The relationship between Church and State in America has long been a point of contention, particularly among Evangelicals who assert that the nation was founded as a Christian entity. They argue that the settling, conquest, and founding of America were guided by God's hand, pointing to the Christian faith of many early immigrants and the biblical principles embedded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They cite statements from founders like George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin to bolster their claim that the United States was established as a Christian nation. However, legal experts often counter that the government should not favor one religion over another, viewing practices like prayer to a Christian God or the display of the Ten Commandments as violations of the inferred principle of separation of Church and State in the Constitution. The Constitution itself makes no explicit statement on this separation, leading to ongoing debate. Historical documents and statements from the Founding Fathers provide insight into their intentions. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which influenced the Bill of Rights, states that religion, morality, and knowledge are necessary for good government and human happiness, encouraging their teaching in schools. Yet, the Founders were clear in their intent to avoid endorsing a specific religion. George Washington, in his farewell address, emphasized that religion and morality are indispensable supports for political prosperity, cautioning against the notion that morality can exist without religion. Thomas Jefferson advised that no religious instruction in schools should favor one sect over another. Benjamin Franklin outlined a creed of fundamental beliefs common to all sound religion, focusing on one God, worship, and doing good to others. John Adams referred to these tenets as the general principles of American civilization, while Chief Justice Joseph Story, in an 1858 decision, clarified that the federal government has no right to impose specific denominational doctrines, leaving religious matters to state governments under the First Amendment's prohibition of establishing religion or restricting its free exercise. The Founders unanimously supported religious instruction in public schools, but limited it to broadly agreed-upon doctrines to prevent the establishment of a national religion. Their writings and decisions reveal no intention to designate the United States as a Christian nation, despite their personal beliefs and advocacy for teaching religion and morality for the nation's benefit. Instead, they aimed for an even-handed approach, ensuring no single denomination dominated, reflecting a commitment to fairness across diverse religious groups in the new nation.

The debate over the separation of church and state remains a perennial source of social strife, intensifying during the Christmas season when public displays of religious texts or symbols spark contention. One perspective insists on removing religious elements from public holidays, leading to stringent laws that distance traditional symbols like Nativity scenes from public spaces. Conversely, the opposing view mistakenly centers such holidays on specific religious figures. This Christmas controversy exemplifies broader disputes over the separation of church and state. Historically, early settlers in the Americas sought escape from the state-supported Church of England's intolerance, not a secular existence devoid of religion, but freedom from imposed singular religious doctrines. They envisioned a public tolerance for diverse religions, reinforcing universal values like the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule, which were not only permitted but encouraged to guide public life. The strict separation now advocated represents a modern cultural philosophy, diverging from historical norms where personal and public life were inseparable, as God reveals in His Word. In ancient Israel, God established a unique union of civil and religious law, commanding kings to write His law by hand and the people to inscribe it on their hearts. This fusion, ordained by God, reflects human nature's inability to serve two masters, as Jesus Christ teaches in Matthew 6:24. Modern strict separation conflicts with this divine intent, stemming from an evolutionary viewpoint that compartmentalizes human life, treating different aspects as disconnected. Such compartmentalization, evident in movements like the sexual liberation of the 60s and 70s, leads to personal and societal discord. As children of God, our devotion demands a singular governance over our hearts, directing every action, public or private. Until God establishes His Kingdom, societal tendencies to separate these spheres will persist, but we are called to total commitment to Him, setting an example of unified purpose in serving God.

The concept of Church and State reveals an inseparable connection between religion, law, morality, and political authority. Whenever the state enacts a law, it dictates what is moral within the framework of its jurisdiction, establishing a body of codified morality that citizens are expected to follow. This act of legislation inherently reflects a form of religious expression, as it concerns values and the way we live, making a complete separation of Church and State an impossibility. In the United States, despite claims of separation, the state continuously defines morality through its laws, indicating what is acceptable or unacceptable behavior. This relationship extends to the idea that the source of law becomes the sovereign authority, akin to a god in the biblical sense. When the state or any governing body enacts laws, it assumes a position of ultimate authority over moral conduct, demanding obedience. If citizens yield to these laws, they are, in effect, submitting to the state as their guiding force. Historically, in the beginning of the United States, the system of law and morality was largely derived from biblical principles, often taken almost verbatim from Scripture. However, over time, particularly after the Civil War and during the Industrial Age, the basis of law shifted from biblical absolutes to human relativism, relying on human experience rather than divine standards. This shift in the source of morality has profound implications, as it moves away from the absolutes of God's law to the variable standards of human thought. Such a change fosters idolatry, not only in religious contexts but across all areas of life, including economics, social programs, agriculture, and manufacturing, as practices increasingly originate from the mind of man rather than from divine guidance. The Bible illustrates this principle in Ezekiel 20, where God gave Israel over to statutes that were not good when they turned from His laws, highlighting that turning away from divine morality leads to systems that cannot produce life. Furthermore, the apostles in Acts 5:29 affirm the priority of obeying God over human authority, emphasizing that believers must adhere to divine law above state-enacted morality, especially when the two conflict. This principle applies continuously, not just in times of persecution, as there is always external pressure to conform to a different system of morality apart from God's standards. Law is inseparable from sovereignty, and whatever source of law one obeys becomes their sovereign, their god, shaping their entire way of life.