Separation of Church and State: Is it Biblical?

One could make the case that it is. Some where i think in Samuel, when God gibe israel what they they want as a king. God lays down some rules for the king. One of those rules is that the king was forbidden to do priestly duties. Saul gets rejected because he is impatient and makes the sacrifices of the priest. After that Samuel finds and annoints David.

Believers in Christ had already conquered the Roman Empire before Constantine offered the church official status: they were the most numerous homogeneous group in all the Empire. In one moment, when the church leaders accepted the offer to become the religion of the state, the church ceased its heavenly mandate (to represent the Christ in the earth) and took up a mandate to represent the Roman throne.

But this was nothing new. The Enemy offered our Lord the same exchange:
Matthew 4:8-9 "Again, the devil took Him to a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. “All this I will give You,” he said, “if You will fall down and worship me.”)

The glory of the kingdoms of the world did not come from the Son but from the Enemy. The Enemy is, after all, the god of this world.

The Enemy does not create anything, he just re-spins the same traps. For the church, he re-spun a trap by offering them greater influence if they would only represent the earthly kingdom of Rome. They took it. And out of that amalgamation came grotesque church offices found nowhere in scripture. But the focus was not to be true to God's word, only to mirror the government and culture of Rome.

Wars (local and regional), killing of the saints, pedophilia, theft, and all kinds of perversion came out of that amalgamation. The worship of people, statues, golden cathedrals to gods... all polytheistic Roman culture.

Democrats prove him right every day because they’re definitely not moral.

Just Passing Through for now. But Offices like Bishop, Presbyter, Elder and Priest are clearly found in the Greek of the NT.

Here's just one for now:

Rom 15:16, NASB: "to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit."

You can read the Greek for Rom 15:16 here:

"in the priestly service
ἱερουργοῦντα (hierourgounta)
Verb - Present Participle Active - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 2418: To minister in holy things. From a compound of hieron and the base of ergon; to be a temple-worker, i.e. Officiate as a priest."

https://biblehub.com/romans/15-16.htm

In Christ,
Xavier.

Then you missed my point.

I'm not sure what you mean by "state Christianity", but that sounds like a theocracy? Am I wrong?

The only thing we'd get from that would be a revolt from some, and hypocrisy from others who were too afraid to fight. Forced conversions are not true conversions. They produce hypocrites, and that would make us unfree, ruining the nation.

No, IMO, the cure is spiritual. That is the only real hope the nation has. Enough of the people must choose to serve Christ, or we will fall.

These are just a handful... a very tiny handful... of quotes by people of that era of the intended relationship between Christianity ("religion") and the government...

For avoiding the extremes of despotism or anarchy… The only ground of hope must be on the morals of the people. I believe that religion is the only solid base of morals and that morals are the only possible support of free governments. Therefore education should teach the precepts of religion and the duties of man towards God. ~ Gouverneur Morris

Let it never be forgotten that there can be no genuine freedom where there is no morality, and no sound morality where there is no religion… ~ Jeremiah Smith

And, at all events, it is impossible for those who believe in the truth of Christianity as a divine revelation, to doubt that it is the especial duty of government to foster and encourage it among all the citizens and subjects. ~ Joseph Story

Why may not the Bible, and especially the New Testament… be read and taught as a divine revelation in the school?… Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament? ~ Vidal vs Girard’s Executors, 1844

[Divine] revelation, assures us that “Righteousness exalts a nation” [Proverbs 14:34]. Communities are dealt with in this world by the wise and just ruler of the universe. He rewards or punishes them according to their general character. ~ Samuel Adams

Article 3 of the Northwest Ordinance (1787) states: Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

Hi Gojira, not talking about forced conversions at all. And agreed that: "Enough of the people must choose to serve Christ, or we will fall."

But the State cannot be Neutral between Christianity and Atheism. To be Neutral between Light and Darkness is to be blind or on the path to becoming blind. A Christian State must endorse and promote Christianity over Atheism (not persecute Atheists, though). It is an obligation. And all Christian denominations once thought so. Without persecuting anyone or any kind of forced conversion at all (which is a sin, and doesn't lead anyone to Heaven), a Christian Nation must promote Christianity.

P.S. Agreed with the sentiments expressed in the quotations in your latest post. God Bless.

Ahh.. thanks for the clarification.

Of course you know of which offices I'm referring: Popes ("Holy Father"), nuns, cardinals

the seperation of church and state was intended to prevent the church from becoming the government,

What many people try to make it to be today is not what was origionally intended.

Absolutely true. Here's a link for more on Jefferson and his publicly-sanctioned ministry to the American Indian tribes:

https://christianheritagefellowship.com/the-truth-concerning-the-jefferson-bible/

Not sure about the site's veracity or not, but this sounds legit. I'll let you folks decide.

Either way, this is only one example of the philosophy behind the first amendment. I have quoted others, and there are MANY more quotes still from the founders and other significant players of that era.

The Left has successfully inverted the meaning of the first amendment, and now they are blatantly attempting to violate it (e.g., the "Equality Act", which I had an e-mail debate with Sen Mark Kelly over).