Jesus foresaw the necessity for seperation of Church and State

[esskreemr]

It's in the Bible:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.

This is an obvious reference to the idea that Government and "The Church" should remain seperate.

[telkanuru]

A great majority of christians tend to quote only the parts of the bible that prove the point they are trying to make. Go figure.

For example, homosexuality is wrong, but will that same person stone me for wearing cloth of two threads? I thought not.

And when the president stands, everyone stands.
[/Obscure reference]

[ls14evar]

Yah, what about the part of the bible that says we get to have slaves.

[Rogue]

It's in the Bible:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.

This is an obvious reference to the idea that Government and "The Church" should remain seperate.

I think that quote tells us that you have a duty to your country, state, earthly sovereign etc. As well as a duty to God.
Remember, there is no mention of seperation of church and state in the constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

This means there will be no Church of the United States of America.
It does not mean religion can't have an influence over what laws are made,what monuments are erected. If a government void of religion was what the founders intended, they sure didn't get that point across with all the references to God throughout the founding documents of this great country.
This also means the Gov. can't force you to whorship in a certain manner. Likewise I should be able to wear a cross or crucifix in my place of employment, even if I'm a teacher,free exercise thereof. As long as I don't try to convert students during class.

IIRC, the Bible says to treat slaves well, it doesnt give an explicit charge to have them.

[/QUOTE=telkanuru]...same person stone me for wearing cloth of two threads?[/QUOTE]
Chapter and verse please. Could this be part of a metaphoric story?

[keith]

.....I believe it's corruption of leviticus. Which outlines accepted behavior while wandering in the desert, so not terribly useful especially if you aren't jewish.

[telkanuru]

Sigh, no, it's leviticus, the book of mosaic law that contains both the prohibition on sodimy (sp?) and kosher laws, etc. It's a bunch of "thou shall" and "Thou shalt not"s; no story whatsoever.

You claim to be a christian and you haven't read the entire bible? I'm an agnosic and I have 3 different copies on my shelf for cross-reference.

[L.O.A.S.]

It's in the Bible:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.

This is an obvious reference to the idea that Government and "The Church" should remain seperate.

Matthew 22
15Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words. 16They 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. 17Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, 20and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
21"Caesar's," they replied.
Then he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
22When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.

Now I'm no theologian, but in context, this does not seem to be a affirmation for the seperation of church and state. Rather, to obey the laws of the land, and to honor God.

[lochinvar]

It's in the Bible:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's.

This is an obvious reference to the idea that Government and "The Church" should remain seperate.

Taken within the context of the story in which it occurs, this line's most reasonable interpretation is, "You gotta pay taxes". It has nothing to say concerning separation of church and state.

[keith]

indeed it is although a slight over emphasis;

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Lev/Lev019.html

see 19:19

[esskreemr]

Now I'm no theologian, but in context, this does not seem to be a affirmation for the seperation of church and state. Rather, to obey the laws of the land, and to honor God.

The coin separates the head of Caesar from whatever is on the other side. Thusly we have seperation.

In addition, the coin is money, everyone know that money is power.

Jesus represents the Church, he also explicitely states that what is Caesar's is Caesar and what is God is God's.

From the above, the coin is obviously a metaphor for seperating the power of the Church from the power of the State.

[L.O.A.S.]

The coin separates the head of Caesar from whatever is on the other side. Thusly we have seperation.

In addition, the coin is money, everyone know that money is power.

Jesus represents the Church, he also explicitely states that what is Caesar's is Caesar and what is God is God's.

From the above, the coin is obviously a metaphor for seperating the power of the Church from the power of the State.

Okay. Since we are playing connect the dots, you may find this amusing.

We all know that women require time and money.

WOMEN = TIME x MONEY

We also know that TIME is MONEY.
TIME = MONEY

WOMEN = MONEY x MONEY = (MONEY)2 <-- The 2 should be superscipt

Now, "MONEY is the root of all EVIL", so

MONEY = (EVIL)1/2

and since (MONEY)2 = WOMEN, and (MONEY)2 = EVIL

WOMEN = EVIL


Women really are Evil. At least the ones who beat me up on the strip.

[esskreemr]

WOMEN = EVIL


Women really are Evil. At least the ones who beat me up on the strip.

Well, duh. You don't need a mathematical formula to determine that. I mean, it's in the Bible!

[riptide]

There are so many contradictions in that Book that any attempts to use it to prove a singular point are ineffective. Read the New Testement, absorb the teachings of Jesus, and then read Siddhartha, Book of Five Rings, the Prophet, The Gospel According to Larry, Suma Theologica, The Repubic, and Utopia.

Oh, and check out a few episodes of Kung Fu as well.

[Westley]

Okay. Since we are playing connect the dots, you may find this amusing.

We all know that women require time and money.

WOMEN = TIME x MONEY

We also know that TIME is MONEY.
TIME = MONEY

WOMEN = MONEY x MONEY = (MONEY)2 <-- The 2 should be superscipt

Now, "MONEY is the root of all EVIL", so

MONEY = (EVIL)1/2

and since (MONEY)2 = WOMEN, and (MONEY)2 = EVIL

WOMEN = EVIL


Women really are Evil. At least the ones who beat me up on the strip.

I was going to say that. Except you beat me to the punch. And that's a weird way of saying it. It's simply W=T T=M M=root of all evil. Therefore, Women = root of all evil.

[Westley]

Read an LDS Bible. They're the same thing, except at the bottom they have where Joseph Smith went through and said okay this is wrong, it got screwed up in the 1500's because of crazy catholics, this is what it originally said. Or this was a mistake when it was translated from Hebrew to English. It's cool, and it makes a lot of sense. It clears up a lot of wtf moments in the bible. In my opinion. But that still doesn't stop ppl from taking random points in the bible like the passage and taking them out of context. Or just completely making stuff up.

[ls14evar]

IIRC, the Bible says to treat slaves well, it doesnt give an explicit charge to have them.

Leviticus 25
44 " 'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

A fairly ringing endorsement. Mainly it talks about treating slaves well in general though. Just another reason why I dont take it literally.

[keith]

There are so many contradictions in that Book that any attempts to use it to prove a singular point are ineffective. Read the New Testement, absorb the teachings of Jesus, and then read Siddhartha, Book of Five Rings, the Prophet, The Gospel According to Larry, Suma Theologica, The Repubic, and Utopia..

you should probably add something by Spinoza and Nietzsche to that list for completeness, and total metaphysical paralysis.

Oh, and check out a few episodes of Kung Fu as well.

but this is far easier, just as complete and leaves more time for fun and frollicks.

[riptide]

you should probably add something by Spinoza and Nietzsche to that list for completeness, and total metaphysical paralysis.

noted.

but this is far easier, just as complete and leaves more time for fun and frollicks.

Have you ever seen an episode of Kung Fu?

[Westley]

Double check, and a wider passage.

"39 ¶ And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be asold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bbondservant:

40 But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubile:

41 And then shall he depart from thee, both he and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return.

42 For they are my servants, which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: they shall not be sold as bondmen.

43 Thou shalt not rule over him with rigour; but shalt afear thy God.

44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the aheathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.

45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46 And ye shall take them as an an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

47 ¶ And if a sojourner or stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother that dwelleth by him wax poor, and sell himself unto the stranger or sojourner by thee, or to the stock of the stranger’s family:

48 After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him:

49 Either his uncle, or his uncle’s son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself."

This entails a person can be bought out of bondage, can be given freedom. More rules, more protection, less condoning.

[keith]

Have you ever seen an episode of Kung Fu?

indeed I have, which is why I can say it easily sums up the philosophy of most self diagnosed fans of eastern religions.