ny pastor raffles off rifle during church

[Marnie]

It is similar to being forced to pay for abortion.  If I were the Pastor of a church, I would gladly give up my 501c3 status to stand against such evil.

 

Shalom, Prair

 

Amen!  Nowhere in the Bible does it teach that Christians are to blindly obey any government edict.  The oft quotes passage in Romans, in fact, teaches the opposite. 

 

 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong.  (Romans 13:3  NIV)

 

 

Sometimes to do "do right," you must necessarily violate a law of the land, ie. Obamacare, gay marriage, etc.  You may face the consequences, but it's better to be punished by man than to offend G-d.  Daniel prayed when the law told him not to, and though he experienced the consequences, he was vindicated.  No tin pot dictator (like Obama) can go against the Lord's will. 

 

Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong...  (Exodus 23:2a  NIV)

 

 

Political stands are not excluded because politics touches every aspect of our lives today, thanks to liberals, who want to control every aspect of our lives.  Most Christians would never think about gay marriage for a nanosecond, but thanks to liberals, we have to. 

[LookingForAnswers]

 

I did not say that Christians should not be politically active, I said that churches should not.  There is a time and a place for everything, church is not the place for political activity.

What is "the church" but the congregation? And what is the "congregation" but the people?

In this instance it is the gathering of a group of people who have come together to worship the Lord and be with each other and hopefully show the love of Christ to those who do not know it.  It is a time and a place set aside for a specific activity.  I am a CBIP by trade but when I gather with other Christians in a church service I am not there to do ply trade or to watch football or read SiFi books, we are there to worship the Lord.  There is a time and a place for everything.  Why would we want to take a time set aside for God and give it over to political talk? 

 

Because politics affects our lives.

 

 

How many churches were involved in the Civil Rights Movement? Let's say we were in the 60's debating this topic, and the church issue was preaching pro-Civil Rights and encouraging people to be politically active to bring about Civil Rights. Would you favor the church losing its tax exempt status for this?

 

 

My first thought is how many churches were involved in fighting the Civil Rights Movement, but that is just a rabbit trail. My answer I guess would be it would depend on how it was being done.  The very gospel of Jesus is against discrimination, so preaching the message of Jesus would be pro-civil rights (the same cannot be said about gun).  Now if they were standing up there spouting political rhetoric and not the Gospel then yes.

Not sure if this is too far off the topic or not, but why do you think churches deserve tax exempt status?  It is not a biblical issue, there was no such thing in the bible times. 

[Marnie]

Not sure if this is too far off the topic or not, but why do you think churches deserve tax exempt status?  It is not a biblical issue, there was no such thing in the bible times.

 

 

Churches have unofficially been exempt from paying taxes since the founding of the country; legally protected since 1894.  The idea that the government should take away the church's special tax status is a sign of just how secularized America has become.  Churches and religious institutions should be  treated differently because they are different.  To take away that disctinction via the tax code is to say that churches, religious schools and hostpitals, missions, etc. are no different than, say, a grocery store. 

 

So, yes, I believe churches should remain free, be able to issue tax receipts for giving, etc. Having said that, I suspect those days are numbered as more and more cash-strapped jurisistictions start eyeing up church property as potential revenue and more and more Americans are ignorant of both their history and of the history of the varioius protestant reformations in Europe in the late 1400's and 1500's, which, if anything, should serve to teach us that at all costs the church should remain completely separate from the government.  Catastrophic results occur when the church sides with the government in issues or the government meddles with the church. 

 

You are right, this is not, striclty speaking, a Biblical issue, but there are Biblical precedents that we are allowed to observe and maybe follow, in particular the treatment of the Jewish religious institutions in the OT (they were essentially "tax exempt") and one could even argue that the State (Rome) during Jesus' time gave very special treatment to the Jews, going so far as to actually build them a temple. 

[Guest P_W]

This thread has really taken a turn from the original topic and I think I have added about as much as I can without rehashing what has already been said.  There is only one final point that maybe those who are against churches being exempt from paying taxes might want to consider and that is what would happen to churches should they be forced to pay taxes?  

 

We have to consider that many churches pay staff, the preacher, the janitor, the secretary, etc. and all churches pay utility bills.  Some churches have a mortgage, and there are always maintenance costs, which could be quite expensive especially if the building is old, and so many churches are very old.  Then add in the other hidden costs that people do not always think about, but as a home owner, I understand what it takes to keep up our home and how expensive it gets, so I can only imagine the costs involved in maintaining a church building.

 

Many churches do their own tithe and support missionaries, food pantries, the poor and other civic programs.  Our church has a "coats for kids" project every autumn or winter and they do things like recycling to help off-set some of the costs involved, but to assist the poor, help them with utility bills, etc. takes a good amount of money.

 

No, the money isn't going directly to God, but it helps God's people.  God does not need the money, but the poor need help and Jesus commissioned us to feed the hungry and clothe the naked and I am sure He realized this would take money.  Paying property taxes would only take away the money that is needed to accomplish what God wants us to do in helping His people.  Many congregations are already poor and struggle to do what we are called to do.  Taxing them might mean the doors of the church would close permanently and this would be a travesty. 

 

I thought about starting a new thread on the issue of churches being tax exempt, but we have almost discussed it into the ground already.  The heart of the issue isn't necessarily the 501c3 status, though.  The issue is how much government intrusion into our churches and private lives we will stand back and take.

 

I find no problem understanding the need for churches and various charitable organizations to be tax exempt.  I do, however, have a problem understanding why the NFL is tax exempt!  Maybe that will be the topic of a new thread?

 

Shalom, Prair

[nebula]

But even so, when a person gives a tithe or an offering, it is given to the Lord and the work of His ministry. Are you fine with a portion of the money you gave to the church to give to the food bank to be given instead to the government?

If my church were to leave the realm of religion and enter the secular realm i would be fine with it.

Ah, so you are a believer in separating the "sacred" from the "secular"?

That isn't Biblical.

It is not my distinction, it is the worlds.

 So, you're OK with the world's distinctions running the church?

I have been thinking about this a bit more deeply and I think my answer is flawed.  First, Jesus himself made the distinction, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.Second even you made the distinction above, the money you give to your church is given to God while I am assuming the money you paid for your groceries you do not view as money given to God.  Our churches are set apart by this distinction, they are tax exempt, and you seem to think that this distinction is a good thing.

You are apparently misunderstanding the concept that giving to God the "tenth" and the firstfruits of something is an act of dedicating the entirety to God.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

Not sure if this is too far off the topic or not, but why do you think churches deserve tax exempt status?  It is not a biblical issue, there was no such thing in the bible times.

 

 

Churches have unofficially been exempt from paying taxes since the founding of the country; legally protected since 1894.  The idea that the government should take away the church's special tax status is a sign of just how secularized America has become.  Churches and religious institutions should be  treated differently because they are different.  To take away that disctinction via the tax code is to say that churches, religious schools and hostpitals, missions, etc. are no different than, say, a grocery store. 

 

So, yes, I believe churches should remain free, be able to issue tax receipts for giving, etc. Having said that, I suspect those days are numbered as more and more cash-strapped jurisistictions start eyeing up church property as potential revenue and more and more Americans are ignorant of both their history and of the history of the varioius protestant reformations in Europe in the late 1400's and 1500's, which, if anything, should serve to teach us that at all costs the church should remain completely separate from the government.  Catastrophic results occur when the church sides with the government in issues or the government meddles with the church. 

 

You are right, this is not, striclty speaking, a Biblical issue, but there are Biblical precedents that we are allowed to observe and maybe follow, in particular the treatment of the Jewish religious institutions in the OT (they were essentially "tax exempt") and one could even argue that the State (Rome) during Jesus' time gave very special treatment to the Jews, going so far as to actually build them a temple. 

 

 

I can say I pretty much agree with you, that Churches are different.  But then others get upset with me for suggesting there is a difference between the secular and the sacred.  I think for most of us there is an innate understanding that there is a difference.  What I do at church is different and set apart from what I do at work. 

The biggest issue I have with the tax exempt status is that the church has to give up certain amount of control to the secular authorities to receive it. 

As the poster above said, most churches cannot survive without this tax exempt status, which gives our government too much control over those churches.   What will come of these churches if the government should choose to assert more control in exchange for the tax exempt status.   I believe that churches would be well served to break this connection before it is too late

[LookingForAnswers]

 

But even so, when a person gives a tithe or an offering, it is given to the Lord and the work of His ministry. Are you fine with a portion of the money you gave to the church to give to the food bank to be given instead to the government?

If my church were to leave the realm of religion and enter the secular realm i would be fine with it.

Ah, so you are a believer in separating the "sacred" from the "secular"?

That isn't Biblical.

It is not my distinction, it is the worlds.

 So, you're OK with the world's distinctions running the church?

I have been thinking about this a bit more deeply and I think my answer is flawed.  First, Jesus himself made the distinction, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.Second even you made the distinction above, the money you give to your church is given to God while I am assuming the money you paid for your groceries you do not view as money given to God.  Our churches are set apart by this distinction, they are tax exempt, and you seem to think that this distinction is a good thing.

You are apparently misunderstanding the concept that giving to God the "tenth" and the firstfruits of something is an act of dedicating the entirety to God.

 

 

I dont think so at all, but it does seem you are making a distinction between what is dedicated to God and what gets to go towards groceries.

[nebula]

You are apparently misunderstanding the concept that giving to God the "tenth" and the firstfruits of something is an act of dedicating the entirety to God.

I dont think so at all,

 

I disagree. You believe in churches paying the government for their right to their freedom of speech with the money people gave to represent their dedication to God.

[LookingForAnswers]

 

You are apparently misunderstanding the concept that giving to God the "tenth" and the firstfruits of something is an act of dedicating the entirety to God.

I dont think so at all,

 

I disagree. You believe in churches paying the government for their right to their freedom of speech with the money people gave to represent their dedication to God.

 

 

Wow, I dont know who's post you have been reading, but they sure were not mine. And I dont really appreciate the half quotes which leave of the true meaning of the words

[LadyKay]

This has just turned out to be another heated debate thread.Mods why don't you delete it?

Oh no no no. You must not delete a thread just because it has become a heated debate. I have no issue with heated debates. They all end in comments about Hitler and the nazis. You watch and see.