom to stay out of Caesar's business? No! He simply recognized that Caesar and his government had a right to be in power and that God and His Kingdom, although separate, also had a right to be in power. This is analogous to Christians paying taxes to their government. The separation of church and state debate has nothing to do with the willingness or unwillingness of Christians to pay taxes to the government. It is about not allowing Christian Theists to display any expressions of their faith, Theistic writings, or symbols in the public square. Jesus' entire ministry was about doing God's will. Jesus' whole ministry was done in the public arena. He held up the truth of the Old Testament scriptures on many occasions. He certainly was not for expunging Christian Theistic expressions, writings, and symbols from the public arena!
The Pharisees were trying to exploit an apparent inconsistency between Jesus not being a respecter of persons and recognizing Caesar's kingship. This is not much different than the current assertion that Christian Theism should be expunged from the public arena based upon the "separation of church and state" argument because both are based upon hypocrisy and clever lies.
2006-12-24 09:00:25 · 8 answers · asked by ? 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Giving unto Ceasar what is unto him is the same as the separatin of the church and state. If you live in a community where there is law made by its ruler, members of that community must abide by the law. The religious would express its concern only the basis of loose morals or failure of the government to prevent a desecration to human rights to live as an honorable citizen.
If ever the church was influential before in many circumstances, it was because the ruling monarch in the early traditions used the religious tenets as a subtle way to control its subject by injecting guilt into the minds of the believer thus cleansing their image in public a dictatorial regime.
How you see it in this present world is an exploitations on both sides that can either be true or a clever lie because some of the creators of the ruling can be sincere in their thoughts while opportunists also have their own agenda for agreeing.
2006-12-24 09:28:54 · answer #1 · answered by Rallie Florencio C 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sometimes i agree with you and sometimes i do not.
this is one time where i could meet you half way.
i think that Jesus was saying that you should respect the laws of man while you are within the boundaries of thoes laws.
while in rome pay tax to rome, etc.
and i think that this is a good example that could be seen as Jesus saying to keep Church (the government of god) and Rome (the government of man) seperate.
the removal of Christian writings from courthouses and state owned public buildings i agree with. unless you are going to display the writings of every religion, and make your laws within the confines of every religious belief.
I as a Pagan should not have to go into an American Courthouse and stand trial before the laws of a god that i do not worship. weather thay are written or implied. some of the laws of this cuntry are based in the laws of the christian god. but lets be real here. murder, rape, and theft were illegal by the laws of man long before the God of Aberham.
i should not be made to feel that when i go to court for any reason that i am being held up to the 10 commandments of the Christian religion. there are only about 5 of them that i actually think are wrong in the first place. If you wish the 10 commandments displayed in the courthouse. then display the laws of every religion. at least this way it sends the message to the jury that this is a very diverse country.
with the 10 commandments as a basis for law. it could hapen that i would be convited not because i am guilty but because a lawyer was able to prove that i am guilty of worshiping other gods, and therefore would have no problem killing someone because i do not respect the laws of that paticular god.
as far as public displays in the form of street preachers and such. i am ok as long as they are not pushy. the only people in this category that really **** me off is the Abortion protestors.
shove a picture of a dead baby in my face and i am likely to knock your teeth down your throat. i have lost 2 children to miscarrage and i do not need a visual.
as for public displays of the 10 commandments or crosses or other christian writeings, i really do not care, i actually kind of like to see them. but answer me this.
why is it that if i put up a display in my front yard that shows my beliefs and attempts to explain them that it (and my house) will be vandalised within 3 days.
freedom for all and all of that jazz right.
when Christians begin to respect the beliefs of everyone else then everyone else will begin to respect their beliefs.
2006-12-24 09:26:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He said that we have to respect the authorities we have, including government authorities, because they are given by God.
However, would he be in favor of separation of church and state? Before I read your rather long back-up statement I thought of how he said go into villages with his message and if they reject you wipe the dust off your feet and go elsewhere. I think he knew there would be those who will not hear or accept the Good News and to move on to others. I think that attitude moves into the separation of churrch and state - a theocracy does not work, you cannot force people (Constantine) so church and state must be separated for that, and other good reasons, as well..
I am a Christian.
2006-12-24 09:08:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Christ would not have something to do with politics. As for that verse, that's beside the point what so-spoke of as pupils say approximately it, for in fact hid from them; however the Lord is in basic terms saying if Caesar, whosoever he may be, in by any skill form of government he's taking, if he needs taxes, so we provide him taxes. Our accountability to government is to place as much as their authority; yet you're insinuating that a technique or the different God has no section interior the state. you may understand scripture first, then make a remark.
2016-10-18 23:04:48 · answer #4 · answered by mctaggart 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I refer you to this video and really get to know the truth. Also look up a man named David Icke. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911
2006-12-24 09:02:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh for Christ's sake!
2006-12-24 09:06:30 · answer #6 · answered by copestir 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lord have mercy
2006-12-24 09:02:48 · answer #7 · answered by 2.71828182845904 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It sounded to me you had an answer to your question!
2006-12-24 09:05:28 · answer #8 · answered by mrs.mom 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋