"Church and State" debate question

[HTColeman]

Oh yeah and you also referenced

Acts 17-6-7 : 6But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some other brothers before the city officials, shouting: "These men who have caused trouble all over the world have now come here, 7and Jason has welcomed them into his house. They are all defying Caesar's decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus."

 

[Dezaad]

Christ never taught "separation of Church and state." And only pseudo christians are against a Christian theocracy/righteuos government . . . .

You see everyone? The reason there exists a separation of church and state in this country is that even the churches are better off, as a whole, with this separation. This writer is just an early manifestation of what will happen if we allow the wall to lower and disappear. Christians will start fighting over what is real Christianity, and we end up with sect fighting sect for dominance.

The attitude expressed in this short post ought to be a warning flag to all medium and small sects who aren't interested in being squeezed out of favor by the larger sects that will drop all pretense of limited egalitarianism once the wall of separation is down.

 

[Dezaad]

It's the principle of the matter...

What principle would that be? I can see no connection between Thomas Edison's 500 attempts to invent something, and your disagreement with the definition of insanity.

Allow me to make it clear: Edison, had he been insane, would have never succeeded in inventing the light bulb. If he had been insane, he would have tried the same thing to invent the light bulb over and over, each time expecting a different result, and each time failing. Because Edison was not insane, he tried different things each time, and hoped for a different result. On his last try, he got a different result.

 

[HTColeman]

You see everyone? The reason there exists a separation of church and state in this country is that even the churches are better off, as a whole, with this separation. This writer is just an early manifestation of what will happen if we allow the wall to lower and disappear. Christians will start fighting over what is real Christianity, and we end up with sect fighting sect for dominance.

The attitude expressed in this short post ought to be a warning flag to all medium and small sects who aren't interested in being squeezed out of favor by the larger sects that will drop all pretense of limited egalitarianism once the wall of separation is down.

I agree, I don't want George W. Bush telling me how to interpret the Bible or how to practice my Christianity. There should be separation of church and state but the state shouldn't limit what the church can do (as long as they are within common laws, i.e. no murdering cults)

BTW, I was pointing that out because I don't like when people exaggerate the Bible or add to it, to try and make a point.

 

[Dezaad]

I agree, I don't want George W. Bush telling me how to interpret the Bible or how to practice my Christianity. There should be separation of church and state but the state shouldn't limit what the church can do (as long as they are within common laws, i.e. no murdering cults)

I don't want Bush telling the Churches what to do, either, or any other political leader. However, even more so, I don't want the Churches telling political leaders what to do. Essentially, these are two sides of the same coin, in the long run. So, I do want the Churches to be very limited in their political influence. This is to say, I don't want Churches to have any institutionalized influence.

 

[HTColeman]

I don't want Bush telling the Churches what to do, either, or any other political leader. However, even more so, I don't want the Churches telling political leaders what to do. Essentially, these are two sides of the same coin, in the long run. So, I do want the Churches to be very limited in their political influence. This is to say, I don't want Churches to have any institutionalized influence.

So, I guess we are right back to where we started...What defines an activity of the church as having "political influence"? And, on the flip side, how far can the gov't go to limit that activity before they are influencing the Church?