The state recognized marriage certificate is a way to keep track of people/citizens and what they owe to the state in taxes. In England it was the king's business as he was the head of the church and state. A required civil ceremony just allows the state to create a legal contract which it uses to determine it's responsibilities in family benefits from the state and what it is owed in taxes (filing taxes as a family has different rules than filing singly).
An official ceremony where two people formally declare their intention to comply with state rules regulating married couples and sign the paper doesn't replace a church ceremony. If the couple wishes to have a marriage which is recognized by God they will have the ability to do so in the church of their choice.
The state requires legal documents for many life experiences - birth and death are required to be recognized by most religions and governments. For a birth the church usually requires things like a blessing or christening and for a death a church often requires either a church or grave-side service and blessings. Is it your argument that birth and death certificates are an attempt to unseat the place of God in these life bench-marks?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I have no idea where you got that from my previous comment. But it appears that you're trying to reduce what I said to absurdity, which is fine because as I said above, you probably do not see why and how what you're doing is exactly the opposite of separating the church from state until it's too little too late. Separation of church and state was never supposed to become the separation of God(core Christian values that have never been debatable) from the state, as that would turn the state into a completely new god who would oppose core Christian values, and would eventually lead us into tyranny.