Repost: Church And State

By Jonathan D. Payne 
Follow Jonathan On Facebook
The American Christian Journal
COMMENTARY/NATION

Separation between Church and State is not a constitutional edict. Nor is it mentioned in any of our historical documents, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, or the sundry writings of the founding fathers, et al.
It is a modern construct of Secular Fundamentalism, to wit, an atheistic religion. 

This is hallmarked by a foundational belief that there is no God, and that man himself is the final arbiter of his destiny.

So when someone cries foul concerning separation issues, they are actually promoting the supremacy of their secular religion over the validity of a theistic one. The Constitution states that there can be no STATE RELIGION, but in actual fact there is one—simply read the aforementioned Secular Fundamentalism statement.

This is not a tug-of-war issue about our religious rights and freedoms, this is about the wholesale transplanting of the core values of this country to another set of values being promoted by liberal and/or atheistic influences of society.

If you have no stable core values, such as Christianity, then the rules can be set for society as you please. This is the precursor (socially) of the totalitarian government blueprint to control US society as a whole, and Christianity in specific. 

Many declare that our president is doing this with a theistic twist, whereby government will control through what would appear as a Christian edict, though he is a Moslem—this of course, the powers that be would claim, is utter nonsense. 

However do pay attention to the fact that it is those who protest the loudest, are who are, in actuality, perpetrating the exact systematic establishment of government control that they decry. God sets you free, man-based philosophies of liberal ideologies, no matter the flavour, ultimately enslave. 

There is a day coming when you will have to choose between serving the STATE, and serving THE LORD.

I speak of the ephemeral "Separation of Church and State" which does not exist in the context that it is used. In the true sense of what it should mean is that:

1. Government can not (and should not) establish a religion, 
2. Individuals have a right to live by their own religion, 
3. Religion (of any kind) should not be used to fashion policies in order to avoid establishing a bias and... 
4. Though the founding fathers were decidedly a Christian majority, their viewpoint was to be universal, inclusive, and reflected in the founding of our country.

However, and here is the telling point, to establish those goals (which was to avoid religious persecution—by government or individuals) they used the framework of Christianity, because the principles of faith in Christ provides the foundation to forment the "inalienable rights" of every man, woman, and child regardless of their personal belief system. 

In other words, it is the framework upon which the laws, and ordinances, of this country were founded on to guarantee religious freedom—any religion. 

It is amazing to realize that so many people fight this notion. If you take into account that Christianity is the only religion, by it's own tenants and articles of faith, that provides a peaceful co-habitation of other religions and people of faith, you then realize that it is the only blueprint broad enough to be all inclusive. 

However, you do not have laws that state, "by the recognized principles of Christianity you can not sell a person into slavery because God says you that you should not" what you do get is "all men are created equal, and therefore as such they can not be considered property that can be bought or sold". 

Neither do you have laws that state "don't kill because God's 10 commandments say not to do this" but you do have that "you can not take the life of another AS to do so violates the sanctity of life". 

These principles work for Jew, Hindu, Catholic, Protestant, atheist, or any HUMAN BEING, regardless if they practice a religion or not. So the issue is not if there is a separation of church and state, but rather do the laws of the land violate the individual's right to self-determination INCLUSIVE of their right to practice their own religion.

It seems rather odd for a Christian to question whether their belief system has any validity in the ongoing interactions of society at large, but I know those who cling just as ardently to the separation issue as do non-believers. If it is not societally valid, then where is your faith, and how do you hope to practice your beliefs? 

If you don't recognize the sovereignty of God, in total, then why serve Him at all? 
This country needs a moral compass, not an exclusive, discriminatory, self-appointed state religion. If you are a Christian, then the practice of your faith is who you are, and the principles by which you live. But no religion should dictate it's own version of morals of societal intercourse to the exclusion of negating the God-given right of self-determination. 
  
We should be free to follow a path that estolls our Lord and Savior, and does not constrain another IF that religion does not force it's morality on our society and it's governance. That though our faith is the cornerstone of this country, it does recognize that others believe differently. 
  
And in this, we strive to protect them as well IF they do not marginalize others, or cause direct or indirect influence that damages societal norms as a whole. Or places one set of values over another unless it adversely damages our culture, or inherently defrauds the inalienable rights of others. 
  
Christianity does that. Once that cornerstone of faith is thrown asunder, the we will have no protections in place for the safe commerce of America. All will be vulnerable. 
  
And this should not be. 
  
Be blessed, be loved and be at peace. May the light of God's glory and presence fire the brilliance of your souls. You are greatly loved.