Few topics stir as much debate as the relationship between faith and government. For some, separation of church and state is seen as a safeguard for religious freedom. For others, it feels like a tool to push Christianity out of the public square. #ChurchAndState#FaithInPublicLife#ChristianCitizenship#christianforums#crosswalkforums#forums#crosswalk#faithcommunity#faithforums
When America’s founders spoke of “separation of church and state,” they were drawing from a historical context shaped by both religious persecution and the desire for freedom of conscience. But centuries later, Christians are still wrestling with how this principle should be applied.
Does the Bible give us a clear framework for how faith interacts with government? Jesus said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17). Paul wrote in Romans 13 about honoring governing authorities. Yet the prophets of old regularly spoke truth to power, holding kings accountable to God’s standards.
In today’s culture, the tension feels sharper than ever. Some believers want to see Christian values more openly influence policy, education, and law. Others warn that entangling faith with government can dilute the gospel and even corrupt the church. And then there are those who argue that secular society uses “separation” language less as protection and more as a way to marginalize faith altogether.
So where do Christians stand? Is separation of church and state a biblical principle, a political necessity, or something else entirely? How do we faithfully live as both citizens of heaven and citizens of earthly nations?
The idea of separation of church and state was to prevent the domination of either by the other, so what is seen in China will not happen or as in Iraq.
It is not intended to ban notices with the 10 commandments or nativity scene in or on governmen/statet property.
There needs to be a debate/discussion of just what religion is.
Is the belief that there is no Hod a religion?
It is and so atheism should not be promoted in state school.
Its neither its a doctrine designed to preserve freedom of conscience from control by the church or the state. The church should not dictate the actions of the government nor should the government dictate the actions of the church except in matters of safety .
Interesting points here. The phrase “separation of church and state” doesn’t come straight from the Bible, but the tension it describes definitely shows up. Jesus didn’t seek political power, yet he challenged the powers that be. Paul calls for respect of authorities and warns against idolatry of empire.
It seems like Scripture resists neat categories. It doesn’t hand us a blueprint for governance but does call us to live faithfully under any system — without compromising the kingdom’s values.
To me, the question isn’t whether the state should be “Christian,” but whether the Church can stay Christlike when it’s too close to power. Curious how others navigate that tension. Especially with policy debates heating up.
“Friends, Americans, countrymen, lend me your ears”
The phrase “Separation of church and state” is a concept famously penned by Thomas Jefferson, but an idea which he borrowed from Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island, and edited for his own purpose, clarifying the meaning (in his mind) of the establishment clause of the first amendment, the first in the bill of rights. The establishment clause does not use this phrase, and interestingly only prohibits congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The judiciary eventually interpreted this establishment clause, expanding the scope to the rest of the federal government. The establishment clause makes no mention of religions influence in the federal government, only that there can be no law that establishes any religion, nor can there be any law prohibiting the practice of any religion. Neither Thomas Jefferson’s phrase, nor the establishment clause in the first amendment draw any source ideology from the bible. Both are simply ways men seek to protect themselves from men.
The establishment clause of the first amendment is positive for Christians, because our federal government is comprised of elected men, and there is no requirement for our elected official to be Christian. If our Government could make laws establishing a religion, there is no protection that those laws would be written by men who claim and practice Christianity. The establishment clause has no sway over elected officials practicing or proclaiming their religious devotion, nor does it prohibit federal officials from religious practice in the course of their duties. In other words, the first amendment is not a law that prohibits the practice of religion in federal arenas, but one that prohibits making laws that establish religion.
To answer the original question: “Is Church and State Separation Biblical—or Just Political?”, the answer is It is not biblical, it is just political, but it is generally positive for the Christian faith. (IMHO)
