American flag in sanctuary?

[Lamb]

How do you feel about an American flag in the sanctuary or up near the altar?

 

[Josiah]

I'm okay with it... especially if there is also a Christian flag.

It is MY understanding that this is a new practice, at least in the USA. In the LCMS, it started in 1917. At the start of World War II (where Germany was an ENEMY!) persecution against German Lutherans was great - with church burnings, etc. SO, in reaction, very suddently, LCMS churches changed to English worship, the hymnal was very quickly (and terribly) translated into English and some parts substituted with Anglican wording, the name of the denomination changed from "Die Deutsche Evangelishe Kirsche von Missouri, Ohio and Anderan Staten" to The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, and the American flag predominately placed in the church. A lot of other churches added the American flag during World War II.



.

 

[Lees]

I'm okay with it... especially if there is also a Christian flag.

It is MY understanding that this is a new practice, at least in the USA. In the LCMS, it started in 1917. At the start of World War II (where Germany was an ENEMY!) persecution against German Lutherans was great - with church burnings, etc. SO, in reaction, very suddently, LCMS churches changed to English worship, the hymnal was very quickly (and terribly) translated into English and some parts substituted with Anglican wording, the name of the denomination changed from "Die Deutsche Evangelishe Kirsche von Missouri, Ohio and Anderan Staten" to The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, and the American flag predominately placed in the church. A lot of other churches added the American flag during World War II.

So where is the 'separation of church and state' now?

You like the 'separation of church and state' yet you want the American flag in the Churches.

Why should the State influence the Church and the Church cannot influence the State?

WWI didn't make the Stars and Stripes Christian. WWII didn't make the Stars and Stripes Christian. The North's victory in the War Between the States certainly didn't make the Stars and Stripes Christian. As it destroyed a Bible believing Christian people.

The North's victory didn't make America Christian. It destroyed much of Christianity, as it continues to do.

If any flag deserves to be in the Church, it is the Confederate Flag. It represented a Bible believing people. The Bible Belt. And it is the last stronghold on earth of Protestant Bible believing Christians.

Which, if people could put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4, they could tell that is why it is so hated and attacked and removed today.

I also think 'Dixie' should be in the hymnal's in the chruches. Better yet, 'Oh I'm A Good Ol Rebel' should be there to.

My opinion

Lees

 

[tango]

How do you feel about an American flag in the sanctuary or up near the altar?

I really don't care one way or the other as long as it doesn't become the primary focus.

I think I visibly cringed visiting a friend's church some years ago, when the preacher very specifically made the point that the middle three letters of Jerusalem are USA. When you get that kind of ra-ra patriotism running through a church service it feels like it's missing the point. Trying to torture Scripture until it produces some evidence that the modern day United States features anywhere in its pages seems like an exercise in futility, unless you really are crossing lines to the point you might as well toss the Bible in the trash and write your own version featuring yourself front and center.

 

[Josiah]

So where is the 'separation of church and state' now?

Two DIFFERENT flags. On two different sides of the church. Having both doesn't mean one is legit and the other is not.

And "separation" is the word YOU IMPOSED on my posts, I never used that word. I don't deny either.

Why should the State influence the Church and the Church cannot influence the State?

Who said the state should influence the church? Not me... that's what I argued against.


.

 

[Albion]

How do you feel about an American flag in the sanctuary or up near the altar?

I guess that I don't think about it much.

However, the question did get me to check into the situation in a number of churches that I'm familiar with. Somewhat surprising to me, hardly any of them displayed any flags at all. Those that did display the American flag at the left in the sanctuary (as my home church does) certainly did not pair it with that so-called "Christian flag."

 

[Lees]

Two DIFFERENT flags. On two different sides of the church. Having both doesn't mean one is legit and the other is not.

And "separation" is the word YOU IMPOSED on my posts, I never used that word. I don't deny either.





Who said the state should influence the church? Not me... that's what I argued against.

Well, just what does having both flags in the Church mean?

No, you argued for 'separation of church and state' in the thread 'Keep Religion Out Of Public Schools' in the 'Ethics and Debate' category. Any efforts to keep religion out of public schools is based upon the lie of 'separation of church and state'.

You don't want Christianity represented in the public schools, yet you want the State represented in the Church with it's flag flying.

You don't want Christianity affecting the State, yet you want the State to affect Christianity.

You don't want the Ten Commandments on any hallway in public schools, but you want the American flag flying in the church.

Lees

 

[Lamb]

When I'm at worship, I prefer to keep the worldly things outside of the sanctuary, so I don't like seeing country flags, especially near the altar.

 

[Josiah]

Well, just what does having both flags in the Church mean?

That we are citizens of TWO Kingdoms.

No, you argued for 'separation of church and state' in the thread 'Keep Religion Out Of Public Schools' in the 'Ethics and Debate' category.

No. YOU are the one who keeps imposing this Anabaptist idea to me, a Lutheran.

I don't want Gov. Newsom teaching my son HIS religion... forcing it upon my son.... teaching my son that what we believe is wrong.... Unlike you, I believe that God is correct when He specifically states that it is PARENTS who are to teach religion to our children. I'm agreeing with God on that point.

You don't want Christianity represented in the public schools, yet you want the State represented in the Church with it's flag flying.

1. I don't want to ignore God's specific command for PARENTS to teach religion to their children, not the government.

2. "Representing" is not "Forcing its theology on our children."

You don't want Christianity affecting the State, yet you want the State to affect Christianity.

I never said I want the State to affect Christianity, I said the exact opposite. You are the one who wants the State to control religion (at least what is taught to our children).




.

 

[Lees]

That we are citizens of TWO Kingdoms.





No. YOU are the one who keeps imposing this Anabaptist idea to me, a Lutheran.

I don't want Gov. Newsom teaching my son HIS religion... forcing it upon my son.... teaching my son that what we believe is wrong.... Unlike you, I believe that God is correct when He specifically states that it is PARENTS who are to teach religion to our children. I'm agreeing with God on that point.






1. I don't want to ignore God's specific command for PARENTS to teach religion to their children, not the government.

2. "Representing" is not "Forcing its theology on our children."





1. I never said that Christianity cannot or should not "affect" the secular state.

2. I never said I want the State to affect Christianity, I said the exact opposite. You are the one who wants the State to control religion (at least what is taught to our children).

Then if we are citizens of two kingdoms Christianity should be represented in the public schools. The Ten Commandments should be hanging in the school halls. If because we are citizens of two kingdoms, the U.S. flag can fly in the Church, then because we are citizens of two kingdoms, the Ten Commandments should be in the hallways of our schools.

Again, 'keeping religion out of public schools' is only based upon 'separation of church and state'. And that is what you preach. If you believe it is not based upon 'separation of church and state', then pray tell what is the basis for religion being taken out of public schools? What is the basis for government removing the Ten Commandments from public places. Or prayer not being allowed in the public schools?

Gov. Newsome is not teaching your kids or any other kids about religion in public schools. So why don't you send them to the public schools? Instead you force Romanism upon your kids, contrary to your faith. You a good Lutheran PARENT.

Again, you don't want Christianity represented in the public schools. You don't want the Ten Commandments in the hallways...do you? You don't want prayer in the public schools...do you?

When you don't want Christianity represented in the public schools, you are saying Christianity should not affect the State.

When you want the U.S. flag flown in the Church, you are saying you want the State to affect the Church.

You like to cloak your words in something more palatable, but that is what you are saying.

Lees

 

[Josiah]

Then if we are citizens of two kingdoms Christianity should be represented in the public schools.h

@Lees The State is not a member of the Church. The Church is not a citizen of a State. Church and State are two DIFFERENT realms. By displaying two DIFFERENT flags it is simply acknowledging that we are members of two different realms. Perhaps if we ONLY had one or the other or perhaps had one flag that incorporated elements of both the Christian and US flags, well that might be misleading but nope, both says there are two. Not blended into one or even displayed together but two distinctive realms represented by two different flags, displayed separately.

Gov. Newsome is not teaching your kids or any other kids about religion in public schools.

Thankfully, that's correct! He is doing exactly as God said to do - stay out of that, allow parents to do this as God commands. But you want Gov Newsom to do this. You want the secular State to teach your kids ITS religion, impose ITS theology upon them (perhaps teaching that what you teach your kids is wrong)... while God insists that PARENTS are to teach THEIR religion to your kids. I hold that we should do as God commands, you hold to replacing that with the king teaching religion to our children; I hold that we should do as God commands, you oppose that.

So why don't you send them to the public schools?

I already have answered this...

1. Above all, because public schools here are TERRIBLE. My wife is a certified public school teacher, now retired, and she was the one who very boldly insisted that our kids NOT attend these horrible schools. The school our son attends is academically far, far, far better - and this is dramatically substantiated by objective test scores. It's verified to be far, far better academically. And in other ways, too.

2. It's not the reason but it's a plus that this school is Christian and reinforces our views at many (almost all) points. Thus, the "family life" curriculum in California public schools - written by Planned Parenthood - teaching the glories of abortion, the goodness of same gender marriage and masturbation, exploring why it might be better to change ones gender identity, that sex among kids is just wonderful and "natural", that at times it's right to lie to parents, all that _________ that our public schools teach, that stuff is NOT taught at our son's school but rather its pro-life, pro-family, sanctity of life, chastity, sex only in marriage, etc. There is theology too but 95% of that I fully agree with, and the 5% where I don't I can very easily explain the difference to my children - AND the Catholic school does NOT teach that my Lutheran views are wrong, they do NOT attempt to convert or convince, they simple present the Catholic view and the students are free to accept or reject; many of the teachers are not Catholic and about one-third of the students are not Catholic. Our son goes to this Catholic school rather than a Baptist one closer to us not only because it's academically much better but because I agree with Catholic theology more than that anabaptist, arminian, free-will, anti-Sacrament Baptist school.... and the Baptist school states it attempts to convert, the Catholic school insists it does not. MY faith is the norm, not Gov. Newsom, I can choose WHICH theology my son will be taught (and how), not a bunch of wacho, uber-liberal, woke, LGBTQI+ Democrats in Sacramento (the State).

When you want the U.S. flag flown in the Church, you are saying you want the State to affect the Church

You have our positions reversed. Again. I do NOT want the State to rule the church, that's your position, you want the State to teach its religion to our children whereas God commands that PARENTS do this.

Especially in a democracy, CHRISTIANS can express and vote their faith and thus influence the State but the Church should not. I don't agree that the Church should tell all its members exactly which candidates to vote for, which party to register as, nor the State to tell all citizens which theology is correct. The Church should rule the Church, the State should rule the State. Right now, California is largely obeying what God says - that PARENTS should teach religion to students, NOT the State - just as God says. You want it to disobey God. I wish the State would do LESS teaching in this area (STOP teaching "family life" entirely, for example), you want it to do MORE. I think we should do as God says, you disagree.



.

 

[Lees]

@Lees The State is not a member of the Church. The Church is not a citizen of a State. Church and State are two DIFFERENT realms. By displaying two DIFFERENT flags it is simply acknowledging that we are members of two different realms. Perhaps if we ONLY had one or the other or perhaps had one flag that incorporated elements of both the Christian and US flags, well that might be misleading but nope, both says there are two. Not blended into one or even displayed together but two distinctive realms represented by two different flags, displayed separately.





Thankfully, that's correct! He is doing exactly as God said to do - stay out of that, allow parents to do this as God commands. But you want Gov Newsom to do this. You want the secular State to teach your kids ITS religion, impose ITS theology upon them (perhaps teaching that what you teach your kids is wrong)... while God insists that PARENTS are to teach THEIR religion to your kids. I hold that we should do as God commands, you hold to replacing that with the king teaching religion to our children; I hold that we should do as God commands, you oppose that.





I already have answered this...

1. Above all, because public schools here are TERRIBLE. My wife is a certified public school teacher, now retired, and she was the one who very boldly insisted that our kids NOT attend these horrible schools. The school our son attends is academically far, far, far better - and this is dramatically substantiated by objective test scores. It's verified to be far, far better academically. And in other ways, too.

2. It's not the reason but it's a plus that this school is Christian and reinforces our views at many (almost all) points. Thus, the "family life" curriculum in California public schools - written by Planned Parenthood - teaching the glories of abortion, the goodness of same gender marriage and masturbation, exploring why it might be better to change ones gender identity, that sex among kids is just wonderful and "natural", that at times it's right to lie to parents, all that _________ that our public schools teach, that stuff is NOT taught at our son's school but rather its pro-life, pro-family, sanctity of life, chastity, sex only in marriage, etc. There is theology too but 95% of that I fully agree with, and the 5% where I don't I can very easily explain the difference to my children - AND the Catholic school does NOT teach that my Lutheran views are wrong, they do NOT attempt to convert or convince, they simple present the Catholic view and the students are free to accept or reject; many of the teachers are not Catholic and about one-third of the students are not Catholic. Our son goes to this Catholic school rather than a Baptist one closer to us not only because it's academically much better but because I agree with Catholic theology more than that anabaptist, arminian, free-will, anti-Sacrament Baptist school.... and the Baptist school states it attempts to convert, the Catholic school insists it does not. MY faith is the norm, not Gov. Newsom, I can choose WHICH theology my son will be taught (and how), not a bunch of wacho, uber-liberal, woke, LGBTQI+ Democrats in Sacramento (the State).






You have our positions reversed. Again. I do NOT want the State to rule the church, that's your position, you want the State to teach its religion to our children whereas God commands that PARENTS do this.

Especially in a democracy, CHRISTIANS can express and vote their faith and thus influence the State but the Church should not. I don't agree that the Church should tell all its members exactly which candidates to vote for, which party to register as, nor the State to tell all citizens which theology is correct. The Church should rule the Church, the State should rule the State. Right now, California is largely obeying what God says - that PARENTS should teach religion to students, NOT the State - just as God says. You want it to disobey God. I wish the State would do LESS teaching in this area (STOP teaching "family life" entirely, for example), you want it to do MORE. I think we should do as God says, you disagree.

You contradict yourself. In post #(9) you said we as Christians are 'citizens of TWO kingdoms'. Now you say the Church is not a citizen of the State. So, which is it?

You are the 'Master Cherry Picker'. Why didn't you answer my questions in the 2nd paragraph? You preach 'keep religion out of public schools'. And the basis for keeping religion out of public schools is 'separation of church and state. Yet you say that is not the basis. So, what, again, pray tell, is the basis?

If Gov. Newsome is doing God's work, why do you a Lutheran PARENT force Romanism on your kids. Why don't you send them to Gov. Newsome's public schools? Or has Gov. Newsome failed in God's work?

Wait a minute. You just said Gov. Newsome is doing God's work in the public schools. Now you say the public schools are terrible. What is wrong with this picture? You say California is doing what God says, yet the public schools are worthless.

I never said I wanted the State to teach religion to our children. That is not true. And you are failing in your job as a Lutheran PARENT allowing the Roman influence upon your children. You say it is the PARENTS job to teach religion to their children. Yet you hand over the reigns to the Roman Church.

I never said I want the State to rule the Church. That is another lie on your part.

I hate to break the news to you, but Christians are the Church. In the early days of America, the schools were held in the church buildings. My oh my, what a breach of your 'separation of church and state' doctrine that would be.

You present one oxymoron after another. You don't want religion in public schools. Yet you want the American flag flying in the churches. Again, because you never answer, Do you want the Ten Commandments in the hallways of public schools? Or prayer in the public schools?

You want the State to influence the Church. You reject any influence of the Church upon the State. "Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord...."

Lees

 

[Lees]

@Albion

Oh gee Albion, you disagree with my post #(10). I just can't express how devasted I am...not.

Lees

 

[Albion]

What would cause you to think that merely disagreeing with your post had to signal something as glamorous or personal as an attempt to make you feel "devastated?"

LOL. I might have opted for a longer post, but there was so much wrong with your theorizing that it seemed to me easier just to click on the symbol for "disagree." That's all.

 

[Josiah]

You contradict yourself. In post #(9) you said we as Christians are 'citizens of TWO kingdoms'. Now you say the Church is not a citizen of the State. So, which is it?

Which is it? Exactly what I said.

CHRISTIANS (people with the divine gift of faith in Christ as Savior) are members of TWO different, distinct realms. The CHURCH (that institution) is not the state. The STATE (that institution) is not the church. They are different realms. They co-exist, but responsible for different things and operating in different ways.

If Gov. Newsome is doing God's work

He is to do the State's work. He is the chief executive of the secular State, THAT realm. He is not an ordain minister... He is not a bishop of the Church. And his role as governor would have nothing to do with the church if he was. And he is not the parent of my children and thus is not the one God specifically states has the authority and responsibility to teach religion to my son.

has Gov. Newsome failed in God's work?

As governor of California, he doesn't have God's work, he has the State's work. The Church did not ordain and install him as its bishop, the State installed him as its governor. There is a difference.

And NOWHERE in Scripture does it mandate that ANY king, ruler, dictator, emperor - or any agent thereof - is to teach religion to our children. Not once. Nowhere. Not Alexander the Great. Not Julius Caesar. Not Nero. Not King David or King Solomon. Not President Biden. What God states - clearly, consistently, frequently - is that PARENTS have this God-given responsibility and authority. He NEVER said it's actually the king, emperor, dictator, governor, caesar or president.

you say California is doing what God says

In that it is NOT teaching religion to our kids. California agrees with God in THAT matter, it leaves THAT issue to the parents; in THAT it is doing as God commands. It's you rejecting what God commands here.

You don't want religion in public schools. Yet you want the American flag flying in the churches.

An American flag in a church is not the Emperor, King, Caesar, Dictator teaching religion to my children.... it is not violating God's command that PARENTS teach religion to their children, NOT Gov. Newsom or Julius Ceasar or Adolf Hiter; parents are not the State.


In having both flags is simply acknowledging that there are two realms. It is NOT stating that one handles everything and the other is irrelevant, moot, nothing. It is NOT stating that one must do whatever the other desires. It is stating there are two different realms. Both exist.

You want the State to influence the Church

No, again, you have our positions reversed. I do NOT want the State to influcence the Church or do the Church's ministry. That's your position, that's what you want. I want the Emperor, Dictator, King, President, Governor to KEEP OUT of the church, NOT interject itself into the role of the Church, NOT violate what God says and teach my religion to my kids when that's the PARENTS role - not the State's role. Gov. Newsom should teach HIS OWN KIDS HIS RELIGION as their parent, not force his religion on my kids as the State's governor.



.

 

[Lees]

Which is it? Exactly what I said.

CHRISTIANS (people with the divine gift of faith in Christ as Savior) are members of TWO different, distinct realms. The CHURCH (that institution) is not the state. The STATE (that institution) is not the church. They are different realms. They co-exist, but responsible for different things and operating in different ways.







He is to do the State's work. He is the chief executive of the secular State, THAT realm. He is not an ordain minister... He is not a bishop of the Church. And his role as governor would have nothing to do with the church if he was. And he is not the parent of my children and thus is not the one God specifically states has the authority and responsibility to teach religion to my son.






As governor of California, he doesn't have God's work, he has the State's work. The Church did not ordain and install him as its bishop, the State installed him as its governor. There is a difference.

And NOWHERE in Scripture does it mandate that ANY king, ruler, dictator, emperor - or any agent thereof - is to teach religion to our children. Not once. Nowhere. Not Alexander the Great. Not Julius Caesar. Not Nero. Not King David or King Solomon. Not President Biden. What God states - clearly, consistently, frequently - is that PARENTS have this God-given responsibility and authority. He NEVER said it's actually the king, emperor, dictator, governor, caesar or president.






In that it is NOT teaching religion to our kids. California agrees with God in THAT matter, it leaves THAT issue to the parents; in THAT it is doing as God commands. It's you rejecting what God commands here.






An American flag in a church is not the Emperor, King, Caesar, Dictator teaching religion to my children.... it is not violating God's command that PARENTS teach religion to their children, NOT Gov. Newsom or Julius Ceasar or Adolf Hiter; parents are not the State.


In having both flags is simply acknowledging that there are two realms. It is NOT stating that one handles everything and the other is irrelevant, moot, nothing. It is NOT stating that one must do whatever the other desires. It is stating there are two different realms. Both exist.





No, again, you have our positions reversed. I do NOT want the State to influcence the Church or do the Church's ministry. That's your position, that's what you want. I want the Emperor, Dictator, King, President, Governor to KEEP OUT of the church, NOT interject itself into the role of the Church, NOT violate what God says and teach my religion to my kids when that's the PARENTS role - not the State's role. Gov. Newsom should teach HIS OWN KIDS HIS RELIGION as their parent, not force his religion on my kids as the State's governor.

Again, if the Church and State are two distinct realms which the Christian is a member of, then why should the American flag fly in the churches? If such a distinction between Church and State requires no Ten Commandments in public school hallways, how is it that such a distinction doesn't apply to the American flag, which represents the State.

Again, because you refuse to answer, 'separation of church and state' is the basis for keeping religion out of public schools. And it is the basis for removing anything Christian out of public schools. If 'separation of church and state' is not the basis for doing that, then pray tell what is the basis?

Again, Gov. Newsome 'is' doing God's work, you said. California is doing God's work, you said. Which is exactly what you want. Neither Christianity or religion are taught in those public schools. Yet you remove/send your kids to a Roman Christian school to do the work of the State and influence your kids with the Roman faith. In other words, you didn't take your kids out of public schools due to their being taught Christianity or religion. But then you place your kids in a Church institution which does the job of both Church and State.

The American flag represents the State. You say it flying in the Church doesn't violate God's laws as it just acknowledges the Christian is part of two realms. Then how does the Ten Commandments placed in public school hallways violate the State? How does Christian prayer in public schools violate the State? No one is saying everyone must follow or participate.

No, again, that is not true. I want the Church to influence the State, not the State to influence the Church.

You keep acting like Newsome and California are forcing religion upon your kids. But they didn't. They are doing your bidding. Yet you, the Lutheran PARENT send your kids to a Roman school institution to be influenced by the Roman faith. Oxymoron.

Lees

 

[Josiah]

Again, if the Church and State are two distinct realms which the Christian is a member of, then why should the American flag fly in churches?

@Lees I think you just answered your own question. Since Christians live in both realms, then it makes sense for both flags to fly in a place where Christians are - two different flags, perhaps on opposite sides of the church room. We exist in both. Neither controlling the other. I'm not saying it's a good idea to display both flags in a church but it's acceptable.

, 'separation of church and state' is the basis for keeping religion out of public schools.

The reason I've given you (many, many times!!!!) for rejecting your idea of the emperor, king, dictator, caeser, czar teaching his religion to my kids is...


1. GOD specifically, directly, boldly, consistently, verbatim gives the responsibility and authority to teach religion to the child's PARENTS, not the State. Given by God to his own mother and father, to the PARENTS of that child. Never, not once, never is this authorization or responsibility given to kings, emperors, dictators, rulers, czars, governors, presidents or any other leader of state or to the state itself. Never. Not once. NOT to Pharaoh Ramses, NOT to King David, NOT to Alexander the Great, NOT to Antiocus Epiphanes, NOT to Julius Ceasar, NOT to Adolf Hitler, NOT to Governor Newsom. NOT to the Kingdom of Egypt. NOT to the Kingdom of Judah. NOT to the Roman Empire. NOT to the Holy Roman Empire. NOT to the USA. I think it's good to do as God commands, you think it's good to ignore God and for the state to do this.


2. Your concept of the secular State teaching a Christianity that is void of any teaching is both impossible and dangerous. I gave dozens of very fundamental ideas taught by some Christian churches that are flat-out contradictory to each other - and you refuse to say which California schools should and should not present (except for one - evolution; THAT idea - supported by most Christians and Christian churches - you think should not be presented) but you don't give a rip about what horrible, heretical, wrong, dangerous ideas are taught by California (as long as evolution is not taught). You MUST evade the issue of WHAT form of Christianity will be taught because there is no single form of it, especially in the USA - and you know it. So, what the State ultimately teaches could (indeed very likely would) be offensive and horrible to many and probably most Christians, California would be telling your kids that your faith/church is wrong, it would be displacing you. You MUST state EXACTLY - at every point - WHAT will and will not be taught (it's also required by law in all 50 states) and you won't because we all know you'll come up with something that is offensive to most Christians OR worse, you'll come up with a Christianity that is empty, void, meaningless, irrelevant religion (one that believes pretty much nothing) - which is obviously worse than teaching nothing about it at all.

Again, Gov. Newsome 'is' doing God's work, you said. California is doing God's work, you said. Which is exactly what you want. Neither Christianity or religion are taught in those public schools. Yet you remove/send your kids to a Roman Christian school

I told you repeatedly why my son doesn't attend a public school (and I've told you this is not, NOT, NOT because California does not impose its religion on my child).

As a parent, I can CHOOSE to send my son NOT to a state school but a church school - an extension NOT of the state but of the church. I can choose - as the parent responsible for religious instruction - to send my child to a church school where religion is taught. MY choice of WHAT church school that presents WHAT theology that is acceptable to ME. And the church school my son attends states - EXACTLY, FULLY, COMPLETELY, IN WRITING, at every point - what it will present to my child as religion (what you think the State must not do, although that's illegal), and that religion is acceptable to me, as his parent. I don't send him to a Baptist school because that religion is not acceptable to me. And it's UP TO ME (and my wife) because the responsibility and authority in religious instruction belongs to my wife and I, not President Biden or Governor Newsom. I'M choosing.... based on full and complete disclosure. I am to choose what religious views will be taught to my kid - NOT some governor, dictator, king, emperor, pharoah or any other head of state or the state itself.... and not you. You want parents to be victims of whatever the State of California wants to teach about God but hides from parents.



.

 

[Lees]

@Lees I think you just answered your own question. Since Christians live in both realms, then it makes sense for both flags to fly in a place where Christians are - two different flags, perhaps on opposite sides of the church room. We exist in both. Neither controlling the other.






You continue to impose that Anabaptist idea on me even though I've NEVER used it and I've told you many times I'm not Anabaptist.

The reason I've given you (many, many times!!!!) for rejecting your idea of the emperor, king, dictator, caeser, czar teaching his religion to my kids is...


1. GOD specifically, directly, boldly, consistently, verbatim gives the responsibility and authority to teach religion to the child's PARENTS, not the State. Given by God to his own mother and father, to the PARENTS of that child. Never, not once, never is this authorization or responsibility given to kings, emperors, dictators, rulers, czars, governors, presidents or any other leader of state or to the state itself. Never. Not once. NOT to Pharaoh Ramses, NOT to King David, NOT to Alexander the Great, NOT to Antiocus Epiphanes, NOT to Julius Ceasar, NOT to Adolf Hitler, NOT to Governor Newsom. NOT to the Kingdom of Egypt. NOT to the Kingdom of Judah. NOT to the Roman Empire. NOT to the Holy Roman Empire. NOT to the USA. I think it's good to do as God commands, you think it's good to ignore God and for the state to do this.


2. Your concept of the secular State teaching a Christianity that is void of any teaching is both impossible and dangerous. I gave dozens of very fundamental ideas taught by some Christian churches that are flat-out contradictory to each other - and you refuse to say which California schools should and should not present (except for one - evolution; THAT idea - supported by most Christians and Christian churches - you think should not be presented) but you don't give a rip about what horrible, heretical, wrong, dangerous ideas are taught by California (as long as evolution is not taught). You MUST evade the issue of WHAT form of Christianity will be taught because there is no single form of it, especially in the USA - and you know it. So, what the State ultimately teaches could (indeed very likely would) be offensive and horrible to many and probably most Christians, California would be telling your kids that your faith/church is wrong, it would be displacing you. You MUST state EXACTLY - at every point - WHAT will and will not be taught (it's also required by law in all 50 states) and you won't because we all know you'll come up with something that is offensive to most Christians OR worse, you'll come up with a Christianity that is empty, void, meaningless, irrelevant religion (one that believes pretty much nothing) - which is obviously worse than teaching nothing about it at all.






No. I told you why my son doesn't attend a public school (and I've told you this is NOT, NOT, NOT because California does not impose its religion on my child).

As a parent, I can CHOOSE to send my son NOT to a state school but a church school - an extension NOT of the state but of the church. I can choose - as the parent responsible for religious instruction - to send my child to a church school where religion is taught. MY choice of WHAT church school that presents WHAT theology. The school my son attends states - EXACTLY, FULLY, COMPLETELY, IN WRITING, at every point - what it will present to my child as religion (what you think the State must not do, although that's illegal), and that religion is acceptable to me. I don't send him to a Baptist school because that religion is not acceptable to me. And it's UP TO ME (and my wife) because the responsibility and authority in religious instruction belongs to my wife and I, not President Biden or Governor Newsom. I"M choosing.... based on full and complete disclosure. I am to choose what views will be tuaght to my kid - NOT some governor, dictator, king, emperor, pharoah or any other lead of state or the state itself. You want parents to be victims of whatever the State of California wants to teach about God but hides from parents.

@Josiah, no, I didn't answer my question, and neither did you. You simply answered a cherry picked question, removing the context, that you think you can get away with. You are the 'master cherry picker'. Answer the first paragraph of my post #(16), in context. The context being in my second question which you ignore. " If such a distinction between Church and State requires no Ten Commandments in public school hallways, how is it that such a distinction doesn't apply to the American flag, which represents the State?"

Again, because you refuse to answer, if separation of Church and State is not the basis for keeping religion, Christianity, out of public schools, what is the basis? Simple question.

Of course, you can send your kids anywhere you want. That is not the point. The point is Gov. Newsome is doing your bidding. California is doing your bidding. Yet you and your wife refuse to send you kids to their public schools. And instead, send them to Roman schools, not of your faith, you say, so that they are taught both what the State and Church would teach. In other words, you want your kids to be taught both secular and religious knowledge by a church institution. Yet you don't want other kids to have access to the same. You want to leave them at the mercy of secular only.

Which of course paves the way for your solution....find a Roman Catholic school to send your children to. And what does Rome say about that? , "Give us a kid till she is 7 and we will have her for life". In other words, your solution is Romes solution. Which means the problem creating the need of solution, you hope for. Yet the problem doesn't exist for you because Newsom and California are doing your bidding.

Lees

 

[Josiah]

if separation of Church and State is not the basis for keeping religion, Christianity, out of public schools, what is the basis? Simple question.

The reason I've given you (many, many times!!!!) for rejecting your idea of the emperor, king, dictator, caeser, or czar teaching his religion to my kids is...


1. GOD specifically, directly, boldly, consistently, verbatim gives the responsibility and authority to teach religion to the child's PARENTS, not the State. Given by God to the child's own mother and father, to the PARENTS of that child. Never, not once, never is this authorization or responsibility given to kings, emperors, dictators, rulers, czars, governors, presidents or any other leader of state or to the state itself. Never. Not once. NOT to Pharaoh Ramses, NOT to King David, NOT to Alexander the Great, NOT to Antiocus Epiphanes, NOT to Julius Ceasar, NOT to Adolf Hitler, NOT to Governor Newsom. NOT to the Kingdom of Egypt. NOT to the Kingdom of Judah. NOT to the Roman Empire. NOT to the Holy Roman Empire. NOT to the USA. I think it's good to do as God commands, you think it's good to ignore God and for the state to do this.


2. Your concept of the secular State teaching a Christianity that is void of any teaching is both impossible and dangerous. I gave dozens of very fundamental ideas taught by some Christian churches that are flat-out contradictory to each other - and you refuse to say which California schools should and should not present (except for one - evolution; THAT idea - supported by most Christians and Christian churches - you think should not be presented) but you don't give a rip about what horrible, heretical, wrong, dangerous ideas are taught by California (as long as evolution is not taught). You MUST evade the issue of WHAT form of Christianity will be taught because there is no single form of it, especially in the USA - and you know it. So, what the State ultimately teaches could (indeed very likely would) be offensive and horrible to many and probably most Christians, California would be telling your kids that your faith/church is wrong, it would be displacing you. You MUST state EXACTLY - at every point - WHAT will and will not be taught (it's also required by law in all 50 states) and you won't because we all know you'll come up with something that is offensive to most Christians OR worse, you'll come up with a Christianity that is empty, void, meaningless, irrelevant religion (one that believes pretty much nothing) - which is obviously worse than teaching nothing about it at all.

The point is Gov. Newsome is doing your bidding. California is doing your bidding.

He is obeying God's command that PARENTS are to teach religion to their own kids, not the state. You are rejecting what God says.

And as you know, the reason we are not sending our son to a public school is not because it is obeying God's command at this point. I've told you that over and over and over and over and over again. It's because the academics of California public schools are horrible. I want much better for my son, and fortunately I can afford to send him to a private NON-STATE schools that is far, far better.

Yet you don't want other kids to have access to the same.

Actually, I'd LOVE to have a system where parents would receive a grant (money taken in taxes for education) that could be used by the parents for ANY school - regardless of whether it is an agent of the state or a church or of neither - and for homeschoolers, too. This concept exists to SOME degree in SOME places in the US but not in California. I have the money to pay the tuition, of course many don't. The answer here fundamentally is not to go against God and give the Emperor the authority to teach religion but to improve the quality of academics in American public schools. I understand they have excellent schools in Japan (where also religion is not taught), we could in the US too, I believe. Our son's Catholic school spends FAR less per student than public schools do but the academics are FAR, FAR better. We could do better - much better - academically. But that's another subject for another day. That's not the issue here.


The point here is whereas God specifically gives the responsibility and authority to teach RELIGION to the parents of the child, you want us to give that authority to the Czar, dictator, king, emperor, president, governor of the state that the victim child happens to reside in at that time - he imposing his religion on our children. I think we should do as God commands.



.

 

[Lees]

The reason I've given you (many, many times!!!!) for rejecting your idea of the emperor, king, dictator, caeser, or czar teaching his religion to my kids is...


1. GOD specifically, directly, boldly, consistently, verbatim gives the responsibility and authority to teach religion to the child's PARENTS, not the State. Given by God to his own mother and father, to the PARENTS of that child. Never, not once, never is this authorization or responsibility given to kings, emperors, dictators, rulers, czars, governors, presidents or any other leader of state or to the state itself. Never. Not once. NOT to Pharaoh Ramses, NOT to King David, NOT to Alexander the Great, NOT to Antiocus Epiphanes, NOT to Julius Ceasar, NOT to Adolf Hitler, NOT to Governor Newsom. NOT to the Kingdom of Egypt. NOT to the Kingdom of Judah. NOT to the Roman Empire. NOT to the Holy Roman Empire. NOT to the USA. I think it's good to do as God commands, you think it's good to ignore God and for the state to do this.


2. Your concept of the secular State teaching a Christianity that is void of any teaching is both impossible and dangerous. I gave dozens of very fundamental ideas taught by some Christian churches that are flat-out contradictory to each other - and you refuse to say which California schools should and should not present (except for one - evolution; THAT idea - supported by most Christians and Christian churches - you think should not be presented) but you don't give a rip about what horrible, heretical, wrong, dangerous ideas are taught by California (as long as evolution is not taught). You MUST evade the issue of WHAT form of Christianity will be taught because there is no single form of it, especially in the USA - and you know it. So, what the State ultimately teaches could (indeed very likely would) be offensive and horrible to many and probably most Christians, California would be telling your kids that your faith/church is wrong, it would be displacing you. You MUST state EXACTLY - at every point - WHAT will and will not be taught (it's also required by law in all 50 states) and you won't because we all know you'll come up with something that is offensive to most Christians OR worse, you'll come up with a Christianity that is empty, void, meaningless, irrelevant religion (one that believes pretty much nothing) - which is obviously worse than teaching nothing about it at all.






He is obeying God's command that PARENTS are to teach religion to their own kids, not the state. You are rejecting what God says.

And as you know, the reason we are not sending our son to a public school is not because it is obeying God's command at this point. I've told you that over and over and over and over and over again. It's because the academics of California public schools are horrible. I want much better for my son, and fortunately I can afford to send him to a private NON-STATE schools that is far, far better.






Actually, I'd LOVE to have a system where parents would receive a grant (money taken in taxes for education) that could be used by the parents for ANY school - regardless of whether it is an agent of the state or a church or of neither - and for homeschoolers, too. This concept exists to SOME degree in SOME places in the US but not in California. I have the money to pay the tuition, of course many don't. The answer here fundamentally is not to go against God and give the Emperor the authority to teach religion but to improve the quality of academics in American public schools. I understand they have excellent schools in Japan (where also religion is not taught), we could in the US too, I believe. Our son's Catholic school spends FAR less per student than public schools do but the academics are FAR, FAR better. We could do better - much better - academically. But that's another subject for another day. That's not the issue here.


The point here is whereas God specifically gives the responsibility and authority to teach RELIGION to the parents of the child, you want us to give that authority to the Czar, dictator, king, emperor, president, governor of the state that the victim child happens to reside in at that time - he imposing his religion on our children. I think we should do as God commands.

Oh cherry picker, if such a distinction between church and state requires no Ten Commandments in public school hallways, how is it that such a distinction doesn't require no American flag in the Church?

No, parents teaching their children about religion is not the basis for keeping religion out of public schools. That is what you say. That is not what the State says. The State says, 'separation of church and state'. Which you promote, though you are deceptive in wording it differently.

Oh gee, the public school school system that Newsome and California present, which is in agreement with you, has gone to hell. What a coincidence. Take God, Religion, Christianity out of the public schools, and they go to hell. And you then run to a Christian based institution, not of your faith, you say, to teach your kids both secular and religious teaching.

See your hypocrisy? You opt for religion being taught your children so that they receive a better education. Yet you want to deny that to untold millions of chldren with your doctrine of separation of church and state. Which you hide in saying instead, no religion in public schools.

And of course, your solution to the problem which you promote, is to turn to the Roman Church institutions. And what does Rome say? "Give us your kid till she is 7, and we will have her for life".

Lees