Zemke Posted January 15, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,028 Content Per Day: 0.23 Reputation: 451 Days Won: 1 Joined: 01/24/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 15, 2015 There may come a time when any "official" organization of believers will be a compromise. The answer is simply non official organizations. Homes, basements, park pavilions, backyards, barns, fields etc. Once a month rent a hall for a Saturday day long fellowship with the county believers. A Christianity will be lived more outside the church organization with all the constant program functioning because there won't be much of one. A whole new paradigm of organization. FREEDOM. It could be grand people. Taxes taxes stink'n taxes. Forget about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle Posted January 15, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 764 Topics Per Day: 0.18 Content Count: 7,626 Content Per Day: 1.80 Reputation: 1,559 Days Won: 44 Joined: 10/03/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 15, 2015 I find this whole premise of this thread humorous. I don't believe the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold a ruling or law where churches who didn't perform same-sex marriages would loose their tax exempt status. God bless, GE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Eye Posted January 15, 2015 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 118 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 52 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/20/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 I find this whole premise of this thread humorous. I don't believe the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold a ruling or law where churches who didn't perform same-sex marriages would loose their tax exempt status. God bless, GE You must be young in age. I remember many Christians saying the same thing about abortion in 1972. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I find this whole premise of this thread humorous. I don't believe the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold a ruling or law where churches who didn't perform same-sex marriages would loose their tax exempt status. God bless, GE You must be young in age. I remember many Christians saying the same thing about abortion in 1972. Now that's funny. GE, young of age? LOL (No offence Golden Eagle.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryt Posted January 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 52 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,230 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 124 Days Won: 1 Joined: 08/22/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/03/1952 Share Posted January 16, 2015 At my Tuesday men's group, we discussed rules the government has, will, or could impose on the church, such as homosexual marriages, etc.. It all comes down to the tax exempt status. I proposed that if a church was unwilling to obey by the rules, then they should give up their tax exempt status, and then the rules would not apply to them. Nobody wanted to hear that. But what is right and what is wrong? Is it right to keep the status, don't pay taxes, and then refuse to obey the rules? Is that the example a church organization, representing Jesus Christ, should give to the world? It is not about tax exempt. It is about the church incorporating and thus registering as a paper entity in order to procure certain priveleges. Once a church incorporates it becomes voluntarily subject to all the laws governing corporations. There are already several instances where 501.c3 churches have been shut down for various reasons because they refused to conply with the corporate laws. The powers that be are biding their time until they and start forcing churches to submit to the corporate laws. Some will go underground and some will submit and start performing according to the corporate statutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joylynn Posted January 21, 2015 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 11 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 2 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/20/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) I do not believe that the 501C3 status was actually created to benefit churches, but to control them. We've been handed what we were told was a benefit, but it was actually a muzzle. I am not so sure that the church will go underground, but may instead return to what it should have always been. Edited January 21, 2015 by joylynn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjp34652 Posted January 21, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 17 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 448 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 156 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/19/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 21, 2015 At my Tuesday men's group, we discussed rules the government has, will, or could impose on the church, such as homosexual marriages, etc.. It all comes down to the tax exempt status. I proposed that if a church was unwilling to obey by the rules, then they should give up their tax exempt status, and then the rules would not apply to them. Nobody wanted to hear that. But what is right and what is wrong? Is it right to keep the status, don't pay taxes, and then refuse to obey the rules? Is that the example a church organization, representing Jesus Christ, should give to the world? 501 c.3 tax exempt status is a control device, not a favor granted by the government. It's purpose is to subvert the gospel message and inflict its religious citizens with a fear of government reprisal. So it is intended and so it has succeeded. The government will not revoke tax exempt status because it creates a convenient leash to restrain those who might speak against it. According to the constitution, the government has no right to tax religions or prohibit their operation in any way. Of course, the US threw out the constitution years ago, so the idealistic application is a matter for academic discussion - as is being done in this thread. The proposed questions are meant to lead responders into a dilemma between obeying the government or giving up tax exempt status. Neither was intended by the founding fathers and neither is either moral or legal. Tax exempt status is not a favor, it is a right. The free exercise of that right shall not be infringed upon by the government. The exercise of religious convictions is a matter of high moral as well as legal principle. It used to be considered a right in America so much so that the subject never arose for discussion. The fact that the subject has indeed been broached here as well as many others forums suggests that the United States is no longer a nation which holds the free exercise of religion in high regard. In my opinion it is the right as well as the duty of every Christian citizen to criticize the government, its leadership and its policies whenever and wherever they conflict with the Will of God as revealed in the Holy Bible.(*) IF GOD DOES NOT JUDGE AMERICA, HE WILL HAVE TO APOLOGIZE TO SODOM AND GOMORRAH. and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft... (*) It has been suggested by many fanatical supporters of tyranny that Romans 13:1 justifies the "my country right or wrong" attitude with regard to US government policy. It should interest the reader to know that in Russia, now led by Vladimir Putin - a man with a strong Orthodox background, the use of the exact same scripture verse is used to support the policies of the Russian Federation. God does not favor a nation simply because it's people use scripture verses to justify wickedness in high places. "Christ does not vindicate a race or a nation. It is the sovereignty of God which is vindicated." - Reinhold Neibuhr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
another_poster Posted January 21, 2015 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 336 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 129 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/14/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 21, 2015 people have suggested here that churches should pay tax. Of course they haven't thought it through very well. That would mean that any mission trip overseas or donations to overseas work would be a tax deduction and all the costs that we don't get to claim now will suddenly be claimable as a tax deduction meaning most churches would pay no tax while costing the govt a lot to administer tax affairs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zemke Posted January 21, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,028 Content Per Day: 0.23 Reputation: 451 Days Won: 1 Joined: 01/24/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 21, 2015 I do not believe that the 501C3 status was actually created to benefit churches, but to control them. We've been handed what we were told was a benefit, but it was actually a muzzle. I am not so sure that the church will go underground, but may instead return to what it should have always been. Well as with many things in this world there are two sides to the coin. I know of an orphanage who has been able to receive life saving and changing procedures and drugs through corporate donation because of 501C3 status. Up to this point there have been no demands on literature preached or printed. As soon as a stipulation on those things would happen they would drop the status but it has been a blessing up to this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amor Posted February 14, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted February 14, 2015 I find this whole premise of this thread humorous. I don't believe the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold a ruling or law where churches who didn't perform same-sex marriages would loose their tax exempt status. God bless, GE You must be young in age. I remember many Christians saying the same thing about abortion in 1972. Now that's funny. GE, young of age? LOL (No offence Golden Eagle.) Your comment would seem to imply that churches on the USA are obliged yo perform abortions. As thing is not the case, what is the point you're trying to make? A Question to tiger eye,obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts