Ther are two things I have thought on this issue in the church side. One is the manipulation of th states over the churches. The churches cannot have their own freedom to do in worship service or nay services in the church without the consent of the states. Two, what ever laws impart the states whether to the nation or to the church must be followed by the church. Well, that is okay to follow the laws. However, if the corrupt laws would be imputed to the community, and the church is not separated from states, then the church should follow the that kind of laws which somehow against the laws of God. The best example of this laws or rights is to impose the legal abortion which is against the teaching of the church based on the Scripture of the sanctity of life
I agree with you Dodong Sonny. Separation between church and state is an issue even before in our world history until today. There should be a separation because church's business is to live differently from what the world does or the state. It is to live a distinct life of being a body of Christ that has virtue and is able to treat people and valued people fairly with dignity and liberty that enables the church to act freely without any restriction from the state. It should be separated so that the church will exercise the freedom that they have especially in worshiping God and following the decrees of God without any consultation of the state. Church should do a task of decision making especially in following the ordinances. The church should not compromise the truth, it should be allowing God to get involve to what He wanted to be in the church as His bride.
There should be a separation of the church and State because first of all, the State and the Church have different roles and functions which can not just be neglected. The State has the role of maintaining the peace and order of a country while the Church's role is to be a place wherein people gather together to worship God.The State creates laws which help the country to be a better place to live in. There is something that is in the church which many of the officers in the State disagree of applying it into their system. For example, loving the enemies, just as the Bible says, can not be easily applied in the State. Most of what the officers do in the State is to reveal their enemy's scandal in order for him to get embarrassed which is not likely biblical. The State focuses on the things which are seen and does actions which the members of it think is right. The Church focuses on the things unseen and spiritual, doing actions which God wants for His children to do which are bible-centered. Most of the rules in the State are based on how people perceive what is right in their eyes while the Church's basis of what is right is that how God sees things glorifying in His name.
I agree with you mand's, that there should be a separation between church and the state. For they have different focuses and roles in the society. They have different point of views. Besides, if these two were together, what would happen to the structure or system of the church?. The church might compromise to the rules of the state which were not biblically right.
I agree with you Amanda. The state indeed focuses on the things which are seen and their decisions are based on its members' approval while the church is the opposite of it for it focuses on the things that are spiritual and was originated to be bible-based with its every decisions.But this idea made me think how they can complement each others strength and weaknesses. The state can really help the church to be open-minded with the needs of the society and the influence that the it carries can be a very influential tool for the church's goal to impact the spirituality of the community. While the church can give the state the help of looking and considering the perspectives of the Bible about the issues of the world that are surely touched in the Bible. If this would happen I know it would make our society better.
A church is called to be free. The state also has a freedom but these two should be separated because they have different vision and mission. The church doesn't need to ask the state's permission whatever and whenever they decide things because a church should think about what is good for the human race. If the church decides and fails and commit mistakes then the state should be out of it, then vice versa. There should be limitations, boundaries , rules, agreement between the church and state so that there should no competition for anything and for something. These two should separate because church should not follow what the states agreed or ordered. Church should follow the commandments in the standard of the Word of God. If there is no separation there is competition between these two and conflicts because points of views differ.
Church has to follow the state if it does not do anything evil. Even though church has different function but the church is still required to pass on papers for registration, license and/or whatever to the state. We still need not neglect the authority of the state for the church is under them in some ways. The church has to stand on what is biblical and pursue evangelizing those who are in the government so that the leadership will be under the Holy Spirit.
I agree with you Cai, the church and the state should not separate themselves, instead they should work together for good, and none of them should not be higher than the other. Both should have respect with one another, and they should work together as one, and support each others best decision.
yes its true jul that church and state has different mission and goal because their work is also different so thats why they need to be separated. and as we dont want to mix our church about the government matter although it is important to know the government but it doesnt mean that church will join what the government wants them to do. basta its very difficult to join these two the church and the state kay maggubot ang tnan if they are together.
I agree with you Julz :). God is a God of order, not chaos. That's why permanent separation between church and state has a great advantage. God has given each one freewill, so why not give it to both church and state? If we will put them together, then it will just bring confusion to the functions of both. God has made the church and state uniquely, so why disprove its distinctness? Thus, permanent separation between church and state gives justice to both.
The separation of church and state is a concept defining the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state. It may refer to creating a secular state, with or without explicit reference to such separation, or to changing an existing relationship of church involvement in a state. This idea is credited to the internet. This is one of the most debated topics throughout history. The concept of separation of church and state was first coined by Thomas Jefferson who used it as a way of saying that the government cannot make a person choose a certain religion or be forced to live by someone else’s religion. As for me, this idea is somewhat good but we can never hide the fact that there are advantages and disadvantages of having this kind of thing. The advantages of this separation are churches are free to do what they believe they ought to do and the government has no right whatsoever of being an obstacle to what people in the church in whatever religion is doing. The people, in religious setting, are also united with each other because they share common belief and interest as a group. The disadvantages of separation of church and state are the fact that there are people group who use religion as a means so that they can do what they planned to do that are not beneficial to other people group, the state tries to get involve in the process of helping those that are being exploited but then there goes this reasoning that the government can not be involve and get in them because it is a religious problem. This is a sad thing as this is also happening even in different places here in the Philippines. In one way or another, state benefits from the church as church is compose of people and church benefits from the state as the government as it also helps the church. Instead of arguing and fighting and killing, why not be thankful for this symbiosis? ------- Makes Me Think :)
I agree with you that indeed this topic is one of the most debated subject throughout history. In fact, we are discussing it even up to this day. I guess that we shall never stop wondering about its every angle until the last day. Besides, I wonder if people really understand what they mean separation of the church and state. Yeah, we have to think about it.
Yeah I agree with you ate Sarah, if the people really understand what they really mean of the annulment between the church and state. Somehow, this concept was just based from the First amendment of United States Constitution. Which they had seen the state of England which is a church state, something. Maybe, it should be clarified what they really wanted to imply with this matter. For it just bring confusion to many.
I find it hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation of the church and the state in today's setting. Looking back, in the time of Theocracy or in the time of monarchy, there was no distinction between state and religion. In fact, there was a harmonious relationship when Godly people are ruling (e.g. King David). Fast forward, we are now in a world where issues on separating religion and state concerns so many individuals.The separation of the church and state has become a very big deal. The Philippine Constitution has declared principles and state policies consisting "The separation of the Church and the State" (Article II, Sec. 6). So what do we think of this word separation? I wonder what really is the dividing line between the state and the church. Does it mean to have a zero relationship? or does it mean that the members of the church cannot participate in state affairs? If so, then what are we going to do? We are in this state and we are also members of the church. In today's setting I find it hard to define the dividing lines of separation. I believe that the part of constitution I mentioned above was given to protect the interest of the church and its adherents and I appreciate that.It means that the church (consisting all religious groups) shall be protected from violation and that there shall be no law to be passed that concerns how a religion be established or governed. As for me, there's no need to fight for separating the church and the state because we cannot. Whether we like it or not, these two influenced a society in so many ways. If I could begin to comprehend or imagine what it truly means to separate the two, then perhaps I would cast my vote. But for now, I believe that there could be harmony between the two coexisting in the midst of us, then I'll keep it like that.
It really is a hard question to answer and even ponder about. I really liked the questions that you have asked there. I also thought about it and asked, "what does it really mean for the church and the state to be separated?" "Does it mean to have a zero relationship?" I really wonder too. Indeed we are somewhat part of the state and we are members of the Church too. It kind of confuses us to where we must take side. But I realized that we really don't have to. I also believe that the part of constitution you mentioned above was given to protect the interest of the Church. So there's really no need to fight.
Me either. i can identify with your dilemma. sorry for the usage of word. poke me if you are uncomfortable with it. :) anyway i agree with what you said about unable to separate the church and the state. There is no problem with that. but to use the word harmony, then i would question that side because i can not remember an event when it was harmonious... in my own opinion, it will not be. It had never been and it's gettin' worst by now.
The question why there should be a permanent separation between church and state find me hard to answer. They should be separated maybe because they differ in function, roles, and so that it prevents chaos towards the church leaders and government officials. It is through church that we have fellowship with other believers. We worship God though we can do it alone but we need both privately and publicly declare the goodness of God. We can learn spiritual disciplines at church and it is one of the functions also. Believers help one another grow in their faith and build each other up. Evangelism and service are some of the functions of church too. While the state keeps the country united and form a community. Government has officials in every barangay and cities that will serve as leaders. There's law for the people to follow. Government maintains authority. However, the church is under the state in terms of registration and other stuffs that are necessary thus it would be great if both work in harmony.
The “church” should be construed as any organized religious body with its doctrines/dogmas and “state” should be understand as any governmental body, any government-run organization or any government-sponsored event. Separation of the church is a two way street. Religious groups cannot dictate to or control the government.Separation of the church and state is the key to protects all people from the religious tyrnarry of anyone religious group or tradition and it protects all people from a government intent of tyrannizing. By this, the separation of state and church can impact us personally and it has a number of implications for an individual citizen.
I agree with you ate. I believe that time will come that they will be together in harmonious relationship, being leaders in the state and church to lead the people. It is because God designed them both and they have different functions for His glory. For now, both have many disagreements but time may come that both of them will be used by God together.
Yes, I agree with you ate. The church and the State are just too different with their functions and their roles in the society. The church is where believers gather together in worship and the state is the one which does the function of maintaining peace and order among people in the society. They may differ in functions, but the fact remains that they both exist in our society.
The permanent separation of church and states has a great problem even before because of over manipulation, the church grows and the states over reacted for it because they want to overpower or they want to hold the church. This cause uneasy between the church and the state. The church cannot exercise their freedom,and the church can be corrupted by the states because of some imposed laws that are corrupt and not acceptable to the church.
There are questions came into my mind. One of these is that why there was a time that the state and the church was not separated and in fact had harmonious relationship? But as I see today, people, government, officials, and laws have been changed. That is the reason why the state and church should be separated. It is because of the different priorities, visions, and missions. It is also because of the conflicts of the natural law with the law of God. There should be separation between them so that they can have their freedom to act or perform the law that they have. It is also to show respect to what they believe. If they are not separated, I think there may be many disagreements that may encounter. It is also for the benefit of the church to preserve the importance of Christianity and the practices. It is also that they can do everything that is align to God's will without asking permission from the state. Yet these days, the church are still required to pass some papers just like the documents of the lot that the church had built or other requirements that the state required. Even the church and the state are separated, the church must still submit to the state. In a sense that it did not contradict to what the Bible says. It is also a way to show to the state that they are still respected even they have been separated. Through this, the state can be encourage to also respect the church and not abuse it because of the population that it has. Thus, in spite of this separation, it is still important that these two can go together for unity. It is because God also designed the state and government and He is also the origin of it.
Church and State are totally different in so many ways, and it means that they also have different functions. Its like a water and oil, when you combine them together the oil will always separate itself and it will just flout, and you can not mix it together like nothing happens. But both are very useful in different ways, church and state they can work together for good. The church would be the supportive and back up part and the state would be the one to take the rule and lead. It doesn't really have to separate both, in fact both should work together as one, and none of them should dominate. So that there will be a unity in the nation and in both the church and state. My main point is that, instead of looking at the church and the state in a negative way, we can't find any positive things to happen and so we just like both to separate. If we all look in a positive way like, here in the Philippines because of the leaders of the church divorce was not being allowed and as well as abortion. So Church is very helpful to the state when it comes to moral act and decision making. I guess the thing is that it all depend on the persons choice and decision in life.
I find it hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation between church and state. For by the separation of the church and the state it means that the state has no right to use its power and authority to dictate people on what religion they might have and what should be the rules in the church. The church has its own freedom to have its own system without the help of the government. But we could not deny the fact that the church or the people in the church were still subject to the law of the state, specifically when it comes to registrations. I understand the separation of the church and the state in terms of its functions. The church is intended for fellowship of the children of God, in worshiping God, and in learning spiritual things that help believers grow in their faith in Christ. And the state's role is to maintain safety among the people and to provide leadership in our nation, yet they should not involve in church affairs.
I agree that state should not involved in church affairs, Gie Ann. I also agree with what you said about the state having no right to use their power and authority to tell people what they should observe when it comes to religious matters. Yet, there must also be submission in the part of the church and that is to be publicly recognized.
I it is hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation between church and state but in my own philosophy the state have no right to use its power and authority to dominate or rule people on what religion they might have or belief. The church has its own freedom and to have its own system and management. But the churches were subject to abide and obey the government. As believers we should consider what God requires of us in our relationship to civil government. (Rom.13:1a). Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. In this verse the commandment is addressed to all mankind, without exception. Every person is included in this instruction both believers and unbelievers, and this will include obedience, respect, love, prayers and support. But the church will not compromise of what the state is doing not pleasing in God’s eyes. The church were intended to have fellowship with the children of God, in worshiping God, and in learning spiritual things that help individual grow spiritually in their faith in Christ and also the church were given the tasks of spreading the gospel (Acts 1:8), teaching doctrine (Matthew 28:20), and disciple people (Ephesians 4:11-13). But the state's role is to maintain safety among the people and to provide good leadership in our nation, through roads constructions, seminars, education, and society development like livelihood. But the state should resist evil (Romans 13:3) keep order (I Peter 2:13-15) value the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights, maintain of peace and order, protect people lives by giving fair judgment, gives liberty, and the general welfare of the society. The church and the state have separate duties and loyalties therefore it must not go with the flow.
If we agree to separate the state and the church what possible things might happen? We should first consider possible consequences of our demand that might cause division between the church and the state.
In Romans 13: 1 the authorities that exist have been established by God. i didn't say that I don't agree with you guys but we should also consider what the Bible says about government and authorities. Yes, it is true that because of the laws that the state impose churches now a days are struggling in compromising what is untruth. But this doesn't mean we must neglect those authorities in order for us believers not to compromise the untruth and live a life away from the temptation of compromising. We should find it as a challenge and as an opportunity to minister the community and state. Yes, we will live freely but as a christian are you satisfied in your life knowing that someone out there is dead in salvation? State is one of many ways that we can communicate them the gospel of salvation. I didn't say that we must compromise in order to share the gospel but let us follow the example of Paul (1 Cor.9:20). Believers "connect" the truth and "disconnect" lies!
Why should there be permanent separation between the church and state? A question that is really hard for many of us to answer. We can't deny the fact that the church and the state play different roles in the society. They are separated and should remain separated for the sake of the citizens and to preserve each person's freedom, especially when it comes to choosing their own religion. Separation of the church and state is necessary so that religious affairs can freely be accomplished. The essence of this is to give freedom to the church to act and live without the control of the state. We can't also deny that the church needs to comply to the government requirements but this is necessary to be recognized and it is also for the church's welfare. Yet, this doesn't mean that the church is under the control of the government, rather, it just allows legal recognition of the church. Separation of the church and the state makes it possible for citizens to choose freely where to get affiliated. There should really be a permanent separation so that persecution and discrimination will be avoided as much as possible. There will also be an equal protection to anyone who chooses their own beliefs and religion. As for the Christians, the separation of the church and the state is very beneficial because it prevents the state to gain full control of it. The same thing with the state, the church is not allowed to get involved in the government affairs because everyone has his own belief, and if churches is not separated from their affairs, it might cause chaos. In general, there must be separation of the church and the state so that freedom of the citizens to choose their own belief will be preserved and maintained.
Exactly! To maintain and to preserve the freedom of the citizens to choose to their own belief is there should be permanent separation of church and state. People may be confused by the different views and principles of the two if they will not separate. It is very important that they have permanent separation so that the citizens in our society are freely dependent to their own freedom of choice. They can think freely what they need to do because there would know chaotic principles that gives them confusion where to affiliate.
I agree with you ate Mitch. Separation of church and state does help in maintaining and preserving the freedom of every individual to choose their own beliefs. Because the state cannot interfere anymore to the decisions of every individual regarding the choosing of their belief if there is a separation.
Permanent separation between church and state has advantages and disadvantages. And one the advantages is freedom of religious choice this mean that the government can’t impulse a certain religion in our country. Everyone has a freedom to choose their individual religion. And this separation would not create discrimination of each other- the state and church. People are allowed to serve and express of what they believe in. And this advantage is an opportunity of all Christian because this chance to share, worships, and serves our true God. There is an acknowledgement and respect of the individual churches in our country in this separation. And this should be permanent so that we are leaving of liberty in our beliefs. But as I observe right now state is using the church especially in times of their needs specifically during election. People in the government pursue some church to support them during election especially those churches that has a lot of members and there are churches also will compromise about this thing. We can see here that although there is separation but still they need each other. They correlate to each other sometimes and church right now needs to submit to the government. Like in our school basically we have the freedom to learn all the theology subjects, purely but when our school decided to accredit in the government so the government required the school to have other subject aside from theology subject so that the students will be recognized in their profession when they are going to apply work in the public. So I can see here that these two has different function/roles and be separated but they are still important to each other.
For me, there should be a permanent separation between church and state because of these two reasons: First, state is a political community governed by the government officials which perspective differs from the perspective of the church. Our government is more concern about our physical needs such as economic development, protection for people's life, and growth, but the church goal is more than these perspective. The church is more concern about human being's needs both physical, social, mental and, most of all, man's spiritual condition. Their worldviews really matter in this case, and because of this reason, they cannot work together having the same vision and mission for our society. The second reason, I think, is authority between the two. The government thinks that they are authoritative than the church because they are the one who manage and control our political community. In the same way with the church, they thinks they have the right to say something to the government because they have “the Law of God”. Because of this, they have conflicts of their decision-making for the society. That's why there is know reason that church and state should be together. The best thing to do is to have a permanent separation!
The Church and State needed to be permanently separated. Not that the church will be out of the state, but the state be out of the Church. Separation does not mean that the Church won't comply what the state requires. The Church still needs to comply the requirements needed for the state but it doesn't mean that the Church would apply all the laws that are from the state, such as laws that are not inclined with God's law. To be separated means that the state should NOT create laws or any requirements that would prevent the Church (or any religious beliefs) from exercising their freedom of belief. I believe we all have the right to exercise our freedom to utilize our beliefs, simply because we are created by our Creator with a free will and the state should not hinder that freedom. Therefore the Church and the state needs to be permanently separated.
I agree, that the church still needs to comply what the state requires. It's true that it doesn't mean that the church could do whatever they pleases even if it is against the norm of the society. Separation does not pertain to that of doing anything that the church wants to do but to still abide by the general norm of the state as stated in the law. The only good thing in that separation was that the state cannot interfere with the leadership of the church in regards to their plans and activities for the congregation as the whole.
I don't think so that there would be permanent separation between the church and the state, as what Atty. Jo Imbong stated, "church and state may differ in their domain and purpose, but they do not necessarily antagonize or cancel each other. In fact it is only through their co-existence and harmony that the well-being of man is achieved, that is, the State providing for the material goods of man and religion ministering to man’s spiritual needs. This co-existence comes about because they have a common form of reference–man’s well-being." I do agree with him that though they both perform different roles they complemented each other. For it doesn't mean that they differ in function they should be of separation. They aimed the same for the betterment of the people.
You have the point that the state and church exist for the well-being of human kind. Separation here talks about authority of each area on each other. I am convinced enough that they must have a boundary for them to exercise their own sovereignty. But then you are right when you said that both of them influence the well-being of man. Is their really harmony with the two terms? Hmmmm i dont want to argue, just explaining my views...
Yes it is true that the state and the church exist for the well-being of human kind. It is the will of God that the state duties is to maintain safety among the people and to provide good leadership in our nation, maintain of peace and order, protect people lives by giving fair judgment and the church duties is to guide people back to God. Both of them influence the well- being of man.
"Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's” (Mark 12:17 NIV). This is one of the Bible verses that greatly convicts me in regards with my viewpoint about the permanent separation of church and state. The context of this verse is that the Pharisees wanted to trap Jesus through asking him with this question, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar?” (Mark 12:14). Then Jesus made his reply in Mark 12:17 and it just simply mean that human beings should submit both to God and governing authorities. Jesus then made a distinction between the church and state or any political power. It's not new for us then the issue about the permanent separation between the church and state. For me, as I based my answer from the Bible, I can say then that I am not against of it. The state cannot interfere to the people in regards with their religious affairs and the state also should not demand a 'church state'. There must be a religious freedom for all. On the other hand, the church must also submit to the authority of the state. Any religious group must respect the laws, policies and regulation of the states as long as it does not violate the people's rights in the religious facet. For me, the separation between the church and state can help each one to learn the values of obedience and respect. It gives us somehow the pattern of the relationship between God and His people. Just as the people ought to obey God, God as well, values respect and in fact He does not treat His children rudely but rather He treat them with a paternal and an unconditional love no one can ever transcend.
I agree with you Shiela. In other words separation of church and state both respects the nature of religious faith and supports the maturation of religious liberty as described by the council. Religious institutions will breathe freely and thrive if government does nothing to entangle itself with religious ministries.
Church is defined as a religious organization that serves and promotes Godly lifestyles. It is managed and ruled by ministers, elders, and deacons. As for some they considered it as a religious sect that gains confidence and provision from God. State in a broader sense is the political form of the organization of a social life, which is created as a result of the rise and activity of public authority. Particularly a ruling system exercising management over the basic spheres of social life and depending, if necessary, on force. Considering their definition, there should be a permanent separation between the state and church, for what reasons? Government—it is the way of managing and organizing its citizens or congregations. It is here where sovereignty is exercised. As we all observed, the church have their own way of governance as well as the state. Laws and Regulation—it is the given guidelines and notices to the people where actions, behavior and thoughts are evaluated according to the standard given. Both the state and he church have their own laws and regulation. Philosophy—it simply defines as the worldview or stand of a person on some issues. This could be affected on his or her motivation and views in the future. The church is founded by God while the state is founded with the needs of its citizens. Goals—it comprises with the national goals or the great commission. It is the written purposes of existence where activities and programs derived. The state's goal mainly focused on producing well competitive, productive, and effective individuals. It is to support the demands of people within the state. However, the church aimed to make all people be in godly living. Evangelization is the church prior goal. Offices or departments—it is the division of agencies or area on where a person would approach. Each office had its own functions, but they work on one main goal. Both the state and the church have their own departments and offices where they are free to exercise their authority and responsibility. Activities and Promotions—it is the body of planned actions based on their given goals. The state had their own proposed programs as well as the church in relation to their own goals purpose. Therefore, the church and the state should have a permanent separation for all have their own authority, responsibility, and accountability. Without separation it could lead to trouble and misdirected implementation of sovereignty.
There should be permanent separation between church and state because they have different function in our society. The church itself is an organization or group of people who believes in a certain deity, it depends to what kind of church, and practiced a lifestyle according to their beliefs and teachings. In a biblical sense, the church is the body of Christ or the temple of God. That fact emphasizes that the church is holy and inviolable. It is the pillar and ground of the truth. The church is the stronghold of the truth and the guardian or defender of the truth over against all the enemies of the Kingdom of God. The state on the other side is a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory, one that is sovereign or a government of a politically organized society having a particular character. As we all know, state has been so corrupted by those people who in in the government position. In there, slander, corruption, stealing, and wicked acts are done. The state is of this world and the church is of God. The church does belong to the state but the state should not be in the church. They should be permanently separated because what is holy cannot go alongside with what is evil.
I think you're what you're trying to say is that the church and state should be permanently be separated because the state is evil while the church is good and there is no way that good and evil be together. It seems sounds judgmental because we can't really say that all that is in the Church has a good method. Yes, its the house of God but we can't deny that there were corrupted Church all around the world.
I agree with your opinion Renie Boy. That is why many people will say that they must be separated because there is law that the state introduce but it against to the church especially outside the Philippines. One of the example is the same sex marriage, for the state it is okay but for the church it is not right for it displeases God.
I'm a Christian but i don't want to live life like ascetic. When we view the seperation of Church and State we will not just view what we are right, but we should think, what we should do to make it right. Let us think outside the box!
I find it hard to react on this question but I'll be focusing on the Philippines, I have found out that its the American who introduced “the separation of church and state” in the Philippines. It provided us freedom of choosing our religion, knowing our background by the time when we were under the colony of the Spain we can see a picture of the church intervening the state or government affairs and the same with the government towards the churh. There should be permanent separation between church and state because if we'll think about it, if the church and the state will be in the same mind, whatever the government and the church is going to proposed about religion then everyone should follow it. Like I was thinking what if there would be no separation of the Church and the State then they would decide that the whole Philippines or the whole world would have one religion. Have we seen the picture? If this would happen we will lose our rights and freedom of religion. So, there should be permanent separation of the church and state so that we can have our rights to choose whom to believe and not being controlled by the state or government on whom to worship.
you're right weng in pointing out America's involvement in the introduction of the principle "separation of church and state", but its ironic because in their constitution, we can not find the words "separation of church and state". This principle is actually just an interpretation of a provision that their Congress shall not make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. But most people wrongly think that separation of the church and state is a law and there are people viewing this in extreme proportions. Those who are "pro-separation" acts as if the church should have nothing to do with the state and vice versa. They just leave the state with whatever they're doing and pray for condemnation for the state instead of praying for its progress and/or deliverance. By doing this, they condemn the state and judge it as nonredeemable. On the other side of the pendulum, "anti-separatist" compromise too much with the state to the point of losing their identities as a religious group or movement. They become the state's puppets. So any of the extremes is not a solution at all. The solution actually lies in the understanding of the church's role in the society or in any state it is currently living in.
There are lots of people before debating about the issue of the separation between church and state and we can see it even now. Although much of the debate surrounding the separation of church and state involves the relationships between large institutions that does not mean that it does not impact us, personally. In fact, the separation of church and state has a number of implications for us as an individual citizen. These are the following implications of the separation between church and state: Because of the separation of church and state, the government is not allowed to tax the church for the purpose of supporting someone else's religion. Because of the separation of church and state, the government is not allowed to direct the church in their religious observances. No government officials can come around and tell the people in the church that they should pray or that they should not pray. They cannot tell them that they should pray silently or out loud. When it comes to religious matters, government officials quite simply have no authority whatsoever. Whether elected or appointed, they only have civil authority and only that much civil authority which the law allows. Authority in religious and sacred matters is completely removed from their jurisdiction. At least, that is how it is supposed to work. However this religious freedom is not simply a negative freedom. It is not simply a matter of the government staying out of the church’s religious business. On the contrary, religious liberty requires the active involvement of the government on a number of different levels. For one thing, the government is obligated to defend church’s religious liberty whenever it is violated. When one level of government discriminates against the church for religious liberty, higher levels will act to defend them. When private companies discriminate against the church because of religion, the government must act on their behalf to stop it. If religious minorities gather in public, the government is obligated to provide police protection in order to ensure their safety and thus also their right to express their views. In any situation, the government also pays for the court system in which legal cases relating to religious liberty are heard and decided. At least, that is how it is supposed to work.
As I was thinking about this question and keep on looking for reasons why the state and church should always be separated, I was lead to the fact of the benefits that the churches experience under the "freedom of religion" law. Our evangelical churches here in the Philippines are one of the examples. We have the great privilege here of enjoying our fellowship with our churches and teach Christ to other people with freedom. Thanks to the separation of the church and state for this freedom I would say. But at the same time I feel sorry about the churches who are under the communist government, who are manipulating the society with their lies. These people are doing whatever they can just to possess and rule both the state and the church. And the Christians there are being beaten and killed because of their faith. This is one of the possibilities that will happen if the state and church would not be separated or to be more accurate, if the state will rule over the church. But ideally speaking if the orthodox church will conquer and rule over the state it would bring great harmony between them and will render better service to the community. But of course this will just happen if the church would be fully based and dependent upon the Bible with all its teachings and actions.
I would agree to you Carmelle :-) It is good to see Evangelical churches here in the Philippines enjoying such freedom because of the separation of the state and church. I wonder how terrible would it be if there is no separation between the church and state, worst if the ruler would prohibit Christianity or that Christian would continue worshiping God and sharing the gospel. If not the state, the pope also, exercising his power, and having the highest authority, will dominate and manipulate how the state should be run. It is only right to have the separation between the church and the state.
I really have difficulties answering the question why there should be permanent separation between church and state. Perhaps, it was the privileges of the churches enjoying the freedom to formulate its own policy and beliefs without the interference of the state. I believe that church and state played different roles according to their concerned areas. However, it does not mean also that because the state will not impose what religion or beliefs or how the church should be run, the church is no longer under the state or that the church will no longer submit to the government. We are still commanded to submit to the authorities and that includes churches as well.
I agree with you Ate, the church and the state has its own freedom to do what it wills. But sometimes the two collide and it brought trouble to the mind of the people. Yes, we are commanded to submit to our government, but are we going to submit to the government which is corrupt? I think the good Bible commands because of the good government, but when it comes to a point that the government is corrupt, I think there we can oppose.
The permanent separation between the church and state because of the primitive society wherein there are lots of issues that affects the living of the individual whether they will interact or participate or will against. The separation of the church and state is a common metaphor that is well recognized. Equally well recognized is the metaphorical meaning of the church staying out of the state’s business and the state staying out of the church’s business. Because of the common norm about the separation of the church and state, in this phrase everyone create incorrect thinking that this is in the constitution. For Christian, my big question comes into my mind is it appropriate for the believers to serve both the church and state? How much time he/she will spend for it. Well it is the duty of the Christian to well-oriented to such limitations and barriers. When we talk about the church it is an organization the involves the group of believers who are called by God and having fellowship with other mankind while the state is the political organization of such a body of people and the members or representatives of the governing classes assembled in a legislative body. So they have different functions to the society. It is proven that God is holy that must be apart from the states for they are corrupted people, there is slander, and do evil things. They both against to their beliefs, standard, and practices. The church is to glorify God and has its purpose and goals for spiritual growth while the state promotes ungodly things to corrupt people’s minds to do such deceitful things though not all of those who are in the position. The state focuses of what is earthly things however the church promotes godliness and focuses on the eternal things which comes from God.
Separation of the church and the state, okay. When this law was implemented, is it really effective? Within the nation, when the church and state are being separated, then that means that there are two businesses that works; business with the secular world and business with God. If that were so, then the two businesses collides and the mother nation is in chaos. Well, I believe that the state should not impose restrictions on personal religious beliefs and religion should not impose it's beliefs on the state.
You have the point that the Church and the state must be balance in terms of imposing restrictions by the state to the personal religious belief and religion should not impose beliefs on the authority of the state. i learned that there would be unity when both are doing their own business by not against from it. They should be more considerate to what others are doing though they are not one.
You have the point that the Church and the state must be balance in terms of imposing restrictions by the state to the personal religious belief and religion should not impose beliefs on the authority of the state. i learned that there would be unity when both are doing their own business by not against from it. They should be more considerate to what others are doing though they are not one.
This issue was long been debated from the past until now. And many church leaders among those of the evangelicals have different views as to the topic. It so very broad that it envelops a lot of topics like power, compromises, ethics, leadership, etc. In my own opinion the annulment of the church and the state should really be a big 'YES'. Both needs to be separated as each of them plays a different important role in the society and among the people. Making them work along side with each other will just make things harder for them to focus on the goals each of them have. A little look back of the past, we knew that the state and the church in the history are put up as one. And if we also pay a close attention to the details of what happen to that unity; it was all chaotic. The state no longer has the right to exercise their own authority and the leadership that they have because the leaders of the church namely the priests was the one who possess power. The state leaders was as good as nothing at all in the place where state and church are one. I'm with those whose thoughts was for it to be really separated. Because the church would promote compromising if it works along side with the state whose principle was very much apart from what the scripture says.
In the first place, the Church must not be wedded to the State and the State must not be wedded to the Church. The Church that I am talking about here is the group of true believers. The Church is the bride of Christ and to Him alone is she to be married. If the church be married to the state, there will only be confusion and chaos because they are not compatible. She was not established for the purposes of the state, but exist for the purposes of Christ. Also, εκκλησία(a feminine word), the Bride, has the role of submitting to her husband (Eph 5:22-33). If she be married to the state, naturally she has to be under the rule of the state because if she does otherwise, she won't be functioning her proper role and position in the marriage. Imagine the church submitting to the edicts of fallible men instead of having the inspired teachings of Scripture as above over everything. If the state heads the church, what will happen to the integrity of the gospel? Can she really serve two masters? If she is married to the state and also do church “duties”, this means she is having an adulterous affair – and with Christ?!? Is that even possible? Her loyalty will tragically be divided. But the Bible is crystal clear in saying that the head of the Church is Christ. Thus, if there's anyone that is due her loyalty and devotion, it is Christ. The Church must not see the State as a husband or even as a likely candidate for a husband. If in the first place, marriage between the two is not in the picture then annulment or separation should not even be considered. With that clear in mind, does this mean that the Church must not have any involvement with the state whatsoever? Of course not! The question about the proper and rightful involvement of the church with the state is answered if we answer this question first: “What is the relationship of the church and the state?” The answer is in the scriptures itself. Does Scripture tell us that we should not have ANY involvement with the state? What comes to mind when we read Jesus' words “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's”? Did Jesus say that we should NOT give anything at all to the state? Again, of course not! If we say that the state has no place whatsoever in our agenda then we're not reading that passage clearly. In fact, Jesus commanded us to “give back”. Why “give back”? Is He hinting that we are not giving the state what is due to the state or we are failing at some other points? Are we extremely hands off from the affairs of the state that our hands are in a fist making us unable to “give back”? So in this passage alone we can see that we have the dynamic role/relationship of a “giver” towards the state. What are these things that we should give and contribute to the state that are not oppose to our role/relationship with Christ? Really, just thinking about the things that we can contribute blows my mind away. Besides, we should not only be thinking of them but really do them instead. Are we doing what is expected of us? This question must challenge believers to be true to their roles and relationships with Christ and the state.
The Church and state should have a permanent separation. Even though that the Scripture had said that the Government is instituted by God, still it has a different function and purpose. Indeed Church is the body of Christ, since it is the Body of Christ, the state has no right to rule over it, because in its function and structure, Christ is the head of the Church(body of Believers), because Christ is the head of the church. But also since the Church is also part or even God placed it as part of the state, the Church is still obliged to submit to its governance as what the Bible commanded. But it is not a factor that it will be not separated from the state. But a lot of happenings today that even there are local groups or Churches are involved of what is happening in the midst of the state. Just like that the Philippine Election 2016 is already approaching. Some Churches even join to campaign their bet whom they wanted to win. Its already working together for the goal of the state, but the Church as individuals are just obliged to follow what the state has required. What would happen also to the gospel if the Church is not separated from the State. But I think what is important is that the Church should impact the state by blessing the state. This should be that the Gospel should affect the State.
The Church and state should have a permanent separation. Even though that the Scripture had said that the Government is instituted by God, still it has a different function and purpose. Indeed Church is the body of Christ, since it is the Body of Christ, the state has no right to rule over it, because in its function and structure, Christ is the head of the Church(body of Believers), because Christ is the head of the church. But also since the Church is also part or even God placed it as part of the state, the Church is still obliged to submit to its governance as what the Bible commanded. But it is not a factor that it will be not separated from the state. But a lot of happenings today that even there are local groups or Churches are involved of what is happening in the midst of the state. Just like that the Philippine Election 2016 is already approaching. Some Churches even join to campaign their bet whom they wanted to win. Its already working together for the goal of the state, but the Church as individuals are just obliged to follow what the state has required. What would happen also to the gospel if the Church is not separated from the State. But I think what is important is that the Church should impact the state by blessing the state. This should be that the Gospel should affect the State.
This question reminds me why Church should involve with the government and why government should be involved with the Church. What the difference between being separated and being united?In my opinion, I will not separate the church from the state neither state from the church. Some will just say because of the toleration might happened in the church and state, that’s why they want Church to be separated from the State. But if we look both sides, they were just a vice versa. State could influence the church in some cases, and church might influence the state. Our lives depend upon the Church and State, but our moral lives lies upon God. The Bible itself says,” Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, ...” Rom. 13:1-7 For such person should submit to authority with a proper wisdom how the government manage the authority.
Yes I agree with what you've said that our lives depend upon the church and state but not all the time that we could depend our lives to the state because there is the word that we are trying to avoid and that is 'conformity' to what the state is trying to promote that could not please God. Submitting to the authorities of these world that yes but as people of god it is our challenge to be watchful in everything we do especially in the sight of God because we might not know that a single submission we did to the state could already be displease God.
Yes I agree with what you've said that our lives depend upon the church and state but not all the time that we could depend our lives to the state because there is the word that we are trying to avoid and that is 'conformity' to what the state is trying to promote that could not please God. Submitting to the authorities of these world that yes but as people of god it is our challenge to be watchful in everything we do especially in the sight of God because we might not know that a single submission we did to the state could already be displease God.
Church and state has always been separated because both of them have its own different goal that since cannot be united. Because Church exist for the purpose of more on spiritual education. Church educate the community or the people of their spiritual area in each of the lives of individual. And while the states is the one who controlled the government of how this imperfect world being handled. The state is more concern of the world, the physical things of what is seen and which they thought could be helpful for this country that they are governing. The state at the same time is trying to meet the needs of these mere world temporarily that they think could satisfies their worldly desire that the world demands. While the church is more on the preparation of what is or what might be in the future. The church cannot demand or overpower to the state and at the same time mostly the state is not open to the possible help that could be offered from the church, because the state might not angry with the program of the church and vise versa which is the reason why it is possible for them to be united with one goal.
Church and state has always been separated because both of them have its own different goal that since cannot be united. Because Church exist for the purpose of more on spiritual education. Church educate the community or the people of their spiritual area in each of the lives of individual. And while the states is the one who controlled the government of how this imperfect world being handled. The state is more concern of the world, the physical things of what is seen and which they thought could be helpful for this country that they are governing. The state at the same time is trying to meet the needs of these mere world temporarily that they think could satisfies their worldly desire that the world demands. While the church is more on the preparation of what is or what might be in the future. The church cannot demand or overpower to the state and at the same time mostly the state is not open to the possible help that could be offered from the church, because the state might not angry with the program of the church and vise versa which is the reason why it is possible for them to be united with one goal.
Based on my observation, it is better that church and state should be separated. The earlier people tried merging it together but each are too different with their goals and functions in the society. Although separated, they should work hand in hand together in serving the community. The church is more focused on spiritual aspect and teaching the people about God and His commands. The state on the other hand is in charge of the safety and living satisfaction of its citizens.
Based on my observation, it is better that church and state should be separated. The earlier people tried merging it together but each are too different with their goals and functions in the society. Although separated, they should work hand in hand together in serving the community. The church is more focused on spiritual aspect and teaching the people about God and His commands. The state on the other hand is in charge of the safety and living satisfaction of its citizens.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTher are two things I have thought on this issue in the church side. One is the manipulation of th states over the churches. The churches cannot have their own freedom to do in worship service or nay services in the church without the consent of the states. Two, what ever laws impart the states whether to the nation or to the church must be followed by the church. Well, that is okay to follow the laws. However, if the corrupt laws would be imputed to the community, and the church is not separated from states, then the church should follow the that kind of laws which somehow against the laws of God. The best example of this laws or rights is to impose the legal abortion which is against the teaching of the church based on the Scripture of the sanctity of life
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Dodong Sonny. Separation between church and state is an issue even before in our world history until today. There should be a separation because church's business is to live differently from what the world does or the state. It is to live a distinct life of being a body of Christ that has virtue and is able to treat people and valued people fairly with dignity and liberty that enables the church to act freely without any restriction from the state. It should be separated so that the church will exercise the freedom that they have especially in worshiping God and following the decrees of God without any consultation of the state. Church should do a task of decision making especially in following the ordinances. The church should not compromise the truth, it should be allowing God to get involve to what He wanted to be in the church as His bride.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere should be a separation of the church and State because first of all, the State and the Church have different roles and functions which can not just be neglected. The State has the role of maintaining the peace and order of a country while the Church's role is to be a place wherein people gather together to worship God.The State creates laws which help the country to be a better place to live in. There is something that is in the church which many of the officers in the State disagree of applying it into their system. For example, loving the enemies, just as the Bible says, can not be easily applied in the State. Most of what the officers do in the State is to reveal their enemy's scandal in order for him to get embarrassed which is not likely biblical. The State focuses on the things which are seen and does actions which the members of it think is right. The Church focuses on the things unseen and spiritual, doing actions which God wants for His children to do which are bible-centered. Most of the rules in the State are based on how people perceive what is right in their eyes while the Church's basis of what is right is that how God sees things glorifying in His name.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you mand's, that there should be a separation between church and the state. For they have different focuses and roles in the society. They have different point of views. Besides, if these two were together, what would happen to the structure or system of the church?. The church might compromise to the rules of the state which were not biblically right.
DeleteI agree with you Amanda. The state indeed focuses on the things which are seen and their decisions are based on its members' approval while the church is the opposite of it for it focuses on the things that are spiritual and was originated to be bible-based with its every decisions.But this idea made me think how they can complement each others strength and weaknesses. The state can really help the church to be open-minded with the needs of the society and the influence that the it carries can be a very influential tool for the church's goal to impact the spirituality of the community. While the church can give the state the help of looking and considering the perspectives of the Bible about the issues of the world that are surely touched in the Bible. If this would happen I know it would make our society better.
DeleteA church is called to be free. The state also has a freedom but these two should be separated because they have different vision and mission. The church doesn't need to ask the state's permission whatever and whenever they decide things because a church should think about what is good for the human race. If the church decides and fails and commit mistakes then the state should be out of it, then vice versa. There should be limitations, boundaries , rules, agreement between the church and state so that there should no competition for anything and for something. These two should separate because church should not follow what the states agreed or ordered. Church should follow the commandments in the standard of the Word of God. If there is no separation there is competition between these two and conflicts because points of views differ.
ReplyDeleteChurch has to follow the state if it does not do anything evil. Even though church has different function but the church is still required to pass on papers for registration, license and/or whatever to the state. We still need not neglect the authority of the state for the church is under them in some ways. The church has to stand on what is biblical and pursue evangelizing those who are in the government so that the leadership will be under the Holy Spirit.
DeleteI agree with you Cai, the church and the state should not separate themselves, instead they should work together for good, and none of them should not be higher than the other. Both should have respect with one another, and they should work together as one, and support each others best decision.
Deleteyes its true jul that church and state has different mission and goal because their work is also different so thats why they need to be separated. and as we dont want to mix our church about the government matter although it is important to know the government but it doesnt mean that church will join what the government wants them to do. basta its very difficult to join these two the church and the state kay maggubot ang tnan if they are together.
DeleteI agree with you Julz :). God is a God of order, not chaos. That's why permanent separation between church and state has a great advantage. God has given each one freewill, so why not give it to both church and state? If we will put them together, then it will just bring confusion to the functions of both. God has made the church and state uniquely, so why disprove its distinctness? Thus, permanent separation between church and state gives justice to both.
DeleteThe separation of church and state is a concept defining the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state. It may refer to creating a secular state, with or without explicit reference to such separation, or to changing an existing relationship of church involvement in a state. This idea is credited to the internet.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the most debated topics throughout history. The concept of separation of church and state was first coined by Thomas Jefferson who used it as a way of saying that the government cannot make a person choose a certain religion or be forced to live by someone else’s religion.
As for me, this idea is somewhat good but we can never hide the fact that there are advantages and disadvantages of having this kind of thing.
The advantages of this separation are churches are free to do what they believe they ought to do and the government has no right whatsoever of being an obstacle to what people in the church in whatever religion is doing. The people, in religious setting, are also united with each other because they share common belief and interest as a group.
The disadvantages of separation of church and state are the fact that there are people group who use religion as a means so that they can do what they planned to do that are not beneficial to other people group, the state tries to get involve in the process of helping those that are being exploited but then there goes this reasoning that the government can not be involve and get in them because it is a religious problem. This is a sad thing as this is also happening even in different places here in the Philippines.
In one way or another, state benefits from the church as church is compose of people and church benefits from the state as the government as it also helps the church. Instead of arguing and fighting and killing, why not be thankful for this symbiosis?
------- Makes Me Think :)
I agree with you that indeed this topic is one of the most debated subject throughout history. In fact, we are discussing it even up to this day. I guess that we shall never stop wondering about its every angle until the last day. Besides, I wonder if people really understand what they mean separation of the church and state. Yeah, we have to think about it.
DeleteYeah I agree with you ate Sarah, if the people really understand what they really mean of the annulment between the church and state. Somehow, this concept was just based from the First amendment of United States Constitution. Which they had seen the state of England which is a church state, something.
DeleteMaybe, it should be clarified what they really wanted to imply with this matter. For it just bring confusion to many.
I find it hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation of the church and the state in today's setting. Looking back, in the time of Theocracy or in the time of monarchy, there was no distinction between state and religion. In fact, there was a harmonious relationship when Godly people are ruling (e.g. King David). Fast forward, we are now in a world where issues on separating religion and state concerns so many individuals.The separation of the church and state has become a very big deal. The Philippine Constitution has declared principles and state policies consisting "The separation of the Church and the State" (Article II, Sec. 6). So what do we think of this word separation? I wonder what really is the dividing line between the state and the church. Does it mean to have a zero relationship? or does it mean that the members of the church cannot participate in state affairs? If so, then what are we going to do? We are in this state and we are also members of the church. In today's setting I find it hard to define the dividing lines of separation. I believe that the part of constitution I mentioned above was given to protect the interest of the church and its adherents and I appreciate that.It means that the church (consisting all religious groups) shall be protected from violation and that there shall be no law to be passed that concerns how a religion be established or governed. As for me, there's no need to fight for separating the church and the state because we cannot. Whether we like it or not, these two influenced a society in so many ways. If I could begin to comprehend or imagine what it truly means to separate the two, then perhaps I would cast my vote. But for now, I believe that there could be harmony between the two coexisting in the midst of us, then I'll keep it like that.
ReplyDeleteIt really is a hard question to answer and even ponder about. I really liked the questions that you have asked there. I also thought about it and asked, "what does it really mean for the church and the state to be separated?" "Does it mean to have a zero relationship?" I really wonder too. Indeed we are somewhat part of the state and we are members of the Church too. It kind of confuses us to where we must take side. But I realized that we really don't have to. I also believe that the part of constitution you mentioned above was given to protect the interest of the Church. So there's really no need to fight.
DeleteMe either. i can identify with your dilemma. sorry for the usage of word. poke me if you are uncomfortable with it. :) anyway i agree with what you said about unable to separate the church and the state. There is no problem with that. but to use the word harmony, then i would question that side because i can not remember an event when it was harmonious... in my own opinion, it will not be. It had never been and it's gettin' worst by now.
ReplyDeleteThe question why there should be a permanent separation between church and state find me hard to answer. They should be separated maybe because they differ in function, roles, and so that it prevents chaos towards the church leaders and government officials. It is through church that we have fellowship with other believers. We worship God though we can do it alone but we need both privately and publicly declare the goodness of God. We can learn spiritual disciplines at church and it is one of the functions also. Believers help one another grow in their faith and build each other up. Evangelism and service are some of the functions of church too. While the state keeps the country united and form a community. Government has officials in every barangay and cities that will serve as leaders. There's law for the people to follow. Government maintains authority. However, the church is under the state in terms of registration and other stuffs that are necessary thus it would be great if both work in harmony.
ReplyDeleteThe “church” should be construed as any organized religious body with its doctrines/dogmas and “state” should be understand as any governmental body, any government-run organization or any government-sponsored event.
DeleteSeparation of the church is a two way street. Religious groups cannot dictate to or control the government.Separation of the church and state is the key to protects all people from the religious tyrnarry of anyone religious group or tradition and it protects all people from a government intent of tyrannizing. By this, the separation of state and church can impact us personally and it has a number of implications for an individual citizen.
I agree with you ate.
DeleteI believe that time will come that they will be together in harmonious relationship, being leaders in the state and church to lead the people. It is because God designed them both and they have different functions for His glory. For now, both have many disagreements but time may come that both of them will be used by God together.
Yes, I agree with you ate. The church and the State are just too different with their functions and their roles in the society. The church is where believers gather together in worship and the state is the one which does the function of maintaining peace and order among people in the society. They may differ in functions, but the fact remains that they both exist in our society.
DeleteThe permanent separation of church and states has a great problem even before because of over manipulation, the church grows and the states over reacted for it because they want to overpower or they want to hold the church. This cause uneasy between the church and the state. The church cannot exercise their freedom,and the church can be corrupted by the states because of some imposed laws that are corrupt and not acceptable to the church.
ReplyDeleteThere are questions came into my mind. One of these is that why there was a time that the state and the church was not separated and in fact had harmonious relationship? But as I see today, people, government, officials, and laws have been changed. That is the reason why the state and church should be separated. It is because of the different priorities, visions, and missions. It is also because of the conflicts of the natural law with the law of God.
ReplyDeleteThere should be separation between them so that they can have their freedom to act or perform the law that they have. It is also to show respect to what they believe. If they are not separated, I think there may be many disagreements that may encounter. It is also for the benefit of the church to preserve the importance of Christianity and the practices. It is also that they can do everything that is align to God's will without asking permission from the state. Yet these days, the church are still required to pass some papers just like the documents of the lot that the church had built or other requirements that the state required.
Even the church and the state are separated, the church must still submit to the state. In a sense that it did not contradict to what the Bible says. It is also a way to show to the state that they are still respected even they have been separated. Through this, the state can be encourage to also respect the church and not abuse it because of the population that it has.
Thus, in spite of this separation, it is still important that these two can go together for unity. It is because God also designed the state and government and He is also the origin of it.
Church and State are totally different in so many ways, and it means that they also have different functions. Its like a water and oil, when you combine them together the oil will always separate itself and it will just flout, and you can not mix it together like nothing happens. But both are very useful in different ways, church and state they can work together for good. The church would be the supportive and back up part and the state would be the one to take the rule and lead. It doesn't really have to separate both, in fact both should work together as one, and none of them should dominate. So that there will be a unity in the nation and in both the church and state. My main point is that, instead of looking at the church and the state in a negative way, we can't find any positive things to happen and so we just like both to separate. If we all look in a positive way like, here in the Philippines because of the leaders of the church divorce was not being allowed and as well as abortion. So Church is very helpful to the state when it comes to moral act and decision making. I guess the thing is that it all depend on the persons choice and decision in life.
ReplyDeleteI find it hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation between church and state. For by the separation of the church and the state it means that the state has no right to use its power and authority to dictate people on what religion they might have and what should be the rules in the church. The church has its own freedom to have its own system without the help of the government. But we could not deny the fact that the church or the people in the church were still subject to the law of the state, specifically when it comes to registrations.
ReplyDeleteI understand the separation of the church and the state in terms of its functions. The church is intended for fellowship of the children of God, in worshiping God, and in learning spiritual things that help believers grow in their faith in Christ. And the state's role is to maintain safety among the people and to provide leadership in our nation, yet they should not involve in church affairs.
I agree that state should not involved in church affairs, Gie Ann. I also agree with what you said about the state having no right to use their power and authority to tell people what they should observe when it comes to religious matters. Yet, there must also be submission in the part of the church and that is to be publicly recognized.
DeleteI it is hard to answer why there should be a permanent separation between church and state but in my own philosophy the state have no right to use its power and authority to dominate or rule people on what religion they might have or belief. The church has its own freedom and to have its own system and management. But the churches were subject to abide and obey the government. As believers we should consider what God requires of us in our relationship to civil government. (Rom.13:1a). Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. In this verse the commandment is addressed to all mankind, without exception. Every person is included in this instruction both believers and unbelievers, and this will include obedience, respect, love, prayers and support. But the church will not compromise of what the state is doing not pleasing in God’s eyes.
DeleteThe church were intended to have fellowship with the children of God, in worshiping God, and in learning spiritual things that help individual grow spiritually in their faith in Christ and also the church were given the tasks of spreading the gospel (Acts 1:8), teaching doctrine (Matthew 28:20), and disciple people (Ephesians 4:11-13). But the state's role is to maintain safety among the people and to provide good leadership in our nation, through roads constructions, seminars, education, and society development like livelihood. But the state should resist evil (Romans 13:3) keep order (I Peter 2:13-15) value the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights, maintain of peace and order, protect people lives by giving fair judgment, gives liberty, and the general welfare of the society. The church and the state have separate duties and loyalties therefore it must not go with the flow.
If we agree to separate the state and the church what possible things might happen? We should first consider possible consequences of our demand that might cause division between the church and the state.
ReplyDeleteIn Romans 13: 1 the authorities that exist have been established by God. i didn't say that I don't agree with you guys but we should also consider what the Bible says about government and authorities. Yes, it is true that because of the laws that the state impose churches now a days are struggling in compromising what is untruth. But this doesn't mean we must neglect those authorities in order for us believers not to compromise the untruth and live a life away from the temptation of compromising. We should find it as a challenge and as an opportunity to minister the community and state. Yes, we will live freely but as a christian are you satisfied in your life knowing that someone out there is dead in salvation? State is one of many ways that we can communicate them the gospel of salvation. I didn't say that we must compromise in order to share the gospel but let us follow the example of Paul (1 Cor.9:20).
Believers "connect" the truth and "disconnect" lies!
Why should there be permanent separation between the church and state? A question that is really hard for many of us to answer. We can't deny the fact that the church and the state play different roles in the society. They are separated and should remain separated for the sake of the citizens and to preserve each person's freedom, especially when it comes to choosing their own religion. Separation of the church and state is necessary so that religious affairs can freely be accomplished. The essence of this is to give freedom to the church to act and live without the control of the state. We can't also deny that the church needs to comply to the government requirements but this is necessary to be recognized and it is also for the church's welfare. Yet, this doesn't mean that the church is under the control of the government, rather, it just allows legal recognition of the church. Separation of the church and the state makes it possible for citizens to choose freely where to get affiliated. There should really be a permanent separation so that persecution and discrimination will be avoided as much as possible. There will also be an equal protection to anyone who chooses their own beliefs and religion. As for the Christians, the separation of the church and the state is very beneficial because it prevents the state to gain full control of it. The same thing with the state, the church is not allowed to get involved in the government affairs because everyone has his own belief, and if churches is not separated from their affairs, it might cause chaos. In general, there must be separation of the church and the state so that freedom of the citizens to choose their own belief will be preserved and maintained.
ReplyDeleteExactly! To maintain and to preserve the freedom of the citizens to choose to their own belief is there should be permanent separation of church and state. People may be confused by the different views and principles of the two if they will not separate. It is very important that they have permanent separation so that the citizens in our society are freely dependent to their own freedom of choice. They can think freely what they need to do because there would know chaotic principles that gives them confusion where to affiliate.
DeleteI agree with you ate Mitch. Separation of church and state does help in maintaining and preserving the freedom of every individual to choose their own beliefs. Because the state cannot interfere anymore to the decisions of every individual regarding the choosing of their belief if there is a separation.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePermanent separation between church and state has advantages and disadvantages. And one the advantages is freedom of religious choice this mean that the government can’t impulse a certain religion in our country. Everyone has a freedom to choose their individual religion. And this separation would not create discrimination of each other- the state and church. People are allowed to serve and express of what they believe in. And this advantage is an opportunity of all Christian because this chance to share, worships, and serves our true God. There is an acknowledgement and respect of the individual churches in our country in this separation. And this should be permanent so that we are leaving of liberty in our beliefs.
ReplyDeleteBut as I observe right now state is using the church especially in times of their needs specifically during election. People in the government pursue some church to support them during election especially those churches that has a lot of members and there are churches also will compromise about this thing. We can see here that although there is separation but still they need each other. They correlate to each other sometimes and church right now needs to submit to the government. Like in our school basically we have the freedom to learn all the theology subjects, purely but when our school decided to accredit in the government so the government required the school to have other subject aside from theology subject so that the students will be recognized in their profession when they are going to apply work in the public. So I can see here that these two has different function/roles and be separated but they are still important to each other.
For me, there should be a permanent separation between church and state
ReplyDeletebecause of these two reasons: First, state is a political community governed by the government officials which perspective differs from the perspective of the church. Our government is more concern about our physical needs such as economic development, protection for people's life, and growth, but the church goal is more than these perspective. The church is more concern about human being's needs both physical, social, mental and, most of all, man's spiritual condition. Their worldviews really matter in this case, and because of this reason, they cannot work together having the same vision and mission for our society.
The second reason, I think, is authority between the two. The government thinks that they are authoritative than the church because they are the one who manage and control our political community. In the same way with the church, they thinks they have the right to say something to the government because they have “the Law of God”. Because of this, they have conflicts of their decision-making for the society. That's why there is know reason that church and state should be together. The best thing to do is to have a permanent separation!
The Church and State needed to be permanently separated. Not that the church will be out of the state, but the state be out of the Church. Separation does not mean that the Church won't comply what the state requires. The Church still needs to comply the requirements needed for the state but it doesn't mean that the Church would apply all the laws that are from the state, such as laws that are not inclined with God's law. To be separated means that the state should NOT create laws or any requirements that would prevent the Church (or any religious beliefs) from exercising their freedom of belief. I believe we all have the right to exercise our freedom to utilize our beliefs, simply because we are created by our Creator with a free will and the state should not hinder that freedom. Therefore the Church and the state needs to be permanently separated.
ReplyDeleteI agree, that the church still needs to comply what the state requires. It's true that it doesn't mean that the church could do whatever they pleases even if it is against the norm of the society. Separation does not pertain to that of doing anything that the church wants to do but to still abide by the general norm of the state as stated in the law.
DeleteThe only good thing in that separation was that the state cannot interfere with the leadership of the church in regards to their plans and activities for the congregation as the whole.
I agree with your statement. They have their own purpose and function as how God will designed the Church and the State.
DeleteI agree with your statement. They have their own purpose and function as how God will designed the Church and the State.
DeleteI don't think so that there would be permanent separation between the church and the state, as what Atty. Jo Imbong stated, "church and state may differ in their domain and purpose, but they do not necessarily antagonize or cancel each other. In fact it is only through their co-existence and harmony that the well-being of man is achieved, that is, the State providing for the material goods of man and religion ministering to man’s spiritual needs. This co-existence comes about because they have a common form of reference–man’s well-being." I do agree with him that though they both perform different roles they complemented each other. For it doesn't mean that they differ in function they should be of separation. They aimed the same for the betterment of the people.
ReplyDeleteYou have the point that the state and church exist for the well-being of human kind. Separation here talks about authority of each area on each other. I am convinced enough that they must have a boundary for them to exercise their own sovereignty. But then you are right when you said that both of them influence the well-being of man. Is their really harmony with the two terms? Hmmmm i dont want to argue, just explaining my views...
DeleteYes it is true that the state and the church exist for the well-being of human kind. It is the will of God that the state duties is to maintain safety among the people and to provide good leadership in our nation, maintain of peace and order, protect people lives by giving fair judgment and the church duties is to guide people back to God. Both of them influence the well- being of man.
Delete"Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's” (Mark 12:17 NIV). This is one of the Bible verses that greatly convicts me in regards with my viewpoint about the permanent separation of church and state. The context of this verse is that the Pharisees wanted to trap Jesus through asking him with this question, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar?” (Mark 12:14). Then Jesus made his reply in Mark 12:17 and it just simply mean that human beings should submit both to God and governing authorities. Jesus then made a distinction between the church and state or any political power. It's not new for us then the issue about the permanent separation between the church and state. For me, as I based my answer from the Bible, I can say then that I am not against of it. The state cannot interfere to the people in regards with their religious affairs and the state also should not demand a 'church state'. There must be a religious freedom for all. On the other hand, the church must also submit to the authority of the state. Any religious group must respect the laws, policies and regulation of the states as long as it does not violate the people's rights in the religious facet. For me, the separation between the church and state can help each one to learn the values of obedience and respect. It gives us somehow the pattern of the relationship between God and His people. Just as the people ought to obey God, God as well, values respect and in fact He does not treat His children rudely but rather He treat them with a paternal and an unconditional love no one can ever transcend.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Shiela. In other words separation of church and state both respects the nature of religious faith and supports the maturation of religious liberty as described by the council. Religious institutions will breathe freely and thrive if government does nothing to entangle itself with religious ministries.
DeleteChurch is defined as a religious organization that serves and promotes Godly lifestyles. It is managed and ruled by ministers, elders, and deacons. As for some they considered it as a religious sect that gains confidence and provision from God.
ReplyDeleteState in a broader sense is the political form of the organization of a social life, which is created as a result of the rise and activity of public authority. Particularly a ruling system exercising management over the basic spheres of social life and depending, if necessary, on force. Considering their definition, there should be a permanent separation between the state and church, for what reasons?
Government—it is the way of managing and organizing its citizens or congregations. It is here where sovereignty is exercised. As we all observed, the church have their own way of governance as well as the state.
Laws and Regulation—it is the given guidelines and notices to the people where actions, behavior and thoughts are evaluated according to the standard given. Both the state and he church have their own laws and regulation.
Philosophy—it simply defines as the worldview or stand of a person on some issues. This could be affected on his or her motivation and views in the future. The church is founded by God while the state is founded with the needs of its citizens.
Goals—it comprises with the national goals or the great commission. It is the written purposes of existence where activities and programs derived. The state's goal mainly focused on producing well competitive, productive, and effective individuals. It is to support the demands of people within the state. However, the church aimed to make all people be in godly living. Evangelization is the church prior goal.
Offices or departments—it is the division of agencies or area on where a person would approach. Each office had its own functions, but they work on one main goal. Both the state and the church have their own departments and offices where they are free to exercise their authority and responsibility.
Activities and Promotions—it is the body of planned actions based on their given goals. The state had their own proposed programs as well as the church in relation to their own goals purpose.
Therefore, the church and the state should have a permanent separation for all have their own authority, responsibility, and accountability. Without separation it could lead to trouble and misdirected implementation of sovereignty.
There should be permanent separation between church and state because they have different function in our society. The church itself is an organization or group of people who believes in a certain deity, it depends to what kind of church, and practiced a lifestyle according to their beliefs and teachings. In a biblical sense, the church is the body of Christ or the temple of God. That fact emphasizes that the church is holy and inviolable. It is the pillar and ground of the truth. The church is the stronghold of the truth and the guardian or defender of the truth over against all the enemies of the Kingdom of God. The state on the other side is a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory, one that is sovereign or a government of a politically organized society having a particular character. As we all know, state has been so corrupted by those people who in in the government position. In there, slander, corruption, stealing, and wicked acts are done. The state is of this world and the church is of God. The church does belong to the state but the state should not be in the church. They should be permanently separated because what is holy cannot go alongside with what is evil.
ReplyDeleteI think you're what you're trying to say is that the church and state should be permanently be separated because the state is evil while the church is good and there is no way that good and evil be together. It seems sounds judgmental because we can't really say that all that is in the Church has a good method. Yes, its the house of God but we can't deny that there were corrupted Church all around the world.
DeleteI agree with your opinion Renie Boy. That is why many people will say that they must be separated because there is law that the state introduce but it against to the church especially outside the Philippines. One of the example is the same sex marriage, for the state it is okay but for the church it is not right for it displeases God.
DeleteI'm a Christian but i don't want to live life like ascetic. When we view the seperation of Church and State we will not just view what we are right, but we should think, what we should do to make it right. Let us think outside the box!
DeleteI find it hard to react on this question but I'll be focusing on the Philippines, I have found out that its the American who introduced “the separation of church and state” in the Philippines. It provided us freedom of choosing our religion, knowing our background by the time when we were under the colony of the Spain we can see a picture of the church intervening the state or government affairs and the same with the government towards the churh. There should be permanent separation between church and state because if we'll think about it, if the church and the state will be in the same mind, whatever the government and the church is going to proposed about religion then everyone should follow it. Like I was thinking what if there would be no separation of the Church and the State then they would decide that the whole Philippines or the whole world would have one religion. Have we seen the picture? If this would happen we will lose our rights and freedom of religion. So, there should be permanent separation of the church and state so that we can have our rights to choose whom to believe and not being controlled by the state or government on whom to worship.
ReplyDeleteyou're right weng in pointing out America's involvement in the introduction of the principle "separation of church and state", but its ironic because in their constitution, we can not find the words "separation of church and state". This principle is actually just an interpretation of a provision that their Congress shall not make any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. But most people wrongly think that separation of the church and state is a law and there are people viewing this in extreme proportions. Those who are "pro-separation" acts as if the church should have nothing to do with the state and vice versa. They just leave the state with whatever they're doing and pray for condemnation for the state instead of praying for its progress and/or deliverance. By doing this, they condemn the state and judge it as nonredeemable. On the other side of the pendulum, "anti-separatist" compromise too much with the state to the point of losing their identities as a religious group or movement. They become the state's puppets. So any of the extremes is not a solution at all. The solution actually lies in the understanding of the church's role in the society or in any state it is currently living in.
DeleteGood point ate Weng. The freedom of religion is one of the reason why they should separate.
DeleteGood point ate Weng. The freedom of religion is one of the reason why they should separate.
DeleteThere are lots of people before debating about the issue of the separation between church and state and we can see it even now. Although much of the debate surrounding the separation of church and state involves the relationships between large institutions that does not mean that it does not impact us, personally. In fact, the separation of church and state has a number of implications for us as an individual citizen.
ReplyDeleteThese are the following implications of the separation between church and state:
Because of the separation of church and state, the government is not allowed to tax the church for the purpose of supporting someone else's religion.
Because of the separation of church and state, the government is not allowed to direct the church in their religious observances. No government officials can come around and tell the people in the church that they should pray or that they should not pray. They cannot tell them that they should pray silently or out loud. When it comes to religious matters, government officials quite simply have no authority whatsoever. Whether elected or appointed, they only have civil authority and only that much civil authority which the law allows. Authority in religious and sacred matters is completely removed from their jurisdiction. At least, that is how it is supposed to work.
However this religious freedom is not simply a negative freedom. It is not simply a matter of the government staying out of the church’s religious business. On the contrary, religious liberty requires the active involvement of the government on a number of different levels.
For one thing, the government is obligated to defend church’s religious liberty whenever it is violated. When one level of government discriminates against the church for religious liberty, higher levels will act to defend them. When private companies discriminate against the church because of religion, the government must act on their behalf to stop it. If religious minorities gather in public, the government is obligated to provide police protection in order to ensure their safety and thus also their right to express their views. In any situation, the government also pays for the court system in which legal cases relating to religious liberty are heard and decided. At least, that is how it is supposed to work.
As I was thinking about this question and keep on looking for reasons why the state and church should always be separated, I was lead to the fact of the benefits that the churches experience under the "freedom of religion" law. Our evangelical churches here in the Philippines are one of the examples. We have the great privilege here of enjoying our fellowship with our churches and teach Christ to other people with freedom. Thanks to the separation of the church and state for this freedom I would say. But at the same time I feel sorry about the churches who are under the communist government, who are manipulating the society with their lies. These people are doing whatever they can just to possess and rule both the state and the church. And the Christians there are being beaten and killed because of their faith. This is one of the possibilities that will happen if the state and church would not be separated or to be more accurate, if the state will rule over the church. But ideally speaking if the orthodox church will conquer and rule over the state it would bring great harmony between them and will render better service to the community. But of course this will just happen if the church would be fully based and dependent upon the Bible with all its teachings and actions.
ReplyDeleteI would agree to you Carmelle :-) It is good to see Evangelical churches here in the Philippines enjoying such freedom because of the separation of the state and church. I wonder how terrible would it be if there is no separation between the church and state, worst if the ruler would prohibit Christianity or that Christian would continue worshiping God and sharing the gospel. If not the state, the pope also, exercising his power, and having the highest authority, will dominate and manipulate how the state should be run. It is only right to have the separation between the church and the state.
DeleteI really have difficulties answering the question why there should be permanent separation between church and state. Perhaps, it was the privileges of the churches enjoying the freedom to formulate its own policy and beliefs without the interference of the state. I believe that church and state played different roles according to their concerned areas. However, it does not mean also that because the state will not impose what religion or beliefs or how the church should be run, the church is no longer under the state or that the church will no longer submit to the government. We are still commanded to submit to the authorities and that includes churches as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Ate, the church and the state has its own freedom to do what it wills. But sometimes the two collide and it brought trouble to the mind of the people. Yes, we are commanded to submit to our government, but are we going to submit to the government which is corrupt? I think the good Bible commands because of the good government, but when it comes to a point that the government is corrupt, I think there we can oppose.
DeleteThe permanent separation between the church and state because of the primitive society wherein there are lots of issues that affects the living of the individual whether they will interact or participate or will against. The separation of the church and state is a common metaphor that is well recognized. Equally well recognized is the metaphorical meaning of the church staying out of the state’s business and the state staying out of the church’s business. Because of the common norm about the separation of the church and state, in this phrase everyone create incorrect thinking that this is in the constitution. For Christian, my big question comes into my mind is it appropriate for the believers to serve both the church and state? How much time he/she will spend for it. Well it is the duty of the Christian to well-oriented to such limitations and barriers. When we talk about the church it is an organization the involves the group of believers who are called by God and having fellowship with other mankind while the state is the political organization of such a body of people and the members or representatives of the governing classes assembled in a legislative body. So they have different functions to the society. It is proven that God is holy that must be apart from the states for they are corrupted people, there is slander, and do evil things. They both against to their beliefs, standard, and practices. The church is to glorify God and has its purpose and goals for spiritual growth while the state promotes ungodly things to corrupt people’s minds to do such deceitful things though not all of those who are in the position. The state focuses of what is earthly things however the church promotes godliness and focuses on the eternal things which comes from God.
ReplyDeleteSeparation of the church and the state, okay. When this law was implemented, is it really effective? Within the nation, when the church and state are being separated, then that means that there are two businesses that works; business with the secular world and business with God. If that were so, then the two businesses collides and the mother nation is in chaos. Well, I believe that the state should not impose restrictions on personal religious beliefs and religion should not impose it's beliefs on the state.
ReplyDeleteYou have the point that the Church and the state must be balance in terms of imposing restrictions by the state to the personal religious belief and religion should not impose beliefs on the authority of the state. i learned that there would be unity when both are doing their own business by not against from it. They should be more considerate to what others are doing though they are not one.
DeleteYou have the point that the Church and the state must be balance in terms of imposing restrictions by the state to the personal religious belief and religion should not impose beliefs on the authority of the state. i learned that there would be unity when both are doing their own business by not against from it. They should be more considerate to what others are doing though they are not one.
DeleteThis issue was long been debated from the past until now. And many church leaders among those of the evangelicals have different views as to the topic. It so very broad that it envelops a lot of topics like power, compromises, ethics, leadership, etc. In my own opinion the annulment of the church and the state should really be a big 'YES'. Both needs to be separated as each of them plays a different important role in the society and among the people. Making them work along side with each other will just make things harder for them to focus on the goals each of them have.
ReplyDeleteA little look back of the past, we knew that the state and the church in the history are put up as one. And if we also pay a close attention to the details of what happen to that unity; it was all chaotic. The state no longer has the right to exercise their own authority and the leadership that they have because the leaders of the church namely the priests was the one who possess power.
The state leaders was as good as nothing at all in the place where state and church are one. I'm with those whose thoughts was for it to be really separated. Because the church would promote compromising if it works along side with the state whose principle was very much apart from what the scripture says.
In the first place, the Church must not be wedded to the State and the State must not be wedded to the Church. The Church that I am talking about here is the group of true believers. The Church is the bride of Christ and to Him alone is she to be married. If the church be married to the state, there will only be confusion and chaos because they are not compatible. She was not established for the purposes of the state, but exist for the purposes of Christ. Also, εκκλησία(a feminine word), the Bride, has the role of submitting to her husband (Eph 5:22-33). If she be married to the state, naturally she has to be under the rule of the state because if she does otherwise, she won't be functioning her proper role and position in the marriage. Imagine the church submitting to the edicts of fallible men instead of having the inspired teachings of Scripture as above over everything. If the state heads the church, what will happen to the integrity of the gospel? Can she really serve two masters? If she is married to the state and also do church “duties”, this means she is having an adulterous affair – and with Christ?!? Is that even possible? Her loyalty will tragically be divided. But the Bible is crystal clear in saying that the head of the Church is Christ. Thus, if there's anyone that is due her loyalty and devotion, it is Christ. The Church must not see the State as a husband or even as a likely candidate for a husband. If in the first place, marriage between the two is not in the picture then annulment or separation should not even be considered. With that clear in mind, does this mean that the Church must not have any involvement with the state whatsoever? Of course not! The question about the proper and rightful involvement of the church with the state is answered if we answer this question first: “What is the relationship of the church and the state?” The answer is in the scriptures itself. Does Scripture tell us that we should not have ANY involvement with the state? What comes to mind when we read Jesus' words “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's”? Did Jesus say that we should NOT give anything at all to the state? Again, of course not! If we say that the state has no place whatsoever in our agenda then we're not reading that passage clearly. In fact, Jesus commanded us to “give back”. Why “give back”? Is He hinting that we are not giving the state what is due to the state or we are failing at some other points? Are we extremely hands off from the affairs of the state that our hands are in a fist making us unable to “give back”? So in this passage alone we can see that we have the dynamic role/relationship of a “giver” towards the state. What are these things that we should give and contribute to the state that are not oppose to our role/relationship with Christ? Really, just thinking about the things that we can contribute blows my mind away. Besides, we should not only be thinking of them but really do them instead. Are we doing what is expected of us? This question must challenge believers to be true to their roles and relationships with Christ and the state.
ReplyDeleteThe Church and state should have a permanent separation. Even though that the Scripture had said that the Government is instituted by God, still it has a different function and purpose. Indeed Church is the body of Christ, since it is the Body of Christ, the state has no right to rule over it, because in its function and structure, Christ is the head of the Church(body of Believers), because Christ is the head of the church. But also since the Church is also part or even God placed it as part of the state, the Church is still obliged to submit to its governance as what the Bible commanded. But it is not a factor that it will be not separated from the state. But a lot of happenings today that even there are local groups or Churches are involved of what is happening in the midst of the state. Just like that the Philippine Election 2016 is already approaching. Some Churches even join to campaign their bet whom they wanted to win. Its already working together for the goal of the state, but the Church as individuals are just obliged to follow what the state has required. What would happen also to the gospel if the Church is not separated from the State.
ReplyDeleteBut I think what is important is that the Church should impact the state by blessing the state. This should be that the Gospel should affect the State.
The Church and state should have a permanent separation. Even though that the Scripture had said that the Government is instituted by God, still it has a different function and purpose. Indeed Church is the body of Christ, since it is the Body of Christ, the state has no right to rule over it, because in its function and structure, Christ is the head of the Church(body of Believers), because Christ is the head of the church. But also since the Church is also part or even God placed it as part of the state, the Church is still obliged to submit to its governance as what the Bible commanded. But it is not a factor that it will be not separated from the state. But a lot of happenings today that even there are local groups or Churches are involved of what is happening in the midst of the state. Just like that the Philippine Election 2016 is already approaching. Some Churches even join to campaign their bet whom they wanted to win. Its already working together for the goal of the state, but the Church as individuals are just obliged to follow what the state has required. What would happen also to the gospel if the Church is not separated from the State.
ReplyDeleteBut I think what is important is that the Church should impact the state by blessing the state. This should be that the Gospel should affect the State.
This question reminds me why Church should involve with the government and why government should be involved with the Church. What the difference between being separated and being united?In my opinion, I will not separate the church from the state neither state from the church. Some will just say because of the toleration might happened in the church and state, that’s why they want Church to be separated from the State. But if we look both sides, they were just a vice versa. State could influence the church in some cases, and church might influence the state. Our lives depend upon the Church and State, but our moral lives lies upon God. The Bible itself says,” Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, ...” Rom. 13:1-7 For such person should submit to authority with a proper wisdom how the government manage the authority.
ReplyDeleteYes I agree with what you've said that our lives depend upon the church and state but not all the time that we could depend our lives to the state because there is the word that we are trying to avoid and that is 'conformity' to what the state is trying to promote that could not please God. Submitting to the authorities of these world that yes but as people of god it is our challenge to be watchful in everything we do especially in the sight of God because we might not know that a single submission we did to the state could already be displease God.
DeleteYes I agree with what you've said that our lives depend upon the church and state but not all the time that we could depend our lives to the state because there is the word that we are trying to avoid and that is 'conformity' to what the state is trying to promote that could not please God. Submitting to the authorities of these world that yes but as people of god it is our challenge to be watchful in everything we do especially in the sight of God because we might not know that a single submission we did to the state could already be displease God.
DeleteChurch and state has always been separated because both of them have its own different goal that since cannot be united. Because Church exist for the purpose of more on spiritual education. Church educate the community or the people of their spiritual area in each of the lives of individual. And while the states is the one who controlled the government of how this imperfect world being handled. The state is more concern of the world, the physical things of what is seen and which they thought could be helpful for this country that they are governing. The state at the same time is trying to meet the needs of these mere world temporarily that they think could satisfies their worldly desire that the world demands.
ReplyDeleteWhile the church is more on the preparation of what is or what might be in the future. The church cannot demand or overpower to the state and at the same time mostly the state is not open to the possible help that could be offered from the church, because the state might not angry with the program of the church and vise versa which is the reason why it is possible for them to be united with one goal.
Church and state has always been separated because both of them have its own different goal that since cannot be united. Because Church exist for the purpose of more on spiritual education. Church educate the community or the people of their spiritual area in each of the lives of individual. And while the states is the one who controlled the government of how this imperfect world being handled. The state is more concern of the world, the physical things of what is seen and which they thought could be helpful for this country that they are governing. The state at the same time is trying to meet the needs of these mere world temporarily that they think could satisfies their worldly desire that the world demands.
ReplyDeleteWhile the church is more on the preparation of what is or what might be in the future. The church cannot demand or overpower to the state and at the same time mostly the state is not open to the possible help that could be offered from the church, because the state might not angry with the program of the church and vise versa which is the reason why it is possible for them to be united with one goal.
Based on my observation, it is better that church and state should be separated. The earlier people tried merging it together but each are too different with their goals and functions in the society. Although separated, they should work hand in hand together in serving the community. The church is more focused on spiritual aspect and teaching the people about God and His commands. The state on the other hand is in charge of the safety and living satisfaction of its citizens.
ReplyDeleteBased on my observation, it is better that church and state should be separated. The earlier people tried merging it together but each are too different with their goals and functions in the society. Although separated, they should work hand in hand together in serving the community. The church is more focused on spiritual aspect and teaching the people about God and His commands. The state on the other hand is in charge of the safety and living satisfaction of its citizens.
ReplyDelete