nebula Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Wow, I dont know who's post you have been reading, but they sure were not mine. That is what your position amounts to. People who give a tithe do so to represent their dedication to God of their finances. For the government to tax this money because the church desires to keep its freedom of speech, the church is indeed paying the government for their right to their freedom of speech with the money people gave to represent their dedication to God. This is a trap the government created when it passed the law in question. And I dont really appreciate the half quotes which leave of the true meaning of the words By saying, "but it does seem you are making a distinction between what is dedicated to God and what gets to go towards groceries," you are showing that you do not understand the concept of dedication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 11, 2014 That is what your position amounts to. Thank you for twisting my position to fit your view of me. People who give a tithe do so to represent their dedication to God of their finances. For the government to tax this money because the church desires to keep its freedom of speech, the church is indeed paying the government for their right to their freedom of speech with the money people gave to represent their dedication to God. This is a trap the government created when it passed the law in question. Yes, this is the trap the government has use the law in question to create. Anytime you accept something from the government you have to follow their rules to receive it. It is sad, but true. By saying, "but it does seem you are making a distinction between what is dedicated to God and what gets to go towards groceries," you are showing that you do not understand the concept of dedication. I do not understand your definition of it, that is for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marnie Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 811 Topics Per Day: 0.12 Content Count: 7,338 Content Per Day: 1.08 Reputation: 76 Days Won: 2 Joined: 10/06/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted March 11, 2014 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. I want to tread carefully here. The Church as an institution is different from other, secular institutions, which is why I believe there needs to be special status granted it in the tax code. Special status does not suggest any kind of government control, or at least it shouldn't. Unless you are referring to churches endorsing one political candidate or party over another, which would be a violation of IRS code (unless it's a minority church, it seems), there doesn't appear to be any meddling from any level of the government going on today. I believe this special status should remain even if America moved to a flat tax or national sales tax, eliminating income tax and eliminating all deductions. A so-called charitable deduction ought to remain in perpetutity, thus preserving that national "innate understanding" that religious institutions are special. Regarding the idea that most churches cannot survive without tax exempt status, I believe this is not true. Some, perhaps, but certainly not most churches can afford to pay various taxes (property, sales, etc.). There was a day when clergy got very special breaks by the community (free dry cleaning, free cups of coffee, discounts all over town) which they don't any more. But we still have clergy. Regarding the Church's ability to issue tax receipts for giving; I will concede that there may be some who wouldn't give or give as much because they really want or need that deduction, but many believers give without using an envelop or "claiming" the offering for a variety of reasons. They'll give cash or whatever, so that nobody knows how much they gave. In our church, some major givers give that way. In their minds, they don't want the IRS knowing how much they give, so it's an anonymous thing with them. Christians should be giving regardless of what the tax advantage or liability is. I don't believe in tithing, by the way. I believe in Paul's admonition that believers should give "as they are able," or as the Lord enables them to. It's His money, anyway. I'll end by saying that we in America have been very fortunate that since our founding, our country has been very sympathetic to a worldview based on the Bible. This is due to the foresight of our Founders. Even though, over the years, we have drifted farther and farther away from our founding principles, the Church has, by in large, been left alone by all levels of government. This is definitely changing as the worldview of the majority of Americans has shifted away from the Bible (or I should say "Biblical principles") to a secular, European, worldview. Its' sad, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 11, 2014 That is what your position amounts to. Thank you for twisting my position to fit your view of me. How about, then, if you explain to someone who does not want a portion of their tithe going to the government that this is not what they will in essence be doing? By the way, I said this is what your position amounts to, not what you were consciously thinking. By saying, "but it does seem you are making a distinction between what is dedicated to God and what gets to go towards groceries," you are showing that you do not understand the concept of dedication. I do not understand your definition of it, that is for sure. The whole principle of giving the "firstfruits" of something is an outward expression of dedicating the entirety of that something to God. If the firstfruits are holy, the whole batch is holy. Even though not everyone believes that we do not have to perform this duty under the New Covenant, those that do are giving their tithe with this perception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwikphilly Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 96 Topic Count: 308 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 18,152 Content Per Day: 4.58 Reputation: 27,851 Days Won: 327 Joined: 08/03/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 11, 2014 Blessings everyone... Lol,I did not read all the posts but I am wondering how the conversation went from a pastor supporting local hunters & gun owners by raffling off a rifle went to first fruit offerings??Praise the Lord! Upstate NY(Troy) is out in the woods & I think most everyone hunts or has a rifle for varmints......I think the worst part is that someone got the media involved & perhaps it was the pastor,clearly he is looking to take a political stand & in this case it sends out the wrong message & gives people(non-believers)the wrong impression. In a town like that I can understand a donated rifle being the prize in a church raffle but don't agree with the pastor making a show of it...............They could have had their little raffle & did not have to advertise,probably every member has a gun in the house...... With love-in Christ,Kwik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted March 11, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.92 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted March 11, 2014 Blessings everyone... Lol,I did not read all the posts but I am wondering how the conversation went from a pastor supporting local hunters & gun owners by raffling off a rifle went to first fruit offerings??Praise the Lord! Upstate NY(Troy) is out in the woods & I think most everyone hunts or has a rifle for varmints......I think the worst part is that someone got the media involved & perhaps it was the pastor,clearly he is looking to take a political stand & in this case it sends out the wrong message & gives people(non-believers)the wrong impression. In a town like that I can understand a donated rifle being the prize in a church raffle but don't agree with the pastor making a show of it...............They could have had their little raffle & did not have to advertise,probably every member has a gun in the house...... With love-in Christ,Kwik Thank-you for perspective, Kwik! This is what happens when people inject their own side political and theological side issue biases that become a life of their own. But you bring a good point. The state of New York, aside from Albany, is a much different make-up than New York City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts