End Times and Current Events

General Category => Churchianity => Topic started by: Mark on February 05, 2011, 04:03:25 pm



Title: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on February 05, 2011, 04:03:25 pm
STATE-OWNED CHURCHES ARE KILLING AMERICA
By Chuck Baldwin

America was birthed in the spirit of liberty and baptized in the blood of patriots and tyrants. Leading the charge in America's fight for independence was a courageous group of patriot-preachers that came to be known as the "Black Regiment." I have written several columns on this subject. Suffice it to say here that I invite readers to take a look at my Black Regiment web page to learn more about this early American phenomenon. There is little doubt that without these stalwart Christian pastors, this country would not have come into existence. (I extended this call for a modern-day Black Regiment 5 years before Glenn Beck ever mentioned it.)

See my Black Regiment page here.

Plus, to read my column regarding the Black Regiment that was published in The New American magazine in 2009, click here.

So, what did these colonial preachers have that today's preachers don't? The better question might be: what did these colonial preachers NOT have that today's preachers do? The answer? Two things: 1) an IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt corporation status, and 2) a 50-year misinterpretation of Romans chapter 13.

The now infamous 501(c)(3) section of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) goes back to 1936 (the seeds of this Venus Fly Trap date back to 1872). But then-Senator Lyndon Johnson was the Dr. Frankenstein who, in 1954, unleashed this monster upon America. His motivation was: he did not like the way pastors and churches were opposing his liberal agenda, and he wanted to use the power of law to silence them. He, therefore, introduced verbiage to the IRC that churches were prohibited from influencing political legislation and supporting political campaigns, or risk losing their tax-exempt status.

Of course, colonial pastors didn't have to worry about their churches being "incorporated" as State-created (and controlled) entities, or about IRS agents intimidating them regarding what they could or could not say. In early America, preachers were free men; they could say whatever they darned well pleased. Gasp! Beyond that, virtually everyone regarded preachers as being "God's men," not the "servants of men."

Today, however, the average pastor has become the servant of the State and the church he pastors, more often than not, has become a creature of the State. It is an absolute fact that State-owned churches are killing America!

Dick Greb of the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship in Westminster, Maryland, wrote: "Many Americans find it disturbing that some of our churches today are little more than milquetoast corporations that fear our federal government more than the great I AM. Moreover, it can even be said that some preachers have the appearance of cringing, 'politically correct' cowards, rather than committed Godly men of fortitude with backbone, such as those we read of in the Bible." (Source: Greb, Dick. "The 501(c)(3) Hallucination: A Bane to Liberty." Reasonable Action Issue #244 Winter 2003.)

Dear reader, you can take this to the bank: the vast majority of pastors and board members of these 501(c)(3) corporations, when push comes to shove (and it always does), will demonstrate unconditional loyalty to the State. Plus, they will compromise or sacrifice any and every Bible doctrine or principle in order to preserve their tax-exempt status and stay on the smiley side of the IRC. They will also throw anyone under the old proverbial bus who might risk them falling out of favor with the IRS. (I can give painful and personal testimony to that fact!) Greb is right! Many, or most, of today's pastors and church officers fear the federal government far more than they fear God.

Not only did colonial preachers not have to contend with putting their churches under some State-controlled corporation, they would never have allowed it to happen! Can one imagine John Leland, Jonas Clark, or John Witherspoon being told by any State official what he could or could not say, or what his church could or could not do? What a joke! These men were willing to go to prison or even the grave in order to remain faithful to their spiritual calling and to their political and moral convictions!

The other thing that colonial preachers did not suffer from was a 50-year indoctrination of a misinterpretation of Romans 13.

This "Submit-to-the-government-no-matter-what" doctrine (using Romans 13 as the pretext) is a satanically inspired lie designed to turn free men and women into slaves of the state! Students of history know that Adolf Hitler encouraged German pastors and churches to promote this same fallacious philosophy among the German people. Gee! I wonder why? And according to Erwin Lutzer's book, "Hitler's Cross" (must reading, I might add), out of the more than 14,000 evangelical churches and pastors in Germany at the time, only about 800 remained faithful to Scripture and opposed Hitler's brand of state worship. If my math is correct, that's about 5%. And it would not surprise me if 5% is about the percentage of pastors and churches in America today that are opposing this modern-day worship of the state.

At this point, instead of embellishing upon Romans 13, I am going to insert a commercial. I began a series of messages on Romans 13 last Sunday at Liberty Fellowship in Kalispell, Montana. In fact, by the time you read this, Part 1 of my message on Romans 13 will be available online.

To view my message, "The Truth About Romans 13, Part 1," click here.

I will continue my series on Romans 13 this Sunday, February 6, 2011. I invite readers to watch this address live on the Internet. View this livestreaming broadcast, here.

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." So said Edmund Burke. And, unfortunately, the good men that are mostly doing nothing and allowing evil to triumph in our land are the good men (and women) of America's churches who have either been intimidated by the 501(c)(3) tax-exempt corporation status, or who have been put into a sheepish, servile, Satan-induced coma from an overdose of misapplied Romans 13 poison.

To quote the famous Bible commentator, Matthew Henry, "It is the devil that stirs up his instruments, wicked men [in government or without], to persecute the people of God; tyrants and persecutors are the devil's tools, though they gratify their own sinful malignity, and know not that they are actuated by a diabolical malice." (Source: Matthew Henry's Commentaries on the Bible, notes on Revelation 2:10)

Yes, the Black Regiment preachers of colonial America helped lead America's fight for freedom and independence. But, they did not have their hands out to the IRS, or their minds and hearts numbed into apathy and indifference by decades of misuse and abuse of Romans chapter 13.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin635.htm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on February 05, 2011, 04:06:04 pm
Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report
02/15/09

The L.A. Times has just reported that local ministers are being asked to spread the word about the upcoming digital TV switch. Standing in the pulpit of Mount Moriah Baptist Church in South Los Angeles FCC Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein asked the Baptist Ministries Conference of Los Angeles (nearly 50 African American preachers) to include information on the June 12 digital TV switch in their sermons. Woodie Ramsey, a deacon at Southern Missionary Baptist Church of South East Los Angeles, said the ministers were prepared to spread the word: "It's incumbent upon each church to take care of the needs of its ministry, and this is just one more need for our people," he said. "We'll do our part." Meanwhile "The Worldwide Church of God" has refused to divulge how many of its pastors are now on the FEMA payroll, after a member expressed concerns about religious leaders being used to condition their congregation to accept the declaration of martial law. In a May 2006 a story first broke (& has since been confirmed) the shocking news that FEMA was training pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to obey the government in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation. A KSLA news report confirmed that 'Clergy Response Teams' are being trained by the federal government to quell dissent and pacify citizens to obey the government in the event of a declaration of martial law. We will also be covering many more topics that relate to this subject.


Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report (Part 1)
http://www.mp3.cftresources.com/2009_02-15_1__Alarming%20501c3%20Church%20Report%20Part%201.mp3

Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report (Part 2)
http://www.mp3.cftresources.com/2009_02-15_2__Alarming%20501c3%20Church%20Report%20Part%202.mp3

Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report PDF
http://www.pdf.cftresources.com/2009_02-15__Disturbing%20501c3%20Corporate%20Church%20Report.pdf

02/22/09
Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report (Part 3)
http://www.mp3.cftresources.com/2009_02-22_1__Alarming%20501c3%20Church%20Report%20Part%203.mp3

Disturbing 501c3 Corporate Church Report (Part 4)
http://www.mp3.cftresources.com/2009_02-22_2__Alarming%20501c3%20Church%20Report%20Part%204.mp3

02/22/09 current events

In this teaching we will be discussing the following topics: Catholicism reintroduces Indulgences to get out of purgatory quicker, Jehovah Witnesses failed prophecies, Islamic deceptions, KJV affirmed, Hindu Militants offer 250.00 to kill Christian pastors.

http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1061


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 05, 2011, 05:41:55 pm
Here's one thing I've noticed at the average 501c3 church - during the service, the pastor, choir director, and other ministers will play tag team throughout at least 1/2 of it, and then the pastor doesn't come in to preach when the service has only 20-30 minutes left. Overall, the pastor's sermon may be solid, but when your time is limited to preach, there's going to be ALOT that you WON'T be able to say.

For example, the average John Weaver preaching time is 1 hour. Yes, ONE HOUR. He covers every little gritty detail in his sermons.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on February 06, 2011, 05:47:48 am
The apostacy of the 501(c)3 church system I believe is directly related to Jesus' warning about the end times, and may in part be the abomination of desolation spiritually. Is not a "works" doctrine a form of claiming one's own efforts does things when it is actually God that gives the increase? Would not that be a man standing in the holy place (a fake Christian preacher preaching false doctrines within the body of Christ of believers) and proclaiming himself (claiming a title of preacher/expert, and encouraging members to do deeds like "winning souls" and working as a volunteer for some non-profit, etc) God?


15   When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 
16   Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 
17   Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 
18   Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 
19   And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 
20   But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: 
21   For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 
22   And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. 
23   Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not. 
24   For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 
25   Behold, I have told you before.
Matthew 24:15-25 (KJB)





Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 06, 2011, 08:02:51 am
The apostacy of the 501(c)3 church system I believe is directly related to Jesus' warning about the end times, and may in part be the abomination of desolation spiritually. Is not a "works" doctrine a form of claiming one's own efforts does things when it is actually God that gives the increase? Would not that be a man standing in the holy place (a fake Christian preacher preaching false doctrines within the body of Christ of believers) and proclaiming himself (claiming a title of preacher/expert, and encouraging members to do deeds like "winning souls" and working as a volunteer for some non-profit, etc) God?

I got that impression from my previous pastor - yes, he "seemed" like a "godly" man, but at the same time, he was really being puffed up by the Baptist big wig leaders(including the seminary President) in the city, the ladies in particular were just gushing over him, pretty much everyone thought he was some great leader who could do no wrong, etc, etc.

Guess what - as time went on as I moved out of the city, I started to find out things about him I never even thought about. One time a couple of years ago in a radio interview, when asked about what is that blessed hope, part of his response was, "dawning of a new day", without even mentioning Jesus Christ. And then it was only a couple of days ago when I was looking for something on the internet, an article popped up in my lap(that I had no intention of searching for, nor concerning him as well) over some interfaith group in my previous city. Not only is he a member of it, but he is the CHAIRMAN of it. I mean all this time, people like the seminary President puffing him up as some great godly man, but did NOT see THIS?

Anyhow, when you posted this, it reminded me of this.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on February 22, 2011, 05:41:16 am
THIRTY WAYS THAT THE IRS TRIES TO CONTROL PREACHERS AND CHURCHES IN AMERICA
By Greg J. Dixon, Pastor Emeritus
Indianapolis Baptist Temple

Each of these propositions has been taken from IRS Publication 1828, Tax Guide For Churches and Other Religious Organizations, two letters from the Regional Commissioner of the IRS Cincinnati that the Indianapolis received through discovery, the twenty-two interrogatories that were included with the letters, and the 4 inch file that accompanied the letter with the news clippings on the church and pastor dating back to 1971.
The following demands are what the Internal Revenue Service requires of churches to maintain exemption from Federal Income Tax.

1. The church must have a ―distinct legal existence – According to IRS publication #557 that legal existence would date from incorporation, page 3. Therefore a church must be incorporated.
2. The church must admit that it exists by privilege granted by the IRS (tax-exempt) rather than by right granted by God through the Holy Scriptures, (non-taxable) recognizing another Head (State) rather than Christ.
3. The church must have a ―recognized creed and form of worship‖. The IRS must approve (recognize) the creed (belief) and form (manner) of worship.
4. The church must have a ―definite and distinct ecclesiastical government.
5. The church must have a ―formal code of doctrine and discipline.
6. The church must have a ―distinct religious history. This is denominational.
7. The church must be an ―organization.
8. The church must be an ―organization of ordained ministers.
9. The church must have these ordained ministers who are ―selected after completing prescribed courses of study. Like the Apostles, who had only ―been with Jesus, local Baptist churches many times approve pastors who are not educated at all in any formal way.
10. The church must have ―established places of worship. True churches many times have no permanent address (place of worship), but because of persecution and other reasons have moved from place to place.
11. The church must submit to the IRS by paying a user fee (tribute) for tax-exempt status. This would be contrary to the Scriptures, and U.S., and all State Constitutions.
12. The church must be engaged in activities that further ―exclusively public Purposes rather than Private interests. The true church of Christ exists for the personal and private interest of Christ her Head, not the State.
13. The church must answer to the IRS as to its ―daily activities.
14. The IRS controls all financial activities of the church including source, donors of $100.00 or more, and expenditures.
15. The church may not use cash, or it will be suspected of money laundering. All books and records must be available for IRS inspection at all times.
16. The church must act in the capacity of an informer to the RIS as to who serves at the church in the capacity of ―pastors, associates, counselors, educational directors, teachers, office help, clerical, and maintenance personnel.
17. The church must inform the IRS as to who the church helps in the area of charity.
18. The church must inform the IRS as to love gifts to evangelists and missionaries over $600.00 by filing a Form 1099 on each including those who are regularly supported.
19. The church must use only IRS approved methods of fund raising.
20. The pastor of the church must not preach against the tax system of the U.S. or say anything against the practices and tactics of the IRS.
21. The pastor of the church must answer to the IRS and give unlimited submission to the civil magistrate pertaining to all laws, federal, state and local, including ―Public Policy.
22. The pastor of the church must advocate, promote, and actively encourage race mixing if the church has an educational ministry.
23. The pastor of the church cannot influence legislation concerning licensure of church ministries.
24. The pastor of the church cannot engage in political activity in regard to opposing pornography.
25. The pastor of the church cannot actively support legislation that declares that children belong to their parents not the state.
26. The pastor of the church cannot actively support legislation opposing a state lottery or other gambling laws.
27. The pastor of the church cannot advocate support of the U.s. or State Constitutions as the Supreme Law of the U.S. or the various states.
28. The pastor of the church cannot actively participate in opposing the public school system.
29. The pastor of the church cannot declare publicly that the church is to obey God, not government.
30. The pastor of the church cannot oppose laws legalizing sodomy.

Conclusion: The entire forty-seven page booklet is available for a gift of any amount including postage and shipping through:

Temple Books
P.O. Box 11
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
E-mail: drgregdixon@earthlink.net
Web: www.unregisteredbaptistfellowship.com

PDF from Scott, loaded with 501c3 info.
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/End-Time-Current-Events-2-20-11.pdf


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on March 01, 2011, 05:32:47 am
This right here is a perfect example of why you do not join the IRS controlled 501c3.

Now government wants to control tidiness of churches
Fight over exempt status focuses on clutter at worship center

A New Hampshire city official has taken the old saying "cleanliness is next to godliness" one step too far in a battle now raging over the tax status of a church building, determining that cleanliness is godliness, according to a legal team in the midst of the fight.

The dispute concerns Liberty Assembly of God, now called Destiny Christian Church, over its decision to use its building to feed the hungry and help the needy, and the resulting impact on its building.

It appears a city official didn't like clutter, and concluded the church couldn't be religious with it there.

It was several years ago that the foundations of the problem were set in place, when Concord, N.H., officials decided that if the church used its building to house the homeless and meet missionaries' needs, it would no longer be a church because those weren't "religious" purposes.

A subsequent room-by-room inspection of the facility was conducted by city officials, and their determination was that such activities were not religious, so the legal experts with the Alliance Defense Fund jumped into action. They now have pending a tax appeal for the church's 2008 taxes as well as a lawsuit over the 2009 taxes.

A ruling in the 2008 case could be coming any day, but it's uncertain whether that will resolve the complications that arose following comments from Kathryn Temchack, the city's director of real estate assessments, who said the church must be stripped of its full tax exemption because its rooms were not clean.

(Story continues below)

Read more: Now government wants to control tidiness of churches http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=269337#ixzz1FLY3lskI


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 02, 2011, 03:37:25 am
That's an interesting case because it mixes two different levels of government involved. But for that NH case, it's more of a local zoning/permit issue, as 501(c)3 is federal only, though all levels of government go by a groups federal tax status to define what kind of organization it is.

In this case, local government is getting involved based on that groups local zoning/health permit issues. Whether or not a group is non-profit, they still must meet local zoning and health laws. If the local board finds that group was operating a shelter and not a church, they would consider them in violation of zoning laws relationg to oeprating a shelter, which really means nothing about their tax status per se'.

Over the years, I've been over this type stuff again and again in my mind in prayer, and there is ultimately no avoiding it, the government and the world in general. They now have us backed into a corner because a group of people cannot operate anything without the government having a say due to their laws that are in place concerning taxes and business laws and permits/licenses, public/private property, etc., and you have to deal with federal, state, county, and city levels of government.

I know of no place on earth that a human being can go to and not be "subject" to some other people's laws. Every place on earth is now owned by somebody, or it's a collective ownership of the world's governments like Antarctica. The governments of the world look at it as you being on their property, regardless of whether or not you agree with them. And the world considers it perfectly legal to have you removed from what they consider their property, or even your very own government, as we see with Libya.

Caesar doesn't care what the topic of the group's focus is, so long as that group complies with the laws of the worldly government, be it health codes for operating a public kitchen, to operating a shelter, non-profit status, etc. If they just had a building that was used as a place to make meals for the homeless, then the government could stick it's nose in and could claim the group was operating a restaurant without the proper permits and health department inspections and whatever else they came up with, be it county building codes, health codes, city codes.

So what does a group do? There has even been many cases of government trying to impose it's rules that govern operating some type of business on small Christian gatherings in someone's home.

I've said for a long time now that I believe that we are not to run a church group as the world does because I see no call for it in scripture, and the more the worldly governments assert their dominion over the activities of the individual and group, the more it is requiring believers to withdraw from their antichrist system.

The world isn't going to suddenly stop enforcing it's will on the public. According to scripture it will actually get worse. So trying to fight that beast system at it's own game is futile. If you play in their world, they expect, no demand, that you paly by their rules, and their rules in the world are based on "eye for an eye". Expect it. This is why I believe that Jesus said to render unto Casear or render unto God. It's a person's choice to render to one or the other, but you can't do both, as Jesus says that "...cannot serve God and mammon". To attempt to do both is to me being double-minded.

If a group goes by what the world says about people gathering in a given location, then they are "subject" to the laws of government by virtue they have contacted government saying they are doing a given thing as a group. The government in turn says you need a permit, or fill out this and that, etc. and off you go into the world, trying to render unto Caesar things that are Casear's, only to find there's no end to it unless you completely detach from it altogether, and start rendering unto God.

The world goes by the law, not by grace. Scripture says that we ought to obey God rather than men.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 15, 2011, 11:34:23 pm
If I understand this correctly, can a church be a 501c3, but UNREGISTERED, meaning that it didn't register with the IRS to form itself like a corporation to get these special privileges like limited liability, but in exchange have to report everything like donors to the church to the government?

So what I'm asking is that 501c3 registereds = being like a corporation entity, but 501c3 unregistereds = pews can right off their offerings, but that's the only privilege?

I was just looking on the IRS web site, and they put out a big list of all the charatible organizations that are eligible for tax deduction contributions - however, I was surprised some churches that I've attended that allowed tax deduction Sch A's were NOT on that list on the IRS web site.(ie-giving me the impression that the IRS Pub 78, section 170(c) was listing ONLY the REGISTERED churches)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 16, 2011, 03:45:24 pm
This is what I was talking about - saw this youtube video last night, and pretty much this guy says ALL churches are 501c3s, HOWEVER, it's the ones that are REGISTERED that are treated as corporations.(meaning they're the ones that have to pretty much file tons of paperwork and report everything to the government agencies)

FWIW - I've seen a few of this guy's videos - he seems like a Christian that bears good fruit. Was wondering if what he's saying is correct or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3nG-KM2wd8


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on April 17, 2011, 04:54:54 am
I think you're wondering if a person can be a little pregnant. The whole point is about "churches" serving Caesar, regardless of their paperwork they have filed with Caesar.

If a group of people have an organization that is recognized by the government as some type business activity, then that group of people is messing up in my opinion. First, they shouldn't have any organization filed with the government, and second, I don't believe there is scriptural support for any formal group meeting in the first place. I firmly believe it was never suppose to go beyond people gathering in each other's houses for local fellowship.

Instead of people gathering in a single location where the local group of believers have recognized elders, I believe the elders are suppose to be going out and meeting with the local believers in their own homes. And any support for the full-time elders in the ministry is for their personal support, not supporting a building fund, paving parking lots, sending people on missions to foreign countries to feed poor heathen kids, etc. It's all suppose to be local, and the Word spreads locally from house to house.

Just imagine the local group of believers supporting just the living expenses of their elders only, such as housing costs and food. But no, the greed of man has turned into a full blown business operation where they are sharing the spoils with Caesar.

Scripture says to do the work of an evangilist, right? How is it being an evangilist if you're hanging out in a building every weekend?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Christian40 on June 26, 2011, 08:59:38 pm
“In the matter of changing religion, State favors are stronger than penalties.” http://hushmoney.org/

The Framers of America's Founding Documents relied heavily upon the writings of the political philosopher, Baron de Montesquieu. Typical of Montesquieu's brilliant insight, he once wrote that:

“A more certain way to attack religion is by favor, by the comforts of life, by the hope of wealth; not by what reminds one of it, but by what makes one forget it; not by what makes one indignant, but by what makes men lukewarm, when other passions act on our souls, and those which religion inspires are silent. In the matter of changing religion, State favors are stronger than penalties.”
The Spirit of the Laws, Baron de Montesquieu (1748)

Acceptance of State favors has had disastrous consequences on the churches in America. The church has been effectively silenced (or as Rev. D. James Kennedy put it, "gagged"). Now the disastrous consequences are being felt by the entire nation.
“The IRS has succeeded in gagging Christians.”

Rev. D. James Kennedy has stated:
“The federal government has proved a tremendous impediment to the ongoing work of Christians. In all the laws that they have passed against Christian schools, gagging the church, taxation, and all kinds of things that they have done, they have made it harder for the church to exercise its prerogatives and to preach the gospel.

"Take the last presidential election. There were numbers of things that I knew that I was never able to say from the pulpit because if you advance the cause of one candidate or impede the cause of the other you can lose your tax exemption. That would have been disastrous not only for the church, but for our school and our seminary, everything. So you are gagged. You cannot do that. The IRS, a branch of our government, has succeeded in gagging Christians."
Is there a remedy? Yes! The church can be re-empowered and regain the former glory and influence she once held in America. But in order to do so the church must stop acting as an underling, as a subordinate, as a dependent, of the State. The church must cease asking for State favors.
Because that for his name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles. (3John 1:7)
Rather than being a "favor" or a "benefit", what the church has done through State incorporation and seeking the IRS' 501c3 status, is it traded its birthright for a mess of State-licensed pottage.
The church has taken the hushmoney. But there's a way out. The church can give it back! The church can give back the government "benefits" that no church ever needed in the first place.
By spending a little time here, you'll learn some important facts, problems, and myths about the corporate 501c3 status. You'll discover what happens to churches and ministries when they ask for these State favors and operate as "nonprofit tax-exempt religious corporations." You're likely to learn some things that will shock and amaze you.
You'll also learn why it's completely unnecessary for a church to incorporate and become 501c3, and why most of what you've been told about the so-called "benefits" of incorporation and 501c3, as it applies to churches, is a pack of lies, and that these lies were fabricated by attorneys and accountants to create a multi-billion dollar "church compliance" industry.

Under the Articles link at the top of this page you'll find some thought-provoking incorporated 501c3 church articles that have appeared in newspapers and magazines; and there are also a few audio files of radio interviews that have been done on this issue.
http://hushmoney.org/

Are you trying to get reliable facts on whether you should:
501c3 a Church
501c3 a Ministry
Incorporate a Church
Incorporate a Ministry
Become Tax Exempt
Become Tax Deductible
Start a Nonprofit Religious Organization

Are you looking for trustworthy information on how to:
Start a Church
Start a Ministry
Start a Home-Church
Start a Free-Church
Empower Your Church
Would you like all that without having to hire an attorney or CPA? You've come to the right place!

http://hushmoney.org/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 27, 2011, 07:04:55 am
IRS asked to silence ministry's local efforts

An El Paso, Texas-based ministry is the target of a complaint from Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The organization wants the Internal Revenue Service to zero in on Tom Brown Ministries.

Americans United (AU) is complaining that the ministry has had a role in the effort to recall El Paso Mayor John Cook and city council members Steve Ortega and Susie Byrd. The ministry, according to AU, "appears to have run afoul of federal tax law" by engaging in "partisan politics" and misusing the ministry's resources.

Pastor Tom Brown's response? "You just have this group that is anti-religious, very liberal," he tells OneNewsNow. "They are known for attacking people of conservative values as well as those who are Bible believers -- so they're just trying to intimidate us to try to get our voice silenced. But their intimidation is not going to work."
 
Americans United alleges the church is violating the tax code for religious organizations. Brown admits he has worked as an individual to recall Cook, but not on behalf of the ministry.
 
"I as a person definitely have been working tirelessly trying to get him recalled," says the pastor. "As far as the church, church members wanted to participate in the recall -- and since the IRS doesn't forbid recall petitions, there's nothing illegal that we're doing."
 
Brown stresses that churches need not be intimidated by anti-religion groups and need to speak up for themselves.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=1399126


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on July 27, 2011, 03:06:12 pm
What is AU, the alter ego of the ADL?  ::)

But thanks should go to them for bringing up the point because that begs the question what is the correct doctrine on the matter. Unfortunately for both sides, they are both exposed as violating sound doctrine. The AU for not believing Jesus, and Brown for meddling in the secular world instead of preaching the gospel to them. As scripture says, he needs to come out from among them and be seperate. Who cares about secular politics? It's all going to fail because it rejects God. They are of the world and the world hears them, but we are not of the world.

Jesus says to let the dead bury their dead!


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 02, 2011, 06:02:23 am
Tennessee Pentecostal Church in Tax Exemption Legal Battle
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/delicious/gqlf/~3/dRPb8TkxQ0A/31896-tennessee-pentecostal-church-in-tax-exemption-legal-battle

A lawsuit is challenging Davidson County's refusal to rescind a property tax assessed on a local church. Apparently oblivious that churches across the nation have used book and athletic facilities to minister to their communities for decades, officials levied a partial property tax on Christ Church Pentecostal’s bookstore and gymnasium under the argument that they are not an integral part of the church’s ministry.

“Churches shouldn’t be treated differently than other entities in Tennessee—such as college bookstores, family wellness centers and hospital gift shops—that are tax exempt by law,” says Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. “It’s a widely known fact that churches across America effectively use facilities such as gyms and bookstores for clear, religious purposes and are exempt from property taxes just like other organizations that serve the community—often at a loss. The bookstore at the church actually loses money every year because of their desire for people to have materials even in needy situations. Neither the bookstore nor the gym are operated for any other reason than ministry and outreach to the community.”

Luk 20:25   And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's. 



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 16, 2011, 04:35:05 am
Luk 20:25   And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

Poll: pastors want IRS out of pulpit

Protestant pastors overwhelmingly agree government should not attempt to regulate pastors' sermons through re-evaluation of a church's tax exemptions, according to a new survey by LifeWay Research.

The research, sponsored by the Alliance Defense Fund, followed a related study conducted by LifeWay Research in October 2010 that found Protestant pastors also largely believe candidates for public office should not be endorsed from the pulpit.

In the new study, conducted in August 2011, 79 percent of 1,000 Protestant pastors surveyed strongly disagreed -- and another 7 percent somewhat disagreed -- with the statement: "The government should regulate sermons by revoking a church's tax exemption if its pastor approves of or criticizes candidates based on the church's moral beliefs or theology."

The earlier 2010 survey of 1,000 Protestant pastors found 84 percent disagree -- 70 percent strongly and 14 percent somewhat -- with the statement, "I believe pastors should endorse candidates for public office from the pulpit."

A June 2008 LifeWay Research survey also found 87 percent of American adults disagreed with the statement, "I believe it is appropriate for pastors to publicly endorse candidates for public office during a church service." In an October 2008 study, less than 3 percent of Protestant pastors agreed that they had publicly endorsed candidates for public office during a church service that year.

Religion has emerged as a prominent issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. Reporters are asking candidates questions about their religious faith and how it relates to their approach to governance.

"Pastors and church people have strong feelings when it comes to moral issues that some consider political, and historically churches have played a significant role in shaping political opinions," said Ed Stetzer, vice president of research and ministry development at LifeWay Christian Resources. "Pastors, however, clearly don't think the pulpit is the place for politics, nor do they think the church is the place for the IRS."

http://srnnews.townhall.com/news/faith/2011/09/14/poll_pastors_want_irs_out_of_pulpit


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on September 16, 2011, 12:26:54 pm
They are correct, that there is no room for worldly politics within the body of Christ, but then those "churches" are of the world, so they are subject to Caesar. You cannot serve two masters.


Title: Government Panel to control future of Churches...
Post by: Mark on September 19, 2011, 07:13:16 am
Evangelical Council: Church Tax Breaks, Compensations Scrutinized

In an effort to more clearly define and look into possible changes in legislation regarding tax breaks and compensations for churches and nonprofit groups, the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA) has appointed a trio of panels.

The ECFA announced last week that representatives from religious groups, the broader nonprofit sector and the legal community have been appointed to the panels that will work with the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations.

The commission was formed following a report issued by U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in January that focused on the financial practices of six high-profile Christian ministries, ECFA said. Allegations included perceptions of excessive spending on high-end travel, accommodations, and property, according to a commission member.

After Grassley released the findings of his three-year inquiry, rather than seek legal action, the senator asked ECFA to lead an independent national review that includes making recommendations on accountability and policy issues affecting religious and other nonprofit organizations.

Florida pastor and one of President Obama’s spiritual advisers, Dr. Joel Hunter, who is a member of the ECFA commission, told The Christian Post that he would like to see the panels discover that new legislation is not necessary.

In an effort to more clearly define and look into possible changes in legislation regarding tax breaks and compensations for churches and nonprofit groups, the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA) has appointed a trio of panels.

The ECFA announced last week that representatives from religious groups, the broader nonprofit sector and the legal community have been appointed to the panels that will work with the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations.

The commission was formed following a report issued by U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in January that focused on the financial practices of six high-profile Christian ministries, ECFA said. Allegations included perceptions of excessive spending on high-end travel, accommodations, and property, according to a commission member.

After Grassley released the findings of his three-year inquiry, rather than seek legal action, the senator asked ECFA to lead an independent national review that includes making recommendations on accountability and policy issues affecting religious and other nonprofit organizations.

Florida pastor and one of President Obama’s spiritual advisers, Dr. Joel Hunter, who is a member of the ECFA commission, told The Christian Post that he would like to see the panels discover that new legislation is not necessary.

“We have been given the opportunity to gather this kind of information so that we could not just automatically go toward legislative resolutions, but rather we could do some self-examination and try to clarify what was reasonable and what was intended for religious exemptions by the IRS and by the customs we now have in the U.S.,” Hunter said.

“Part of this idea [of tax breaks and compensations] is that the churches and other non-profits contribute so much to the public well-being. They contribute so many services, and so much benefit that they more than make up for any exemptions and taxes that they have.”

The ECFA stated that the issues before the commission include whether:

    churches should be more accountable to the federal government;
    legislation is needed to curb perceived abuses of the clergy housing allowance exclusion;
    the current prohibition against political campaign intervention by churches and other nonprofits should be repealed or modified;
    the rules for determining the reasonableness of nonprofit executive compensation should be tightened;
    penalties should be expanded for nonprofits and their leaders who engage in prohibited activities.

Hunter said that the commission and panel studies should also include educating people on the positive aspects of giving faith-based groups and nonprofits certain tax breaks.

“Our responsibility is to continue to tell the story of just exactly how much churches, and mosques, and synagogues, and temples are providing in the way of goods and services to those in need in our communities,” he said. “The good things that they are providing would otherwise fall upon the government to provide. We would like people to clearly see that this is a wonderful investment.”

Hunter said he recognizes the potential for abuses, but believes much of allegations are about perceptions.

“There were some perceived violations, some perceived expenditures that people looked upon,” he said. “The lavish houses and jets and all of that kind of stuff that people reasonably look at and say, ‘Wait a minute, are we as taxpayers contributing to that kind of excess and is that right? Was that the intent of a reasonable exclusion (tax break)?’”

The ECFA Commission will also be receiving input from the Internal Revenue Service, town hall meetings and other informal channels. Two law firms will be providing independent technical analysis and research for the commission on a pro-bono basis.

According to ECFA President Dan Busby, a total of 66 members have been named to the panels by Commission Chairman Michael Batts. The three panels include one of Religious Sector Representatives, one of Nonprofit Sector Representatives, made up of 18 individuals, and one of Legal Experts.

Ultimately, Hunter said the panels will make “an effort to put in reasonable boundaries and put in some self-correcting measures that will hopefully avoid legislation.”

“In the end, there may be a mix of self-policing and some necessary legislation. We do not know that yet. It would be preferable to avoid legislation, but we are not that far along the process, yet,” he said.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/delicious/gqlf/~3/xR0VsxCA7Jk/



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 01, 2011, 04:09:05 am
You can say what ever you want if your not 501c3!! What is more important the money or the message?

Hundreds of pastors thumb noses at IRS
'Pulpit Freedom Sunday' targets restriction on sermons about politicians' moral values


Just the name Internal Revenue Service can strike fear in the hearts of consumers, business owners and business operations volunteers for churches alike. But this weekend, pastors have the opportunity to thumb their noses at the federal agency – and have the weight of one of the largest Christian and human rights defense teams at their backs.

It's the weekend for the Alliance Defense Fund's annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday, on Oct. 2.

That's the Sunday each year when pastors are encouraged to "present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates" to "exercise their constitutionally protected right to free religious expression."

The event takes place in the face of a "problematic Internal Revenue Service rule that activist groups often use to silence churches."

Known as the "Johnson Amendment," it was put into place by then-Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson from Texas in 1954 when he was facing public criticism from religious leaders over his behavior in Washington while he was campaigning for re-election.

His rule bans ministers from discussing electoral candidates from the pulpits, even though, logically, ministers' speech is protected by the Constitution.

The ADF has been promoting Pulpit Freedom Sunday for several years in hopes of bringing a direct confrontation with the IRS into court in which officials and attorneys expect the "rule" would be thrown out.

The program has pastors publicly discuss candidates' issues from a biblical perspective, record the message and deliver it to the IRS.

The federal agency, however, has not yet risen to the bait. It also has declined to discuss the events with WND.

ADF officials said pastors from more than 475 churches in 46 states have registered to participate this year. That's nearly five times as many as last year's approximately 100 participants. This is the fourth year for the event.

 

"Pastors and churches shouldn't live in fear of being punished or penalized by the government," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. "Churches should be allowed to decide for themselves what they want to talk about. The IRS should not be the one making the decision by threatening to revoke a church's tax-exempt status. No government-recognized status can be conditioned upon the surrender of a constitutionally protected right.

"That’s why ADF started Pulpit Freedom Sunday: to get the government out of the pulpits of America," he said.

Freedom Sunday is associated with the ADF Pulpit Initiative, a legal effort designed to secure the free speech rights of pastors in the pulpit. It's goal is the elimination of the Johnson Amendment.

ADF said a national survey it conducted just weeks ago of 1,000 randomly selected senior pastors found that nearly nine out of 10 believe the government should not regulate their sermons.

"The survey confirmed what pastors of nearly every persuasion have told us for years: they don’t want the IRS, or any other governmental agency, to censor what they say from their pulpits," Stanley said.

"No one would suggest a pastor give up his church's tax-exempt status if he wants to keep his constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment. Likewise, no one should be asking him to give up his church's tax-exempt status to be able to keep his constitutionally protected right to free speech," he said.

The ADF effort points out that before the amendment in 1954, "there were no restrictions on what churches could or couldn't do with regard to speech about government and voting, excepting only a 1934 law preventing nonprofits from using a substantial part of their resources to lobby for legislation."

Since Johnson's amendment, "The IRS has steadfastly maintained that any speech by churches about candidates for government office, including sermons from the pulpit, can result in loss of tax exemption."

Consequently, the amendment has intimidated churches into effectively silencing their speech.

Read more: Hundreds of pastors thumb noses at IRS http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=350641#ixzz1ZWGWG0Xd






Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on October 02, 2011, 03:40:50 am
Quote
That's the Sunday each year when pastors are encouraged to "present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates" to "exercise their constitutionally protected right to free religious expression."

The event takes place in the face of a "problematic Internal Revenue Service rule that activist groups often use to silence churches."

Known as the "Johnson Amendment," it was put into place by then-Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson from Texas in 1954 when he was facing public criticism from religious leaders over his behavior in Washington while he was campaigning for re-election.

His rule bans ministers from discussing electoral candidates from the pulpits, even though, logically, ministers' speech is protected by the Constitution.

On this point, I think I actually agree with Johnson's law. "Churches" have no business actively participating in politics of the world. As scripture says, "They are of the world: therfore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them" 1 John 4:5 (KJB)

Jesus says also, "Let the dead bury their dead..."

So as for the IRS, if a group is going to form a "church", I recommend they not apply for government-backed, non-profit status (501c3). Some make the legal argument that a group isn't legally required to apply anyway as they claim that status is already conveyed without application to church groups. That's a wordly debate, and up to the individual or group to decide for themselves how to interpret that part of Caesar's laws.

If man's laws restrict a believers ministry, then the believer needs to decide who they will obey, God or man.

"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Romans 14:5 (KJB)

"Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called." 1 Corinthians 7:20 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 13, 2011, 12:06:11 pm
Watchdog group targeting pastor's rights

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has asked the IRS to investigate First Baptist Church of Dallas and its pastor for posting videos that endorse a presidential candidate, but the pastor isn't concerned about it.

Pastor Robert Jeffress, who is familiar with Americans United's executive director Barry Lynn, introduced Rick Perry at last weekend's Values Voter Summit at the request of the Family Research Council. Following the scuffle about the pastor's subsequent comments on Mormonism being a "cult," the church-state separation advocacy group targeted Jeffress. (See earlier story)

"Barry Lynn has spent his whole career writing letters to the IRS trying to intimidate churches. This is absolutely nothing but an attempt by Barry Lynn to get some much-needed publicity," the First Baptist pastor contends. "Look -- they are challenging my right as a pastor to endorse a candidate, and of course I would never officially endorse a candidate as pastor of First Baptist Church Dallas."

But he says that he personally has every right, as does every American, to say whatever he wants to say and to endorse whomever we wants to endorse.

"Barry Lynn has been trying to muzzle pastors for years [by] threatening their tax-exempt status," Jeffress notes. "And what Barry never tells anybody is that there has never been a church in American history that has ever lost its tax-exempt status."

He further argues that this attack from Americans United is just a lot of hot air designed to corner pastors into being silent, but he assures that "Lynn is not going to succeed." He believes the watchdog advocate is just trying to become relevant again, but "it's just not going to work."

And Jeffress reiterates that any endorsement of his was a personal one, as he would never make a political endorsement from the pulpit.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1457116


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on October 13, 2011, 01:29:48 pm
I gather that "Amercians United" is an athiest group? After so many legal challenges and letters sent, a pattern would emerge that would be hard to ignore that this Barry Lynn person has a personal agenda to attack another's ideology ultimately, under the guise of making sure pastors abide by US law.

If he has a record of going after all different religions, then okay, but to target a specific religion is in my opinion by US law, religious persecution, that involves federal civil rights.

It's up to Jeffress whether or not he wants to "appeal unto Caesar".


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Christian40 on October 15, 2011, 03:49:14 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFWXFKKtc-s&feature=share


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 21, 2011, 09:48:40 am
This is a topic that VERY FEW will cover, otherwise, most ministries, including fruitful ones, by and large won't even touch this with a 10 foot pole.

No, I'm not trying to put Scott, Greg Dixon, etc on a pedestial, but again, the vast majority of ministries don't even utter "501c3" from their mouths. Come to think of it, one message forum I frequent every now and then is very kind, however, the one time I posted warning about the 501c3 tag, I ended up getting alot of hostility responded toward me. And over at another end times message forum I frequent, even though they do a great job watching and discerning the times/wolves in sheep's clothing, they still seem to be under the bondage of Churchianity(ie-have read posts saying how great it is that their pastors are using NKJVs).

Seriously, if the state(regardless of what country it is) has their dominion over you, it is NOT good. I commented to someone early this week how the Chinese government was going after the home church Christian network DESPITE the fact that they did NOT break any laws(as they don't have to register), she responded how this home church was somehow at fault, how there are Christians in the China government, how there's nothing wrong with registering with the government, etc.

We are definitely living in backwards times now - have to give unlimited obedience to authority even if they're bad, we can't "criticize" authority even if they're way out of line, oh boy...when the antichrist emerges, what are they going to say? We shouldn't "judge" him either? ::)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 22, 2011, 09:19:59 pm
I have a couple of questions here...

1) I am STILL trying to understand this issue - from what I hear, Sam Adams's church(which was former pastored by Mike Slattery) is a non-501c3, however, they meet in a building. So can you still have a building and still not be registered? I understand what you guys said above about local fellowship meeting in a house with ordained elders, but still...

2) Anyone having trouble finding any kind of local fellowship? akfools posted an email in another thread over someone that invited him for local fellowship. Even though he seems to be non-501c3, he comes off as a charismatic heretic. I mean on my side, all churches here are 501c3(with some being ecumenical/emergent). And don't see any homes for fellowship in my area.

So ultimately, if we have to go at it ALONE...this is what worries me a bit.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on October 23, 2011, 02:38:36 am
Your never alone so long as you got Jesus. He promised He would never leave us nor forsake us.

I believe that "for where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" is in fact a description of the type "church services" we are to have, or at least when we have "services".

"Let not your heart be troubled..."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 23, 2011, 06:46:24 am
Faith group to IRS: Don't tread on us!
John Kerry case reveals loophole for feds to quash political speech


A religious group is charging the Internal Revenue Service with using a legal loophole to first tax nonprofits' free speech, then run away with impunity when challenged in court.

The nonprofit Catholic Answers tasted this tactic firsthand in 2008, when its president, Karl Keating, posted a discussion on the organization's website arguing that, according to church rules, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., should not be allowed to receive communion in the Catholic Church because of his support for legalized abortion.

The IRS then levied an excise tax on Catholic Answers for engaging in alleged "political speech" against then-presidential primary candidate Kerry, a tax Catholic Answers paid.

But when challenged in court, the IRS simply refunded the tax, while refusing to change its ruling that Catholic Answers' speech was taxable political intervention in an election. Lower courts then ruled Catholic Answers had no course of action against the IRS.

But Catholic Answers, together with the James Madison Center for Free Speech, are now asking the Supreme Court to step in, claiming this "tax-and-run" strategy allows the IRS to arbitrarily tax churches, charities and religious activists into silence, or dodge the consequences if the nonprofits fight back.

"Not only did the federal courts in this case misapply Supreme Court law, they have allowed the IRS to engage in trickery by penalizing nonprofits who exercise their right to speak, only to return the money at the last possible second," explained James Bopp Jr., general counsel for the James Madison Center and co-chairman of the Election Law Subcommittee of the Federalist Society. "So long as the IRS is allowed to do this, nonprofits like Catholic Answers will be deterred from speaking about individuals who are political candidates in any context for fear they'll be investigated and taxed. Nothing prevents the IRS from doing this again. And these groups now have no judicial remedy."

Read more: Faith group to IRS: Don't tread on us! http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=358653#ixzz1bbXoGqCB


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 17, 2012, 01:28:40 pm
I got this from Bryan today...

Quote
I just heard about the "Christian and Missionary Alliance" doing corporate take-overs of small debt-free churches here in America! I will be doing a short message on this issue within the next few days.

Anyone know about this? ???


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on January 17, 2012, 05:33:38 pm
Nope, news to me.

I'd really like to know what is meant by "take-overs". Seeing these are allegedly debt-free churches, what is the given reason for these take-overs? They must already be "signed up" with that organization somehow.

It wouldn't surprise me if a local small church were to get "approached" by some large churchianity group claiming to have all the answers to the small congregations efforts, and promise to take them under the wing so to speak and help run their church, only in the end to have the group decide the church would be "better managed" under their control. I can see it happen, and I have no doubt there are some smalltime preachers that would fall for it.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2012, 06:30:50 pm
This is related(if you know what I mean here...)...

IRS seeks nearly $1 billion budget increase for hiring spree

Published February 17, 2012

| FoxNews.com

The Obama administration is asking Congress for a nearly $1 billion budget increase for the IRS, a move that would allow the agency to hire thousands more employees.

The administration is arguing that hiring additional IRS agents will more than pay for itself. The IRS wants to dedicate another $400 million to enforcement efforts, claiming that alone would raise $1.5 billion in additional revenue -- once all the agents are trained up in a few years.

The request is an attempt to restore money to the IRS budget that was cut in 2011. The $12.8 billion budget request would mark an 8 percent increase over the 2012 budget, but a 5.3 percent increase over the prior year's budget.

Republicans moved to pare down the IRS budget last year. The cuts were part of a broader effort to rein in federal government, but the IRS was targeted in part because of its role in carrying out the federal health care overhaul. The IRS, among other health care tasks, is supposed to make sure Americans follow the requirement -- which is under court challenge -- to buy health insurance.

But the IRS argues that more money means more agents, and that means more revenue.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/17/irs-seeks-nearly-1-billion-budget-increase-for-hiring-spree/#ixzz1mggUKDUR


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2012, 09:15:46 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U2bDkixql8


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 15, 2012, 05:10:16 am
They did not get rid of the "Posse Comitatus Act". A constitutional convention is required to do that. That reporter is completely wrong. The Constitution has not been changed. What has been done is laws have been passed that disregard the Constitution.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 15, 2012, 08:07:35 am
They did not get rid of the "Posse Comitatus Act". A constitutional convention is required to do that. That reporter is completely wrong. The Constitution has not been changed. What has been done is laws have been passed that disregard the Constitution.

I understand what you're saying - however, which is worse...laws that have been passed that disregard the Constitution which is what happened, or getting rid of the "Posse Comitatus Act"?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 15, 2012, 03:45:51 pm
Well, putting it that way, I'd have to say if under the choice of getting rid of the Act by constitutional convention, yet abide by the Constitution, I'd say the latter is better, as it would be following the Constitution as designed.

Though Washington is trying to give the impression through the media, and has passed laws, you cannot legally get rid of the Act by passing other laws. It must be through a constitutional convention to amend the constitution.

I think to pass laws that are unconstitutional, or are designed to circumvent the Constitution is far worse, because it shows no regard for the rule of law, which is what the Constitution is based on. If your not going to work the system the way it is designed, there is no reason for the system. It will collapse, so by passing these laws that really need a solid constitutional challenge, and not challegning them in court, they become assumed as constitutional, and over time people start acting based on an unconstitutional law. It's a psych game as much as anything.

The thing is people think because a bill is signed into law, that it must be legal, constitutional. And it will be treated as such till it's legally challenged in a court of law. But then one might wonder how much good it does to challenge when the Supreme Court has a judge that discourages the use of the US Constitution as a government model to follow.

It's unfortunate, but I really think the US government is not even really bothering to hide having totally sold out to the NWO.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 24, 2012, 02:19:37 pm
OK, I have this one more question...

cold fusion posted this one post over on PPF talking about 501c3, and how churches NEVER had to incorporate to begin with as they're exempt from taxation to begin with. Here's one thing I don't understand - I thought non-501c3s do not allow their pews to write off their deductions on their taxes, but the post CF posted said they can b/c they're exempt from taxation anyways?

Then why in the world did these churches incorporate to begin with, if they had the same benefits already as a non-501c3 ???


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 25, 2012, 04:57:18 am
I do remember something about that. There is some kind of existing status for churches that classifies them tax-exempt without filing 501c3.

So I guess the answer is that they have been duped. I personally see it as a situation where a group of Christians don't have to apply for anything, taxes or not. It's all about tax money/tribute that they even apply for a tax status, because of greed. And the "system" only recognizes those who got a degree from a recognized seminary school, and in those schools they teach their children of hell how to scam the public and the government on tax money as a "non-profit".


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 25, 2012, 09:41:34 am
I do remember something about that. There is some kind of existing status for churches that classifies them tax-exempt without filing 501c3.

So I guess the answer is that they have been duped. I personally see it as a situation where a group of Christians don't have to apply for anything, taxes or not. It's all about tax money/tribute that they even apply for a tax status, because of greed. And the "system" only recognizes those who got a degree from a recognized seminary school, and in those schools they teach their children of hell how to scam the public and the government on tax money as a "non-profit".

I think I remember this from a Johnson teaching, how a 501c3 entity HAS to have a "seminary" degree "preacher".

I think the whole "network" of wolves is making much more sense now.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on March 26, 2012, 06:46:44 am
Most churches in America have organized as "501c3 tax-exempt religious organizations." This is a fairly recent trend that has only been going on for about fifty years. Churches were only added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson for that. Johnson was no ally of the church. As part of his political agenda, Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant influence the church had always had on shaping "public policy."

Although Johnson proffered this as a "favor" to churches, the favor also came with strings attached (more like shackles). One need not look far to see the devastating effects 501c3 acceptance has had to the church, and the consequent restrictions placed upon any 501c3 church. 501c3 churches are prohibited from addressing, in any tangible way, the vital issues of the day.

For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares "legal," even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, etc.), that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status. The 501c3 has had a "chilling effect" upon the free speech rights of the church. LBJ was a shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.

Did the church ever need to seek permission from the government to be exempt from taxes? Were churches prior to 1954 taxable? No, churches have never been taxable. To be taxable a church would first need to be under the jurisdiction, and therefore under the taxing authority, of the government. The First Amendment clearly places the church outside the jurisdiction of the civil government: "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Religion cannot be free if you have to pay the government, through taxation, to exercise it. Since churches aren't taxable in the first place, why do so many of them go to the IRS and seek permission to be tax-exempt? It occurs out of:

Ignorance ("We didn't know any better")
Bandwagon logic ("Everyone else is doing it")
Professional advice (many attorneys and CPAs recommend it)
Does the law require, or even encourage, a church to organize as a 501c3? To answer that question let's turn to what the IRS itself has to say.

Churches Need Not Apply
In order to be considered for tax-exempt status by the IRS an organization must fill out and submit IRS Form 1023 and 1024. However, note what the IRS says regarding churches and church ministries, in Publication 557:

Some organizations are not required to file Form 1023. These include:
Churches, interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).
Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Exempt”
According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):

Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations.
(a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status.
(c) Exceptions.
(1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches.
This is referred to as the "mandatory exception" rule. Thus, we see from the IRS’ own publications, and the tax code, that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for tax-exempt status. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-exempt.”

Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Deductible”
And what about tax-deductibility? Doesn’t a church still need to become a 501c3 so that contributions to it can be taken as a tax deduction? The answer is no! According to IRS Publication 526:

Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions
You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS.
In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-deductible.”

Churches Have a Mandatory Exception To Filing Tax Returns
Not only is it completely unnecessary for any church to seek 501c3 status, to do so becomes a grant of jurisdiction to the IRS by any church that obtains that State favor. In the words of Steve Nestor, IRS Sr. Revenue Officer (ret.):

"I am not the only IRS employee who’s wondered why churches go to the government and seek permission to be exempted from a tax they didn’t owe to begin with, and to seek a tax deductible status that they’ve always had anyway. Many of us have marveled at how church leaders want to be regulated and controlled by an agency of government that most Americans have prayed would just get out of their lives. Churches are in an amazingly unique position, but they don’t seem to know or appreciate the implications of what it would mean to be free of government control."
from the Forward of In Caesar's Grip, by Peter Kershaw

http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 26, 2012, 05:21:18 pm
Well, there you go! Any questions class?  ;)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 29, 2012, 12:35:25 pm
Recently Dallas Baptist Seminary President Chuck Swindoll said churches *should* incorporate as 501c3.

In light of what we read here the last week or so, if this isn't pure wickedness, then we don't know what is.

With that being said, with all the Masonic/Jesuit infiltration of all these "denominations" over the last 100 or so years, maybe it was their influence that got these churches to incorporate from the get-go. No, not saying it was this alone, but when you give your pearl to swine, don't expect it to be kept spotless clean.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 29, 2012, 04:17:51 pm
"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2012, 09:21:22 pm
http://nation.foxnews.com/separation-church-and-state/2012/04/23/proposed-law-would-force-churches-host-gay-weddings

Lawmakers: Force Churches to Host Gay Weddings

By Todd Starnes
 
Religious liberty groups are blasting a proposed ordinance that would force churches in Hutchinson, Kan. to rent their facilities for gay weddings and gay parties.
 
The Hutchinson City Council will consider adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected classes in the city’s human relations code. They are expected to vote on the changes next month.
 
According to the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission, churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.”
 
Meryl Dye, a spokesperson for the Human Relations Commission confirmed to Fox News that churches would be subjected to portions of the proposed law.




Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on April 25, 2012, 03:34:05 pm
Well then, stop renting out their facilities to the genral public! They want the world's cash, but don't expect to abide by the world's ways. Hypocrites. That's what they get when they do business with the world, like out of greed signing up to be a "non-profit" wink wink.  ::)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 28, 2012, 12:11:34 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfT0_rP7S04&feature=BFa&list=UUM-ro_ubM20MFdDHP0adr_Q


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on April 28, 2012, 06:14:35 am
Notice all the catholics...  ???

'War' promised if IRS attacks church speech
Dispute erupts when bishop criticizes assault on religious liberties


While a group that opposes expressions of Christianity in public forums wants the IRS to use its formidable power to crack down on what pastors say, one legal foundation says, “Bring it on,” promising a “legal war” if churches are attacked on such issues.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State Executive Director Barry Lynn recently wrote a letter to the IRS demanding help in quashing the speech of a leader in the Roman Catholic Diocese in Peoria, Ill.

The April 19 letter calls a recent homily given by Bishop Daniel Jenky a violation of IRS regulations relating to the tax-exempt status of the church, because Jenky cited atrocities of past governments, specifically naming Hitler and Stalin, and then cited the failings of the Obama administration.

The homily was also reprinted in the Catholic Post, and urged Catholics to stand by their religious convictions, even outside the walls of the church.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care,” he said.

“In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path,” the homily says.

The homily included the plea, “Now things have come to such a pass in America that this is a battle that we could lose, but before the awesome judgment seat of Almighty God this is not a war where any believing Catholic may remain neutral.”

Jenky even included a dire prediction for the nation if Catholics don’t stand by their convictions.

“This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences, or by the following fall our Catholic schools, our Catholic hospitals, our Catholic Newman centers, all of our public ministries – only excepting our church buildings – could easily be shut down.

“Because no Catholic institution, under any circumstance, can ever cooperate with the intrinsic evil of killing innocent human life in the womb,” he said.

He was opposing the Obamacare mandate that employers, including schools, hospitals and others, pay for abortions for employees.

American’s United tells the IRS that this homily puts the Catholic bishop afoul of the law, and demands that an investigation of the priest be undertaken.

In the letter to the IRS, AU says in part, “Bishop Jenky compared Obama to Hitler and Stalin and accused him of pursuing policies that will close Catholic institutions.

“Moments later he exhorted members of his flock not to vote for candidates who fail to uphold Catholic values.

“It is impossible to interpret this as anything but a command to vote against Obama,” Lynn said.

The Thomas More Society says that the law and the Bill of Rights is on the bishop’s side, and promises a “free and aggressive legal defense to any religious leaders targeted or victimized for the robust exercise of their free speech rights.”

“The Internal Revenue Service has no legal right to investigate, let alone threaten or penalize the Catholic Diocese of Peoria for illegal ‘electioneering’ after Bishop Daniel Jenky, C.S.C., referred to policies of Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin while delivering a robust, wholly legitimate critique of current federal efforts to quash and curtail religious liberties,” says Thomas Brejcha, president of the Thomas More Society.

“References to egregious, historical mistakes on the part of political leaders of the past in messages to congregations, even in an election year, are fully protected by the First Amendment, whether those messages are delivered from the pulpit or on soap boxes in the public square,” he continued.

“We think the law is very clear,” said Brejcha.

“Well-settled federal law does not prohibit churches and other tax-exempt non-profits from speaking out against government policies at odds with the common good or – as in this case – constitutionally obnoxious.”

“Where would the civil rights movement have been were it not for the courage of those of our religious leaders who spoke truth to power on behalf of the disenfranchised?” Brejcha added.

“When Bishop Jenky said, ‘…every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences…,’ he’s simply telling people that their religious convictions and values matter outside the church walls,” said Brejcha.

Twice recently the Thomas More Society has faced down the IRS on behalf of religious groups. The society said one case was when the IRS was holding up approval of the Coalition for Life of Iowa’s request for tax-exempt status, while simultaneously pressing its pro-life members to stop conducting prayer vigils outside a Planned Parenthood abortion facility in Iowa City.

“After TMS challenged the IRS’s legal position, the service’s demands to stop the picketing were suddenly dropped and the Coalition promptly received IRS approval for tax-exempt status,” the organization reported.

In another case the group challenged the IRS for “highly improper demands” made by the agency about prayer vigils conducted by the Christian Voices for Life.

Upon being challenged, the agency backed down.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/war-promised-if-irs-attacks-church-speech/?cat_orig=politics

I just want to say something about the Thomas More, you see his name all the time about dealing with Christian legal issues, like the Thomas More law center and Thomas More Society, well Thomas More was a catholic, a hard core catholic the murdered Christans by burning them on a stake in England. He hated William Tyndale and was number one on his list of people to kill. Just saying...


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on April 28, 2012, 01:17:28 pm
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 28, 2012, 01:22:03 pm
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1 (KJB)

Yep, the beauty of this verse is that you do NOT need a judge, a jury panel, and a couple of attorneys(or the "Dream Team" OJ had) to try the spirits to see if they are of God, b/c the Lord gave us his WRITTEN WORD.

1Co_6:12  All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 29, 2012, 11:11:37 pm
Pastor Greg Dixon - Trail of Blood Video

http://thetrailofblood.net/?page_id=2


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 04, 2012, 10:16:26 am
FYI, some of our "early bible scholars" like Matthew Henry and John Wesley were licensed preachers. Yes, Henry got a license to preach from the England government. I have Henry's commentary - overall, it's pretty solid, but his end times escatology was pretty wacked and didn't make sense, b/c he had the A-Mill view(where the church replaced Israel and went through a tribulation of 2000 years). For the most part, his interpretation of Revelation and Daniel was symbolic, and left scratching your head.

And I'm under the impression that Spurgeon was also a licensed preacher, although I'm not sure. He was a salaried preacher to boot.

John Bunyan was NOT a licensed preacher, and look at the persecution that he faced(spent like 15 years in jail for refusing so).

Not that Henry, Wesley and Spurgeon was loved of this world, but nonetheless neither suffered much persecution, and are well respected among the seminaries and the modern-day church. Bunyan? Nah, not so much buzz.

Another bad fruit of the modern-day church is their refusal to believe end times escatology is futurisitic - neither Henry, Wesley, nor Spurgeon believed in a futuristic end times escatology, and neither does the modern-day 501c3 pastor. Connect the dots.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 04, 2012, 10:30:51 am

501(c)3 and the Prostitution of American Churches

http://brie-hoffman.hubpages.com/hub/5013c-and-the-Prostitution-of-American-Churches


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: tennis shoe on May 07, 2012, 10:49:20 am
This document originated from a local church. It’s edited for anonymity. I asked about 501c3 years ago. They acted like they’d never heard of it. This is the first time I’ve seen this in writing.

Quote
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF <CHURCH NAME>

1. Name: The name of this corporation shall be <church name>.

2. Period of Duration: The duration of the existence of the corporation shall be perpetual.

3. Purpose: The corporation is organized exclusively for religious purposes. The purpose for which it is formed is for the assembling of believers in Christ Jesus for religious worship, for the promotion of scriptural holiness, and for-the spreading of the Gospel by the preaching of the Word and by personal testimony.

No part of the net earnings of the corporation shall inure to the benefit of any officer of the corporation, or any private individual (except that reasonable compensation may be paid for services rendered to or for the corporation affecting one or more of its purposes), and no officer of the corporation, or any private individual shall be entitled to share in the distribution of any of the corporate assets on dissolution of the corporation. No substantial part of the activities of the corporation shall be the Carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and the corporation shall not participate in, or intervene in (including the publication or distribution of statements) any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.

Notwithstanding any other provision of these articles, the corporation shall not conduct or carry on any activities not permitted to be conducted or carried on by an organization exempt under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code and its Regulations as they now exist or as they may hereafter be amended, or by an organization contributions to which are deductible under Section 170 (c) (2) of such Code and Regulations as they now exist or as they may hereafter be amended.

4. Name and Address of Registered Agent: The name of the registered agent is <edited> and the address of the registered agent <edited>.

5. Names and Addresses of current Church Board:
<list edited>

6. Members: Only believers in full communion shall be members. See Article VI.
!
By-Laws of <Church Name> Revised & Approved by Membership Vote on <date>.

7. Disillusionment: Upon the dissolution of the corporation or the, winding up its affairs, the assets of the Corporation shall its be distributed exclusively to charitable, religious, scientific, literary, or educational organizations which would then qualify under the provisions of Section, 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code and its Regulations as they now exist or as they may hereafter be amended. The distribution shall be at the discretion of the Trustees and Church Board with approval of Church membership.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 07, 2012, 10:59:24 am
^^

Good find! Notice how they use the word "propaganda" when they describe over what they can't do - cannot influence legislation means carrying on of propaganda ??? ::)

It's pretty obvious that the IRS is telling them that their 1st ammendment rights are stripped. As for politically intervening on behalf of endorsing political candidates, personally, this I don't find this biblical(especially b/c 99% of candidates out there serve Satan). But STILL, there's no denying their 1st ammendment constitutional rights are being stripped right under their noses. As for influencing legislation, yeah, I do find this biblical on the contrary(ie-churches should speak out against abortion, sodomy, and gambling).


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 13, 2012, 07:09:23 pm
OK, this may be just a tad bit-off topic, but somewhat related...

Got this in email(from Scott's mailing list - saw this link on one of the links he put in there). This one's a good one exposing Chuck Missler and how alot of these "discernment ministries" have not said one word about Missler.(Missler has close ties with Rome, but will discuss this in its appropriate thread)

Link: http://ephesians511blog.blogspot.com/2012/04/satanic-cover-up-of-chuck-missler.html

Anyhow, pt being that while I've followed some of these discernment ministries(Lighthouse Trails, Worldview Weekend, Noise of Thunder, Let us Reason, Roger Oakland, and others listed on there), and while they've done a wonderful job for the most part exposing the New Age, Postmodern Emergent Church, at the same time, it's as if they have no discernment on the BIG issues - the perverted bible versions like the NIV, and most of all 501c3.

If these ministries are exposing Rome like they say they are, then they should very well know that 501c3 is a church/state entity, which is exactly how the Roman Catholic Church system has been setup from the get-go. They should also very well know that the RCC has their fingerprints on the NIV and the other non-KJV bibles.


Title: Obama calls pastors to explain gay marriage support; black churches ‘conflicted'
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 14, 2012, 02:03:44 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-calls-pastors-explain-gay-marriage-support-black-151738220.html
Well, they ARE 501c3s...

Obama calls pastors to explain gay marriage support; black churches ‘conflicted' by president's decision

After making his historic remarks on same-sex unions last week, President Barack Obama led a conference call with black church pastors to explain his support for gay marriage, the New York Times reports. The call, which was held with "eight or so African-American ministers," occurred about two hours after the president's interview with ABC's Robin Roberts.
 
Obama explained to them that he struggled with the decision, pastors on the call told the paper, but several voiced their disapproval.
 
"They were wrestling with their ability to get over his theological position," the Rev. Delman Coates, a Maryland pastor who was on the call, told the Times.
 
The conference call was part of a quiet effort by the president to control potential political damage caused by his support of same-sex marriage.
 
According to the Times, Obama phoned "at least one [the Rev. Joel C. Hunter] of the five spiritual leaders he calls regularly for religious guidance, and his aides contacted other religious figures who have been supportive in the past."
 
Hunter, the pastor of a conservative megachurch, said he wasn't surprised Obama didn't ask him advice before the ABC interview because "I would have tried to talk him out of it."
 
At services on Sunday, black churches were conflicted about President Obama's support of gay marriage, according to the USA Today:

Some churches were silent on the issue. At others, pastors spoke against the president's decision Wednesday--but kindly of the man himself. A few blasted the president and his decision. A minority spoke in favor of the decision and expressed understanding of the president's change of heart.
 
Bishop Timothy Clark, head of the First Church of God, a large African-American church with a television ministry in Columbus, Ohio, was perhaps most typical. He felt compelled to address the president's comments at a Wednesday evening service and again Sunday morning. He was responding to an outpouring of calls, e-mails and text messages from members of his congregation after the president's remarks.
 
What did he hear from churchgoers? "No church or group is monolithic. Some were powerfully agitated and disappointed. Others were curious. 'Why now? To what end?' Others were hurt. And others, to be honest, told me it's not an issue and they don't have a problem with it."
 
What did the bishop tell his congregation? He opposes gay marriage. It is not just a social issue, he said, but a religious one for those who follow the Bible. "The spiritual issue is ground in the word of God." That said, "I believe the statement the president made and his decision was made in good faith. I am sure because the president is a good man. I know his decision was made after much thought and consideration and, I'm sure, even prayer."

 


Title: Norway Abolishes National Church
Post by: Charrington on May 23, 2012, 11:42:40 pm
In an unprecedented move this week, the Norwegian Parliament voted unanimously to abolish the national Church. Considering that 72% of the population (3.6 million people) are non-believers, it may not be a very surprising move, but it’s still noteworthy.

Before the parade starts, though, it turns out that this isn’t a complete separation of the two entities as was initially reported.

The country used to financially support the church and participated in selecting certain church officials — this new step will remove the government from that process while retaining some funding to the church.

According to the Norwegian Humanist Association’s website, this is only the first step in complete church and state separation. Up until now, all citizens who were baptized in Norway were automatically members of the Church of Norway despite a staggeringly low regular church attendance rate of 2%.

This amendment  will start with the following steps:

    The Lutheran Church of Norway will be renamed The People’s Church

    Norway will no longer have an official national religion

    The government will no longer participate in the appointment of bishops and deans

    There will no longer be a requirement for parliamentary officials to be members of the Lutheran Church

The following things will not be changed:

    The church tax will remain in place (although a small portion will be going to humanist organizations)

    A church office will remain in the government, headed up by a minister

After reading through kirken.no (the former Church of Norway’s official site) it sounds like it was an amiable split. The fact that the state is still funding the church is justified as follows:

    “… The Committee notes that the constitutional changes resulting from the settlement the church intends to clarify the Norwegian churches free position as religious communities. This means that the religious activities of the church will no longer be the state’s task. However, it is government’s task to support the church as a religious community, and to support other religious and philosophical alike. The Committee endorses the understanding that the changes represent a new basis for the development of the Norwegian Church as an independent religious communities. The Committee would also emphasize the importance of establishing security for the changes contribute to the preservation of the Norwegian Church’s mission to be an open, inclusive and democratic national church.”

So there is still some intermingling, but it sounds like they are off to a better start to a beautiful, secular future.


http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/05/22/norway-abolishes-national-church/


Title: Re: Norway Abolishes National Church
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 24, 2012, 09:23:15 am
Odd to say, but this isn't a bad thing - Caesar funding a church is NOT a good thing, period.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on May 29, 2012, 04:17:31 pm
Holder to brief black pastors on campaign 2012

Attorney General Eric Holder, the IRS, and the liberal lawyers at the ACLU will brief several hundred pastors in the African American community on how to participate in the presidential election -- which the Congressional Black Caucus chair expects will help President Obama's campaign.

"We will have representatives from nine denominations who actually pastor somewhere in the neighborhood of about 10 million people, and we're going to first of all equip them with the information they need to know about what they can say and what they cannot say in the church that would violate their 501c3 status with the IRS," Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., told MSNBC today.

"In fact, we're going to have the IRS administrator there, we're going to have the Attorney General Eric Holder there, we're going to have the lawyers' organization from around the country, the ACLU -- all giving ministers guidance about what they can and cannot do," he noted.

Cleaver said they would not tell pastors which candidate to support. They will let them know who to regard as the bad guys, though (hint: not Democrats). "We're going to talk about some of the draconian laws that have cropped up around the country as a result of the 17 percent increase in African American votes," Cleaver said, describing voter ID laws as a form of Jim Crow-style "poll tax" on seniors and black voters.

The CBC chairman is confident that "President Obama is going to get 95 percent of the [African American] vote," and wants to keep that turnout high. "We want to let them know that there is a theological responsibility to participate in the political process, at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition," he said.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/holder-brief-black-pastors-campaign-2012/567501


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on June 04, 2012, 09:40:14 am
IRS: Politics can jeopardize churches' tax-exempt status

Pastors meeting in Washington have been warned about political activities that could jeopardize their churches' tax-exempt status.

IRS regional manager Peter Lorenzetti told the Faith Leaders Summit that prohibited activities include endorsing or opposing candidates, campaigning for them, or making contributions to their campaigns.

But pastors are free to do any of those things as private citizens, according to Congressman G.K. Butterfield.  The North Carolina Democrat, a former judge, said, "You simply cannot do it in your capacity as the pastor of the church and give the implication that the church is endorsing the candidate."

Lorenzetti said churches can distribute voter guides that educate about political issues without favoring a particular candidate.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=1607606


Title: Remember this pastor who challenged the IRS on the pulpit by endorsing McCain?
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 05, 2012, 09:17:09 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEVToHSWTYQ



Title: Re: Remember this pastor who challenged the IRS on the pulpit by endorsing McCain?
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 05, 2012, 09:20:41 am
FYI...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Hice

In September 2008, Hice was one of 33 pastors across America who participated in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,”[3] an effort that challenged an Internal Revenue Service code threatening churches and pastors with loss of tax-exempt status and criminal behavior if they address certain moral or political issues from the pulpit. In that sermon, Hice endorsed Senator John McCain for President. The outcome of that stance is still pending.[4]
 
Dr. Hice was instrumental in raising sufficient funds to cover Barrow County, Georgia's attorney's fees for the Ten Commandments lawsuit, enabling the county to only be required to pay the $150,000 court ordered fee to the ACLU.[1]
 
Dr. Hice has been interviewed and quoted by numerous local and national media including Fox News Channel, CNN, ABC World News Tonight, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Associated Press, HBO, Esquire, Coral Ridge Ministries, TBN, and The Atlanta Journal.[5]

<skip>

Jody currently served as Sr. Pastor of Bethlehem First Baptist Church. However recently in April 2010 he resigned.,[2] in Bethlehem, Georgia. In addition, he served as First Vice President of the Georgia Baptist Convention (2004–05) and Professor of Preaching at Luther Rice Seminary.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 13, 2012, 12:25:51 pm
Isa 66:3  He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.
Isa 66:4  I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.
Isa 66:5  Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed
.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 19, 2012, 07:18:53 am
America needs prophets or, Before the 501c3

The intense fight over Obamacare’s HHS mandate highlights a real disdain for religion in public life. Obamacare has had religious detractors from the start because of abortion concerns, but they have had their own detractors among the political and chattering classes.

While paying lip service to the right of Catholic bishops to participate in the conversation, for instance, one pundit actually said (before the bill had passed) that the hierarchs were holding America “hostage” by their refusal to back down on their antiabortion lobbying. In other words, yes, speak. But not much. And for all our sakes, shut up if you’re being effective.

Here on the Fourth of July, it’s worth noting that this sentiment would have stunned the founders. In researching the life of Paul Revere, I found time and again the active role played by church leaders in their day.

In 1754, for instance, Massachusetts legislators pushed for a new sales tax. Newspapermen and pamphleteers let the ink fly and fired off acidic squibs denouncing the measure. So did pastors. From the pulpit, ministers railed against the bill in harsh terms. Rev. Samuel Cooper of Brattle Street Church in Boston even called the lawmakers “bastards” for it. Rev. Jonathan Mayhew opposed the bill as well, pointing out the burden it would place upon the poor.

Mayhew was a force to be reckoned with in matters both ecclesial and political. He battled the imposition of an Anglican bishop in America on the one hand (he was a staunch Congregationalist), and on the other preached a stemwinding sermon against the Stamp Act, kicking off America’s decade-long protest against unjust taxation. For Mayhew, the role of the minister was to speak to any subject of weight in his community. And he did, along with most others.

The political outlook of Boston preachers was so demonstrative that as the Revolution inched closer, Paul Revere left his lifelong congregation because the minister was too supportive of the establishment. He began attending West Church, where Mayhew had previously pastored.

The prophet’s job is to confront power and hold it to account, to remind its practitioners that they answer to a greater sovereign. His job is not so much to predict when God will act in history as much as to insist that he in fact will.

That task was vital during our revolutionary beginnings. And while people can point to the cultural shift from that time to this (we’re hardly as religious as we once were), the job is arguably more important now.

As government becomes more intrusive, the role of prophet is ever-more important. Pastors need to become more active and more vocal, not less so. An interventionist government assumes the right to act in nearly any situation. It needs to be shown that such expansionist plans are not always acceptable — in fact, usually not.

Policy wonks aren’t up to that task. Neither are lobbyists. Or lawyers. Or journalists.

They’re all helpful, and they should be involved. But what America needs are more prophets who will speak truth to power, embolden their flocks, and live the gospel they preach. If personal faith means anything, it’s going to have (for better or worse, depending on the example) a public impact. It’s unavoidable. It would serve America well if that impact were more deliberate and pastors more aware of the role they can play.

This isn’t to say that pastors should get involved in every political spat, or push for new legislation. They primarily should lead their flocks. But when the state acts egregiously or proposes laws that are fundamentally unjust, they shouldn’t stand by. They should follow their forebears and speak out.

Politicians and pundits oppose preacherly meddling because they want freedom to scheme and act without regard to any authority higher than their own. Fine. But we don’t have to let them. Because of those meddling pastors in 1754, the proposed tax bill failed. What would happen today if America’s ministers took their calling more seriously?

http://joeljmiller.com/prophets-wanted/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 19, 2012, 10:08:13 am
Quote
Politicians and pundits oppose preacherly meddling because they want freedom to scheme and act without regard to any authority higher than their own. Fine. But we don’t have to let them. Because of those meddling pastors in 1754, the proposed tax bill failed. What would happen today if America’s ministers took their calling more seriously?

501c3 or no, honestly, I don't think 99% of pastors even care anymore. Just as long as they consistently roll in the offering plates every week, meaning their salaries and 401Ks will stay afloat, they'll be happy. It shouldn't sit well with anyone seeing these modern-day pastors driving around in new, nice cars and approaching their pastor position like it's any other 9-5 job(and then go home and watch tv or other entertainment afterwards).


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 29, 2012, 03:12:14 pm
Why Some Churches Should Lose Their Tax Exempt Status

The Gospel of Jesus Christ has been perverted on many fronts by pastors who have enacted principles of mega-church entrepreneurship that have turned Christianity into a multi-billion dollar business rather than fulfilling the mission of reaching out to a hurting world. 

Nearly 20 years ago, Christian apologist Hank Hanegraaf warned of this dynamic in his book appropriately entitled Christianity in Crisis. The book chronicled the dangers of mega church pastors like Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Jesse Duplantis, and many others who were leading people astray with a gospel of health and wealth. 

A few years ago, Hanegraaf released a follow-up book entitled Christianity in Crisis: The 21st Century dealing with the modern day promoters of the feel good health and wealth message like Joyce Meyer, John Hagee, Td Jakes, Creflo Dollar, and Joel Osteen just to name a few. Because of this grand travesty of justice, I would fully support any law that would strip many if not all churches of their tax-exempt status.

In the New Testament, Paul warned Timothy (I Timothy 6:5) of those preachers who promoted the errant idea that godliness is a means for financial gain. Yet today, if we turn on our television screens we see many ministers who seem to be teaching that exact message. Is it any wonder that much of the world is turned off to the Christian faith after seeing such nonsense at work?

It is sad but probably true that anyone who truly wanted to make a fortune could easily convert to Christianity and start a new church promising health and wealth returned tenfold to all those who sent money their way. Such a perversion of the gospel is often seen when one watches the Trinity Broadcasting Network or the Inspiration Network especially when they are right in the midst of their fundraising drives, many of which they promise a ten times anointing being bestowed upon those who agree to give. Where does the money from such fund drives go? 

There are more than a few examples of the injustices that are occurring under the guise of Christianity. In 2009, Inspiration Network CEO David Cerullo purchased a $4 million mansion in the Western South Carolina area all the while he had to lay off some employees to keep the network functioning. In July 2010, Joel Osteen purchased a $10.5 million house not far from his church in Houston. 10 years ago, NBC Dateline ran a story about Benny Hinn's multi-million dollar California beach house. 

There are but many more stories to tell. However, to paraphrase the end of John's Gospel, if we were to give account of all the mega-church ministers who live a life of luxury with the funds they solicit from their unsuspecting audiences, there would not be enough room in the world for all the books that would be written.

With that said, I am all for action to be taken so that we can cut some pages out of that book until we eliminate it once and for all so that never again will the American people have to be subjected to the false gospel which promotes health and prosperity instead of giving people a cup of the Water of Life that is only found in a genuine experience with Christ. 

Not only should multi-million dollar mega-churches have their tax-exempt status forever removed, they should also be required to give an account of how every dollar they collect is spent so that we can forever end the voodoo-like get-rich scheme that is being executed under the banner of the Christian faith.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/13484/why-some-churches-should-lose-their-tax-exempt-status?utm

Some churches? it should be ALL of the Churches. Pay your taxes people, and then there is no problems what so ever. 


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on August 29, 2012, 04:08:28 pm
Paying taxes to Caesar isn't the problem, it's all the deductions those with money get that allows them to pay next to nothing in taxes, especially corporations.

While the non-profit status isn't needed by "churches", one thing that does need attention is how these "non-profits" offer stuff for a set donation. How is that not a retail sale? They aren't suppose to sale stuff for a profit, so how can they say "for a donation of..."? To me, that's retail sales. The "break even" part of non-profit is REALLY stretched by these organizations.

Making "churches" pay taxes won't solve the country's financial problems. Not even close. What this is I think is a prelude to a major crackdown on Christianity and it's "churches".


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Boldhunter on September 04, 2012, 02:34:43 am
Does anyone here think a 501c3 (Private Foundation) is a good choice for funding Christian causes? If not, what might be better ways to go?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 04, 2012, 10:33:24 am
Does anyone here think a 501c3 (Private Foundation) is a good choice for funding Christian causes?

No - read through this thread, and you'll find some good sources over why 501c3 is very, very bad, especially for the Christian church.

Quote
If not, what might be better ways to go?

There are many other passages to prove this point, but this is one of many passages that says it all! :)

Gal 2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Gal 2:17  But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
Gal 2:18  For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
Gal 2:19  For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
Gal 2:20  I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Gal 2:21  I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 04, 2012, 02:05:51 pm
Quote
501c3 (Private Foundation)

501c3 is government controlled speach for money.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on September 04, 2012, 02:49:06 pm
Does anyone here think a 501c3 (Private Foundation) is a good choice for funding Christian causes? If not, what might be better ways to go?

No, not since Jesus tells us directly and specifically how to be charitable...

1   Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. 
2   Therefore when thou doest [thine] alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 
3   But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 
4   That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
Matthew 6:1-4 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Boldhunter on September 04, 2012, 08:42:56 pm
What about in the case where you have a Christian celebrity and donated celebrity memorabilia that can draw in donations at fundraisers to help pro-life causes? There are arguments I have heard made that this is a tax-sheltered way to protect funds that are donated. The goals I've heard explained are not for glory of the mission - but rather to spread awareness about abstinence, and to help those who already have found themselves pregnant so that they have an option BESIDES abortion. It is VERY difficult to get people to support anything to do with the huge problem of teenage promiscuity. The attitude is Cest'laVie! It's even more difficult to draw the secular world to WANT to understand the need for abstinence messages to jr. high,  high school and college-age students - so being "public" or "high profile" is necessary. The work is done in the love of Jesus - and ultimately keeps many babies from certain death, but it is not a "church" entity. There is no control by the government as to where the money is given, and much of it directly funds sonograms/medical/counseling for crisis pregnancy centers where girls are given to truth about their baby being a real human being - and many babies have been saved. I understand the political bind the church becomes entangled in - but I'm wondering if protecting monies for other "works from the Body" is not just being a good steward.
Your thoughts?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 04, 2012, 09:00:34 pm
Mat 5:1  And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
Mat 5:2  And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
Mat 5:3  Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:4  Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
Mat 5:5  Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Mat 5:6  Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Mat 5:7  Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Mat 5:8  Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Mat 5:9  Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Mat 5:10  Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:11  Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Mat 5:12  Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

Mat 8:20  And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.
Mat 8:21  And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
Mat 8:22  But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
Mat 8:23  And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him.
Mat 8:24  And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.
Mat 8:25  And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish.
Mat 8:26  And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm.
Mat 8:27  But the men marvelled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!

Mat 17:20  And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.
Mat 17:21  Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on September 05, 2012, 03:52:57 am
Quote
What about in the case where you have a Christian celebrity and donated celebrity memorabilia that can draw in donations at fundraisers to help pro-life causes?

What you describe is a secular effort. That's how the world does it.

What part of doing alms in secret do you not understand?

No, you are suppose to not advertise your charity, period. It's suppose to be in secret so no one knows your charity but God and you. We don't get tax breaks or awards for being charitable!

Have you forgotten?...

"Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give." Matthew 10:8 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 23, 2012, 04:10:15 am
IRS Complaint Filed Against Colo. Christian Group for Endorsing Republicans

A Washington, D.C.-based church-state watchdog group has filed a complaint to the IRS against a Colorado-based Christian group, saying they violated tax-exemption rules by endorsing a political party.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State sent the complaint on Wednesday against Ridgway Christian Center, an organization connected to Praise Him Ministries. The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, wrote the letter to the IRS in response to a fall 2012 publication of RCC which apparently endorsed the Republican Party for the upcoming elections.

"In this case, Ridgway Christian Center/Praise Him Ministries has endorsed not just one candidate by an entire slate with its command to vote for the Republican Party," wrote Lynn. "I believe this type of brazen disregard for the law cannot be allowed to go unchallenged. I urge you to investigate this matter and fully apply the law."

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/irs-complaint-filed-against-colo-christian-group-for-endorsing-republicans-81972/#aWkjA0EeI0LldO2f.99


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on September 23, 2012, 05:40:55 am
Quote
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United, wrote the letter to the IRS

So they did so why? What are they doing tattletelling on people? What does one religious group care what another does? And what do they care what Caesar thinks? Bunch of frauds.  ::)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 23, 2012, 08:10:43 am
Pastors Pledge To Defy IRS, Preach Politics From Pulpit Ahead of Election

 More than 1,000 pastors are planning to challenge the IRS next month by deliberately preaching politics ahead of the presidential election despite a federal ban on endorse- ments from the pulpit. The defiant move, they hope, will prompt the IRS to enforce a 1954 tax code amendment that prohibits tax-exempt organizations, such as churches, from political endorsements.     

MORE http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/20/pastors-pledge-to-defy-irs-preach-politics-from-pulpit-ahead-election/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 23, 2012, 09:02:04 am
Pastors Pledge To Defy IRS, Preach Politics From Pulpit Ahead of Election

 More than 1,000 pastors are planning to challenge the IRS next month by deliberately preaching politics ahead of the presidential election despite a federal ban on endorse- ments from the pulpit. The defiant move, they hope, will prompt the IRS to enforce a 1954 tax code amendment that prohibits tax-exempt organizations, such as churches, from political endorsements.     

MORE http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/20/pastors-pledge-to-defy-irs-preach-politics-from-pulpit-ahead-election/

I don't like anything the IRS does, however, with all due respect, these 501c3 churches AGREED with the IRS via a *contract* that in exchange for allowing write-offs on their Sch As for donations, they would fork over some of their 1st ammendment rights.

Again, I'm not a big fan of the IRS, but they entered into a CONTRACT with the IRS. It's alot like taking out a mortgage buying a home. Yeah, if you took out a $500K mortgage for a mere above-average home, it would be a bum deal. But nonetheless, you AGREED to the contract(no matter how bad it is), so there's no ifs ands or buts.

Sorry, but if you agree to play by the world's rules, you get what you ask for.

You sow to the flesh corruption, you reap corruption...


Title: Re: Remember this pastor who challenged the IRS on the pulpit by endorsing McCain?
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 23, 2012, 09:08:41 am
FYI...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Hice

In September 2008, Hice was one of 33 pastors across America who participated in “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,”[3] an effort that challenged an Internal Revenue Service code threatening churches and pastors with loss of tax-exempt status and criminal behavior if they address certain moral or political issues from the pulpit. In that sermon, Hice endorsed Senator John McCain for President. The outcome of that stance is still pending.[4]
 
Dr. Hice was instrumental in raising sufficient funds to cover Barrow County, Georgia's attorney's fees for the Ten Commandments lawsuit, enabling the county to only be required to pay the $150,000 court ordered fee to the ACLU.[1]
 
Dr. Hice has been interviewed and quoted by numerous local and national media including Fox News Channel, CNN, ABC World News Tonight, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Associated Press, HBO, Esquire, Coral Ridge Ministries, TBN, and The Atlanta Journal.[5]

<skip>

Jody currently served as Sr. Pastor of Bethlehem First Baptist Church. However recently in April 2010 he resigned.,[2] in Bethlehem, Georgia. In addition, he served as First Vice President of the Georgia Baptist Convention (2004–05) and Professor of Preaching at Luther Rice Seminary.

Here's a classic example from 2008 when these pastors of 501c3 churches decided to "stand up" to the IRS by endorsing political candidates from the pulpit - as you can see, it did NOT work. This particular pastor(Hice) ended up resigning from his church just 2 years later.

Again, I'm not a fan of the draconian IRS, but the 501c3 agreement IS pretty much that, a CONTRACT b/w the 2 parties. It's not like the IRS will force you to enter into anything.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Boldhunter on September 24, 2012, 02:21:31 am
Please direct me to info for passing to friends how to dissolve properly.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 24, 2012, 08:52:52 am
Please direct me to info for passing to friends how to dissolve properly.

From what we understand, it's more complicated than how it appears. It's not like they can just tell the IRS they want to drop their tax-exempt status and move on. To begin with, the IRS/state gave them their right to exist when they filed Articles of Incorporation with their respective states(and hence became 501c3s).

Ultimately, in exchange for giving up their 1st ammendment rights, the IRS pretty much has gotten less tax revenue from these churches due to letting them write donations off of their 1040s. So yeah, if they want to get out of 501c3, they have to pay the piper, as the old saying goes(ie-their buildings, assets, etc become the property of the state). It happened to Greg Dixon's church years ago - when he wanted to get out, they sent out the SWAT team et al to take over his building, assets, et al.

Like I said, I'm not fan of the IRS, but nonetheless they take it very seriously when a 501c3 entity breaches their laws(ie-endorses a political candidate on the pulpit) b/c of all the potential tax revenue that doesn't come their way due to letting them write off donations on their 1040s. IOW, like said, it's a VOLUNTARY CONTRACT b/w the IRS and whatever organization that chooses to file.

And yes, there ARE churches in America that have chosen not to file - Sam Adams' church in Florida(Adams is a good friend of Scott - just go to sermonaudio.com and he has sermons posted there). Greg Miller's Bible Believer's Fellowship(I think that's the same) in Worthington, Ohio is another.

As you can see, NOONE HAS to file.

Here are a couple of sources that may be helpful.

Greg Dixon's Unregistered Baptist Fellowship
http://www.unregisteredbaptistfellowship.com

The web site owner is not a Christian. However, his section exposing the imminent One World Global Religion being implemented is excellent. Here's more info over 501c3.
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=6271


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 29, 2012, 03:01:04 pm
The Crisis Of Church Incorporation - Excellent read!
http://sedm.org/Forms/SelfFamilyChurchGovnce/CrisisOfChurchIncorporation.pdf


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 03, 2012, 09:26:50 am
Pastors Battle IRS on Pulpit Freedom Sunday

Shouldn't our pulpits be free? More than 1,200 pastors in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico think so.

Pastors around the country have registered to participate in the fifth annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

Registered pastors have committed to preach sermons that present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates. In so doing, they will exercise their constitutionally protected freedom to engage in religious expression from the pulpit despite an Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment that activist groups often use to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status.

“Pastors should decide what they preach from the pulpit, not the IRS. It’s outrageous for pastors and churches to be threatened or punished by the government for applying biblical teachings to all areas of life, including candidates and elections. The question is, ‘Who should decide the content of sermons: pastors or the IRS?’,” says Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) senior legal counsel Erik Stanley.

“No government-recognized status can be conditioned upon the surrender of a constitutionally protected right. No one would suggest a pastor give up his church’s tax-exempt status if he wants to keep his constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment. Likewise, no one should be asking him to give up his church’s tax-exempt status to be able to keep his constitutionally protected right to free speech.”

Pulpit Freedom Sunday, on Oct. 7 this year, is an event associated with the Pulpit Initiative, a legal effort designed to secure the free speech rights of pastors in the pulpit. ADF hopes to eventually go to court to have the Johnson Amendment struck down as unconstitutional for its regulation of sermons, which are protected by the First Amendment.

Pulpit Freedom Sunday began in 2008 with 33 participating pastors. Participation increased each year, with last year’s participation blossoming to 539.

http://www.charismanews.com/politics/34248-pastors-battle-irs-on-pulpit-freedom-sunday

Quote
Shouldn't our pulpits be free?

They are, but you morons feel the need to yoke yourself to the Government and become their dogs. Get out of the 501c3 and serve Jesus and not mans government.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 03, 2012, 09:36:55 am
^^

Again(to these 1200 pastors) - you AGREED to yoke with 501c3 in exchange for getting this "precious" tax-exempt status. NOONE forced you to do anything, but it was YOU that VOLUNTARILY did so so that you and your pews can write off your offering plates off of your 1040s. IOW, you SIGNED A VOLUNTARY CONTRACT to do so.

It's alot like if I want to buy a house, and end up signing a mortgage contract to do so. It's not like I can 2 years later void the whole thing b/c I feel somehow it's "unfair", why? B/c it's a CONTRACT BOTH PARTIES AGREED TO WITHOUT FORCE! Sorry, but you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Besides, WHO CARES if you can't have these tax-exempt write-offs? You have FREEDOM to preach the whole council of God to begin with without this nonsense!


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 05, 2012, 07:12:19 pm
Pastor to Taunt IRS Over Free Speech

How did we get to where we are in our culture and our politics today?  I have wondered this since Obama took office and started exacting his socialist agenda on our great country.  There is plenty of blame to go around—complacency, greed, laziness, apathy.  I submit that churches may not have caused the problems we have today, but certainly could have curtailed the advancement of tyranny.  In my work (my book and The Dr. Gina Show), I have laid out the way that some cowardly pastors have tolerated their flocks’ apathy, greed, complacency and laziness, and that only the pastors have the ability to cause a revolution of the greater congregation to make real change.

Some pastors have been brave enough to rise up and do exactly that.  This weekend is “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” in churches across the country.  Pastors in pulpits across the country will not only endorse candidates from the pulpit, but will also send the tapes of the services directly to the IRS.  Now that’s bold!

Pastor Jim Garlow (disclaimer, my pastor) of Skyline Church of San Diego is leading the charge. While other pastors concern themselves with losing membership for saying something that might offend a potential tithing member, or risk their tax exempt status, some are getting in the face of those who would subvert our Constitutional rights and daring them to sue.

This matters for many reasons, but two of them are crystal clear.  The first is that Christians vote in dismal numbers.   According to Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America, Christian women vote in even lower numbers (around 30%).  Is it any wonder that we are losing ground on issues of life, liberty, and faith? 

The second, less obvious but still critical reason why pastors must confront this lie is because it discourages Christian candidates from running for office.  I hear pastors complain that not enough Christians run, and even complain about it from the pulpit, but do very little to help once a member of their parish, or congregation has stuck their neck out there to run.  When I have tried to recruit good leaders of strong moral character to run, they often say, “I can’t do that to my family.”

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/ginaloudon/2012/10/05/pastor_to_taunt_irs_over_free_speech

Quote
How did we get to where we are in our culture and our politics today?

uhm...you morons yoked yourself to mans government instead of Gods government. You were already free but you gave that up for a little of Caesars lucre


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 05, 2012, 08:53:00 pm

Some pastors have been brave enough to rise up and do exactly that.  This weekend is “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” in churches across the country.  Pastors in pulpits across the country will not only endorse candidates from the pulpit, but will also send the tapes of the services directly to the IRS.  Now that’s bold!

I wonder if they'll be endorsing...MORMON MITT ROMNEY! ::)

Seriously, shame on them if they do. And for that matter too shame on them if they endorse other pagan religion candidates.

Quote
uhm...you morons yoked yourself to mans government instead of Gods government. You were already free but you gave that up for a little of Caesars lucre

Yep, 501c3 is VOLUNTARY - IOW, they AGREED to give up their 1st ammendment rights IN EXCHANGE for letting their pews write off donations off of their 1040s. In addition, they get nice tax breaks for baptisms, baby dedications, weddings, etc. Sorry, if you want a nice house really bad, then you're going to have to take out a big mortgage. No ifs, ands, or buts.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 05, 2012, 08:59:18 pm
These 501c3 pastors who plan to fight the IRS this Sunday need to read and meditate on this passage...

1Sa 8:4  Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
1Sa 8:5  And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
1Sa 8:6  But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
1Sa 8:7  And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
1Sa 8:8  According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
1Sa 8:9  Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.
1Sa 8:10  And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.
1Sa 8:11  And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
1Sa 8:12  And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
1Sa 8:13  And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
1Sa 8:14  And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
1Sa 8:15  And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
1Sa 8:16  And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
1Sa 8:17  He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
1Sa 8:18  And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
1Sa 8:19  Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us;
1Sa 8:20  That we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.
1Sa 8:21  And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD.
1Sa 8:22  And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 14, 2012, 05:22:07 pm
Looks like mainline Churchianity is putting the final nail in the coffin...in terms of going into the strong delusion/revealing of the man of sin Paul preached about in 2nd The 2. No, I'm NOT saying Romney is the Antichrist - but nonetheless it's gotten to an all-time low now...

http://news.yahoo.com/mormonism-voter-enthusiasm-concern-evangelicals-190931883--election.html

Mormonism, voter enthusiasm concern evangelicals
By RACHEL ZOLL | Associated Press – Tue, Oct 9, 2012

NEW YORK (AP) — Evangelical leaders worried that Mitt Romney's Mormonism could suppress conservative turnout on Election Day are intensifying appeals for Christians to vote.

In poll after poll, evangelicals have overwhelmingly said they would back the Republican presidential nominee despite theological differences with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
. But what had been thought of as a hypothetical question for American evangelicals for years, Southern Baptist leader Al Mohler said recently, is now a reality with this election and is being tested in a contest that will likely be decided by slim margins.

"The fact is that Mitt Romney is a Mormon, and many of our people are very, very uncomfortable about voting for a Mormon, as I am. I supported somebody else in the primary. But, hey, we have no option," said Steve Strang, an influential Pentecostal publisher, in a conference call with pastors last week.

Strang was speaking to participants in Pulpit Freedom Sunday, an annual challenge to IRS rules on churches' political activity. While arguing that the government regulations had the effect of silencing pastors, he also cited Mormonism as one reason clergy haven't more forcefully urged congregants to vote this year.

"The Mormons are good, God-fearing people in their own way," Strang said. "We have to be sure our people don't stay at home
."
>:(

Last month, more than two dozen prominent evangelical leaders issued a statement emphasizing the values spelled out in the GOP platform against abortion, gay marriage and other policies were more important than an individual politician's religion. Christians generally do not consider Mormonism part of historic Christianity, although Mormons do.

"Some have tempered their enthusiasm for sound governing principles by their concerns over differences in a candidate's theological doctrine," the letter states, without mentioning Mormonism. "It is time to remind ourselves that civil government is not about a particular theology but rather about public policy."

**I hate to break it to you, but Romney is pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-gun control, Obamacare is modeled after his Romneycare which was authored by an MIT professor, etc, etc. WHOOPS!

Among those signing the statement were the Rev. Franklin Graham, head of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association; veteran political operative Ralph Reed of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, a political action group for religious conservatives; Mark DeMoss, an evangelical adviser to the Romney campaign; and Frank Wright, head of the National Religious Broadcasters, the Washington lobby for Christian radio, TV and digital media.

Evangelicals make up about a third of voters who are registered or lean Republican. Some Republicans have estimated that a significant number of Christian conservatives have not been voting in presidential elections and have focused on getting them registered. But that effort has a new wrinkle this year: Romney is the first Mormon nominee for president from a major party.

DeMoss, who has supported Romney since his first bid for the GOP nomination in 2008, said he has found evangelical concerns about voting for a Mormon steadily decreasing, "but there are people for whom it still is an issue."

** ??? an EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN who's been on the Romney bandwagon for AWHILE NOW?!

The Assemblies of God, a Missouri-based Pentecostal group with more than 12,600 U.S. churches, has launched its first national voter education and registration drive in a presidential-election year. George O. Wood, the denomination's leader, said he was inspired to undertake the project by Champion the Vote, which works to identify and mobilize previously unregistered conservative Christians.

The Assemblies of God voter drive makes no mention of specific candidates or their religion, but the denomination is among the many Christian churches that, in an effort to counter what it considers heretical, has been challenging Mormonism as unbiblical. Pentecostals are known for spirit-filled worship, belief in divine healing and, according to surveys, their social conservatism.

"I think our people recognize we live in a pluralistic culture, therefore one has to look at a candidate and see what values and policies they have independent of what their religious association might be and make a determination on that basis," Wood said in a phone interview. "You can form friendships with people even though you don't agree with them doctrinally."


** Again...BOTH candidates are pro-abortion, pro-gun rights, pro-big government, pro-universal health care, etc.

Pastors are struggling to get that message across while still making clear that important doctrinal differences with Mormons remain. Conservative Christians believe they have a duty to point out beliefs they fear could lead others astray and risk their salvation.

As Strang was getting out the vote last month, the news editor of his best-known magazine, Charisma, wrote a column calling Mormonism "bizarre" and a "Christianesque cult." Another columnist called Mormon doctrines "creepy and (with apologies to Mitt Romney) demonic."

Janet Parshall, a veteran Christian broadcaster now with Moody Radio, invited on her show Tricia Erickson, a former Mormon turned born-again Christian and author of "Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters? The Mormon Church Versus the Office of the Presidency of the United States of America."

Parshall effusively praised Mormons for their dedication to family and compassion for others. She spoke fondly about working with Mormons in Washington. "When we would fight for pro-family issues, boy I tell you, we'd be able to do that with our Mormon friends because they shared the same kinds of values that we did," Parshall said. But she said there was a need to point out "what is biblically correct and what is not." In the ensuing interview, Erickson went on to call Mormonism blasphemous and describe rituals inside Mormon temples, which are for Mormons in good standing only, as "silly," ''bizarre" and "violent."

Southern Baptist leader Al Mohler and other academics took up the issue in a discussion last month at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the flagship training ground for future leaders of the nearly 16 million-member denomination. Called "The Mormon Moment? Religious Conviction and the 2012 Election," the speakers went to great lengths to emphasize that religion should not be a consideration when voting.

**  ??? ??? I don't think so...you guys were NOT saying this in 2000 and 2004 when Bush II was running for election. You guys were making a big deal how Bush II was a true born again, how we need Christian leaders, etc, etc. So why the change all of a sudden ???

Russell Moore, a theologian and a seminary dean, said a candidate's religious outlook should be examined specifically for "whether or not the person is going to be able to work for the common good." But he and others warned that supporting a candidate for president does not mean accepting his faith.

"If a President Romney is elected," Moore said, "we're the people who are willing to, if we're invited into the Oval Office, say, 'President Romney, here's where we agree with you, here's what we like about what you're doing, and we sincerely want to plead with you to believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ so you don't perish everlasting.'"

**Again... ??? ??? WHY haven't you guys done this with OBAMA the last 4 years? Or how about Clinton in the 90's?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 15, 2012, 05:42:06 pm
Church called out for judicial retention pamphlet

Politics and religion have collided at a Burlington church after pamphlets encouraging voters to remove an Iowa Supreme Court justice were made available at a Sunday service.

A woman who attended the City Church service on Sept. 30 told a pastor she believed it was illegal for a church to display material that promotes specific political action. That pastor told her it wasn’t illegal, and in an Oct. 7 sermon another pastor, Steve Youngblood, castigated her for raising objections about the pamphlets that back the removal of Justice David Wiggins.

“Don’t call yourself a Christian and do that,” Youngblood said in the sermon. “We need to draw a line in the sand. We need to begin to say that at City Church this is how we’re going to be.”

Under a 1954 federal law, it is illegal for tax-exempt organizations, including churches, to promote political candidates or ballot issues. Those who violate the law can lose their tax exempt status, which allows tax deductions on money given to a church and allows a church to avoid paying property taxes.

The woman who objected to the pamphlet contacted the Facebook page of Vote Yes To Retain Iowa Supreme Court Justices on Oct. 3, and a complaint was filed with the Internal Revenue Service on Oct. 10, alleging the church is involved in a political campaign.

An IRS spokesman declined to comment Friday.

“The IRS is prohibited by law from commenting on any specific taxpayer or entity,” spokesman Christopher Miller wrote in an email response to The Associated Press.

In his Oct. 7 sermon, the audio of which was posted online, Youngblood speaks of the woman who complained, saying he’d “like to slap her” and that her husband should rise up and “correct her.”

“What makes me madder is that this person’s husband won’t correct them,” he said. “I don’t like rebellious women. I don’t like rebellious men, either. They’re even worse.”

Youngblood then told the 150 people attending the service that the pamphlets are available, and he encouraged them to pick one up.

City Church services are held in the ballroom of the Hotel Burlington, a former downtown hotel converted into an apartment building.

Youngblood said Friday that a church member placed the pamphlets on a table in the foyer, outside the ballroom.

Youngblood said the pamphlets, which encouraged people to vote against retaining Wiggins in the Nov. 6 election, were not distributed in church and the church wasn’t advising church members on the issue. Social conservative groups have mounted a statewide campaign to remove Wiggins because he joined a unanimous 2009 ruling that found a law banning same-sex marriage violated the Iowa Constitution.

A similar effort sparked by the same ruling succeeded in removing three other justices in the 2010 election.

http://www.timesrepublican.com/page/content.detail/id/258139/Church-called-out-for-judicial-retention-pamphlet-.html?isap=1&nav=5013&utm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 15, 2012, 05:57:35 pm
In his Oct. 7 sermon, the audio of which was posted online, Youngblood speaks of the woman who complained, saying he’d “like to slap her” and that her husband should rise up and “correct her.”

“What makes me madder is that this person’s husband won’t correct them,” he said. “I don’t like rebellious women. I don’t like rebellious men, either. They’re even worse.”


Rebellious? I believe it is YOU who are being just that for yoking up with the government - don't you know that you can't serve 2 masters?

BTW - you'd "like to slap her"?


1Co_7:1  Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.


Gal 5:22  But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23  Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24  And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25  If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.


For the record, I don't agree with the woman did either, going to a Facebook page(that supports this judge) to tattle-tale on the pastor. She should have gone to the pastor privately instead.

Mat 18:15  Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
Mat 18:16  But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
Mat 18:17  And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican
.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 23, 2012, 08:01:50 pm
The 501 (c)(3) INCORPORATED CHURCH Down and Dirty
http://biblicallawcenter.com/?p=107


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 06, 2012, 07:04:57 am
IRS Gives Pass to Churches, More Pastors Speak Out

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has officially reported what Liberty Counsel has been saying all along: The IRS is not auditing churches because it does not have the authority to take away churches’ tax-free status.

For years, leftist groups, such as Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AU), have used deception and fear tactics to censor the church and muzzle pastors. A recent letter to religious leaders by Executive Director Barry Lynn inaccurately said, “If the IRS determines that your house of worship has engaged in unlawful intervention, it can revoke the institution’s tax-exempt status.”

An IRS spokesman said last week that the agency has been inundated with complaints, but they are not going to do any audits because they do not have the authority to do so.

“Churches are tax-exempt inherently,” says Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel. “They don’t need a letter from the IRS to be tax exempt, so their tax-exempt status cannot be taken away by the IRS.”

No church has ever lost its tax-exempt status for opposing or supporting a candidate for political office. Churches and pastors may speak on biblical and moral issues. They can educate about the candidates’ viewpoints. They can encourage people to vote and can assist them in getting to the polls. This year Liberty Counsel has sent over 100,000 copies of its Take Back America: Silence is NOT an Option to pastors and church leaders around America, to encourage pastors and church leaders to speak truth to this generation.

More pastors have been involved this year than ever before, even pastors who have been silenced in the past. Billy Graham is running full-page advertisements in a number of newspapers across the country, urging voters to vote for candidates that support Biblical values of life, natural marriage, and religious liberty.

“This is unprecedented for the world’s best-known evangelist,” says Staver. “Billy Graham has always steered clear of politics. In reality, Billy Graham has merely raised his prophetic voice like any preacher should when Biblical and moral values are placed in jeopardy by politicians,” said Staver.

John MacArthur, a well-known pastor and author, who was against Christian political activism, has had a dramatic change of heart. “I was amazed that one of the historic parties in the U.S. adopted the sins of Romans 1 as their platform,” said MacArthur in a recent Sunday morning sermon. “This is a new day in our country. Parties that used to differ on economics, now differ dramatically on issues that invade the realm of God’s law and morality.”

“I am beginning to see more and more pastors waking up and realizing that Biblical and moral issues are under attack and they have no choice but to speak,” Staver says. “This isn’t politics; it is biblical and moral issues that have been politicized.

http://www.charismanews.com/us/34453-irs-gives-pass-to-churches-more-pastors-speak-out?utm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 06, 2012, 07:05:53 am
Has the IRS given up on auditing churches?

Author: Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley

Recently, an IRS official was quoted as saying that the IRS had suspended auditing churches. Does this mean that the IRS has thrown up its hands and given up on enforcing the tax code against churches? The answer is “no,” the IRS has not given up and the tax code still applies to churches.

The IRS official was Russell Renwicks with the Tax-Exempt and Government Entities division. He said that the IRS had received some complaints about potential violations of the tax code by churches this election cycle. But he stated, “We are holding any potential church audits in abeyance.” What did he mean by this?

Mr. Renwick’s statement stems from a 2009 court ruling involving the IRS’ regulations related to church audits. These regulations began in 1984 when Congress passed the Church Audit Procedures Act (CAPA). CAPA instituted several rules the IRS was required to follow when auditing any churches, and was passed to protect the constitutional rights of churches.

One of the requirements of CAPA is that an IRS official at the level of Regional Commissioner or above approve any church audits prior to the IRS contacting the church. The IRS followed this requirement until 1998 when Congress reorganized the IRS. After 1998, the IRS was no longer organized by regions of the country. Instead, it became organized by the constituency it served. So, until 1998, the IRS had regions like the Midwest region or the Northeast region. After 1998, the IRS has divisions such as the small business division and the exempt organizations division.

One consequence of Congress reorganizing the IRS was that the position of Regional Commissioner no longer existed because there were no “regions” in need of a commissioner. So the IRS designated the Director of Examinations in the Exempt Organizations division of the IRS to fulfill the requirement in CAPA previously fulfilled by the Regional Commissioners.

In 2009, a church in Minnesota was being audited by the IRS and challenged the audit. The argument raised by the church was that the IRS was not complying with CAPA because it did not have a sufficiently high level official approving church audits. A federal district court agreed and stopped the IRS’ audit of the church.

After this ruling, the IRS, to the best of our knowledge, shut down all of the church audits that it had ongoing, including one church audit handled by Alliance Defending Freedom. The IRS stated that it was closing the church audit “because of a pending issue regarding the procedure used to initiate the inquiry.” The “pending issue” was the Minnesota court’s ruling that the IRS was not in compliance with CAPA.

Since that time, the IRS has not been auditing any churches to the best of our knowledge. It has proposed new regulations to designate a higher official in the ranks of the IRS to approve all church audits but it has never finalized those regulations. No one really knows what the delay is, but we believe that the IRS will finalize its regulations at some point and will once again begin auditing churches.

In addition, the IRS still believes it has the authority to audit churches. Its website discusses the requirements for instituting a church audit. And that website was updated as late as November, 2012.

So when Mr. Renwicks said that the IRS was holding church audits in abeyance, he did not mean that the IRS was giving up and saying that it will never audit churches again. All Mr. Renwicks said was that it was holding church audits in abeyance until it finalized its new regulations. And we should remember that the IRS has the ability to go back in time and audit churches that it believes has violated the tax code during this time that it is not auditing churches.

The important point for churches to remember is that the IRS has not given up on enforcing the tax code against churches. Churches must still be aware of the IRS regulations.
We have great resources on our website about those regulations to help churches understand their rights.

And we also must not give up on challenging the constitutionality of the Johnson Amendment and the IRS’ enforcement of that law. Alliance Defending Freedom believes that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional and the IRS’ attempts to censor a pastor’s sermon from the pulpit violate the First Amendment. For more information on this legal challenge, visit www.pulpitfreedom.org.

Alliance Defending Freedom stands ready to protect and defend the rights of churches, especially in relation to the IRS. It is important that churches know and act on the right information in this critical area. If you have any specific question regarding what your church can do, please contact us and one of our attorneys will help.

http://blogs.christianpost.com/liberty/has-the-irs-given-up-on-auditing-churches-12910/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 06, 2012, 07:49:33 am
Quote
More pastors have been involved this year than ever before, even pastors who have been silenced in the past. Billy Graham is running full-page advertisements in a number of newspapers across the country, urging voters to vote for candidates that support Biblical values of life, natural marriage, and religious liberty.

“This is unprecedented for the world’s best-known evangelist,” says Staver. “Billy Graham has always steered clear of politics. In reality, Billy Graham has merely raised his prophetic voice like any preacher should when Biblical and moral values are placed in jeopardy by politicians,” said Staver.

Well, they're going to have to give an account to the Lord at the Judgment Seat of Christ(or the Great White Throne of Judgment) for this - don't they have any idea that Romney has the SAME Liberalism ideas as Obama? Don't they have any idea that Romney is a Mormon?

Quote
John MacArthur, a well-known pastor and author, who was against Christian political activism, has had a dramatic change of heart. “I was amazed that one of the historic parties in the U.S. adopted the sins of Romans 1 as their platform,” said MacArthur in a recent Sunday morning sermon. “This is a new day in our country. Parties that used to differ on economics, now differ dramatically on issues that invade the realm of God’s law and morality.”

Well, MacArthur's NIV/NKJV "study bibles" make me shudder to begin with.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 18, 2012, 07:28:02 pm
Pastors Battle IRS on Pulpit Freedom Sunday

Shouldn't our pulpits be free? More than 1,200 pastors in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico think so.

Pastors around the country have registered to participate in the fifth annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

Registered pastors have committed to preach sermons that present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates. In so doing, they will exercise their constitutionally protected freedom to engage in religious expression from the pulpit despite an Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment that activist groups often use to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status.


So how did this turn out for them on the night of 11/06? ::)

While the IRS may not do anything about it now, when things really start to go down, they're going to be given an ultimatum, with no chance of being given to "resist" like this. We'll all find out if these "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" pastors will be either part of the wheat, or part of the tares.

Gal 6:7  Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Gal 6:8  For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.



Title: Local churches start petition for stricter gun control laws
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 13, 2013, 09:21:23 am
http://www.wkrn.com/story/20572979/local-churches-start-petition-for-stricter-gun-control-laws

1/12/13

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -
Brothers and priests, Fathers Joseph and Philip Breen, are leading their parishes, St. Edward Catholic Church and St. Ann Catholic Church to take a stand on a controversial issue.

At Mass on Saturday, Father Joseph Breen of St. Edward Catholic Church encouraged his parishioners to sign a petition calling for stricter laws against assault weapons and high capacity ammunition clips.
 
The petition is in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting last month in Newtown, Connecticut.

"I said to myself, what is it I can do, and I feel very strongly about banning all assault weapons," Father Breen told Nashville's News 2. "We just hope that we keep these weapons from people that could do a lot of harm."
 
Father Breen is calling on support from his parish, and the community in hopes of stricter gun control.

"This is something we need to do to get the assault weapons off of our streets and make everything a little bit safer," Father Breen said. "We're not taking away the ability or to make it illegal to have arms in your homes."
 
While Father Breen knows this is a tough battle and a controversial issue, he believes this petition is the first step.
 
"We who have a love for children, we who love this country America, we need to make it less violent and I'm hoping this [the petition] is one way to make it a little bit safer."
 
The signed petitions will be sent to Congress and President Obama.

The petitions will be available to sign at Sunday Mass.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 16, 2013, 12:28:35 pm
Quote
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-unveils-sweeping-plan-battle-gun-violence-165956859--politics.html


 Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

This is one of 23 gun control agendas that Obama plans to push(or even sign EOs).

Did anyone catch this part? "houses of worship" aka churches in America?

Looks like Caesar is finally come back to collect his chips.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 09, 2013, 05:01:47 pm
http://www.churchleaders.com/pastors/pastor-articles/165157-andy-stanley-obama-is-pastor-in-chief.html

article over 2 weeks old.

Andy Stanley: Obama Is "Pastor-in-Chief"

In a pre-inauguration sermon on Monday morning at St. John's Episcopal Church in Washington D. C., pastor Andy Stanley of North Point Community Church in Georgia referred to President Barack Obama as the "pastor-in-chief" based on his behavior during some of the nation's recent tragic events. The regular pastor at St. John's, Luis Leon, was asked to deliver the benediction at Obama's public inauguration ceremony that morning.
 
The Christian Post reported that Stanley thanked President Obama for his compassionate response to the Newtown school shooting in December, when 26 students and staff were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School before the shooter took his own life. Stanley talked about doing what is necessary when you're "the most powerful person in the room," referring to the story in John 13 where Jesus was surely the most influential person but chose to wash the feet of the disciples. Stanley prayed that Obama would "continue to leverage this influence for the sake of our nation and the sake of the world."
 
Stanley made his comments that morning among opposing opinions of Obama by other pastors in the nation. Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle tweeted on inauguration day, "Praying for our president, who today will place his hands on a Bible he does not believe to take an oath to a God he likely does not know." Driscoll's tweet produced a great deal of debate among the Christian community, some criticizing him for his "judgment" of the president's faith.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 21, 2013, 03:53:52 pm
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/21/17044936-bill-targeting-boy-scouts-tax-exempt-status-draws-criticism?lite=

2/21/13

Bill targeting Boy Scouts' tax exempt status draws criticism

A proposed law in California to remove a state tax exemption for youth groups like the Boy Scouts that don’t allow gay members would set a dangerous precedent, according to an association of nonprofits.

The legislation, introduced by Democratic State Sen. Ricardo Lara on Tuesday, would deny exemptions from state corporate taxes and taxes on items such groups sell. It would also require them to pay corporate taxes on donations and other forms of income.

Lara and LGBT advocacy group, Equality California, said the bill was aimed at groups like the Boy Scouts of America, which has faced increasing protests over its longstanding policy banning gay Scouts and leaders. An expert said she believed it was the first time such a law had been proposed, though it follows the loss of corporate sponsorship dollars to the BSA due to the policy.
 
The California Association of Nonprofits, which has 1,500 member organizations, said it opposed the legislation in its current form, even though the group opposes discrimination based upon sexual orientation or gender identity as outlined in the bill, SB 323.

“ … we are against using the tax exemption as a way to compel change in a nonprofit's policies,” Kris Lev-Twombly, the group’s director of public policy, wrote late Wednesday in an email. “Stripping nonprofits of tax exemption on ideological grounds is a slippery slope. Nonprofits are the embodiments of free speech in our society. When we disagree with a nonprofit's policies, we should vote by moving our donation dollars and our volunteer feet elsewhere.”

Uhm...no it doesn't...once you signed up for your 501c3 tax-exempt status, you pretty much gave up your 1st ammendment rights to the government in exchange for pottage. Does Esau ring a bell?

Heb 12:16  Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
Heb 12:17  For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.


The association said it is difficult to estimate how many of California's 50,000 nonprofits could be impacted because there is no reliable data on how many discriminate based upon sexual orientation. [/size]

“To lose state tax exemption in California could be significant for a nonprofit organization,” he said. “The bill is narrow in the sense that the provision applies specifically to youth organizations, but the question is how many organizations in California might be found to discriminate as outlined in the bill.”

The law would require two-thirds approval of both houses of the state legislature to win approval. Lara said the state already bans discrimination based on sexual orientation in public accommodations and government programs.

“Our state values the important role that youth groups play in the empowerment of our next generation; this is demonstrated by rewarding organizations with tax exemptions supported financially by all Californians,” he said in a statement. “SB 323 seeks to end the unfortunate discriminatory and outdated practices by certain youth groups by revoking their tax exemption privilege should they not comply with our non-discrimination laws.”

The Boy Scouts of America declined to comment on the legislation, which comes about two weeks after it postponed a decision on whether to end the policy at the national level and leave local sponsoring organizations free to decide for themselves whether to admit gay Scouts.

The BSA said it had received an outpouring of feedback on the membership guidelines after the potential change was announced in late January, and that it would take action on the issue at its national meeting in May.
 
More than two-thirds of Scouting groups are affiliated with religious bodies. Among the top religious sponsors, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have called for more time to discuss the issue, while the Southern Baptists on Tuesday passed a resolution rejecting the proposed change, according to the Baptist Press.

Pat Read, an independent consultant for nonprofits and foundations nationwide, said she believed such legislation was a first. However, she said there was a precedent, noting a 1983 Supreme Court case in which the IRS said it would no longer provide tax exempt status to private schools that practiced racial discrimination – a fight the federal tax agency won.

Read said the bill would have a financial impact and could potentially deter people from making donations.

“When the federal government or a state government stands up and says that this nonprofit is not a good nonprofit because of some policy it has adopted, it affects the ability of people to support that group, it affects how much money it has available to support its programs versus paying taxes, and it affects public opinion about the value of its work,” she said by phone from Boulder, Colo. “And all three things are important and all three things are at stake in this legislation.”

She said this legislation could wind up in court if it is approved, noting private organizations would likely object and say, "you have no right to try to tell us what to do.”

“Some of them will be saying, you know, 'well tough we don’t need the tax exemption,'” she added. “But there will be a price to be paid for that.”


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on March 18, 2013, 05:47:30 am
I got this from Bryan today...

Quote
I just heard about the "Christian and Missionary Alliance" doing corporate take-overs of small debt-free churches here in America! I will be doing a short message on this issue within the next few days.

Anyone know about this? ???

Congregation locked out of church building
Pastor says property taken by alliance despite growing membership


Members of a community church in Paramus, N.J., are in a state of disbelief over this week’s confiscation of their beloved church building, built and paid for by members of the church back in 1929.

This past Sunday, the body of believers of the Community Church of Faith and Hope, with a congregation closing in on 100 strong, met in the building for what appears to be the last time.

Monday morning a locksmith hired by the Christian & Missionary Alliance locked the church members out of their building after the New Jersey Court of Appeals ruled that the denomination has every right to exercise a “reversionary” clause, and take the valuable property away from local members.

Although the court ruling clearly gives the congregation until March 18 to turn over the keys to the building, the CMA didn’t wait, and shuttered the building, personal possessions and all, first thing Monday morning.

While the church members are shocked by the property confiscation, they are more bewildered that the Christian Missionary Alliance denomination would act in such a way toward fellow believers.

“We haven’t been treated very Christ-like by the Christian Missionary Alliance,” says Pastor Joseph Smaha, whose battle-weary congregation can’t believe the beloved church of A.B. Simpson would behave in such a way.

Alliance officials did not respond to WND requests for comment.

WND reported a year ago about the dispute between the small community church in suburban New Jersey, and the Metropolitan District of the CMA, led by Bruce Terpstra.

The alliance had determined the church was dying, so ownership of the property and all of the congregation’s assets must be turned over to the denomination.

“Not so,” the pastor of the church, Smaha tells WND.

“There has never been any indication that our church is ‘dying’,” he says. “On the contrary, our body has been growing by leaps and bounds.”

Smaha tells WND that the average attendance has been approaching 100 for quite awhile.

“Our congregation is vibrant, in love with Jesus, and growing steadily, with new people coming in every week,” he says. “What’s more exciting than that is the people receiving Jesus as Lord through our outreach.”

In fact, Smaha tried to explain how healthy the congregation was to Terpstra and Fred Henry, a regional director for the CMA, but the Christian pastor was told, “You could be making the numbers up.”

Smaha urged the pair to come visit the church and “observe the great work that God is doing here,” but his offers were declined.

WND visited the small church for a worship service and observed large numbers in attendance. Far more than the CMA constitution calls for in downgrading a church to “developing.”

Insisting that the congregation is not “viable,” conference officials dispatched a rebuttal to one WND report that said:

    “Because we rely so heavily on the Internet as a source of information that is often unverifiable, we must exercise great caution in what we choose to accept as truth. More than any other generation, we must read Internet articles with great discernment and a healthy dose of skepticism. The sworn enemy of Christ’s church has vowed to stop at nothing to bring about its demise. And the use of media has become a frequent weapon of choice.” – From a CMA letter to pastors.

The Christian Missionary Alliance turned to the courts when congregation members raised objections to turning over the building which they had built and paid for before joining the CMA.

One pastor that WND spoke with, Joseph Broz, told WND that the denomination literally told him they didn’t owe him any prayer while they were attempting to take away his church in Pennsylvania, in a similar fashion.

Broz told WND in an interview that he nearly died in an accident, and the CMA District Superintendent Wayne Spriggs refused to even pass along a prayer request for the injured man.

In the midst of his battle with the C&MA, Broz was in a serious car accident that left him in critical condition. His son, an EMT, emailed C&MA District Superintendent Wayne Spriggs asking for prayer for Broz, saying, “it doesn’t look good.”

Broz told WND, “Spriggs later admitted to him that he never passed on the prayer request, because unbeknownst [to him], Spriggs had revoked the pastor’s credentials due to the property battle, saying, ‘We didn’t owe you any prayer.’”

Broz tells WND that removing a pastor’s credentials and decimating a congregation seem to be standard for the C&MA during one of these “takeovers.”

In fact, WND has reported on several instances of “property confiscation” by the CMA, each involving the practice of exercising a “reversionary clause” in church documents.

The same method repeats itself in CMA churches across the country, and James Sundquist has produced a DVD chronicling the destruction of these churches called “Making Merchandise of Men’s Souls.”

In a number of cases, the members of the local church are shocked to find the locks on the doors to their sanctuaries changed by the CMA without warning.

In July WND reported that the Grace Community Alliance Church in Baldwin Park, Calif., was also nearly locked out of their building.

Much like the Paramus Church, the pastor of Grace Church told WND that everything was going fine at his church until the CMA District Superintendent Bill Malick decided to take the church away under the “reversionary clause.”

In that case, the church had a spotless record of paying dues to the C&MA “Great Commission Fund,” and members say they have had no issues with the district.

But the alliance decided to strip the pastor of his credentials and classify the church as “development” in order to take control of the property.

“We are not in chaos, we are not in financial difficulty,” Pastor Fred Cheock of Grace Community Alliance Church told WND.

“Still, the District Superintendant Bill Malick labels us as ‘development,’ and within weeks tries to cancel all of our worship services and lock our people out of our building,” Choeck says.

Choeck and his congregation are still fighting the CMA over the property.

The pastor of the Paramus church provides WND with a similar account.

Smaha told WND that his church had no problems, and actually he hadn’t even spoken to the CMA District personnel in years.

That all changed when he called them for advice on how to biblically deal with a secretary who allegedly had embezzled thousands of dollars from the church treasury.

Smaha says “our small church was out-of-sight-out-of-mind until someone from the district realized what a nice, valuable piece of property the Paramus congregation had built up.

“Suddenly the district tells us we’re not a viable congregation, and they are invoking the reversionary clause,” he tells WND.

Smaha tells WND that the CMA took his description about how his congregation and the church had survived through lean years, even sold the parsonage to raise funds to repair the sanctuary, and twisted it into a story for a judge about how the church is no longer viable.

“Nothing could be further from the truth, but a judge wouldn’t let us present testimony, he simply ruled that the CMA can deal with its churches however they see fit.”

Smaha tells WND that the small church has been more than viable in recent years, growing from a low of about 20 in attendance to nearly 100. The church also provides a separate service for a Hispanic congregation, has money in the bank and is debt free.

Smaha said the CMA denomination never contributed a penny to the work of the local church, yet now has taken over a debt-free building that has been in the same community of believers for generations.

Smaha told WND that on top of seizing the church building, the CMA has also sent a letter this week demanding the $28,000 the church had in its checking account when this battle began.

“They also plan to sue us for court costs apparently because they feel entitled to all that money because we shouldn’t have stood up for what’s right,” he said.

“I also find it laughable that they claim we are not viable, yet admit that we are completely debt free, and have $28,000 in the bank. We are thriving, and they are lying.”

Reversionary clause

Smaha tells WND that his church was actually aware that a reversionary clause existed in church documents, but that elders from his very church questioned the CMA about it before joining the denomination in the 1990s.

“He was a nice, old World War II vet, who wanted to make sure our congregation wasn’t being taken advantage of,” Smaha tells WND.

The CMA assured this kind elder that the reversionary clause would “never, ever be invoked unless there was an extreme case of a congregational split, false teaching, or the church just closed its doors one day.”

None of which have been alleged in this case.

“Clearly, the court’s involvement in a matter of church governance would run afoul of the First Amendment,” said the recent court decision.

The court referred to the church operating as a hierarchy in its rationale for not getting involved. But Dan Wetzel, the CMA interim vice president of Church Ministries in Colorado Springs, said, “We are not a hierarchal body.”

“Defendants [the Paramus Church] ask the court to intervene in a dispute between them and the CMA. This is a matter of ‘church government’ which the Supreme Court has declared must be free of ‘secular control or manipulation’ under the First Amendment,” says the court ruling.

It was in Colorado Springs that a Chinese CMA congregation had its property seized by the conference, and sold for a karate studio.

Alliance members were heartbroken to learn that the CMA had thrown all of their expensive Chinese-language Bibles into a dumpster.

WND met up with Bruce Terpstra and the CMA attorney Hopkins at the courthouse in New Jersey.

When asked for a comment on the fight between the small church and the denomination, Hopkins replied, “We prefer to handle this situation to the glory of God’s Kingdom rather than in the media.”

Smaha tells WND that a fund has been set up to help the church, as they will now need to rent a meeting place. To help, send donations to: C/O Community Church of Faith and Hope, PO Box 683, Paramus, N.J., 07653

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/congregation-locked-out-of-church-building/#LdgF31EoHDrDTklv.99



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on March 18, 2013, 06:10:10 am
"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:" 1 Peter 5:8 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 22, 2013, 09:20:31 pm
This is an Opinion Piece - but nonetheless if you understand what he's reading(whether you agree with him or not), he makes some good points concerning the (modern-day)church.

First Person: Legal Support of Gay Marriage Places Undue Financial Burdens on Churches

FIRST PERSON | The biggest problem with gay marriage is the government's involvement in marriage.

Marriage is a covenant between two people, ratified by their church or community, and protected by the government. That protection should be limited to contractual settlements between the parties involved as a result of a divorce or separation -- especially where children are involved.

Yet the government has usurped authority it does not have and has begun giving tax credits and mandating services and benefits for married couples. For example, if a company offers health insurance to its employees and their families, the government mandates that the health insurance be provided to spouses.

What happens in the case, however, of an employer who is morally opposed to gay marriage? Should it be legalized, employers will now be forced to provide coverage to "spouses" they are morally opposed to recognizing.

I work for a Christian company and I'm a 36-year-old elder in my local church in Southern Pines, N.C. In both cases, they have the right, and possibly the duty, to oppose gay marriage, including the funding of health and benefits coverage for the gay spouse. If gay marriage were to be legalized, as the case may be with the Supreme Court hearing challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, they would not only be financially required to provide these benefits to gay spouses, but would also be forced to do so in violation of their consciences.

This is not simply a matter of gays wanting equal access to marriage; this is a case of the government imposing acceptance of and financial support of gay marriage upon individuals and employers who are morally opposed to gay marriage. Both my employer and my church would be required to violate their consciences and diminish funds they are using for other endeavors because of the government's actions in regard to marriage. My church, specifically, would be required to reduce funds for missions, evangelism, worship, upkeep, and charitable support of the poor and needy because of this law.

There are other theological and philosophical reasons that could be addressed, but this practical argument is an important one.

The government has created a situation, by virtue of its usurpations, where gay marriage is seen a necessary right for homosexuals rather than the covenantal institution it actually is.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, if your church hadn't yoked up with the government via 501c3, they would NOT have been in this position in the first place!


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 03, 2013, 02:27:16 pm
Was just having this discussion on another message forum - if the USSC rules that SSM is a constitutional right in June(or at the bare minimum, strike down DOMA and a CA's Prop 8 - which would likely over the long haul get SSM legalized across the country, b/c of a lot of tax return complications), the 501c3 modern-day church is really going to be cornered in a box, why? B/c if they don't perform SS weddings, then they violated their 501c3 status, hence will get their tax-exempt status stripped. OR, at bare minimum, with the global economy continuing to go in free fall, these churches will feel obligated to do so as they'll be desperate for more money with their pews losing their incomes and resources(ie-501c3 churches get tax benefits for performing weddings).

Yeah, these are some really interesting times we're living in - we're going to find out really soon which of these churches and ministries are the true sheep, or were goats all along.

Matthew 5:6  Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Mat 5:7  Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Mat 5:8  Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.


Mat 5:10  Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:11  Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Mat 5:12  Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
Mat 5:13  Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.




Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on May 03, 2013, 05:21:08 pm
27  So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?
28  He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
29  But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
30  Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Matthew 13:27-30 (KJB)


"He that hath an ear..."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 07, 2013, 11:36:09 pm
Biden Wants Pastors, Rabbis and Nuns to Tell Their Flocks: Enacting More Gun Control Is the Moral Thing to Do
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/07/biden-wants-pastors-rabbis-and-nuns-to-tell-their-flocks-enacting-more-gun-control-is-the-moral-thing-to-do/
5/7/13

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Vice President Joe Biden has a commandment for pastors, rabbis and nuns: He wants them to tell their flocks that enacting gun control is the moral thing to do. But another vote may have to wait until Congress wraps up work on an immigration overhaul.

Biden met for two-and-a-half hours Monday with more than a dozen leaders from various faith communities – Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh, to name a few. Both Biden and the faith leaders encouraged each other not to give up on what has been an arduous and thus far fruitless effort by Biden and President Barack Obama to pass new gun laws in the wake of December’s schoolhouse shooting in Connecticut.

Around a large, circular table in a conference room on the White House grounds, Biden waxed optimistic about prospects for passing a bill, according to four participants who spoke to The Associated Press after the meeting. Biden’s chief of staff, Bruce Reed, joined the group, as did a handful of Obama aides who work on faith-based outreach. The meeting closed with a meditation and a prayer for action.

But don’t expect a vote any time soon.

“The conversation presumed the vote would happen first on immigration,” said Rabbi David Saperstein, who directs the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. “That seemed to be the back-and-forth on both sides — that immigration was a key priority right now. When that vote took place, it would be an opportunity to refocus on this.”

more


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 14, 2013, 10:23:06 am
Posting this here b/c we are seeing the reaping of the rotten fruits of these tax-exempt, 501c3 organizations. No, I don't like at all what the IRS is doing here, but nonetheless these organizations yoked up with the IRS to start with b/c of the love of money, so now their consequences are they have to bear with them b/c the IRS gave them their right to exist.

http://news.yahoo.com/irs-kept-shifting-targets-tax-exempt-groups-scrutiny-041423528.html
IRS kept shifting targets in tax-exempt groups scrutiny: report
5/13/13

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When tax agents started singling out non-profit groups for extra scrutiny in 2010, they looked at first only for key words such as 'Tea Party,' but later they focused on criticisms by groups of "how the country is being run," according to investigative findings reviewed by Reuters on Sunday.

Over two years, IRS field office agents repeatedly changed their criteria while sifting through thousands of applications from groups seeking tax-exempt status to select ones for possible closer examination, the findings showed.

At one point, the agents chose to screen applications from groups focused on making "America a better place to live."

Exactly who at the IRS made the decisions to start applying extra scrutiny was not clear from the findings, which were contained in portions of an investigative report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

Expected to be made public this week, the report was obtained in part by Reuters over the weekend as a full-blown scandal involving the IRS scrutiny widened, embarrassing the agency and distracting the Obama administration.

In one part of the report, TIGTA officials observed that the application screening effort showed "confusion about how to process the applications, delays in the processing of the applications, and a lack of management oversight and guidance."

After brewing for months, the IRS effort exploded into wider view on Friday when Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations for the IRS, apologized for what she called the "inappropriate" targeting of conservative groups for closer scrutiny, something the agency had long denied.

At a legal conference in Washington, while taking questions from the audience, Lerner said the agency was sorry.

She said the screening practice was confined to an IRS office in Cincinnati; that it was "absolutely not" influenced by the Obama administration; and that none of the targeted groups was denied tax-free status.

It is clear from the TIGTA findings that Lerner was informed in June 2011 that the extra scrutiny was occurring. Key words in the names of groups - including 'Tea Party,' "Patriot' and '9/12' - were being used to choose applications, TIGTA found.

"Issues" criteria were also used, TIGTA found. Scrutiny was being given to references to "Government spending, Government debt, or taxes; Education of the public via advocacy/lobbying to 'make America a better place to live;' and Statements in the case file (that) criticize how the country is being run."

Under these early criteria, more than 100 tax-exempt applications had been identified, according to TIGTA.

Briefed on the practice, Lerner ordered changes.

CONSTANTLY SHIFTING CRITERIA

By July 2011, the IRS was no longer targeting just groups with certain key words in their names. Rather, the screening criteria had changed to "organizations involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy."

**As we all know, 501c3s cannot engage in this. And they agreed so in order that they can write off donations on their 1040s.

But then it changed again in January 2012 to cover "political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the constitution and bill of rights, social economic reform/movement," according to the findings contained in a Treasury Department watchdog report.

In March 2012, after Tea Party groups complained about delays in processing of their applications, then-IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman was called to testify by a congressional committee. He denied that the IRS was targeting tax-exempt groups based on their politics.

The IRS said on Saturday that senior IRS executives were not aware of the screening process. The documents reviewed by Reuters do not show that Shulman had any role.

In May 2012, the criteria for scrutiny were revised again to cover a variety of tax-exempt groups "with indicators of significant amounts of political campaign intervention (raising questions as to exempt purpose and/or excess private benefit)," according to a TIGTA timeline included in the findings.

THOUSANDS OF APPLICATIONS

Each year the IRS reviews as many as 60,000 applications from groups ranging from charities to labor unions that want to be classified as tax-exempt. "Social welfare" groups dedicated to the general good can be tax-exempt under tax law 501(c)4.

These groups do not have to disclose the identities of their donors and they can spend money on advertising for general issues, but they may not endorse specific candidates or parties
.

The U.S. Supreme Court's January 2010 "Citizens United" ruling unleashed a torrent of new political spending and 501(c)4 groups became a popular conduit for some of it, on both ends of the political spectrum, but especially for conservatives.

The number of applications sent to the IRS by groups seeking 501(c)4 status rose to 3,400 in 2012 from 1,500 in 2010. As money poured into 501(c)4 groups, campaign finance activists began to raise questions and demanded a crackdown by the IRS.

(Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh, Kim Dixon and Patrick Temple-West; Editing by Eric Walsh)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 14, 2013, 10:28:23 am
^^

Seriously - read this article, this is NOTHING new done by the IRS. Again, I do NOT endorse the draconian IRS, but time and time again over the years, organizations would agree to make the IRS their head in exchange for the love of money, then later on they would arrogantly act like they are above this very same head they contracted with. This is no different from Esau selling his birthright for a bowl of pottage...

Heb 12:17  For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

For ye cannot serve God and mammon.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on May 14, 2013, 11:11:48 am
Quote
Exactly who at the IRS made the decisions to start applying extra scrutiny was not clear from the findings, which were contained in portions of an investigative report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA).

I think your missing the bigger picture in this story.

I get that organizations made a deal with the IRS, and with that comes certain requirements, but this story is about something else entirely.

This is about a government agency stepping outside their bounds to single out certain groups of people solely based on their political affiliations. It's tyrannical abuse of power, and I'd say it likely originates at the White House.

Quote
By July 2011, the IRS was no longer targeting just groups with certain key words in their names. Rather, the screening criteria had changed to "organizations involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy."

**As we all know, 501c3s cannot engage in this. And they agreed so in order that they can write off donations on their 1040s.

Yes, we know that they are not suppose to do certain things, once they are a non-profit, but this was involving groups that were applying to become a non-profit, so the rules don't apply yet, as they were not non-profits yet!

This was a political witch hunt is what it was. Purely political motivated looking to single out opponents to the current administration.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on May 15, 2013, 11:35:05 am
IRS Official: We are "Close" to Auditing Churches Again

For some time now, the IRS has not been auditing churches. As I explained in more detail in this post, the IRS’ decision to “suspend” church audits stems from a 2009 federal court decision finding the IRS’ regulations on church audits to be unlawful. Since that decision, the IRS, to the best of anyone’s knowledge, has not been auditing any churches. It has said since 2009 that it is preparing new regulations that will enable it to begin auditing churches again, but we have not seen those regulations finalized.
 
However, at a recent tax conference, Treasury Attorney-Advisor Ruth Madrigal said that the IRS’ long-awaited rules on church audits are “close” to being finalized. So what does this mean for churches?
 
What this means is that once the IRS’ regulations on auditing churches are finalized, then it is logical to assume that the IRS will begin auditing churches again. Whether this means that the IRS will audit churches that participated in Pulpit Freedom Sunday remains to be seen. We will have to closely watch the IRS’ actions once the church audit rules are finalized.
 
But ultimately, the constitutional rights of pastors and churches do not turn on whether the IRS decides to audit churches. Alliance Defending Freedom has said for years that the Johnson Amendment in section 501(c)(3) of the tax code is unconstitutional. If the IRS audits and penalizes churches for something it believes violates the Johnson Amendment, then Alliance Defending Freedom stands ready to defend the constitutional rights of America’s pastors to speak biblical truth uncensored by the IRS.
 
For now, we will continue to monitor the situation and will make you aware of any changes the IRS proposes. As we say here at Alliance Defending Freedom, “You watch your flock, and we’ll watch the horizon.” And if you have not yet signed up to participate in Pulpit Freedom Sunday, please do so today. This year, Pulpit Freedom Sunday is all about marriage, and America desperately needs to hear what God says about marriage at this crucial time. Signing up for Pulpit Freedom Sunday is easy and we hope to see thousands of pastors standing united on June 9, 2013, preaching biblical truth about marriage. Will you be one of those pastors? Please sign up today.

http://blogs.christianpost.com/liberty/irs-official-we-are-close-to-auditing-churches-again-16109/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on May 15, 2013, 11:38:11 am
IRS tells pro-life ministry to promote abortion
 
Evidence suggests problem of politicization of tax collector far bigger than admitted


The Internal Revenue Service already has confessed to targeting and trying to injure tea party, Constitution and patriot organizations, by demanding answers to arbitrary questions and delaying their applications for a tax status so they could operate.
 
Now WND has learned that the IRS also put an organization in its bull’s-eye that wanted to do nothing more than share its pro-life message with churches.

Cherish Life Ministries was created to be a non-profit under the IRS 501(c)3 provision so that churches would feel comfortable working together.
 
Peter Shinn founded the group, because he already was working with ProlifeUnity.com, but as it did not carry the same tax code designation as a religious institution, some churches were reluctant to hear the message from its education materials.
 
And even more reluctant to participate, Shinn told WND.
 
The mission of the ProlifeUnity group is to “save the unborn and defend the defenseless, no exceptions, no compromise.”
 
It organizes pickets, works through email campaigns and takes “direct action” on the dispute.
 
So Shinn launched Cherish Life Ministries, a separate organization, to offer help to a coalition of churches that supports mothers struggling with unexpected pregnancies, promotes abstinence and advocates for an end to abortion in the community, state and nation.
 
“Our goal is to assist churches, organize and support a life ministry in defense of life and help function as an outreach to people struggling with unwanted pregnancies in the local community,” the site states.
 
Education materials are offered.
 
But Shinn said the IRS contacted him regarding his application for nonprofit status, and was told he didn’t qualify.
 
“The representative was telling me I had to provide information on all aspects of abortion, I couldn’t just educate the church from the pro-life perspective,” he said. “Every time I pressed her on this issue and asked her to clarify her position, she would state that it wasn’t what she was saying, and then, she would repeat it almost the same way.”
 
The IRS agent did not respond to a WND request for comment on the ministry’s position.
 
But Shinn said he was accused of setting up a political organization.
 
“I asked her why she said we were political organization and she said it was because we had said in our application that we did less than 5 percent political activity. I explained to her that this was what was stated in the application and all we were doing was acknowledging that we were doing less than 5 percent political activity,” he said.
 
He said the woman then accused him of having links to political activity on his website, even though he said he did not.
 
“She told me … they were going to deny my application,” he told WND. “She did get nervous though in the end when I pressed her that I wanted specific information about why I had to educate from a pro-abortion perspective not just pro-life. I explained to her that the Pro-Life Action League even has pro-life in their title and they certainly don’t teach pro-abortion topics and they are still 501(c)(3). I also told her that Planned Parenthood does not teach about pro-life issues yet they are also still a 501(c)(3).”
 
He also told WND that the IRS had rewritten his proposed bylaws “to paint our organization as a political organization. I couldn’t believe they took it upon themselves to do that,” he told WND.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/irs-tells-pro-life-ministry-to-promote-abortion/#I0JcuoLhgYeqxQ13.99



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on May 15, 2013, 03:30:52 pm
Quote
Cherish Life Ministries was created to be a non-profit under the IRS 501(c)3 provision so that churches would feel comfortable working together.
 
Peter Shinn founded the group, because he already was working with ProlifeUnity.com, but as it did not carry the same tax code designation as a religious institution, some churches were reluctant to hear the message from its education materials.

"For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them." Luke 6:32 (KJB)

"If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." John 15:19 (KJB)

"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 13, 2013, 11:51:49 pm
It's not just these 10 "charity organizations", but pretty much all of them - late last year, I crossed paths with some "Christian ministry" at the shopping mall, and even they admitted that not all of our donations go directly to the causes they are trying to help.

http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/blog--the-10-worst-charities
The 10 worst charities
An analysis by the Center for Investigative Reporting and a newspaper identifies organizations that fattened solicitors' wallets.

6/13/13

When you give money to charity, it's reasonable to expect the money will go to, well, the charity. But there's an entire industry of "charities" that are masterful at raising money that overwhelmingly goes to the paid companies that do the fundraising.

The Center for Investigative Reporting and the St. Petersburg, Fla., Tampa Bay Times examined the tax records of 6,000 charities that used paid fundraisers and identified the 50 worst in America. None of the 50, which, combined, paid solicitors nearly $1 billion of $1.3 billion raised over the past decade, gave more than 11 cents on the dollar to those who were supposed to benefit, the investigation found.

In some cases, such as with the Cancer Fund of America, if you donated $20, less than 20 cents of your contribution actually went the organization's cause. Among the 50 worst charities, the average amount that went to the cause itself was about 4 cents of every dollar donated. 

Some of these charities have been flagged before -- an indication that even after word has gotten out about how they do business, many consumers aren't aware that practically none of their donation is being used in a charitable way.

Typically, charity rating organizations want to see fundraising costs no higher than 35%, and many major charities are far below that. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and Make-A-Wish Foundation of America spent 19% and 15%, respectively, on fundraising, according to data published by the Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance.

Many of the charities that poured money from donors into the bank accounts of for-profit solicitation companies have names that sound similar to respected national charities and typically have easy-to-support causes as part of their names, including "breast cancer," "firefighters" and "children's cancer."

more


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 16, 2013, 05:41:44 am
US Senate May Take Up Bill to Lift FEMA Ban on Aid to Churches

The United States Senate may be considering a bill that would lift the Federal Emergency Management Agency's ban on providing aid to houses of worship.
 
Sponsored by Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Republican Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, the bill was introduced last Thursday.
 
"A church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other house of worship, and an otherwise eligible private nonprofit facility operated by a religious organization, shall be eligible for contributions under paragraph (1)(B), without regard to the religious character of the facility or the primary religious use of the facility," reads the Senate bill in part.
 
"…contributions under paragraph (1)(B) shall only be used to cover costs of purchasing or replacing, without limitation, the building structure, building enclosure components, building envelope, vertical and horizontal circulation, physical plant support spaces, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems (including heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, and fire and life safety systems), and related site improvements.'"
 
After being introduced, the Senate bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
 
Daniel Blomberg, legal counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told The Christian Post that he supports the Senate bill.
 
"FEMA has long been categorically banning houses of worship from competing for disaster relief funds on the same terms as other similar eligible nonprofits," said Blomberg.
 
"Discriminating against religious institutions simply because they are religious offends the Constitution, and the bipartisan efforts to correct FEMA's actions…simply seek to right that wrong."
 
In February, the United States House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to have FEMA lift its ban on providing aid to houses of worship.
 
HR 592, known also as the "Federal Disaster Assistance Nonprofit Fairness Act", was sponsored by Republican Representative Christopher Smith of New Jersey and Democratic Representative Grace Meng of New York and passed in a vote of 354 yeas to 72 nays.
 
The effort to have FEMA lift its ban has garnered criticism from certain civil libertarian groups, including Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
 
Maggie Garrett, legislative director for Americans United, told The Christian Post that she considered the bill "constitutionally problematic."
 
"FEMA aid is currently limited to non-profits that offer 'government-like' services. The amount of public money available for disaster relief is not unlimited," said Garrett.
 
"It simply makes sense to direct those funds to the non-profits that provide public services. This is not in any way an example of discrimination against religion."
 
Garrett also told CP that there were many religious groups that sided with Americans United on this matter, including the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, the Interfaith Alliance, and the Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism.
 
"They understand that church-state separation protects religion from government interference and favoritism toward certain faiths," said Garrett.
 
"The independence and integrity of religious institutions depends on maintaining a wholesome separation from the government."

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/us-senate-may-take-up-bill-to-lift-fema-ban-on-aid-to-churches-100094/#oXFUWKxIToe0yv0e.99


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 16, 2013, 11:11:39 am
Sponsored by Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Republican Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, the bill was introduced last Thursday.

Blunt, from what I've read, has been very kind to Monsanto.
 
Quote
"A church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other house of worship, and an otherwise eligible private nonprofit facility operated by a religious organization, shall be eligible for contributions under paragraph (1)(B), without regard to the religious character of the facility or the primary religious use of the facility," reads the Senate bill in part.
 
"…contributions under paragraph (1)(B) shall only be used to cover costs of purchasing or replacing, without limitation, the building structure, building enclosure components, building envelope, vertical and horizontal circulation, physical plant support spaces, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical systems (including heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, and fire and life safety systems), and related site improvements.'"

Government takeover of the 501c3 corporate church is nearing completion, it seems - yes, it's happened since the 50's, but it looks like the final throes is taking place right now. You have this, and then the gay marriage issue that will likely be forced on these churches.
 
Quote
Daniel Blomberg, legal counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told The Christian Post that he supports the Senate bill.

Saw their web site - looks like a controlled-opposition front group.
http://www.becketfund.org/
 


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 24, 2013, 08:31:00 am
A history lesson in New Jersey: Lawsuits could be coming to a church near you


Churches and religious organizations are being advised to review their bylaws, and change them if necessary, to protect themselves from “non-discrimination” lawsuits.

Jeff Johnston of Focus on the Family says changing the bylaws won’t guarantee a lawsuit won't be filed, but it will document the church's beliefs in advance.
 
He cites as an example the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, located in New Jersey. The organization, operated by the United Methodist Church, was sued in 2007 by two lesbians who were refused use of the facility for a civil union ceremony at the seaside location.
 
“They were taken to court for violating a non-discrimination ordinance,” Johnston recalls, “but they also had their tax-exempt status threatened, and they lost some of their tax-exempt status for refusing to host this ceremony.”
 
Just get out of the churches!!! You do not need a building

The New York Times reported that the association lost state tax-exempt status for the Boardwalk Pavilion after New Jersey’s environmental protection commissioner ruled the property was not used by the general public.
 
At the same time, the lesbian couple successfully sued the Methodist organization through the State Division on Civil Rights to demand public access to the privately owned Boardwalk Pavilion. 
 
In its ruling, the court said religious freedom must be balanced with other societal goals, and in this case accommodate homosexuality.
 
It's not only state laws, but local non-discrimination ordinances that are problematic.
 
“Some of them have said that if a church hall rents out its facilities to anybody, yes, it would have to rent them out for a same-sex ceremony,” says Johnston. “So churches need to be pro-active and say,These are our bylaws. This is what we believe about human sexuality and about marriage, and this is what we allow inside of our facilities.”

 - See more at: http://www.onenewsnow.com/legal-courts/2013/07/24/a-history-lesson-in-new-jersey-lawsuits-coming-to-a-church-near-you#sthash.xfAG8Bqt.dpuf


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on July 24, 2013, 04:10:49 pm
Quote
Just get out of the churches!!! You do not need a building

The simplicity in Christ really is that simple. "Abstain from all appearance of evil."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 25, 2013, 05:15:00 am
Rand Paul Calls on Churches to Challenge the IRS

In an interview with The Brody File, Sen. Rand Paul says churches in America should challenge the IRS by speaking boldly from the pulpit and not worry about the consequences.
 
Since most churches are non-profit 501c3 entities, many pastors are reluctant to speak out on political issues for fear of an audit and potential fines from the IRS.
 
Paul says the following: “What I would say to the churches is be bold and challenge them and say in our church we’re still going to discuss good and evil and what we think of it and so be it if the government wants to come and challenge us because if we don’t stand up and try and protect our God-given rights, they’re going to be taken from us.”
 
This interview was done in Des Moines, Iowa, last Friday at the Pastors and Pews event. Video and a partial transcription is below.
 
Mandatory Courtesy: CBN News/The Brody File
VIDEO: http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2013/07/24/brody-file-exclusive-rand-paul-tells-churches-to-challenge-the.aspx?utm

For starters, pastors should preach the Bible. Secondly, why have churches? and if you do then give unto Ceasear what is is. seems simple enough


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 25, 2013, 05:38:29 am
Paul says the following: “What I would say to the churches is be bold and challenge them and say in our church we’re still going to discuss good and evil and what we think of it and so be it if the government wants to come and challenge us because if we don’t stand up and try and protect our God-given rights, they’re going to be taken from us.”
 
This interview was done in Des Moines, Iowa, last Friday at the Pastors and Pews event. Video and a partial transcription is below.

For starters, pastors should preach the Bible. Secondly, why have churches? and if you do then give unto Ceasear what is is. seems simple enough

Ted "Mr. Good Cop" Cruz(Jr. Senator from Texas) was also there speaking - saying how this country needs a "spiritual revival". ::)

Rand Paul is nothing more than a GOP establishment politician, just like his father Ron.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on July 25, 2013, 01:49:28 pm
Yeah, indeed it's politically driven. But what he is telling churchianity is a major red flag, because what he claims isn't true...

Quote
if we don’t stand up and try and protect our God-given rights, they’re going to be taken from us.”

Like Mark says, they need to read their bibles. Their "rights" in Caesar's world will in fact be taken from them no matter how much they protest. They will be forced to either tow Caesar's line or pay the price.

Yep, "Render unto Caesar..."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2013, 01:48:52 pm
Well, even Buffet's son admits this whole "charity giving" is a scam(No, his New Age ideas he talks about in this article are NOT to be endorsed!)...

Warren Buffett's son says charity fuels a 'perpetual poverty machine' and rich people giving money away eases their conscience but doesn't solve the problem

Peter Buffett says new way of thinking is needed to end world inequality

Composer points out nonprofit sector has become big business but problems it was set up to end still persist


When billionaire Warren Buffett pledged to give away 85 per cent of his fortune in 2006, as part of a Giving Pledge where some of the country's wealthiest people would do more to help charity, he was applauded.

But, seven years on, his son Peter warns that just throwing funds at problems in society such as poverty and ill health can prevent a more permanent solution from being found.

In an opinion piece in the New York Times, the composer and chairman of the NoVo Foundation warned that a donor's desire to 'save the day' could have 'unintended consequences.

Mr Buffett said that after his father announced his decision to give away a large portion of his wealth, including donations to three foundations set up earlier for his children to run, the composer noticed a damaging cycle beginning.

He told the New York Times: 'People [including me] who had very little knowledge of a particular place would think that they could solve a local problem.'

'Whether it involved farming methods, education practices, job training or business development, over and over I would hear people discuss transplanting what worked in one setting directly into another with little regard for culture, geography or societal norms.'

An example of unintended consequences from a well-intentioned attempt to help others was when the distribution of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDs in a red-light district resulted in creating a higher price for unprotected sex.

However, Mr Buffett said 'conscience laundering' whereby the wealthy sleep better knowing they have donated large sums while the poor continue to have just enough to get by for the short term, is perpetuating the cycle of inequality. 

'There are plenty of statistics that tell us that inequality is continually rising. At the same time, according to the Urban Institute, the nonprofit sector has been steadily growing,' he said.

'It’s a massive business, with approximately $316 billion given away in 2012 in the United States alone and more than 9.4 million employed.'

The musician, who composed the score for the fire dance scene in the film Dances With Wolves, said he was not calling for an end to capitalism but 'calling for humanism'.

He added that as philanthropy became big business, it has become common to hear people asking what the 'return on investment' is when discussing projects to help those in need.

He added that instead of working on projects that only help in the short-term, funds should be used to find 'ways to live in a functioning society that truly creates greater prosperity for all [and I don’t mean more people getting to have more stuff]'.

The composer's NoVo Foundation, which campaigns to end violence and discrimination against women, tries to address the problem by working to empower society to create a more caring environment,

Along with his wife Jennifer, Mr Buffett said he is committed to supporting 'conditions for systematic change'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2380267/Warren-Buffett-s-son-says-rich-people-giving-money-poor-eases-conscience-doesnt-solve-problems-society.html#ixzz2aeLxgdjd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, this is from a secular view, and Buffet's son is apparently a New Ager - but nonetheless nothing can be closer to the truth as these 501c3 corporate church entities have been running the same way. Clergy hitting on everything's guilt to give their 10%, and their church buildings ended up expanding into big businesses over the long haul. Yeah, it seems like the typical church goer over the long haul would have more peace after giving a percentage of their paycheck in the offering plates rather than having peace knowing that Jesus Christ paid the full penalty for our sins(and belief in his name and his finished work on the cross being our ticket to eternal life).

Matthew 5:3  Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:4  Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
Mat 5:5  Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Mat 5:6  Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Mat 5:7  Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Mat 5:8  Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Mat 5:9  Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Mat 5:10  Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:11  Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Mat 5:12  Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
Mat 5:13  Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.
Mat 5:14  Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
Mat 5:15  Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
Mat 5:16  Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.





Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on July 31, 2013, 02:54:49 pm
In the end, it's all "works" to be seen of men, motivated by the love of money.

Notice Mr. Buffet Jr. failed to mention the real aspect as to why the rich use non-profits like he does himself, and that is the tax implications, and how their "charity" only goes to government-approved "non-profits". If they want the tax breaks, the receiver must be a recognized non-profit, otherwise the money is taxed differently, more like a private "gift", which is taxed at a much higher rate for the donor.

BA, am I right?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2013, 04:04:25 pm
In the end, it's all "works" to be seen of men, motivated by the love of money.

Notice Mr. Buffet Jr. failed to mention the real aspect as to why the rich use non-profits like he does himself, and that is the tax implications, and how their "charity" only goes to government-approved "non-profits". If they want the tax breaks, the receiver must be a recognized non-profit, otherwise the money is taxed differently, more like a private "gift", which is taxed at a much higher rate for the donor.

BA, am I right?

Exactly - which is exactly how the 501c3 corporate church operates.

Also, when I did volunteer work for Habitat for Humanity 6 years ago, it just seemed weird how this "charity" organization had a director, and lower level director, etc in pretty much all of their offices AND in their headquarters - and to boot, they also have their "hierarchy" structures private business do. At the time, I was like, "If this is a not-for-profit charity organization, then HOW are they coming up with all of this money to budget this kind of a staff?". And it seems like too their overhead staff budget is rather large as well, like any privately runned business.

No, I wasn't aware of the corruption and deception going on in these government-approved NFPs, but nonetheless anyone with a halfway decent brain can smell something fishy going on when they see these things.

But for obvious reasons, now I see why(ie-like we're discussing here - love of money, getting a lot of donators b/c they can write if off of their taxes due to their NFP status, etc). Even a lot of churches are runned this same way too - it's as if with them having a lot of resources to go out and do missionary work in both communities and overseas, they sure do seem to have much more having to fill a pretty big staff overhead and maintain their big buildings.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on August 01, 2013, 04:11:59 am
A lot as you know is required of them if they want to be a non-profit. The feds say so. So, they have a corporate staff, and the related trappings. It's all dictated by federal requirements of "charity" organizations. What a racket!

And I agree, how do they get so much money? In part, I think it's through the deals they cut with other corporations to share the tax deduction wealth. Charity organizations giving to other non-profits. They all want, and expect, something in return for their "charity". I expect nothing less from a wicked world.

6  But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
7  Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
2 Corinthians 9:6,7 (KJB)


12  Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.
13  Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.
14  Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.
15  Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.
16  Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.
1 Timothy 4:12-16 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 14, 2013, 01:30:12 pm
California Considers Punishing Youth Groups Against Homosexuality as ‘Bathroom Bill’ Becomes Law

On the same day that the governor of California signed a bill into law mandating that boys who identify as girls be allowed to use girls’ bathrooms and vice versa, a California committee approved legislation which would cause any non-profit organizations that do not embrace homosexuals to lose tax-exempt status.

Senate Bill 323 (SB323) was first introduced in mid-February by Ricardo Lara, a Democratic state senator from Los Angeles. Lara is himself an open homosexual, as well as a member of the California Legislative LGBT Caucus. According to the bill’s introduction, SB323 would “provide that an organization that is a public charity youth organization that discriminates on the basis of gender identity, race, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or religious affiliation is not exempt from [state taxes].”
 
Later in the legislation, approximately 25 youth organizations are specifically listed as entities that would have to embrace these “gender identity” and “sexual orientation” guidelines, or else lose their tax-exempt standing. Little League, Boy Scouts, Cub Scouts, Girl Scouts, Young Men’s Christian Association, Young Women’s Christian Association, Future Farmers of America, Future Homemakers of America, 4-H Clubs, Boys’ Clubs, and Girls’ Clubs are all included.
 
On Monday afternoon, California’s Committee on Revenue and Taxation held a hearing on SB323, and eventually approved the legislation by a 6-3 vote. Now the bill moves forward to the Committee on Judiciary.

 

Proponents of SB323—commonly referred to as the “Anti-Boy Scouts Bill”—herald the legislation as a long-overdue measure to end unfair discrimination in many organizations. John O’Conner of Equality California said the bill would “make it clear … that discrimination has a real cost,” and Senator Lara described his bill as a means to end organizations’ “outdated practices.”
 
“Our state values the important role that youth groups play in the empowerment of our next generation,” Lara stated. “This is demonstrated by rewarding organizations with tax exemptions supported financially by all Californians. SB323 seeks to end the unfortunate discriminatory and outdated practices by certain youth groups by revoking their tax exemption privilege should they not comply with our non-discrimination laws.”
 
However, a news release from Lori Arnold of the California Family Alliance argued that the “Anti-Boy Scouts Bill” is both self-contradicting and unconstitutional.


 Connect with Christian News

“The irony of the proposed law,” Arnold wrote, “is that its blatant use of extortion—by holding nonprofit groups financially hostage—instills its own form of discrimination by trampling individual and organizational religious beliefs by labeling them ‘outdated practices,’ practices that are protected by the First Amendment.”
 
Similarly, Matthew McReynolds of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) stated that “the bill’s imposition of ‘gender identity’ acceptance on virtually all youth sports in California is untenable and out of step with the reasonable privacy expectations,” and also “establishes a gender-blind scheme that most parents believe to be absurd.”
 
On the very same day as the SB323 committee hearing, California Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 1266 into law—a bill that allows boys who identify as girls to use girls’ bathrooms at school, and vice versa. As previously reported, California lawmakers overwhelmingly approved the “Bathroom Bill” last month, even though the bill’s author—Democratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano—admitted that the new measures will “perhaps” make some children “uncomfortable.”
 
“I don’t want to minimize that,” Ammiano said, according to the BBC, “but new experiences are often uncomfortable. That can’t be an excuse for prejudice.”

 

However, Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, told Christian News Network that the enforcement of AB 1266 will lead to instances of “extreme violation of [students’] privacy,” with “horrendous” mental and emotional ramifications.
 
Dacus further said that both SB323 and AB 1266 are being driven by those who want non-traditional sexual behavior accepted and protected in every arena.
 
“The common motive,” he explained, “is to inoculate anyone who has any objection to homosexuality or transsexuality, and [both bills are] specifically targeting young people. The goal is to make transsexuality, cross-dressing, and homosexuality a cultural norm—not just as a matter of tolerance, but as a matter of socially-mandated acceptance.”
 
“It’s a massive demoralizing campaign which is being engaged in at the expense of countless young people who will be unquestionably impacted,” he said.

http://christiannews.net/2013/08/14/california-considers-punishing-youth-groups-against-homosexuality-as-bathroom-bill-becomes-law/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 14, 2013, 01:53:51 pm
And it all starts in California...the same state which is not only the largest in the union, but has one of the largest economies in the entire world.

No different when Reagan signed a pro-abortion bill into law when he was governor of that state in 1967 - when he did so, only 2 states legalized abortion. But after this bill, 20 of them or so followed suit, which all but cornered the USSC to make Roe V Wade the law of the land. And there was the California Prop 6 Briggs Initiative years later which would have banned sodomites in public workplaces like schools - again, it was voted down b/c Reagan campaigned against it.

Potentially, so it begins with church organizations in California.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on August 14, 2013, 03:35:59 pm
Quote
...which would cause any non-profit organizations that do not embrace homosexuals to lose tax-exempt status.

Yep, all about the love of money.

"Render unto Caesar..."



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 16, 2013, 08:23:30 am
Faith Reformers Work to Get IRS Out of the Pulpit

A commission of religious leaders has called for clarity in churches’ ability to endorse candidates and issues from the pulpit without fear of losing their tax-exempt status.

In a report sent Wednesday to Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican who has spent years investigating the finances of high-profile televangelists, the commission called the regulation of speech of religious organizations “disturbing and chilling.”

“The IRS guidelines are very vague, so ministers and nonprofit leaders are afraid of the (appropriate) line,” said Michael Batts, the independent commission’s chairman. “We think it can be fixed without creating a monster of unintended consequences.”

The Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations grew out of Grassley’s probe of ministry finances and makes recommendations for greater transparency and reform. It is overseen by the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, which was founded in 1979 as a watchdog on ethical and financial wrongdoing.

In Wednesday’s report, the commission recommended that members of the clergy should be able to say “whatever they believe is appropriate” from the pulpit without fear of IRS reprisal. Since 1954, IRS regulations allow clergy to speak out on issues but they must refrain from endorsing specific candidates.

Additionally, however, the report suggests that churches should not be able to spend additional funds for political communication. Although some have advocated that churches’ tax-deductible funds should be able to be disbursed for political purposes, the commission says that the policy should remain.

IRS enforcement has been inconsistent, the report suggests. A 2012 Pew Research Center study suggests that black Protestant churchgoers are eight times as likely to hear about political candidates at church as white mainline churchgoers.

“The report shows that black churches have, for lack of a better word, gotten away with it for many years,” said Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, who gave advice on the commission report. “Simply put, this gets the IRS out of the pulpit.”

When ADF’s Pulpit Freedom Sunday began in 2008, about 30 churches participated in the attempt to challenge the IRS by sending sermon transcripts in a bid to invite an IRS audit. In 2012, 1,600 churches participated, but none of them have heard from the IRS, Stanley said.

Clergy want the freedom to do and say many things, but it’s unclear what kinds of churches will take up the mantle, said Eric McDaniel, a government professor at the University of Texas at Austin.

“I don’t think many clergy want to open up a can of worms because then churches become havens for certain candidates and parties,” McDaniel said. “It can turn churches into Democratic or Republican churches that preach the gospel.”

In many ways, however, that’s already happening. A day before the report came out, Baltimore-based pastor Jamal-Harrison Bryant tweeted his support for Cory Booker’s campaign to become the next senator from New Jersey, while outspoken Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, R.I., proudly touted his new status as a registered Republican.

A 2012 Pew Research Center poll suggests about two-thirds of Americans oppose churches endorsing candidates. And some clergy prefer maintaining the status quo.

“My concern is what that kind of change would make to the integrity and the unity of the church itself,” said C. Welton Gaddy, president of The Interfaith Alliance. “It’s about the sanctity of the religious voice in the context of worship and to compromise that authority would be devastating to religion in America.”

The 80-person commission represents every major faith group in America.

http://www.charismanews.com/politics/40638-faith-reformers-work-to-get-irs-out-of-the-pulpit

Its called getting out of the 501c3 GOVERNMENT RAN CHURCHES!!!!!


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 16, 2013, 12:01:11 pm
Quote
Its called getting out of the 501c3 GOVERNMENT RAN CHURCHES!!!!!

THIS and elections are rigged to begin with - who are these people in the article trying to fool by seeing "we have a right to endorse such and such candidate"? Really, it was flooring to see some of these "conservative" churches in 2008 go out and endorse John McCain, when McCain has always been a liberal in conservative's clothing.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 21, 2013, 11:59:58 am
http://news.yahoo.com/atheism-religion-government-says-yes-tax-purposes-141610417.html
8/21/13
Atheism a Religion? Government Says Yes for Tax Purposes

The leader of an atheist group sued because she didn't believe she qualified for tax exemptions afforded to clergy. When the government says she does qualify - as a minister - she got even angrier.

"We are not ministers," Annie Laurie Gaylor, chief of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, told The Tennessean newspaper. "We are having to tell the government the obvious -- we are not a church."

The lawsuit is over the personage exemption for clergy, which allows ministers to claim part of their salary as a tax-free housing allowance.

Gaylor's Madison, Wisc.-based group is organized, united by faith that there is no deity, and essentially builds fellowship around those beliefs. Thus, the Department of Justice filed a brief stating that Gaylor, as the group's leader, is eligible for the exemption since atheist groups can essentially function as a religion.

That complicates the foundation's federal lawsuit, first filed in 2009, after the foundation board voted to give Gaylor and her husband Dan Barker a housing allowance of $15,000 per year. The couple then claimed they didn't qualify for the same tax exemption as clergy so the foundation sued the federal government. In August 2012, a federal judge ruled the case can move forward.

But the Justice Department contends that since Buddhism or Taoism don't include a belief in God and are still considered religions, atheism could qualify as well. Thus, a minister can be seen as a spiritual leader and provide services for a religious organization - and a belief in God isn't legally necessary.

"Plaintiffs may not presume that a law's reference to religion necessarily excludes beliefs that are specifically non-theistic in nature," the government argued in a motion to dismiss the suit.

Gaylor contested, "That's not what we are after."

The foundation first filed the legal challenge to the exemption in 2009 in California, but later dropped the suit due to concerns about standing. It re-filed the suit in Wisconsin in 2011.

Larry Crain, a First Amendment attorney and president of the Church Law Institute, told The Tennessean the government might be right.

"They make an interesting point," he said. "If they apply for the exemption, they might get it."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 24, 2013, 04:48:57 pm
Is having "by laws" even biblical in the first place? ::)

http://news.yahoo.com/churches-changing-bylaws-gay-marriage-ruling-153638830.html
Churches changing bylaws after gay marriage ruling
8/24/13

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Worried they could be sued by gay couples, some churches are changing their bylaws to reflect their view that the Bible allows only marriage between one man and one woman.

Although there have been lawsuits against wedding industry businesses that refuse to serve gay couples, attorneys promoting the bylaw changes say they don't know of any lawsuits against churches.

Critics say the changes are unnecessary, but some churches fear that it's only a matter of time before one of them is sued.

"I thought marriage was always between one man and one woman, but the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision said no," said Gregory S. Erwin, an attorney for the Louisiana Baptist Convention, an association of Southern Baptist churches and one several groups advising churches to change their bylaws. "I think it's better to be prepared because the law is changing. America is changing."

In a June decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that defined marriage as between a man and a woman for purposes of federal law. A second decision was more technical but essentially ushered in legal gay marriage in California.

Kevin Snider is an attorney with the Pacific Justice Institute, a nonprofit legal defense group that specializes in conservative Christian issues. His organization released a model marriage policy a few years ago in response to a statewide gay marriage fight in California. Snider said some religious leaders have been threatened with lawsuits for declining to perform same-sex wedding ceremonies.

Dean Inserra, head pastor of the 1,000-member City Church Tallahassee, based in Florida, said he does not want to be alarmist, but his church is looking into how best to address the issue.

Inserra said he already has had to say no to gay friends who wanted him to perform a wedding ceremony.

"We have some gay couples that attend our church. What happens when they ask us to do their wedding?" Inserra said. "What happens when we say no? Is it going to be treated like a civil rights thing?"

Critics, including some gay Christian leaders, argue that the changes amount to a solution looking for a problem.

"They seem to be under the impression that there is this huge movement with the goal of forcing them to perform ceremonies that violate their freedom of religion," said Justin Lee, executive director of the Gay Christian Network, a nonprofit that provides support for gay Christians and their friends and families and encourages churches to be more welcoming.

"If anyone tried to force a church to perform a ceremony against their will, I would be the first person to stand up in that church's defense." ::)

Thirteen states and the District of Columbia now recognize gay marriage.

Some Christian denominations, such as the United Church of Christ, accept gay marriage. The Episcopal Church recently approved a blessing for same-sex couples, but each bishop must decide whether to allow the ceremony in his or her local diocese.

The majority of Christian denominations, however, view homosexual relationships as sinful. In more hierarchical denominations, like the Roman Catholic Church or the United Methodist Church, individual churches are bound by the policies of the larger denomination. But nondenominational churches and those loosely affiliated with more established groups often individually decide how to address social issues such as gay marriage.

Eric Rassbach is an attorney with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a public interest legal group that defends the free expression rights of all faiths. He said it is unlikely the government would try to force a pastor to perform a same-sex marriage, but churches that rent out their facilities to the general public could face problems if they refuse to rent to gay couples.

Although his organization has not advocated it, he said it could strengthen a church's legal position to adopt a statement explaining its beliefs about marriage.

"A number of groups don't have a written doctrine," Rassbach said. "Say a group like the Primitive Baptists — they don't want a written-down credo, but the courts like written-down things."

Rassbach said it was important for churches to get their beliefs in writing before a dispute arises, otherwise it can look to a court as if something was done after the fact as an attempt to cover up hostility to gays.

Airline Baptist Church Senior Pastor Chad Mills said members of the public use their facilities in Bossier City, La., for many activities, including Zumba classes. In the past, anyone who could pay the fee was allowed to reserve the space. But recently, the church changed its rental policy to allow wedding-related events only for male-female couples.

Some denominations are less concerned about the Supreme Court rulings. The Assemblies of God, the group of churches comprising the world's largest Pentecostal denomination, sought legal advice after the rulings. An attorney for the group distributed a memo to ministers saying there was no reason to change their bylaws.

However, the memo also said that "doing so is not inappropriate, and may be warranted based on future rulings by the Supreme Court and other state and federal courts."

The bylaw changes are coming at a time when many churches are wrestling with gay marriage in general and are working hard to be more welcoming to gays and lesbians.

"It's probably one of the most difficult issues our churches are facing right now," said Doug Anderson, a national coordinator with the evangelical Vineyard Church. "It's almost an impossible situation to reconcile what's going on in our culture, and our whole theology of welcoming and loving people, versus what it says in the Bible."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 24, 2013, 04:50:47 pm
Ultimately, you're now seeing the Hegelian Dialectic process going on with this issue WITHIN these modern-day church buildings - debates over "What wording should be in the by laws?" to "Should we be more loving to gays?" to "What if gay marriage is forced on us?" to other nonsense.

IMHO, I don't think it will be the government, per se, forcing churches to do so over the long haul, as this Hegelian Dialectic process within these church buildings will be the ones pulling the strings.

Titus_3:9  But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 28, 2013, 06:29:55 pm
http://www.christianpost.com/news/hawaii-churches-divided-on-gay-marriage-as-state-could-be-14th-to-recognize-such-unions-103163/
Hawaii Churches Divided on Gay Marriage as State Could Be 14th to Recognize Such Unions
8/28/13

Pastors and church members gathered at New Hope Church Honolulu, Hawaii on Monday to protest the Freedom to Marry Act, which may pass in a special session this Fall, to make Hawaii the 14th state to legalize gay marriage.

"Same-sex marriage is against the will of God," argued Dennis Sallis, pastor of Hope Church Waliki. "We're just preaching the word of God."

A week before, however, over 30 representatives of faith-based groups signed a resolution supporting same-sex marriage, following a service at the Nuuanu church where President Obama went to Sunday school in his childhood years. "They did not choose to be gay – this is how God made them," said Methodist Minister Barbara "Babs" Grace Ripple, 71. "Who am I to say that they should not have the same benefits in life that I have?"

Ripple's fiancé, another Methodist minister, Samuel Cox, was among the first to perform civil unions in Hawaii. He recalled the suicide of a young gay man, whose death reportedly changed Cox's life. "Ever since, I have been a strong advocate for civil rights and marriage equality for our LGBT friends," he said.

Hawaii began struggling with the issue of same-sex marriage in the early '90s, when three same-sex couples sued for marriage licenses in the 1991 case Baehr v. Miike. Following a Hawaii constitutional amendment allowing the legislature to outlaw gay marriage, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled against the couples in 1999. In February 2011, however, the current governor, Niel Abercrombie, signed a new law allowing civil unions, which came into effect on January 1, 2012.

A QMark Research poll reignited the issue early this month. It found that 54 percent of Hawaiians support same-sex marriage, while only 31% oppose it. In January, an Anzalone Liszt Grove Research poll found opposition 6 percent higher at 37 percent.

"Over just the last six months, opposition has dropped by 6 percent which means people are really starting to understand what the issue is about…welcoming others and treating them with respect," explained State Representative Chris Lee. He also argued that legalizing gay marriage would bring money into Hawaii's economy, as more people pay for weddings and receptions in the state.

Roman Catholic Bishop Larry Silva, however, claimed that gay marriage would do more harm than good, and urged Hawaii Catholics to call their representatives to oppose the legislation.

"People with same-sex attraction are a part of our community, even our Catholic community, and they deserve dignity and respect," he explained. Nevertheless, the Catholic Church only allows marriage between one man and one woman.

**Double speak here, and VERY subtle!

The bishop argued that if same-sex marriage is made legal, polygamy, incest, and pedophilia would follow, various faiths would suffer legal persecution, and children would receive substandard care. For these reasons, discrimination against same-sex couples is just, as it between adults and minors, parents and children, professors and students. All people have equal dignity, but in society different people have different roles, and are treated accordingly, he contends.

"If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, its implications will go far beyond the relationship of this or that couple," Silva warned. Besides gay marriage, other sexual preferences will also become "normal" in Hawaii. School textbooks will be bound by law to portray various options, and this will confuse the "normal sexual maturation" of boys and girls, as their sexual identity is "formed over time."

Silva wondered if, once same-sex marriage is normalized, discrimination against those who want to marry their mother or father, brother or sister, or a minor, must also be struck down.

"Would people who firmly believe that God made us male and female, and that God has revealed that homosexual acts are sinful be allowed to hold such beliefs?" the bishop asked. He warned that Christians, Muslims, and others who share these beliefs would be persecuted, and religious freedom would become "only a paper freedom."


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 28, 2013, 06:48:07 pm
http://www.startribune.com/politics/221000901.html
With key battles ahead on gay marriage, fault lines emerge for groups seeking religious breaks
 Article by: RACHEL ZOLL , Associated Press
 Updated: August 25, 2013 - 9:45 AM

The battle over gay marriage is heating up in the states, energizing religious groups that oppose same-sex relationships — but also dividing them.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court gave married gays and heterosexuals equal status under federal law, but did not declare a nationwide right for gays to marry, setting the stage for state-by-state decisions. So faith leaders are forming new coalitions and preparing for the legislative and courtroom battles ahead.

Yet, traditional religious leaders, their supporters and the First Amendment attorneys advising them are divided over strategy and goals, raising questions about how much they can influence the outcome:

— Several religious liberty experts say conservative faith groups should take a pragmatic approach given the advances in gay rights. Offer to stop fighting same-sex marriage laws in exchange for broad religious exemptions, these attorneys say. "If they need to get those religious accommodations, they're going to have to move now," said Robin Fretwell Wilson, a family law specialist at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. Critics reject the idea as a premature surrender.

— Religious leaders lobbying for exemptions can't agree how broad they should be. A major difference is over whether for-profit companies should qualify for a faith-based exception.

— Some religious liberty advocates and faith leaders are telling houses of worship they could be forced to host gay weddings, with their clergy required to officiate. The Louisiana Baptist Convention is advising congregations to rewrite their bylaws to state they only allow heterosexual marriage ceremonies, and the Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious liberty group that opposes same-sex marriage, is advising the same. But legal experts across a spectrum of views on gay rights say it can't happen given strong First Amendment protections for what happens inside the sanctuary.

"A few people at both ends of the spectrum have talked about religion and religious freedom in a way that is really destructive," said Brian Walsh, executive director of the Ethics & Public Policy's American Religious Freedom program which has formed legislative caucuses so far in 18 states. "I think they've made it polarized and difficult to understand."

The issue of accommodating religious opponents has already been a sticking point in legislative battles. In Rhode Island and Delaware, disputes over broader religious exemptions led to the failure of some same-sex union bills. Both states went on to approve civil unions in 2011, then same-sex marriage this year. In New York, gay marriage became law only after Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state's top two legislators struck an eleventh-hour compromise on religious exemptions.

Still, advocates for stronger religious protections haven't won anything close to what they've sought in the 13 states and the District of Columbia where gay marriage has been recognized.

A few states have approved specific religious exemptions related to housing or pre-marital counseling, or benefits for workers in private, faith-based groups, such as the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization, according to analysis by Fretwell Wilson. Most of the states have protected religiously affiliated nonprofits from potential government penalty for refusing to host same-sex marriage ceremonies.

The only other protection written into the laws is a provision First Amendment scholars consider redundant: All spell out that clergy are exempt from performing same-sex ceremonies and can't be sued for their refusal.

The overall result: a patchwork of regulation, with gaps that are likely to become the target of lawsuits
. Massachusetts and Iowa, where same-sex marriage won recognition through the courts, have approved no enhanced religious exemptions related to the rulings.

The statehouse negotiations concern what, if any, exemptions religious believers should have in the public arena. Should a religious social service agency with government funding be required to legally recognize married same-sex couples in all circumstances? Should a congregation that makes money renting property to the public be required to allow gay wedding receptions in the space?

Some advocates go further, arguing religious accommodations should extend in some cases to individuals. In this view, owners of a mom-and-pop bakery that makes wedding cakes should be exempt. So too should the county clerk who issues marriage licenses, as long as someone else in the clerk's office can step in easily and provide the service.

Many cities and states have anti-discrimination ordinances that include sexual orientation, setting up fines or other penalties for failing to comply. Absent an exemption, objectors may have to shut down their businesses or give up their jobs, religious leaders say. They argue losing your livelihood is too harsh a punishment for views on such a core religious issue as marriage.

But gay rights advocates say this argument puts too heavy a burden on gays and lesbians, and presents them with an unfair set of choices.

"In some states, the price of equality in marriage has been agreeing to give up protections against discrimination as part of the negotiations," said Jenny Pizer, senior counsel for the gay rights group Lambda Legal. "In ways, I think, other politically vulnerable groups are not required to pay that price."

Advocates for the exemptions don't agree on where they should go from here.

Nathan Diament, policy director for the Orthodox Union, which represents Orthodox Jewish congregations and has been a prominent voice on religious liberty issues, said his group hasn't taken a position on the religious rights of businesses or employers, but has advocated for broader religious exemptions for employees, such as a clerk who issues marriage licenses. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which in the last two years has made religious freedom a signature policy issue, believes any organization with faith objections, whether a for-profit corporation or a nonprofit agency, should be exempt.

Fretwell Wilson is among legal experts urging faith groups to be practical, in light of growing public support for gay relationships, and focus solely on securing exemptions, instead of trying to block a specific gay marriage law. She is part of an informal group of lawyers who have been drafting model language for exemptions to share with state lawmakers. These legal experts differ on whether same-sex marriage should be recognized, but agree on the potential risks to religious liberty.

"The religious community would have done much better to ask for protection for their religious liberty instead of trying to stop same-sex marriage and try to prevent it for everybody," said church-state expert Douglas Laycock of the University of Virginia, who is recommending the more pragmatic course. "The more same-sex marriage seems inevitable, the less likely we are to see religious liberty protection in blue states."

But Matthew Franck, of the Witherspoon Institute, a conservative think tank in Princeton, N.J., argued the only real protection for religious freedom is maintaining the traditional definition of marriage. He said same-sex marriage advocates are unlikely to tolerate for long any "deviations from the 'new normal' they wish to create," so he predicted religious exemptions granted now will eventually be repealed.

"We have not lost the fight for the truth about marriage, and surrendering the field is premature," Franck said. "I continue to hope that it will never finally be necessary, and I work to make that hope a reality."

**Didn't you say that 3 years ago when Vaughn Walker made his ruling to strike down Prop 8 at a lower federal court? ::)

Whatever strategy the faith groups choose, there's no sign gay rights advocates are prepared to make major concessions.

Jonathan Rauch, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, is one of the very few gay-rights supporters publicly urging fellow advocates to be more magnanimous. He argues that offering religious accommodations makes sense politically.

"I think there's a real risk that we will overreach and set up the other side to portray itself as the victim if we decide we have to stamp out every instance of religious based anti-gay discrimination," Rauch said. "I also think that there's a moral reason. What the gay rights movement is fighting for is not just equality for gays but freedom of conscience to live openly according to their identity. I don't think we should be in the business of being as intolerant of others as they were to us."

Others reject such accommodations.

Rose Saxe, an ACLU senior staff attorney, said the call for a middle ground, "while trying to sound reasonable, is really asking for a license to discriminate." And the Rev. Darlene Nipper of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force said religious groups have another choice: They can accept same-sex marriage
.



 


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on August 29, 2013, 02:25:52 am
Quote
And the Rev. Darlene Nipper of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force said religious groups have another choice: They can accept same-sex marriage.

Uh, a couple does not have to go to a religious institution for marriage, and they know it. But has anybody been pointing that fact out? Nope. All they seem to focus on is anybody that they target for lawsuit. And anybody who says the gay lobby isn't specifically targeting anti same-sex religious groups. i.e. Christians is blind.

It's classic discrimination in forcing people to accept a minority position. Seriously, why don't they just have their own wedding halls and such? It's like a Christian getting mad that a satanic group won't marry Christians! Why in the world would Christians go to some satanic place for a marriage in the first place? They don't!

There are now many "church" buildings that are accepting gays as ministers, so let them marry them! But instead, what gets the headlines? Some couple being rejected by a Christian business, such as photographers or cake bakers. Really?

Of all the wedding photographers and cake bakers, they insist on using some Christian business that is likely known to be Christian, and are shocked and offended when refused service? It's all a setup!


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on September 14, 2013, 03:48:03 am
Eric Holder, IRS officials coached tax-exempt black ministers on how to engage in political activity


Attorney General Eric Holder and IRS officials advised black ministers on how to engage in political activity during the 2012 election without violating their tax-exempt status.

Holder, then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman, and Peter Lorenzetti, a senior official in the scandal-plagued agency’s exempt organizations division, participated in a May 2012 training session for black ministers from the Conference of National Black Churches at the U.S. Capitol hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC). Holder spoke at the event.

“We’re going to, first of all, equip them with the information they need to know about what they can say and what they cannot say in the church that would violate their 501(c)(3) status with the IRS,” said then-CBC chairman Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Democrat from Missouri. “In fact, we’re going to have the IRS administrator there. We’re going to have Attorney General Eric Holder there…the ACLU.”

Cleaver’s session advised black ministers on “draconian laws” including voter ID laws. Cleaver was a sharp critic during the 2012 campaign of Republican Mitt Romney’s policies.

As The Daily Caller has extensively reported, the IRS harassed conservative and tea party groups during the 2012 election cycle with improper reviews of their 501(c)(3) tax-exempt applications.

“[The CBC] had the IRS members there specifically to advise them on how far to go campaigning without violating their tax-exempt status,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told The Daily Caller.

“I viewed the meeting as highly problematic. Eric Holder heads the agency that prosecutes organizations who give false information to the government. The Justice Department coordinates with the IRS on actions taken against not-for-profits. These ministries are given not-for-profit status on the basis that they are not engaging in any political activities. Here, the Obama administration was clearly encouraging them to maximize their efforts by showing them where the lines were drawn in federal case law,” Turley said.

“It is a fundamental precept that cabinet members should not engage in political activities. The most important of those cabinet members would be the attorney general of the United States. To have the attorney general actively advising political allies of the president showed remarkably poor judgment on his part,” Turley told TheDC.

“I believe this session undermined the integrity of the justice department, signaled to other Justice Department officials that the attorney general wants to support these black ministries as much as possible,” Turley said.

Obama won 93 percent of the black vote in 2012, according to exit polling.

“This event was open to all faiths, denominations, colors, creeds, and political affiliations,” Rep. Cleaver told TheDC in a statement. “We were pleased to have leaders from our government provide information on compliance with the law and participation in our electoral system.”

The IRS and DOJ did not return requests for comment.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/13/eric-holder-irs-officials-coached-tax-exempt-black-ministers-on-how-to-engage-in-political-activity/#ixzz2er4rRkss


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 14, 2013, 03:31:26 pm
Eric Holder, IRS officials coached tax-exempt black ministers on how to engage in political activity



The current President of the Southern Baptist Convention, Fred Luter, is also black. He recently get elected to a 2nd consecutive term(which is RARE in the SBC). Luter is also a member of New Orleans RCC Archdiecese's Interfaith group.

Looks like slowly but surely, Caesar is calling in his chips.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 28, 2013, 01:03:45 am
http://news.yahoo.com/pastor-banned-fried-chicken-leads-mississippi-obamacare-push-120227102.html
Pastor who banned fried chicken leads Mississippi Obamacare push
10/27/13

HERNANDO, Mississippi (Reuters) - When Dr Michael Minor first became pastor at Oak Hill Missionary Baptist Church in Hernando, Mississippi, in 1996, he discovered a population overcome by an epidemic of obesity.

"It was so bad, I was having a funeral every weekend," he said.

Minor took dramatic action for a Southern preacher, banning fried chicken at church potlucks and setting up a walking track around the church perimeter.

He has had marked success. "You can see the difference. People are much better sized, way better. And once they get it off, they want to keep it off," he said.

Now he is taking on the much bigger task of trying to get the state's nearly 275,000 uninsured people to sign up for health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

With technology problems dogging enrollment on Obamacare health insurance exchanges, the roles of people like Minor are becoming increasingly crucial in determining the success or failure of President Barack Obama's healthcare law.

His church is one of only two organizations in the state to get a federal "navigator" grant to help the state's uninsured sign up for policies provided through Obamacare.

He has his work cut out for him.

Mississippi ranked last in a 2012 study comparing the health of the states, tying with Louisiana, and consistently ranks at the top for rates of obesity and diabetes.

The local political environment has been far from friendly to Obamacare. Republican-led Mississippi rejected federal funds for an expansion of the Medicaid program for the poor - while its application for a state-based exchange was rejected by Washington, leaving it to use the faulty federal exchange.

"That man is essentially heading up outreach enrollment of the ACA for Mississippi. It's staggering," said Roy Mitchell, executive director of the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program.

Mitchell and other health advocates initially wondered just how this pastor of a tiny church on the Northwestern edge of the state won its grant.

"I applied for it," said the 48-year-old Harvard graduate and health advocate who grew up just miles away in the town of Coldwater.

"I'm a firm believer that people are limited because someone tells them they are limited," Minor said. "I tell my members we can do whatever we want to do. Let's just go for it."

'NO FRY ZONE'

In the foyer of Oak Hill Baptist hangs a picture of Minor and his wife, Lottie, in the White House, a proud reminder of the heights this tiny church of 100 or so has already reached under his leadership. His efforts caught the attention of First Lady Michelle Obama, who in 2009 invited Minor to help promote her "Let's Move" anti-obesity campaign and has invited him to the White House on several occasions.

Off to the side is a room housing a machine donated by the American Heart Association that allows parishioners to get regular readings of their blood pressure and body-mass index.

In the church kitchen hangs a plaque reminding the congregation that it is a "No Fry Zone," a sign of the church's commitment to offer healthier fare at church gatherings.

"It's a symbol, especially with people of color," Minor said of the ban on fried chicken. "You've got to rally around symbols."

Seeing the success in his own congregation, Minor began expanding his gospel of healthy living. His church started sending teams of "health ambassadors" and health professionals to make regular checks on people in rural areas in the Mississippi delta, the poorest region in the poorest state in America.

He started organizing ushers in Northwest Mississippi to promote health among churches in the region, an effort that has grown into a national outreach program through the National Baptist Convention, the largest predominantly African-American Christian denomination in the United States.

Minor sees his work promoting health-care reform as a natural next step. "The ACA fits a niche," he said.

"The way we see it is, we're already doing a decent job with the spiritual aspect of it. The ACA affords us the opportunity to rescue the body and the mind."

HEAVY LIFTING

As a navigator, Minor's initial plan was to recruit ministers in the 41 counties in the Mississippi delta, but when he realized that the other group with federal navigator funding, the University of Mississippi Medical Center, was initially only planning to target current and past patients, Minor decided to set up a statewide network.

To stretch his $317,742 grant, Minor joined forces with Cover Mississippi, a network of consumer and patient advocacy groups and community health centers organized by the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program.

Building awareness will be critical. According to a Kaiser Health Tracking Poll released last month, two-thirds of the uninsured said they did not have enough information about the law to know how it will impact their families. And a survey commissioned by the MHAP of nearly 1,000 residents who would be eligible to buy insurance on the exchanges showed that three-fourths did not know enrollment began October 1.

The U.S. government has not released figures on how many people have signed up so far, but Chad Feldman, who's leading the navigator program at UMMC, said the center has assisted more than 3,000 people, including 1,000 phone calls and more than 2,000 visits.

"The Mississippians we are interacting with are very interested. People are engaged and wanting to learn more," Feldman said.

The hospital has been reaching out to the 200 or so uninsured patients who seek treatment at the hospital each day, and early next year it plans to use its telemedicine network to offer video counseling to walk people through the application process in 100 sites across the state.

That would mean there would be no in-person navigators in some of the state's neediest counties.

So Minor has spent the past three weeks patching together a network of patient advocacy groups and church volunteers, who have gone through the needed 20 hours of navigator training, with the blessing of the Department of Health and Human Services.

He is also tapping into the network of some 20 community health centers and organizations that shared nearly $2.5 million in federal grants to become certified application counselors - trained individuals stationed in health centers that can offer face-to-face enrollment assistance.

As of last week, Minor and his coalition partners had built a network of 75 to 100 navigators and counselors.

"I was so happy I jumped up and down," he said. "We have navigators within an hour's drive of everywhere in the state."

The coalition crosses denominational lines and racial and ethnic lines. "People are just so excited," he said.

Minor's organization will be hitting its stride around the second week of November, when he expects to be signing up thousands of people for coverage that begins on January 1. The plan is to organize enrollment events ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays in the hopes that people will share their good news during family gatherings.

"We feel like once you get people in churches and families, they will become de facto navigators," he said.

(Reporting by Julie Steenhuysen; Editing by Prudence Crowther)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 28, 2013, 07:12:50 am
bet hes part of the clergy response team also


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 03, 2013, 06:36:52 am
HAVE CHURCHES BECOME AGENTS OF THE STATE?


By Chuck Baldwin
October 31, 2013
NewsWithViews.com

Then-Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson devised what has proven to be a brilliant strategy in which to silence and neuter America's churches. His bill, which created the 501c3 tax-exempt corporation status for churches back in 1954, has, over the decades, effectively muted America's pulpits. The vast majority of churches today are thoroughly and completely intimidated by the threat of losing their tax-exempt status under the 501c3 section of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). As a result, the vast majority of pastors are unwilling to address virtually any issue from the pulpit that could be deemed as political.

Add to the fear of losing tax-exempt status the egregiously slavish interpretation of Romans 13--that Christians and churches must submit to civil government no matter what--and a very legitimate argument can be made that Mr. Johnson not only silenced and neutered America's churches, but that he has, in effect, turned them into agents of the state. More and more, the federal government is using pastors and churches to promote its big-government agenda.

Most readers are familiar with how FEMA created a program called "Clergy Response Teams" several years ago. Under this program, tens of thousands of pastors were instructed on how to assist the federal government in the event of a "national emergency." Pastors were encouraged to teach Bible lessons from Romans 13 in which church members were told that God instructs them to always submit to civil authority unconditionally. They were taught to encourage their congregants to turn in their firearms and to be willing to relocate to government-provided shelters if that is what the government told them to do. The last report I read noted that these Clergy Response Teams have been established in over 1,300 counties in the United States. For those readers who are even casually acquainted with history, is this straight out of the N@zi handbook, or what? Now we learn that churches are being used to help the federal government promote and sell Obamacare.

According to TheBlaze.com, "Community organizers are joining pastors across the country to educate and help parishioners sign up for Obamacare. The coordinated initiative, called 'Health Care from the Pulpit,' is being implemented by Enroll America, a non-profit with the goal of maximizing 'the number of uninsured Americans who enroll in health coverage made available by the Affordable Care Act.'

"The program has already reached a number of churches across the nation. In Jacksonville, Fla, Pastor John Newman is among those who invited community organizers from the group to his church to talk about the cost of Obamacare and the enrollment process.

"During the event, Enroll America invited congregants to fill out cards with basic information about themselves or people they knew who might be in need of health care, WJXT-TV [Jacksonville, Florida] reports.

"'Our pastor, he keeps us real informed and grounded in what's going on in the community, and he's always bringing stuff to help us, so I love him for that,' said one parishioner named Michelle Fletcher.

"Enroll America knows that pastors are trusted members of the community, which is why churches are a focus for education and information on the health care law.

"Through 'Health Care from the Pulpit,' the organization is working with faith leaders to ensure that people hear about availability--and with a captive audience in the pews, the move makes logistical sense.

"'Pastors are trusted messengers. They'll be able to get the story across, they'll be able to relate to that story and they'll be able to ask people to enroll in health insurance,' Enroll America organizer Anthony Penna told WJXT.

"From Oct. 25-27, the organization launched its pulpit program as part of the Get Covered America campaign. Enroll America pledged to help churches who wish to enroll congregants or provide people in the community with information and resources.

"A press release from Oct. 22 on the Get Covered America website further explains the purpose of the in-church events.

"'The "Treat Yourself to Coverage Weekend" will also engage dozens of faith groups for the first nationwide push of "Health Care in the Pulpit," GetCovered America's faith engagement program,' it reads. "Working with a diverse group of faith and lay leaders, Get Covered America will host over 50 events across the country to further engage the faith community in education about enrollment in the marketplace."

"Other initiatives are bringing churches into the Obamacare fold as well. Dr. Michael Minor, pastor of Oak Hill Missionary Baptist Church in Hernando, Miss., was recently given a federal grant to help enroll individuals in the health care program.

"Through the $317,742 fund, Minor will work with Cover Mississippi, a cohort of advocacy groups organized by the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program. He has already put together a group of 75 to 100 'navigators' (trainers) around the state to provide information and access to Obamacare. While his efforts are unaffiliated with Enroll America, they serve as another example of a church getting involved in the health care roll-out."

See the report here: 'Health Care From the Pulpit': Here's How Some Churches Are Spreading the Word About Obamacare
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/28/health-care-from-the-pulpit-heres-how-some-churches-are-spreading-the-word-about-obamacare/

Think about it: before a bill becomes law, pastors are forbidden to address it from the pulpit, because it would be "interfering in politics--a violation of the separation of church and state;" but after a bill becomes law it is now the obligation and duty of pastors to support (and promote) it, because it is now the Biblical thing to do, per Romans 13. Was Johnson a diabolical genius, or what?

By the way, I strongly urge readers to purchase the book on Romans 13 that was co-authored by me and my constitutional attorney son, entitled, "Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission." This book shatters the misinterpretation of Romans 13: that Christians are commanded by God to submit to the state no matter what. The Apostle Paul was not introducing a new topic in Romans 13--not at all. The subject is covered throughout the scriptures. This book needs to be read by every pastor and Christian in the country. Order Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission here:

Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission
http://romans13truth.com/

In the same manner that the N@zi government co-opted the churches of Germany, the federal government in Washington, D.C., is co-opting the churches of America today. During the rise of the Third Reich, Germany's pastors and churches were taught the same misinterpretation of Romans 13 that pastors and churches in America are now being taught. And in the same way that Hitler used Germany's pastors and churches to promote his big-government socialist agenda, America's pastors and churches today are being used to promote the big-government socialist agenda emanating from Washington, D.C. Mr. Bush used the churches to promote the FEMA Clergy Response Teams, and now Mr. Obama is using the churches to promote the federal government's socialized health care system.

I remind readers that during the Hitler years, the vast majority of German pastors and churches enthusiastically embraced the N@zi agenda even to the point of flying N@zi flags and giving the N@zi salute during the worship services in Germany's churches. But who among us remembers the names of any of these pathetic pastors? Yet, we do remember (as does history itself) the names of plucky pastors such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Niemoller who led the spiritual opposition to Hitler's encroachment into the church.

Instead of the federal government's draconian "Clergy Response Teams," we need to resurrect Bonhoeffer's band of heroes, which was known as the "Pastors' Emergency League." This was a group of German pastors dedicated to resisting the N@zi agenda--especially inside the church. The creed of Bonhoeffer's Pastors' Emergency League was:

1. To renew their allegiance to the Scriptures.
2. To resist those who attack the Scriptures.
3. To give material and financial aid to those who suffered through repressive laws or violence.
4. To repudiate the N@zi cause.

Bonhoeffer's Pastors' Emergency League soon became a nationwide movement called, the "Confessing Church." In his masterful book, "Hitler's Cross," Erwin Lutzer summarizes the creed of the Confessing Church as being, "No human sovereign should rule over the church; it must be under the Word of God to fulfill its role." (Page134)

Lutzer also noted that the Confessing Church soon realized that "blind obedience, even in matters that belong to the state, might be a violation of the Christian mandate." (Ibid)

Lutzer further wrote, "Many of our Christian heroes were lawbreakers. Whether it was John Bunyan, who sat in a Bedford jail for his preaching, Richard Wurmbrand, who was beaten for teaching the Bible in Communist Romania, Christians have always insisted that there is a law higher than that of the state." (Ibid)

And, again, to quote Lutzer: "[I ]f we say that we will always obey the state, the state becomes our God." (Ibid)

The brave Bonhoeffer rightly said, "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." He also said, "We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the
wheel."

The names of the cowardly and compliant pastors who succumbed to Hitler's ignominious intimidation are forever lost, while the names of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Niemoller will live forever.

In fact, are not the vast majority of highly revered Hebrew and Christian heroes the ones who RESISTED the power of the state when it became tyrannical? From Abram who resisted the "kings of the nations;" to Gideon; to Samson; to Queen Esther; to the prophet Micaiah; to Daniel; to Shadrach Meshach, and Abednego; to Simon Peter, who told civil leaders, "We ought to obey God rather than men;" to William Tyndale; to John Hus; to John Wycliffe; to John Bunyan; to Savonarola; to Martin Luther; to Dietrich Bonhoeffer; and to Jonas Clark, the names history regards most fondly are the names of men who RESISTED the power of the state when it attempted to interfere with man's duty and devotion to God.

However, what do we see today? We see pastors and churches once again becoming the pawns of evil men in government. Pastors are not so much messengers of God and watchmen on the wall as much as they are agents of the state. They are not so much shepherds who fight and give their lives for the sheep as much as they are facilitators of the wolves who seek to prey on the sheep. And in modern history, the seed of this compromise and complacency began in 1954 when Lyndon Johnson introduced the devilish 501c3 tax-exempt corporation status for churches.
 
I am absolutely convinced--now more than ever--that America will never experience any sort of spiritual awakening until pastors and Christians abandon the 501c3 government churches and repudiate the devilish doctrine of unlimited obedience to Caesar. Until we return the Church to its rightful owner, Jesus Christ, the tentacles of oppression and tyranny will continue to strangle our land and our liberties.

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin777.htm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 03, 2013, 05:19:33 pm
Yeah, the fact that churches in America are promoting Obamacare says a lot right there! Looks like they've hit the end of the road.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on November 04, 2013, 02:24:15 am
Quote
HAVE CHURCHES BECOME AGENTS OF THE STATE?

They've always been agents of the state, at least those who have sold their souls for a 501c3 tax number.


Title: Judge strikes down law that gives clergy members tax-free housing allowances
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 23, 2013, 12:25:04 pm
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/judge-strikes-down-law-that-gives-clergy-members-tax-free/article_b8b1c816-bd2b-5f46-9d5a-68c5ad0ed39d.html

Judge strikes down law that gives clergy members tax-free housing allowances
11/23/13

A federal judge has found unconstitutional a law that lets clergy members avoid paying income taxes on compensation that is designated part of a housing allowance.

The decision Friday by U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb could have far-reaching financial ramifications for pastors, who currently can use the untaxed income to pay rental housing costs or the costs of home ownership, including mortgage payments and property taxes.

“It’s a really big deal,” said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, which filed the lawsuit. “A church currently could pay a minister $50,000 but designate $20,000 of it a housing allowance so that only $30,000 would be taxed as salary.”

Crabb acknowledged in her decision that the exemption is a boon to ministers, referencing a 2002 statement by then-U.S. Rep. Jim Ramstad of Minnesota that the tax exemption would save clergy members $2.3 billion in taxes from 2002-2007. But she said the magnitude of the benefit only underscores what’s wrong with the law.

The exemption “provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise,” Crabb wrote.

The defendants in the case are U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and acting IRS commissioner Daniel Werfel. Attempts to reach those agencies late Friday were unsuccessful.

Crabb said the defendants did not identify a reason that a requirement on ministers to pay taxes on a housing allowance is more burdensome for them than for the many millions of others who must pay taxes on income used for housing expenses.

Gaylor called the lawsuit “a sleeper,” saying it has received little media attention and may not be widely known by religious organizations. That will no doubt change with this win, she said. Given the dollar figures at stake, she expects clergy members to pressure the White House to appeal the decision to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.

**This is likely all by design - I don't think this law will be struck down when all is said and done(in the higher courts, that is). As you can see, Caesar is trying to dangle that carrot of the love of money toward these hirelings in order to get them to help push Caesar's agendas further.

Once the clergy get wind of it, I expect they will be very upset,” she said.

The law, passed by Congress in 1954, allows a clergy member to use the untaxed income to purchase a home, and then, in a practice known as “double dipping,” deduct interest paid on the mortgage and property taxes, the foundation said.

“The court’s decision does not evince hostility to religion — nor should it even seem controversial,” foundation attorney Richard L. Bolton said in a statement. “The court has simply recognized the reality that a tax-free housing allowance available only to ministers is a significant benefit from the government unconstitutionally provided on the basis of religion.”

Clergy are permitted to use the housing allowance not just for rent or mortgage but also for home improvements such as swimming pools, Gaylor said. They may exempt from taxable income up to the fair market rental value of their home, a measure particularly helpful to well-heeled pastors, she said.

“When you’re dealing with some of these mega-church pastors with huge mansions, they can be paid an enormous amount in housing allowances,” Gaylor said.

On its website, GuideStone, a Christian financial services provider based in Dallas, calls the housing allowance “the most important tax benefit available to ministers.”


Title: Re: Judge strikes down law that gives clergy members tax-free housing allowances
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 23, 2013, 12:26:13 pm
^^ Related

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/business/11religious.html?_r=0
10/11/2006
Religion-Based Tax Breaks: Housing to Paychecks to Books

For tens of millions of Americans, the Rev. Rick Warren is best known for his blockbuster spiritual guide, “The Purpose Driven Life,” which has sold more than 25 million copies; his success as the founder of the 22,000-member Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif.; and his efforts on behalf of some of the world’s neediest people.

But for tens of thousands of ministers — and their financial advisers — Pastor Warren will also be remembered as their champion in a fight over the most valuable tax break available to ordained clergy members of all faiths: an exemption from federal taxes for most of the money they spend on housing, which typically represents roughly a third of their compensation. Pastor Warren argued that the tax break is essential to poorly paid clergy members who serve society.

The tax break is not available to the staff at secular nonprofit organizations whose scale and charitable aims compare to those of religious ministries like Pastor Warren’s church, or to poorly paid inner-city teachers and day care workers who also serve their communities.

The housing deduction is one of several tax breaks that leave extra money in the pockets of clergy members and their religious employers. Ministers of every faith are also exempt from income tax withholding and can opt out of Social Security. And every state but one exempts religious employers from paying state unemployment taxes — reducing the employers’ payroll expenses but also leaving their workers without unemployment benefits if they are laid off.

Another religion-based tax break — the only one consistently defeated in the courts in recent years — is an exemption from state sales taxes for religious publications but not for secular ones.

This sales tax break has been struck down as unconstitutional in at least five states, most recently in Georgia in February, when a United States District Court judge, Richard W. Story, ruled that “the unique and preferential treatment the state provides to ‘religious’ literature raises serious constitutional concerns” under the First Amendment clause prohibiting an “establishment” of religion.

Yet a few states still have a sales tax exemption for religious publications. One of them is Florida, where state officials, lawyers for two religious publications and a national religious liberty advocacy group have joined forces to defend the tax break from a constitutional challenge waged almost single-handedly by an Orlando lawyer named Heather Morcroft.

Ms. Morcroft is a Legal Aid staff lawyer who works with foster children. She is a believer in Wicca, which she described as a neo-pagan faith loosely based on the traditions of ancient earth-centered religions, and serves as president of the state’s small Wiccan Religious Cooperative.

The cooperative is the formal plaintiff in the pending lawsuit Ms. Morcroft filed almost five years ago to challenge the constitutionality of the Florida exemption. Her arguments echo those that have prevailed in other states: that by exempting religious publications from the sales tax, the government is favoring religious ideas over secular ones, and that tax officials should not be in the business of deciding what publications are sufficiently religious to be exempt.

In contrast to Ms. Morcroft’s lonely fight in Tallahassee, Pastor Warren, who declined to be interviewed for this article, had a host of allies when he went to battle to defend the special tax deduction for housing expenses of clergy members. Ultimately, the allies included both houses of Congress and the president of the United States.

The Housing Exemption

The one small passage in the vast federal tax code that originally conferred the housing-expense exemption on clergy members did not cap the deduction. But in 1971, the Internal Revenue Service limited it to the “fair market rental value” of the furnished home, utilities included.

During a routine audit in 1996, according to court documents, the I.R.S. decided that Pastor Warren’s housing deduction exceeded the rental value of his new home on Via Del Sol in the rugged Trabuco Canyon, southeast of Los Angeles.

That’s when the fireworks began.

Pastor Warren, who gives 90 percent of his considerable income to charities, later explained in an open letter to other ministers that he decided to sue because the housing allowance was the only way small churches could pay their pastors enough to live — and he knew that those ministers could not fight the I.R.S. as he could
.

The deduction, usually called the parsonage exemption, is available to ministers, rabbis and other clergy members of all faiths working at houses of worship. It allows them to live in congregation-owned housing without being taxed on the imputed value of their free housing, as almost all other employees are when they live in company-paid housing.

Much more at the link


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on November 23, 2013, 12:44:49 pm
Quote
The law, passed by Congress in 1954, allows a clergy member to use the untaxed income to purchase a home, and then, in a practice known as “double dipping,” deduct interest paid on the mortgage and property taxes, the foundation said.

Because of my disdain for churchianity, I'm not familiar with the business side of churches, but this type issue doesn't surprise me. Scripture asks why we don't suffer ourselves to be defrauded, yet Warren and others go to court and sue because they don't like something, calling it unfair, when in reality that same scripture tells us their motivation is the love of money.

Another point is that scripture says we are not to preach for filthy lucre, right? So, why are these people taking a salary? Why aren't there limits to the dollar amount you can deduct? A preacher shouldn't get any deductions above "normal" living expenses, maybe a TOTAL of $100,000/year, for housing, food, clothing (Ghandi wore a simple robe people!), everything. And I even lean towards thinking that it may be more edifying that the preacher lives at their building (like a shopkeeper lives uptairs from their store), so no need for a separate house and expenses. Talk about having an appropriate place to have guests come over for dinner!  ;D



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 25, 2013, 06:09:19 am
Judge Strikes Down Housing Tax Break for Pastors
(UPDATED) Longstanding IRS exemption—last revised after Rick Warren dispute in 2002—currently saves pastors $700 million per year.


 One of the most important tax breaks available to American pastors is unconstitutional.

At least, according to a federal judge's assessment of an atheist group's complaint that the IRS's clergy housing allowance—which will save pastors $700 million this year in income taxes—violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb of Wisconsin ruled that the second part of IRS Code Sec. 107, which exempts clergy from paying income taxes on compensation considered a housing allowance, "provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise," reported the Wisconsin State Journal. (The ruling leaves alone the first part of Sec. 107, which excludes the rental value of actual parsonages from being taxed.)

The ruling, while notable, will not have an immediate impact upon clergy compensation because Crabb has stayed its effect until any appeals are resolved. The case, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Lew, will almost certainly be appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. (The Seventh Circuit previously reversed Crabb's ruling that the National Day of Prayer was also unconstitutional.)

The housing allowance is "the most important tax benefit available to ministers," according to GuideStone Financial Resources, the benefits arm of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). America's largest Protestant denomination opposes the ruling.

"The clergy housing allowance isn't a government establishment of religion, but just the reverse," said Russell D. Moore, president of the SBC's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. "The allowance is neutral to all religions. Without it, clergy in small congregations of all sorts would be penalized and harmed."

Religion News Service calculates that the loss of the housing allowance, if upheld, could reduce the take-home pay of some pastors by up to 10 percent.

The lawsuit by the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) addresses the practice of what it calls "double dipping," wherein a pastor can use tax-free income to buy a home, then deduct interest paid on the mortgage and property taxes.

CT previously noted how, after the FFRF's first challenge was dismissed due to lack of standing, the FFRF changed the way it compensated its co-presidents so that they received a housing allowance similar to many pastors. The federal government recently offered a novel defense: that atheist leaders could qualify as "ministers of the gospel." Crabb's ruling rejects this idea. Howard Friedman of Religion Clause explains more.

Such housing allowances last came under scrutiny in 2002 when the IRS challenged megachurch pastor Rick Warren on his housing allowance claim of more than $70,000, leading Congress to revise the law and limit allowances to "the fair rental value of the home." (CT offered its own take in an editorial.)

According to CT sister resource Managing Your Church, the average base salary of a full-time senior pastor in 2012-2013 ranges from $33,000 to $70,000. Eighty-four percent of senior pastors surveyed said they also receive a housing allowance, which accounts for $20,000 to $38,000 in added compensation. The Joint Committee on Taxation calculates the exemption amounted to $700 million in recent years, notes Peter Reilly of Forbes.

CT previously reported how the threat to pastor parsonages lost its legal legs but was revived again, and examined debate over whether or not Congress should change the rules on pastor housing allowances. CT also noted the quirky reasoning that recently allowed one prominent pastor to claim two parsonages.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/november/judge-strikes-down-tax-break-for-pastors-housing-allowance.html?utm


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 25, 2013, 09:37:09 am
Quote
The ruling, while notable, will not have an immediate impact upon clergy compensation because Crabb has stayed its effect until any appeals are resolved. The case, Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Lew, will almost certainly be appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. (The Seventh Circuit previously reversed Crabb's ruling that the National Day of Prayer was also unconstitutional.)

So the defendant in this case is Jacob Lew, the US Treasury Secretary?

Pt being that doesn't everyone see where this is going now? Don't think this recent court ruling will be struck down for long - wouldn't be surprising if Rick Warren, the SBC, and the rest of Churchianity will get on board with the federal government to further push the appeals/supreme court to overturn this judge's recent ruling. If/when they do this, they will only make it worse for themselves b/c they'll only be begging to be on Caesar's yoke more and more. Not good at all, obviously.

And also - funny how Churchianity pastors are begging for more monetary rights here, but at the same time continue to pressure their pews to give, give, and give when a lot of their pews are struggling to make ends meet.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 03, 2014, 07:33:55 pm
This is an EXCELLENT read!

501c3: The Devil's Church
http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/501c3.php


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 06, 2014, 10:08:00 am
501c3: The Devil's Church
http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/501c3.php

Apparently, that Arizona pastor who runs a home church that got jailed recently(it was discussed in another thread, but forgot which one), incorporated his church as a 501c3!

Quote
I still believe that most preachers and churches are walking right into the 501c3 trap without realizing what they have done, and for example, a pastor Salman in Arizona recently came on to youtube and pleaded with American Christians to sign a petition to get him out of jail because he had been arrested for having a home church. Normally, I would have joined in the fight to demand they be released, until I found out that he had hidden the fact that he registered his home church under 501(c)(3).

This is NOT about religious liberty. This is about a contract that a pastor signed to willingly hand over his religious liberty, and his agreement to comply with all federal regulations, building codes, and permits for a church by state definitions. He agreed by contract to meet these standards, and he LIED by not complying with what he agreed to do. 


Yes, I agree! These churches and ministries that have yoked up with Caesar has been their OWN doing! No, they weren't ignorant at all, as they DO know that they've made the IRS as THEIR head(and NOT our Lord Jesus Christ)!

Yeah, stay FAR away from these 501c3s as you can!

Proverbs 12:5  The thoughts of the righteous are right: but the counsels of the wicked are deceit.
Pro 12:6  The words of the wicked are to lie in wait for blood: but the mouth of the upright shall deliver them.
Pro 12:7  The wicked are overthrown, and are not: but the house of the righteous shall stand.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on January 06, 2014, 12:40:01 pm
Quote
Arizona pastor who runs a home church that got jailed recently(it was discussed in another thread, but forgot which one)

Phoenix pastor jailed for operating a "church"
http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,6943.0.html (http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,6943.0.html)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 06, 2014, 01:08:21 pm
Phoenix pastor jailed for operating a "church"
http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,6943.0.html (http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,6943.0.html)

Thank you! :)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on January 27, 2014, 06:04:31 am
Nebraska Atheist Lawmaker Introduces Bill to Revoke Church Property Tax Exemption

An atheist lawmaker in Nebraska has proposed a bill that seeks to revoke property tax exemptions for religious organizations in the state, including churches. Senator Ernie Chambers (D-Omaha) introduced the legislation before the Nebraska Revenue Committee on Friday, explaining that he believes the proposal would help ease the tax burden on Nebraska residents.

http://christiannews.net/2014/01/26/nebraskas-atheist-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-revoke-church-property-tax-exemption/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2014, 10:44:01 am
Nebraska Atheist Lawmaker Introduces Bill to Revoke Church Property Tax Exemption

An atheist lawmaker in Nebraska has proposed a bill that seeks to revoke property tax exemptions for religious organizations in the state, including churches. Senator Ernie Chambers (D-Omaha) introduced the legislation before the Nebraska Revenue Committee on Friday, explaining that he believes the proposal would help ease the tax burden on Nebraska residents.

http://christiannews.net/2014/01/26/nebraskas-atheist-lawmaker-introduces-bill-to-revoke-church-property-tax-exemption/

Yeah, hate to say it, but it seems like the unbelieving world has more discernment than Churchianity. Personally, I would support this too.

Luke 16:8  And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.
Luk 16:9  And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on January 27, 2014, 03:40:19 pm
I think the point is that they are wiser in the ways of the world, simply because they are of the world, and the "children of light" are not of the world and don't think like the world.

Personally, I think there should be some designation that defines a company that is "for profit" versus "not for profit".

The complaint many have is that those "non-profits" operate more or less like a "for profit" business, but don't have the tax burden and end up abusing that tax break. Clarification on the law, maybe more restrictions to how much can be considered a need for the non profit's operations, thus deductible or not taxed at all, but the idea behind charity is there is no gain from the action, so in that sense, should a charity be getting a break, which is a type of profit or benefit for being charitable? There's a case that no, they shouldn't.

Charity says they should incur whatever costs there are for them to be charitable to others, so really, it may be that there should be no "non profits" at all. I understand the whole "cover costs" idea, but that really doesn't play in charity by definition. One is suppose to take on any burden, and not ask to pass on that burden to others to bear.

The world doesn't believe in "...expecting nothing in return...", so they look for compensation for anything they are a part of.

Ultimately, it's the world's problem, let them deal with it.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2014, 03:48:36 pm
1Corinthians 7:35  And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.

1Co 10:33  Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Galatians 5:2  Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal 5:3  For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Gal 5:4  Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Gal 5:5  For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
Gal 5:6  For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.


2Timothy 2:14  Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

Hebrews 4:2  For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

Heb 12:10  For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on January 27, 2014, 04:21:13 pm
12  Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13  But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
14  Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
Matthew 15:12-14 (KJB)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 01, 2014, 10:27:24 pm
http://beforeitsnews.com/religion/2014/02/exposed-churches-accepting-bribe-money-from-government-to-deceive-attendees-2-2463790.html
2/1/14
EXPOSED: Churches Accepting Bribe Money from Government To Deceive Attendees

Churches Accepting Bribe Money from Government To Deceive Attendees. Mark Dice Expliansmore, please listen the below video.

According to Peter Kershaw, In Ceasar’s Grip “For a 501c3 church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares ‘legal,’ even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, same sex marriages, etc.), that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status.  The 501c3 has had a ‘chilling effect’ upon the free speech rights of the church.  LBJ was a shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCdllgcFjlY

In Bob Jones University v. United States (461 U.S. 574), the U.S. Supreme Court noted the following about the government’s intended purpose for the 501c3: The Court asserts that an exempt organization must “demonstrably serve and be in harmony with the public interest,” must have a purpose that comports with “the common community conscience,” and must not act in a manner “affirmatively at odds with [the] declared position of the whole Government.”

Taken together, these passages suggest that the primary function of a tax-exempt organization is to act on behalf of the Government in carrying out governmentally approved policies. MORE HERE

The Government OWNS and RUNS your Church and its Doctrines! 501c3 Tax-Exempt Organizations MORE HERE

Profits Over Prophets: The church was the last vestige of freedom and liberty as God bestowed people the gift of the freedom to choose and government is usurping this gift. Indeed, government is trying its best to eviscerate that freedom in the same manner as it has dictatorially controlled every other major institution in our country. MORE HERE

Naioth Prophetic Word “Suppression and Censorship of 501(c)(3) Churches: A Satanic Deception And Trap” MORE HERE

Who Is REALLY Lord of Your Church? Perhaps if we had real churches we would have real preachers. A real preacher would preach the Law to the oppressor and Liberty to the people. MORE HERE


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Kilika on February 02, 2014, 01:56:57 am
Quote
The Court asserts that an exempt organization must “demonstrably serve and be in harmony with the public interest,” must have a purpose that comports with “the common community conscience,” and must not act in a manner “affirmatively at odds with [the] declared position of the whole Government.

The very basics of Christian doctrine is at odds with the world and the "whole government" already, and the world knows it.

And in order for a "Christian church" to conform to those standards, they must compromise sound Christian doctrine by bowing to the demands of Caesar over their own alleged beliefs.

No question, if a "church" is 501c3, they have sold out to Caesar and turned their backs on God.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2014, 10:18:32 pm
2/2014
Christianity's Churchianity's giant sleeper - China
http://www.ucobserver.org/features/2014/02/sleeping_giant/

Churches — both legal and illegal — are booming in China. Some view them as a welcome counterpoint to rampant materialism. Others see ghosts of a colonial past.
 
By Alex Jürgen Thumm

It was my last Sunday morning in China, my last chance to experience church in a Communist country where, as far as I could tell, Christianity was basically forbidden. It was 2011, and I had been in Beijing for five weeks to study Mandarin. In that time, I hadn’t seen a single cross, church or Bible. In fact, I read at customs that you couldn’t bring in more than four Bibles from abroad. I had no idea that I was in the third-largest Christian country in the world.

In Liangmaqiao, a Beijing neighbourhood that’s home to the foreign and the wealthy, I arrived at the 21st Century Hotel, where the Beijing International Christian Fellowship (BICF) holds services. The parking lot was full of Rolls-Royces and BMWs bearing Jesus-fish decals. At the building entrance, two parishioners acting as doorkeepers asked me for ID — by government order, only foreigners may attend church. I had forgotten my passport, so the doorkeepers made me sign a slip of paper attesting to my alien status.

Inside, 3,000 people packed into various auditoriums, each offering worship in a different language. I opted for the Mandarin service. Imagine an evangelical megachurch of hundreds of Chinese people with American passports. There was an excited but orderly choir, rock music and long, passionate praying. The Chinese-Californian minister preached about outreach and marriage. I recognized most of the songs from my Canadian Baptist upbringing; they had just been translated into Mandarin.

After I’d spent a couple of hours watching the service on jumbo-sized screens (which provided the clearest view), my first megachurch experience came to an end. Just before I managed to escape, someone wanted to talk. This was to be expected — I was one of three white people in the congregation. She was a teacher, she said, from the Philippines. But once we left the hotel and had walked a few blocks, she confessed she was actually a missionary. It was too risky to say so in the church auditorium, which was likely bugged, she said. She asked me directly whether I could secure a church sponsorship for her in Canada. We exchanged e-mail addresses, but I never heard from her again.

'Misconceptions abound about China, and that’s no less the case when it comes to the country’s Christian population.'

Misconceptions abound about China, and that’s no less the case when it comes to the country’s Christian population. Many assume a Communist country that is officially atheist would allow no religion. (Mao Zedong once said “religion is poison.”) But religious freedom is guaranteed in the 1978 constitution — or at least what the government considers “normal religious activity,” occurring in government-sanctioned places of worship serving one of the five official faiths: Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Protestantism and Catholicism. Religion is on the rise in China, with one-third of people claiming an affiliation. To all my Chinese friends’ surprise, there are as many as 130 million Christians in China; the only countries with more are the United States and Brazil. Churchgoers in China outnumber those in all of Europe.

Given figures like these, understanding China’s relationship with Christians is essential to predicting the future of Christianity globally. Whether Chinese Christians refuse or accept state-sanctioned religion, or whether the state itself loosens or tightens its restrictions on the faithful will in turn shape the international body of Christ. In other words, what happens in China won’t simply stay in China. David Wang, co-founder of the Hong Kong-based mission agency Asian Outreach, says Chinese people are busy planting churches abroad; Metro Vancouver alone is home to over 100,000 Chinese Christians. “It’s now the era of ministry from China,” he told Christianity Today magazine.

Christianity and missionaries have been present in China — on and off, officially and covertly — since the eighth-century Tang dynasty. A further wave of tolerance for missionary work washed in during the 13th-century Mongolian Yuan dynasty. This was a time when the Chinese referred to Muslims, Jews and Christians all by the same name, hui hui — a stark contrast in a country that now considers Catholicism and Protestantism as two separate religions.

During a walking tour of Shanghai’s French Concession, I learned about the Taiping Rebellion, which took place between 1850 and 1864. It led to 20 million deaths and, interestingly enough, the foundations for Chinese communism. The cause for all the bloodshed? A certain Hong Xiuquan announced he’d had a vision that revealed he was Jesus’ brother. Over time, he gathered tens of thousands of armed followers seeking to establish the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.

Contemporary Chinese Christianity can probably be traced to 1951, with the founding of the Three-Self Patriotic Movement, one of two state-sanctioned Protestant organizations. Its three “selves” are self-governance, self-support (financial independence from foreigners) and self-propagation (homegrown missionary work). The principles were meant to assure the government that the church would be loyal to the People’s Republic of China.

Perhaps ironically, today’s Christianity was also shaped by the decade-long Cultural Revolution that began in 1966, when religion was banned, faith leaders persecuted and places of worship destroyed or converted for secular use. Amid this upheaval, secret house churches sprang up, the Three-Self Patriotic Movement went underground (and was officially restored in 1979) and today’s church elders came of age.

More recently, in 2007, 70 leaders of illegal house churches convened in Wenzhou to develop seven core values. Several of them are distinctly Chinese. For example, intentional non-denominationalism reflects the Chinese value of wholeness and oneness.

The United Church of Canada has a long history with China, beginning in the mid-19th century with three missions led by the Presbyterian Church, one of the United Church’s founding denominations. Missionaries such as Very Rev. James Endicott, the United Church’s second moderator, carried this work into the 20th century. Endicott’s missionary son, Rev. James G. Endicott, later drew controversy for his support of the Chinese Communist Party.

'Perhaps ironically, today’s Christianity was also shaped by the decade-long Cultural Revolution that began in 1966, when religion was banned . . . '

Gary MacDonald told me about his 19 years of Christian life in China, beginning in 1992. As a United Church global mission worker, he lived in three different rural areas educating teachers with the Amity Foundation, one of China’s largest relief and development agencies and a United Church partner. In these partially illiterate rural communities, being known as a Christian was both a title and a standard. Sermons were over an hour long, and church meant giving, singing, praying spontaneously and forgiving neighbours’ Cultural Revolution betrayals, some of which involved torture. “To have an elderly person — blind and physically challenged because of having been tortured for his or her belief — lead in prayer during a church service is something I shall never forget,” he says.

Today, Chinese Christians can choose between two official Protestant church movements and Catholicism. I’m told these services are much the same as evangelical Chinese churches in the West, with one major difference: the church leaders are required to maintain a relationship with the government.

A separate category of legal worship in contemporary China is exclusive to foreign passport-holders: the international churches. “The Chinese government respects the freedom of religious belief of foreigners in China and they may attend religious activities in temples, mosques, churches and other religious places,” claims the tourism website beijingchina.net.cn. As long as foreigners do not try to establish or change Chinese religious organizations and practices, they are free to participate in worship.

Evangelism, sharing religion with minors and worshipping in public space are prohibited. The government fears that a congregation outside state control could grow too large and too influential.

Shan O-Yuan moved to Beijing from his native California a decade ago for a job in the construction industry and has been active with the BICF from the start. Sure, he says, you have to learn “how to work within regulations,” but for him, the Chinese Christian life is a happy and exciting one. As he sees it, people who live abroad have left familiar cultural constraints behind, so they’re more open to asking spiritual questions. Many rediscover their Christian faith while in China.

O-Yuan, who is in his 30s, has warmed up to his status as a religious minority. Being a Christian in China is a distinction. Unlike in the West, where what O-Yuan describes as a “so-called enlightened, post-Christian” view puts people off organized religion, in China they’re curious, “and it creates conversation.”

Despite evangelism being officially off-limits, O-Yuan claims you can evangelize in China in a way that you simply can’t in the United States. For example, because the Beijing expat community is a transitory one, when you “invest” in people who then return home, your actions ultimately have a global impact.

O-Yuan realizes there are difficulties, however, having faced some himself. “They want you to stay in your own little western enclave,” he says, “and keep your religious life to yourself.” It took a BICF project that he was involved with three tries to get a church planted in Beijing’s central business district. The 2008 Olympics, in particular, put the authorities on edge.

But in China, O-Yuan has found a place where he says God’s will is active and present. He’s witnessed successful church projects, including the establishment of orphanages. Gary MacDonald also told me about a church in Gansu province that refused to obey an order a few years ago to move to the edge of town and hand over its land. It stood up for its property rights, something MacDonald says wouldn’t have happened a decade earlier.

One aspect of the international church that excites O-Yuan is the absence of denominations. People find their common ground in Jesus and in being an expat. Though O-Yuan admits worship is strongly influenced by American evangelism, he insists it would be easier for a non-evangelical to find a spiritual home in China than in the United States: “The evangelical church in China is a lot more open.”

The third category of churches in China is illegal house churches, which operate underground and beyond the state’s control. (In order to keep a low profile, they typically split up once they reach about 100 members.) Those who join are keen to be part of a Christian community — for both its social and religious benefits — and are not intimidated by state threats. Though it’s impossible to know how many people attend house churches, some sources estimate between 45 million and 60 million Protestants, and their numbers are growing — a fact that even the government can’t ignore. In 2012, the State Administration for Religious Affairs created a plan to “guide” illegal house churches into becoming state churches.

Last summer, I returned to Beijing for three months to work as an English-teaching au pair for a wealthy, two-child Chinese family. One Sunday afternoon, after attending a small international church service in a business district, I was invited to a “gathering.” We got in a taxi and arrived at an apartment tower. My new acquaintance forgot which floor to go to. We tried cold-knocking a few doors and asked the doorkeeper if he had seen a large group of foreigners around. Finally, we tried one last floor, and it was the one. It was only when we walked in — late — that I realized it was a house church. I found myself in an apartment larger and more sophisticated than I’ve ever stayed in. It was packed with over 50 Chinese citizens, foreigners and Asian Americans, most of them working professionals and students. The service was long, passionate, hopeful and heavily influenced by American evangelism. It was also surprisingly loud, for an illegal gathering. I now know it was a typical Beijing house service. I wanted to return, but I knew the church would relocate before I’d have the chance.

The most famous illegal house church is Beijing’s Shouwang Church. Founded in 1993, it has grown to include over a thousand members, some of whom reportedly hold memberships in the Communist party. In 2011, having been evicted for the 20th-plus time (the landlords were under pressure from the state), Shouwang started to meet outdoors in the Zhongguancun area of Beijing, sometimes referred to as China’s Silicon Valley. A few dozen worshippers are arrested at every outdoor Shouwang service and usually held for a few hours. Despite the notoriety of the church, its name cannot be found on Chinese websites.

Many other Chinese Christians don’t let themselves be intimidated by the government, often drawing courage from Bible stories such as Daniel in the lion’s den. The Texas-based organization China Aid reports that from 2005 to 2006, 1,958 Christians were arrested in China. Wiretapping is not unheard of. China Aid also reports that house church leaders were arrested at a Christian leadership conference in Shandong province in 2007 and subsequently sentenced to multiple years in a labour camp.

These days, there are hints the Communist party may be more favourably disposed toward faith than in previous generations. China is experiencing a 1960s-style sexual revolution and 21st-century materialism all at once. With a frighteningly large share of the population concerned with little but socio-economic success, values such as politeness, honesty, sexual fidelity and community are taking a direct hit — especially in the cities.

Is Christianity a solution? China’s former premier Wen Jiabao regularly invoked the importance of spiritual growth. The Communist party has also expressed interest in American evangelical-style marriage courses to combat the explosive divorce rate.

Before becoming a Christian himself, the well-known Chinese economist Zhao Xiao pointed to Christianity and its positive impact on the historic economic success of the West. In his 2002 article, “Market Economies With Churches and Market Economies Without Churches,” he argued that China needs a moral foundation and therefore needs Christianity. After his field study in the United States, Zhao concluded that a strong economy requires a moral force to transcend the drive for profit and to infuse the business community with respect for people, contracts and the planet.

Is the Chinese state correct in its judgment that Christianity is a foreign-controlled import? Or can Christianity become indigenous to China? And what does Chinese Christianity look like: Bible-reading followers of Jesus who submit to state control? Would they quote Confucius, venerate ancestors and enjoy traditional Chinese festivals, rooted in Buddhism and luck? After all, many Chinese mix faiths, calling themselves Taoist and Buddhist, for example.

At the same time, one also has to wonder whether Christianity ought to be indigenized — would Chinese Christianity ultimately have a positive impact on China and the rest of the world? Would it even be Christianity?

Many more questions remain. In China, there are no guarantees; the uncrossable line is always fluctuating. Trust can be precarious. Are Christians still persecuted? None of the six pastors I contacted would give me an interview, saying it’s just not the right time. What move will the government make next? When will Christian members of the Communist party take a stand, and when will the party’s treatment of religion estrange a critical mass? What role can western Christians ethically play without compromising the Chinese church’s independence?

For now, O-Yuan believes that the best Chinese Christians can do is tell their story.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 24, 2014, 01:53:03 pm
Was reading this chapter in 1 Kings this morning...

1Kings 12:6  And king Rehoboam consulted with the old men, that stood before Solomon his father while he yet lived, and said, How do ye advise that I may answer this people?
1Ki 12:7  And they spake unto him, saying, If thou wilt be a servant unto this people this day, and wilt serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be thy servants for ever.
1Ki 12:8  But he forsook the counsel of the old men, which they had given him, and consulted with the young men that were grown up with him, and which stood before him:
1Ki 12:9  And he said unto them, What counsel give ye that we may answer this people, who have spoken to me, saying, Make the yoke which thy father did put upon us lighter?
1Ki 12:10  And the young men that were grown up with him spake unto him, saying, Thus shalt thou speak unto this people that spake unto thee, saying, Thy father made our yoke heavy, but make thou it lighter unto us; thus shalt thou say unto them, My little finger shall be thicker than my father's loins.
1Ki 12:11  And now whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.

1Ki 12:12  So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam the third day, as the king had appointed, saying, Come to me again the third day.
1Ki 12:13  And the king answered the people roughly, and forsook the old men's counsel that they gave him;
1Ki 12:14  And spake to them after the counsel of the young men, saying, My father made your yoke heavy, and I will add to your yoke: my father also chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions.



I know this is from the OT - but nonetheless we are in these days now - where the elders are shown the door, and younger, more novice people are given higher prominence. Look at the rotten fruits now.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 03, 2014, 08:36:37 pm
New Film 'Persecuted' Warns of Abuse of Gov't Power, Religious Persecution
2/13/14
http://www.christianpost.com/news/new-film-persecuted-warns-of-abuse-of-govt-power-religious-persecution-114501/

WASHINGTON — "Persecuted," a new film that will be released on May 9, is a thriller with a political message about religious persecution and the abuse of government power.

While Hollywood is better known for making films with a liberal point of view, "Persecuted" was unabashedly made from writer, producer and director Daniel Lusko's conservative viewpoint.

"We as a nation are perilously close to losing freedom of speech and freedom of religion and everyone we've shown the film to has remarked on how easily the plot of 'Persecuted' could actually take place — or perhaps already has and was covered up," Lusko said.

The Christian Post was invited to a pre-screening of the film Monday in Washington, D.C., that was also attended by several members of Congress. There will also be advance screenings at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention later this month and at the Conservative Political Action Conference in March.

If "Persecuted" had been made in the 1960s, the protagonist might have been an anti-war liberal. In 2014, though, the hero is an evangelical preacher, thus reflecting the concerns about the abuse of government power that are currently more commonly found on the right, instead of the left, of the political spectrum.

On the surface, "Persecuted" plays out like many government thrillers. Similar to movies based upon Tom Clancy novels, it has a hero with limited resources faced off against corrupt politicians and government officials. Central to the plot, though, is an effort by the president and his cronies to pass the "Faith and Fairness Act," which would be similar to a "fairness doctrine" for religious groups. If this law were passed, religious broadcasters would be required to present all religious points of view when presenting their own point of view.

**Just like 501c3 on churches in America - they're not allowed to expose other Babylonian religions on the pulpits. Religious persecution? Hardly - it's these churches' faults for embracing the love of money.

The notion that such a law could actually be passed in the United States is not out of the realm of possibility, Jordan Sekulow, executive director of the American Center for Law and Justice, explained to The Christian Post. The law is similar to a resolution that was passed at the United Nations about the defamation of religion.

**Again, this is 501c3 since the 50's.

"It's backed predominantly by Islamic countries, but in the name of tolerance, so that they can criminalize defamation or defamatory speech so that you effectively become a criminal if you say Jesus is the only way, that becomes criminal. So it's real," Sekulow said.

The ACLJ is helping to promote the film and Sekulow has a small role as a reporter.

"I dedicated my small part, and why we're behind the movie, to Saeed Abedini, an American imprisoned in Iran that we represent," he added.

In addition to the abuse of government power, the film is also about the corruption of religion. Some of the film's "bad guys" are government officials while others are church officials who accept government benefits for financial gain.

**Repeat - this is 501c3!

The lead role is played by award winning actor James Remar, who has been in "X-Men: First Class" and "Django: Unchained." His main rival in the film is Oscar-nominated actor Bruce Davison, who has been in two "X-Men" films and "Lost."

The cast also includes Dean Stockwell ("Battlestar Galactica" and "Quantum Leap"), Brad Stine (dubbed "God's Comic" by The New Yorker), Raoul Trujillo ("Apocolypto" and "Cowboys and Aliens"), and Christian singer Natalie Grant. Fred Thompson, star of "Law and Order," former U.S. senator and 2008 presidential candidate, plays the hero's father in the film.

Fox News' Gretchen Carlson also has a small part in the film as a reporter.

"These are issues I have talked a lot about on Fox News and they're central in my life too. I'm a Christian and oftentimes felt the negativity of speaking openly about that," Carlson told The Christian Post.

**She's a Lutheran, which is RCC-light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gretchen_Carlson

Because she is outspoken about her faith, Carlson added, she experiences both encouragement and derision.

"It's really ironic because when people see me on the street, if they happen to recognize me from Fox News, the thing they say to me is, 'thank you for standing up for the values and ideals that I believe in with my family,' ... and yet, that seems to be what I'm mostly criticized for as well. It's interesting, the dichotomy that goes on in society," she said.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 22, 2014, 04:18:50 pm
FYI, 501c3s are classified as corporations too(and not just private businesses). Pt being that a corporation is defined as just that, an artificial person, b/c it has to register with the state(and subsequently the state becomes the head of it). It's not just the 501c3 "non-profit" entities, but private businesses that register as such as well.

http://news.yahoo.com/corporations-believe-god-015244820--politics.html
Can Corporations Believe in God?
3/21/14

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case that may alter the scope of the First Amendment.  Against the backdrop of Arizona’s defunct “Turn the Gays Away” law and others like it, the Court will decide whether corporations have religious beliefs, and whether those beliefs can affect the rights of other people.

The case—actually the consolidated cases of Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius—is also another referendum on Obamacare.  At issue in the case is the Affordable Care Act’s requirement that employer-provided insurance plans include coverage for contraception.  The owners of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, both privately held companies, argue this mandate violates the First Amendment’s protection of the free exercise of religion.

If the Court goes Hobby Lobby’s way—and since the case also affords another bite at the Obamacare apple—it will significantly expand the reach of the first amendment.  And not in a good way.

First, the Court will have to decide that corporations are not only people, but people with consciences.  Conservative “religious freedom” activists like to blur the lines between individuals and businesses.  They talk about bakers and photographers, but Hobby Lobby is a corporation with $3 billion in revenues, 22,000 employees, and 550 stores around the country.  Its owners, the conservative billionaire David Green and his family, argue that what happens to Hobby Lobby happens to them personally.

But this contention runs counter to the foundation of corporate law itself, which is that companies are legal entities distinct from their owners.  If someone trips and falls in a Hobby Lobby store, the Green family isn’t liable (unless they acted negligently as directors).  So why are they liable—legally or morally—for the company’s insurance plan?

Second, the view that corporations have consciences is incoherent.  Corporate personhood is a legal fiction, not an ontological or soteriological fact.  Conceivably, corporations can be said to have interests that give rise to freedom of expression—that was the holding of Citizens United.  But corporations don’t sin, don’t go to hell, and don’t get saved by Jesus.

Third—and this is where most attention has focused—if corporations can opt-out of a general law regarding contraception, why not other laws?  This is where Hobby Lobby connects to Arizona’s law.  The whole purpose of “Turn the Gays Away” was to carve out religious exemptions to civil rights laws.  Normally, a restaurant can’t refuse to serve a customer because she’s black, female, Jewish, or gay (or, obviously, white, male, Muslim, or straight).  But if Hobby Lobby can assert a religious objection to contraception coverage, surely a restaurant can assert a religious objection to non-discrimination law.

In other words, a ruling for Hobby Lobby could make “Turn the Gays Away” the law of the land.  As long as a company’s owners can provide a religious reason, they can opt-out of Obamacare, anti-discrimination laws, marriage laws, employment laws—you name it.  Forget ****-shaped wedding cakes (yes, the Right is actually worried about this).  We’re talking about Fortune 500 companies treating legal marriages unequally, hospitals denying gay spouses their rights, and, yes, denying healthcare to millions of women.

Now, it may strike readers as odd that, in 2014, we are debating the merits of contraception in the first place.  Indeed, with nearly 90% of Americans believing birth control to be morally acceptable, most of us no longer are, which is why Hobby Lobby’s lawyers have focused on the “morning after” pill rather than birth control in general.  Yet as Emily Bazelon revealed in Slate, a coterie of right-wing organizations has indeed lined up to oppose contraception itself.

Which gets to the heart of the matter: This case is really about the sexual revolution and the culture war.  Hobby Lobby’s fundamentalist owners don’t like contraception, don’t like non-procreative sex, definitely don’t like extra-marital sex, and, I’m sure, don’t like homosexuality either.  The Green family—net worth, $4.9 billion—is said to have donated over $500 million to Christian schools and universities, which in turn have produced the weird, parallel-universe lawyers who are now pursuing this case.

That, of course, is their right.  But in trying to convince the rest of us that conservative Christian morality should be the foundation of our laws, they have lost at the polls, lost at the Supreme Court, and lost in the court of public opinion.  Having done so, they are trying to redefine what is meant by “religious liberty” from a shield against government intrusion to a sword against the rights of others.

**And this has all been by design - look how the "religious right" crowd have all but STOOD DOWN since Obama came into office.

These same arguments were used in the 1960s and ‘70s, when the Right had lost the legal, constitutional, and moral battles against civil rights.  Racist restaurateurs and racist universities said their religion compelled them to turn away African-Americans, notwithstanding what the Civil Rights Act had to say.  They took their cause all the way to the Supreme Court, where they finally lost, in 1983 (Bob Jones University vs. United States).

In a concurring opinion in the Right’s favorite religious freedom case—that of a photographer found to have violated New Mexico’s antidiscrimination laws by refusing to photograph a same-sex couple—a Republican-appointed judge wrote that he sympathized with the photographers’ grave religious objections.  But, he said, the price of participating in the open market is to play by the same rules as everyone else.

That is why corporations—large ones like Hobby Lobby and small ones like a photography shop—are people.  Not because they have souls or sins, but because they are legally distinct from us as individuals, and bound by laws of general application.  Denying contraceptive coverage while providing other insurance was found, in 2000, to be a violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.  In other words, it discriminates against women.  It is undemocratic.  That, not the gospel, is the law of the land.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 22, 2014, 04:22:52 pm
^^

501c3: The Devil's Church
http://www.creationliberty.com/articles/501c3.php

Quote
Ketay goes on to list facts about what a 501c3 church corporation is by lawful state definition: •The creator of a corporation is the State.
The State is the sole authority and sovereign head over the corporation.
•The corporation is subject to the laws of the State which limits its powers.
The corporation has no constitutionally protected rights.
The corporation is an artificial person.
The corporation submits to a State Charter declaring it is a creature of the State.
•The corporation is created for the benefit of the public.
•The corporation is a State franchise.
•The corporation is a privilege granted by the State.


Title: IRS revokes conservative group’s tax-exempt status over anti-Clinton statements
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 21, 2014, 06:17:01 pm
OK, this is NOT a church - but nonetheless it looks like Caesar could be very close to finally calling in his chips with these 501c3 churches...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/irs-revokes-conservative-groups-tax-exempt-status-/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
4/21/14
IRS revokes conservative group’s tax-exempt status over anti-Clinton statements

The Internal Revenue Service has revoked the tax-exempt status of a conservative charity for making statements critical of Hillary Rodham Clinton and John Kerry, according to a USA Today report.

The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty, based in Manassas, Va., “has shown a pattern of deliberate and consistent intervention in political campaigns” and made “repeated statements supporting or opposing various candidates by expressing its opinion of the respective candidate’s character and qualifications,” according to a written determination released Friday by the IRS.

The IRS said the center acted as an “action organization” by publishing alerts on its website for columns written by its president, former FBI agent Gary Aldrich, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

The IRS pointed out a column that appeared to be published by Townhall on April 2, 2004, in which Mr. Aldrich wrote, “if John Kerry promises otherwise ill-informed swing-voters lower gas prices at the pump, more than a few greedy, registered ignoramuses will follow him anywhere,” the Free Beacon reported.

Another article cited by the IRS was a 2005 piece titled “Stop Hillary Now!,” which rallied “Clinton haters” to inform voters of Hillary Clinton’s “atrocious conduct,” USA Today reported.

IRS Commissioner John Koskinen said in an interview with The Washington Post last week that the IRS and Treasury Department are likely to rewrite controversial draft guidelines to better define “candidate-related political activities.”

“My bottom line is that it’s in everyone’s interest to have clarification,” he said. “My position since I started more than four months ago is that we ought to have clarity, and that any rule that comes out ought to be fair and easy to administer.”

Conservatives have argued that the proposals are just another way for the Obama administration to target right-leaning groups.

A Fox News poll published last week revealed that 49 percent of American voters believe the IRS intentionally targeted conservative organizations.



Title: Re: IRS revokes conservative group’s tax-exempt status over anti-Clinton statements
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 21, 2014, 06:31:53 pm
Remember THIS from pre-election 2008? YT took down the CNN report video over this pastor(Jody Hice) that lead "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" then - nonetheless, this has ALL been a SETUP...first, one "conservative" organization(as said in the above post) gets their tax-exempt status stripped, now could these "churches" that lead "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" be then be next in line?(ultimately, to show an EXAMPLE to the other 501cs)

Caesar is likely calling in his chips now...

http://www.christianindex.org/4831.article

Minister in national dispute over political endorsement

North Georgia pastor cautions others against following his lead


By Joe Westbury, Managing Editor

Published October 9, 2008

BETHLEHEM — Jody Hice has a word of caution to other pastors interested in following his lead of endorsing political candidates from the pulpit: “Don’t try this alone.”

Or, more to the point, “Don’t try this without an army of lawyers at your side.”

Hice is among a group of 33 mostly evangelical pastors nationwide who are challenging an IRS code that prohibits churches from endorsing candidates under penalty of losing their tax-exempt status. But it’s a far more complicated issue than just slapping a bumper sticker on your Sunday sermon.

“I want my fellow pastors to understand this is a well-orchestrated attempt to challenge the legality of an Internal Revenue Service code which prohibits ministers from making endorsement from their pulpits,” Hice said following his late September endorsement of presidential candidate John McCain.

“We have the backing of the Alliance Defense Fund, which has offered to pay all of our legal expenses that may be incurred in our defense. That’s a big difference from an individual pastor speaking on his own,” he stated.

“We are guaranteed the legal support of the ADF. Other pastors without that safety net are on their own,” said the pastor of First Baptist Church here.

His word to fellow Georgia pastors: “Be cautious.”

The heart of the matter is the right of pastors to speak biblical truth from the pulpit without fear of punishment from the Internal Revenue Service, he explained.

Hice, who is well-versed in political matters, said the Sept. 28 Pulpit Freedom Sunday promoted by the ADF is the first time the Johnson Amendment of 1954 has ever been challenged in such an orchestrated manner. The Amendment allowed the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of any church whose pastor endorsed a candidate for political office, charging that the church was acting as a Political Action Committee (PAC).

“Churches were always tax-exempt before 1954 and were never penalized for this kind of behavior. Since this Amendment was passed, the government has effectively crept in and hijacked the pulpits of America. We as pastors should not lose our First Amendment rights just because we minister on a church staff.

**Uhm...NO! 501c3 is VOLUNTARY, and "churches" in America signed up VOLUNTARILY b/c of the LOVE OF MONEY!

“The government has basically come to use and asked us to surrender those rights in exchange for keeping our tax-exempt status. That is what this Pulpit Freedom Sunday is all about,” Hice explained.

The real issue involving the pastors from a variety of denominations is not their endorsement of a presidential candidate on either side of the spectrum but the freedom to address moral issues, which have increasingly become political issues, he maintained. It comes down to who is going to regulate what can and cannot be said from America’s pulpits – individuals or the government.

“I want to be clear that we are not about turning churches into PACs, though that is what much of the media is reporting,” he said. “That’s not the real story here.”

In his sermon Hice urged those in the sanctuary, which was filled to its 400-seat capacity, not to vote for Barack Obama. He then stated he was going to cast his vote for John McCain.

“To be honest I wish we had other presidential options for this election year but these are our only options. The reality is one of these individuals will be our next president; the question is which one comes closest to favoring a biblical worldview.

“I am clearly not waving McCain’s banner and would not call him the embodiment of Christian morality; but on the two issues most important to believers in this election – abortion and the definition of marriage – I believe he is closer than Obama.

Yes - McCain IS pro-choice, VERY close to Obama's views!

“Both of those issues are clearly moral issues that I, as a pastor, feel I have a responsibility to address. I could have endorsed anyone; I felt this was the best decision and based that decision on information each candidate provided on their website, not on second-hand accounts. This was a very objective response to their stands on these issues.”

Hice said he understands there are other pressing issues in the presidential race but felt those two issues “strike at the heart of America’s morality and are where we, as a nation, receive our blessings from God.”

As part of the challenge and in a desire to be as open and transparent as possible, he has sent a copy of his sermon to the IRS with an explanation of why he felt he did nothing wrong. He is also sending a copy to Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which has already filed six formal protests with the IRS against the endorsements. See related story on this page.

Hice has been interviewed by The Wall Street Journal, CNN, FOX News, the ABC Morning Show, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“The other 32 pastors and I have broken no law in this matter. Perhaps we have stepped over the line in regard to an IRS code, but no law has been broken,” he stated.

No one knows how the tense situation will be played out in the coming months. For now, it’s just “wait and see,” he explained.

Hice is no stranger to politics and serves as president of Ten Commandments – Georgia. He emerged as a leading spokesman in Barrow County’s battle with the American Civil Liberties Union over the right for the Ten Commandments to be posted in the county courthouse. During that dispute, which gained national attention, he founded Ten Commandments – Georgia, Inc., a 501C-3 organization which funded the legal expenses of the Barrow County fight.

He also has a daily radio show, the Jody Hice Show, which deals with moral, constitutional, and religious liberties issues. The show can be heard Monday through Friday at 3 p.m. on WRAF, 90.0 FM in Toccoa. It is also broadcast statewide in Virginia on WFIC-AM in Martinsville.

Individuals desiring to contact Hice can reach him through his website, jodyhice.com.

The ADF is a conservative Christian law firm based in Arizona. For more information on the ADF and Pulpit Freedom Sunday visit www.telladf.org.


Title: Re: IRS revokes conservative group’s tax-exempt status over anti-Clinton statements
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 21, 2014, 06:34:20 pm
^^ This "pastor" RESIGNED in 2010! Hhhhmmm...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Hice

Dr. Jody Hice is an American syndicated radio show host, speaker, and Southern Baptist pastor. Hice, a native of Atlanta, received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Asbury College in Wilmore, Kentucky, a Master of Divinity degree from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, and a Doctor of Ministry degree from Luther Rice Seminary in Atlanta, Georgia.[1]

Jody first served as senior pastor of Bethlehem First Baptist Church, until April 2010.[2] in Bethlehem, Georgia. In addition, he served as first vice president of the Georgia Baptist Convention (2004–05) and Professor of Preaching at Luther Rice Seminary. Dr. Hice has served as senior pastor at The Summit Church, a Southern Baptist church, in Loganville, Georgia since 2011.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on May 05, 2014, 11:29:33 am
Virginia proposal would limit size of gatherings at private homes

A plan to ban "frequent and large gatherings at neighborhood homes" is a lawsuit waiting to happen, a Fairfax County supervisor predicts.

Officials will get an idea Wednesday when public-comment hearings begin in Virginia's most populous county.

"I believe the county is risking a lawsuit and/or a Constitution challenge by interfering with peoples' right to assemble," Supervisor Pat Herrity said in a statement.

The proposed zoning ordinance limits "group assembly" at residences to 49 people a day. Such gatherings "shall not occur more frequently than three times in any 40-day period."

County officials say they have received complaints about group meetings at homes. But Herrity said "they haven't even reached 1 percent of the thousands of complaints our Department of Code Compliance investigates a year."

"This is yet another instance where we appear to be punishing the many for the actions of the few," said Herrity, who reported a total of six complaints were received last year.

Church groups, scouting organizations or even sports fans drawn to a home's big-screen TV during playoffs could be potential targets of the proposed county law. Realtors worry that even open houses would invite civil penalties.

John Whitehead, an attorney and president of the civil-libertarian Rutherford Institute, calls the Fairfax plan "nefarious."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/05/virginia-proposal-would-limit-size-gatherings-at-private-homes/

a push against house churches


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on June 03, 2014, 05:08:11 am
Arizona County Shutting Church Down for Money Arizona Says It Doesn't Owe

La Paz County is forcing a small Quartzsite church that helps the homeless to close its doors by June 15 unless it pays $68,000 in back-taxes and penalties that both state law and the Arizona Department of Revenue say the church doesn't owe.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent Church of the Isaiah 58 Project of Arizona in a lawsuit over the taxes, but because state courts have been unwilling to defer payment of the back-taxes until litigation has completed, the congregation is now facing foreclosure because it operates on a shoestring budget of only $50,000 per year.

Supporters of the church have contributed money to help it pay the illegal tax bill so that it can stay open and continue its lawsuit, but it still needs about $30,000 to avoid foreclosure due to a tax lein on its property.

"Churches shouldn't live in fear of being punished by the government when they've not done anything wrong, but that's precisely what is happening to this church. If La Paz County officials have their way, this church will lose everything," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley.

"The county assessor illegally levied these taxes against the church even though the Arizona Department of Revenue provided a letter stating that the church should owe no taxes. We join community leaders and the homeless whom the church serve in hoping that the church will obtain the amount it needs to continue operating and to continue its legal fight against this injustice."

Under state law, the church qualified for an exemption from property taxes and filed the appropriate paperwork with the La Paz County property assessor. The assessor sat on the church's paperwork for three years before granting a tax exemption and then only granted it for the years 2009 and later, leaving the church with back-taxes for 2007-2008 that it should not owe.

A September 2013 decision from the Arizona Court of Appeals in Church of the Isaiah 58 Project of Arizona v. La Paz County upheld an earlier Tax Court ruling that said the church should have paid the tax bill before challenging it as illegal. ADF attorneys have argued, however, that state law does not require the church to do so when it is challenging an illegally assessed tax so high that the congregation can't pay the bill and ask for a refund later.

The Arizona Supreme Court recently declined to hear an appeal, leaving the church with no choice but to raise enough money to pay the illegal tax bill so it can stay open, continue its lawsuit, and then seek a refund of the bill if it prevails.

Foreclosure will end the church's outreach to the needy, a program which the Quartzsite mayor and police chief have praised. Anyone interested in helping the church reach its goal of raising enough money to pay the illegal tax bill so it can continue to serve the homeless can donate through the church's website.

http://www.charismanews.com/us/44074-arizona-county-shutting-church-down-for-money-arizona-says-it-doesn-t-owe


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 04, 2014, 11:42:39 am
James 3:2  For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.
Jas 3:3  Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body.
Jas 3:4  Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
Jas 3:5  Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
Jas 3:6  And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
Jas 3:7  For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
Jas 3:8  But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.

Romans 13:8  Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2014, 07:57:35 pm
Just scroll down to the blue highlighted(my comments), and read the paragraph above it...

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/06/breaking-enough-invalidated-votes-to-overturn-cochran-victory/
BREAKING! There May Be Enough Invalidated Votes to Overturn Cochran Victory …Update: 800 Hinds County Voters Crossed Over Illegally
Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, June 26, 2014, 3:03 PM

(http://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/h/www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/478x640xIMG_5869.jpg.pagespeed.ic.DVetgtsaoW.jpg)

(Left column: Democrat primary vote; Right column: GOP runoff vote)

The Chris McDaniel campaign has identified multiple Mississippi counties in which enough improper ballots have been cast that a legal challenge to the outcome of the election is warranted.

This after Thad Cochran reportedly relied on 25,000-35,000 Democrat votes to pull him to victory in the June 24 runoff.

UPDATE: The Cochran campaign is reportedly asking county clerks not to certify the voting rolls until the last day possible so that the McDaniel people will not be able to look at the rolls and challenge them.

BIG UPDATE—— CHILD ABUSE and THREATS

I just spoke with Lori Medina who is working with Real Conservative National Committee PAC in Mississippi this week. The McDaniel Campaign is targeting 10 counties where they think they can overturn the election results.

Lorie described one precinct where a “little sixteen year-old blonde female” McDaniel supporter was holding a sign and older men would drive by and threaten her. Several other volunteers were also harassed by Cochran supporters.

There was no information online on where to go vote. One county would only give the name of the buildings where they were voting but not the address to the McDaniel supporters. Many churches lined up in support of Cochran and told McDaniel supporters they could not hold signs on the property because they didn’t want to look biased. One church said McDaniel voters would have to leave because they were holding a funeral.

***Hhhhmmm...were these 501c3 churches doing so(supporting Cochran) b/c they were TOLD so by the IRS? ???

Lorie added, “I have never witnesses such overt out in the open fraud along with extreme ignorance. For the first time in my life I was speechless.”

** The McDaniel campaign is asking for donations and resources to scrutinize the voter rolls.

UPDATE: From Kim Wade:

(http://2-ps.googleusercontent.com/h/www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/335x448xIMG_5869.jpg.pagespeed.ic.hFVHSSQpaW.jpg)

Kim posted this on Facebook:

    I have been at the Hinds County Court house this morning.
    Here’s a page from Hinds County voter roll book.

    The column on the left is where the voter voted in Democrat primary on June 3rd 2014.
    The column on the right is where that same voter voted in the Republican run off on June 24th 2014.

    This is patently illegal!


    The problem is the Hinds County Republican Party in my opinion is dragging its feet in allowing access to “all” the voter information in a timely fashion to complete the audit.

    It appears they are trying to run the clock out and certify the election results on Monday of next week preventing Chris McDaniel from completing an audit of the vote.

    Please call the GOP at 6019485191 fax 6013540972 email info@msgop.org ask that they have an impartial member of the Hinds County Republican Committee oversee the audit, certification instead of the present county chairman.

    Hinds County chair Pete Perry is wearing too many hats and can’t be impartial or fair.

UPDATE: The Mississippi Tea Party President says at least 800 Hinds County Voters crossed over illegally.
MS News Now reported:

    The Mississippi Tea Party President says they’ve found evidence that nearly 800 voters crossed over in Tuesday’s runoff election that should not have been allowed to vote Republican.

    However, Hinds County GOP Chairman Pete Perry says there are some precincts where he knows workers marked the wrong column and that could account for at least 200 of those being cited by the Tea Party. :D

    Members of McDaniel’s campaign staff and some supporters began sorting through voter books on Thursday morning at the Hinds County courthouse.

    They were looking for any “irregularities”.

    In Hinds County, poll workers used the Democratic primary books for the GOP runoff in an attempt to prevent crossover voters.

    However, the group from McDaniel’s camp is still searching those records to try to find anyone who voted as a Democrat on June 3rd and with the GOP on the 24th (the runoff.)

    Much more this story in our newscasts tonight.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 10, 2014, 05:25:40 pm
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Homeland-Security-Bus-Immigrants-Diocese-Rialto-Fontana-Church-266624171.html

SoCal Churches Provide Temporary Shelter, "Spiritual Food" for Immigrants
Buses of immigrants arrived Thursday morning at two churches, part of a plan that has Homeland Security working with the Diocese of San Bernardino

7/10/14

An estimated 50 immigrants carrying temporary visas arrived Thursday aboard Homeland Security buses at two churches in San Bernardino County that are working with federal agencies to help the families through the immigration process.

Officials with the Catholic Diocese of San Bernardino told NBC4 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials reached out to them in an effort to address the border crisis stemming from a wave of undocumented immigrants from Central America who have recently crossed into the United States at the Texas-Mexico border. President Barack Obama has described the situation as a "humanitarian crisis."

"As a church, we want to let them know that there are people here in the United States who love and support them, they're praying with them and for them," said John Andrews, of the Catholic Diocese of San Bernardino County. "Maybe that can give them some of that spiritual food for the next leg of their journey."

A white bus marked "Homeland Security" arrived at a Fontana church early Thursday as volunteers unloaded food and other supplies from other vehicles. Volunteers are expected to transport some of the passengers to Rialto, about five miles east of Fontana.

All of the arrivals are mothers with young children, who are carrying paperwork from ICE that will allow them to remain in the United States as they wait for immigration hearings, Diocese officials said. The families will likely remain at the churches, equipped with air mattresses, for about 24 hours, according to the Diocese.

"The Catholic Church welcomed us," said 16-year-old Dianca, a passenger. "We are here. We are ok."

A volunteer left the church parking lot Thursday morning with Dianca and family members in a car. They were bound for a bus stop and the next part of their journey north.

Nearly all of the passengers are expected to be transported to the Midwest, authorities said.


The arrival follows more than week of tension in the Riverside County community of Murrieta, where buses of immigrant families were turned away as they arrived outside a Border Patrol station that was to serve as a processing center. Fontana police were on standby for Thursday's arrival in the community about 50 miles east of downtown Los Angeles, but no disturbances were reported.

The plan for the undocumented immigrants, who crossed into the United States at the Texas-Mexico border, is to process them at local facilities before reuniting them with family members and social service organizations.

The border crisis led President Barack Obama to request $3.7 billion in emergency funds Tuesday to handle the influx. The request, initially estimated at $2 billion, came a day after another another plane of undocumented women and children arrived at San Diego’s Lindbergh Field, bringing more than 100 immigrants from Central America for processing at local U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities.

The money President Obama is seeking would be for immigration judges, detention facilities, legal aid and other items that could address the situation on the border.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 05, 2014, 08:22:17 pm
http://time.com/3066459/unaccompanied-minor-immigration-border/
This Baptist Charity Is Being Paid Hundreds of Millions to Shelter Child Migrants
8/4/14

Contractors have taken on the huge task of sheltering thousands of unaccompanied child migrants

In the late afternoon of July 9, Air Force One touched down at Love Field in Dallas. President Barack Obama ducked into a private room at the airport for a discussion about the crisis of undocumented children crossing the southwest border. Assembled around a wooden table were top Texas officials, including Governor Rick Perry and Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings, as well as the leaders of several faith-based charities. One of them was a man so anonymous, the White House pool report misspelled his name.

Kevin Dinnin is the CEO of a faith-based, nonprofit organization called BCFS, formerly known as Baptist Child and Family Services. This obscure charity has emerged as one of the biggest players in the federal government’s response to the influx of more than 57,000 unaccompanied children who have trudged across the southern border so far this year. It runs two of the largest facilities for temporarily housing immigrant children, as well as six permanent shelters in California and Texas. Since December, BCFS has received more than $280 million in federal grants to operate these shelters, according to government records. On July 7, two days before Dinnin met Obama in Dallas, the Department of Health and Human Services awarded BCFS $190,707,505 in a single grant.

BCFS is just one part of a sprawling system of shelters for unaccompanied children across the country. As the numbers of children entering the country balloon, so do the dollars required to care for them. To shield vulnerable kids from angry opponents of immigration and the media spotlight, the government declines to disclose the locations and activities of many of the facilities operated by BCFS and similar organizations. That protectiveness comes at a political cost. Governors in states across the U.S. have assailed the federal government for sending kids to their states without notifying local officials, and congressional critics say that massive amounts of taxpayer money are being spent without proper oversight.

Senator Charles Grassley, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell on July 17, requesting information about BCFS contracts to ensure that taxpayer money wasn’t being misused. “Despite being almost completely dependent on the public, BCFS has faced heavy criticism for attempting to avoid public scrutiny,” the Iowa Republican wrote. “This aversion to basic transparency is extremely disturbing.”

BCFS began in 1944 as a home for orphaned children. In recent years, a sleepy San Antonio–based charity grew into a global nonprofit with regional offices around the U.S., as well as in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa. On contract for the federal government, it has provided temporary shelter and emergency services in the wake of natural disasters ranging from Texas hurricanes to Haitian earthquakes. When the state needed to relocate the members of a Texas polygamous sect in 2008, it turned to BCFS, which provided emergency housing. The current crisis is the largest and longest response BCFS has ever faced. It has deployed some 1,400 personnel to manage the temporary shelters this year.

For BCFS executives, the work can be lucrative. According to federal tax records, Dinnin received nearly $450,000 in compensation in 2012. At least four other top officials earned more than $200,000. The median salary for the CEOs of nonprofit organizations like BCFS was about $285,000 in 2011, according to a 2013 survey by Charity Navigator.

The salaries, BCFS spokeswoman Krista Piferrer says, are determined by factors in the group’s contract with HHS. When disaster situations strike, a crisis pay scale replaces a regular one to account for extended 12-hour shifts in two-to-three-week stints. In 2012, an influx of children at the border required an emergency response, according to Piferrer. “It is similar to making an appointment to see a primary-care physician vs. going to the emergency room,” she says. “The emergency room is more expensive.”

The federal grant money for sheltering unaccompanied children, provided by HHS’s Administration for Children and Families, has so far totaled $671 million during the 2014 fiscal year. BCFS has received 40% of those funds, making it the largest recipient of money disbursed to contractors to temporarily house unaccompanied children until they can be reunited with family members or placed in foster care. Dozens of other organizations are involved in the effort, including Southwest Key Programs, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

BCFS is responsible for running two of the three temporary facilities recently set up to house large numbers of undocumented children apprehended by federal agents. One is at the Department of Defense’s Joint Base Lackland, in BCFS’s home city of San Antonio. Lackland is currently housing more than 700 children and has processed more than 3,600 overall since opening in May, says Kenneth Wolfe, an HHS spokesman. Another is Oklahoma’s Fort Sill, which is currently holding about 400 children and has discharged nearly 1,500 to date. Children stay at these facilities for an average of less than 35 days while the government works to find a family member with whom to place them. Because they are temporary shelters, some journalists, faith leaders, members of Congress and foreign dignitaries have been allowed into the facilities at Lackland and Fort Sill. Both facilities are expected to close by the end of August.

These facilities make up just a fraction of the extensive network in place to house child migrants. The Office of Refugee Resettlement’s Unaccompanied Alien Children program (UAC) has been given custody of more than 53,000 children over the past several months. The majority have been cycled through this network of about 100 smaller, permanent facilities, scattered across 14 U.S. states.

Unlike the temporary shelters, the permanent facilities are largely inaccessible to media and the taxpayers that fund them. Their locations are not officially disclosed, and they are “generally unnamed or unmarked,” according to Wolfe. Contractors are prohibited from speaking with the media without permission, BCFS says. As a result, it’s hard to gauge the conditions under which thousands of children are being held, or to assess whether taxpayer money is being well spent.

Wolfe, the HHS spokesman, says the secrecy stems from federal policy designed to protect the children’s privacy and ensure their safety. “We don’t identify the permanent facilities for the security of the children and the staff and the program,” he says. “Like any grant, we have federal staff assigned to oversight.”

A spokesperson for Southwest Key Programs, a Texas nonprofit that has been awarded more than $122 million in federal grants since December to shelter unaccompanied children, making it the second largest recipient after BCFS, said the organization was required to refer press inquiries to HHS. On a recent July afternoon, after multiple emails went unanswered, a TIME reporter drove to a Southwest Key facility in Phoenix. It was a colorful building ringed by tall metal bars and “No Trespassing” signs, situated off a freeway in a part of town where most signs are in Spanish. There was no guard out front to greet visitors, and entry required punching in a code at the locked gate.

The level of secrecy surrounding the facilities is unusual, says Neil Gordon, an investigator for the Washington-based Project on Government Oversight. But observers say it may be warranted. From Arizona to Michigan, clusters of citizens have held armed protests to oppose the relocation of undocumented children to facilities in their communities. “This situation is pretty unique in that they don’t want the mobs to come out and cause problems,” Gordon says. “That might be the reason they’re being so tight-lipped.”

A string of scams have also highlighted the importance of shielding the residents’ privacy. Grifters have been preying on the relatives of unaccompanied children, promising to help reunite them with their family members for fees ranging from $300 to $6,000, according to the Associated Press. The FBI is investigating the scams, which have targeted the families of children staying at BCFS facilities like Lackland, the AP reports.

Critics in Congress say the federal government is skirting transparency obligations. On July 1, Oklahoma Representative Jim Bridenstine, a Republican, was denied access to the BCFS facility at Fort Sill. “There is no excuse for denying a federal representative from Oklahoma access to a federal facility in Oklahoma where unaccompanied children are being held,” he said. “What are they trying to hide?” Soon after, the conservative media erupted over reports that BCFS planned to purchase a Texas hotel and turn it into a 600-bed facility for housing unaccompanied minors. (BCFS scuttled the idea, citing a backlash fed by inaccurate reporting.)

The UAC grant applications provide a glimpse of the extensive requirements to which organizations like BCFS must adhere. In addition to meeting all state and federal statutes, shelters must provide two hours per weekday of outdoor activity, offer classroom instruction on subjects like reading and science, supply counseling and personalized medical care, and grant phone calls to family members and access to visitors. The documents dictate that providers “utilize a positive, strength-based behavior-management approach, and shall never subject [residents] to corporal punishment, humiliation, mental abuse or punitive interference with the daily functions of living, such as eating or sleeping.”

Immigrant advocates say unaccompanied children are particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. In January, the National Immigrant Justice Center issued a policy brief based on interviews with hundreds of unaccompanied children in the Chicago area. The minors reported grim conditions in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security, before transfer to shelters run by contractors. According to the policy paper, 56% said they had been placed in three-point shackles, which restrain individuals at the wrists, waist and ankles. More than 70% reported being placed in unheated cells during the winter. Some said they were barely fed.

The lack of public or congressional oversight of the facilities sheltering unaccompanied children should not be construed as concealing anything untoward, say groups that have visited them and worked with BCFS. The care at BCFS sites is extensive, Piferrer says, with the chief of the respiratory-disease branch at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention embedded at the site to track every illness the children faced, from broken ankles to fevers to GI-tract infections. “You don’t find another organization like this,” Gary Ledbetter of the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention says of BCFS. “It’s basically a turnkey operation.”

“There’s not one bit of care that those kids were receiving that wasn’t first class,” says Chris Liebrum of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, a Baptist network with which BCFS is affiliated. “The federal government has come to Kevin. When the government says, ‘We need thousands of kids taken care of, can you do it?’ He’s done it.”



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 16, 2014, 07:26:33 am
Is the IRS Going to Censor Sermons at Your Church?



An atheist group wants to censor what priests, pastors, rabbis and other clergy say in their sermons by threatening an IRS challenge of their tax-exempt status.

Generally, the leaders of houses of worship in America have the constitutional right to preach and promote anything short of an outright endorsement of a political candidate. But now, that freedom is being challenged.

In 2012, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a nonprofit atheist organization that advocates strict separation of church and state, sued the Internal Revenue Service seeking to force the agency to question the tax-exempt status of churches and other houses of worship if they preach on moral issues in a way that has “political implications.”

On July 17, the Freedom from Religion Foundation formally agreed to dismiss the lawsuit voluntarily, with assurances from the IRS that the agency “no longer has a policy of non-enforcement against churches.” The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, was dismissed without prejudice—meaning the atheist group could revive it at any time if the IRS reverts to its previous “inaction.”

Daniel Blomberg, legal counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, agreed to answer questions about the case from The Daily Signal and explain the threat posed to Americans’ religious freedom.

The Daily Signal: Who and what is the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and what is this campaign they’ve launched against houses of worship?

Blomberg: The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a militant atheist group that seeks to marginalize religion in public life and demonize it generally. The lawsuit just dismissed was a step worse than usual. It was a failed attempt to use everyone’s favorite government agency— the IRS—to censor private religious speech: what pastors say to their congregations during religious services.

Q: What authority does the IRS have to monitor or censor sermons?

A: The Internal Revenue Service has seized on an old law, the “Johnson Amendment,” which was pushed through by an at-risk politician to censor what some non-profits were saying about him; [the IRS] expanded it through regulation to ban pastors from using “code words” such as “pro-life” in their religious instructions in church services.

Q: What is the Johnson Amendment?

A: It’s a tax law that restricts the speech of certain tax-exempt groups, including churches. The IRS has implicitly recognized that it can’t punish houses of worship for a minister’s sermon to the congregation, but it constantly threatens enforcement without ever following through. And that’s why the Freedom From Religion Foundation sued—it wanted more than threats, it wanted censorship.

Q: Why should Americans of all religious faiths and beliefs be alarmed?

A: Because while reasonable people can disagree about how much religious leaders should preach about politics, they all should agree that the IRS doesn’t have any role censoring what a pastor says in the pulpit during a religious service. And they should further agree that militant atheists shouldn’t be able to use the IRS as their attack dog.

Throughout history, religious leaders have preached openly about moral issues with public policy impact such as slavery, racial equality, child labor reform, and prison policies. And throughout history, politicians have tried to silence religious leaders who spoke against them—including religious leaders such as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

Using government coercion to ban pastors, rabbis, imams, and priests from talking to their own congregations in the context of a religious service regarding religious beliefs just because those beliefs threaten politicians is about as unconstitutional as a regulation could be.

Q: What is The Becket Fund’s role?

A: The Becket Fund represented Holy Cross Anglican Church in fending off the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s lawsuit. And we remain actively engaged in protecting houses of worship from IRS censorship.

Q: Is the IRS embracing the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s position?

A: Once Holy Cross Anglican Church intervened in the lawsuit to protect churches from censorship, the IRS and the Freedom From Religion Foundation worked together to dismiss the lawsuit and protect the Johnson Amendment from a direct challenge.

Because the IRS never enforces the amendment, churches never get a chance to fight back. But the lawsuit gave houses of worship a chance to stand up, and once the Freedom From Religion Foundation realized that, they and the IRS couldn’t run away fast enough.

Q: Has any house of worship faced punishment or censorship already as a result of this lawsuit?

A: No. The lawsuit had no impact at all. In fact, the Freedom From Religion Foundation admitted to the court in support of its joint request with the IRS to dismiss the lawsuit that the IRS isn’t enforcing the Johnson Amendment at all right now – not against churches, not against anyone. Although the IRS is still threatening houses of worship with censorship, and apparently has 99 churches on its list of targets for the future, FFRF’s lawsuit has nothing to do with that.

Q: What happens next?

A: The ball remains in the IRS’s court. It can stop threatening ministers about the religious teaching they provide to their congregations.


http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/09/is-the-irs-going-to-censor-sermons-at-your-church/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 16, 2014, 09:53:33 am
They've been doing that for a long time(and it's been getting worse) - if anything, this is yet another smokescreen to further hide everyone in the dark over what 501c3 REALLY is.

For example - while the average pew is aware that their churches can't engage in politics(ie-endorse political candidates on the pulpit) - at the same time they do NOT know that the violation of IRS rules(and withdrawing from 501c3) will end up with MAJOR consequences(ie-not just disallowing write-offs of donations on their taxes, but taking away all of their assets and buildings).

Having been in these church services recently - yes, I can attest to the fact that it's NOT what these pastors are saying, but it's what they're NOT saying(ie-they will just butter you up saying how everything's going to get gooder and gooder if you do this and that).

1John 4:16  And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
1Jn 4:17  Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 21, 2014, 04:14:48 pm
http://www.infowars.com/state-run-churches-caught-red-handed/

State-Run Churches Caught Red-Handed
Many 501(c)(3) pastors promote government viewpoints rather than liberty

8/11/14

George Barna is the foremost researcher of modern Christianity in the country.

He recently spoke about a two-year research project studying why modern-day pastors and churches are so silent regarding political issues. The result of his research only confirms what I have been trying to tell people for years. But there was one thing his research uncovered that did somewhat surprise me. OneNewsNow.com covered the story:

“On Thursday, George Barna–research expert and founder of The Barna Group–shared with American Family Radio’s ‘Today’s Issues’ about new information he’s compiling at American Culture and Faith Institute over the last two years, gauging where theologically conservative pastors are at politically.

“‘What we’re finding is that when we ask them about all the key issues of the day, [90 percent of them are] telling us, Yes, the Bible speaks to every one of these issues. Then we ask them: Well, are you teaching your people what the Bible says about those issues?–and the numbers drop…to less than 10 percent of pastors who say they will speak to it.’

“When researchers ask those pastors what else they are willing to do to get their people active in the political process, Barna said ‘it’s almost nothing.’

“‘So the thing that struck me has been that when we talk about the separation of church and state, it’s that churches have separated themselves from the activities of the state–and that’s to the detriment of the state and its people,’ stated the researcher.”

That 90% of America’s pastors are not addressing any of the salient issues affecting Christian people’s political or societal lives should surprise no one–especially the readers of this column. It has been decades since even a sizeable minority of pastors have bothered to educate and inform their congregations as to the Biblical principles relating to America’s political, cultural, and societal lives. But the part of the research that did somewhat surprise me was this statement by Barna: “What we’re finding is that when we ask them about all the key issues of the day, [90 percent of them are] telling us, Yes, the Bible speaks to every one of these issues. Then we ask them: Well, are you teaching your people what the Bible says about those issues?–and the numbers drop…to less than 10 percent of pastors who say they will speak to it.”

Did you get that? Ninety-percent of America’s pastors say they KNOW that the Bible speaks to all of these issues, but they are deliberately determined to NOT teach these Biblical principles. That is an amazing admission!

It would have been one thing if the pastors had said that these political issues were not relevant to scripture, and, therefore, they didn’t feel called to address them. But the pastors are admitting that, yes, they KNOW that the scriptures DO relate to our current political issues, but they are deliberately choosing to NOT teach those scriptural principles. Holy heads-in-the-sand, Batman!

I confess: this statistic caught me off-guard. So, we can forever dismiss ignorance as justification for pastors remaining silent.

Now, all of the church members out there who have been forgiving of their ministers for not speaking out on the issues by saying things like, “He really doesn’t understand what’s going on,” need to reevaluate their leniency–if they are intellectually honest, that is–and if they truly care about the future of their country.

Church member, admit it: that pastor of yours who refuses to speak out on the issues KNOWS the Bible speaks to these issues, and he is DELIBERATELY refusing to teach those Biblical principles to you and your family.

So, we are not dealing with IGNORANT pastors; we are dealing with DELIBERATELY DISOBEDIENT pastors. They are PURPOSELY CHOOSING to remain silent. Will that make any difference to the Christians in the pews who say they want their pastor to take a stand but are willing to overlook his “ignorance?” Probably not. But, at least, we now know what the real issue is, don’t we?

The report goes on: “Why the disconnect? According to Barna, the answer is simple. He suggests asking pastors how someone would know if their church is ‘successful’–which he did.”

“‘There are five factors that the vast majority of pastors turn to [when asked that question],’ he explained. ‘Attendance, giving, number of programs, number of staff, and square footage.’”

There you have it: pastors are more concerned about being “successful” than they are being truthful. They believe if they tell their congregations the truth, their churches will not be “successful.” And it is so refreshing to see Barna directly ask pastors what “success” means to them. So, now we know (as if we didn’t know before; but, at least now there is definitive research to back it up). The vast majority of pastors believe church success lies in:

*Attendance

*Giving (money)

*Number of programs

*Number of staff

*Square footage (of facilities)

Shazam! Where did pastors come up with this definition of “success?” You know where: from men such as Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels, et al.

The megachurch phenomenon of the last several decades transformed how pastors think and behave. Pastors read the “successful church” books and publications; they attend the “successful church” conferences; they watch the “successful church” videos, etc. They, then, try to mimic the tactics and strategies they have been taught. And if there is one constant theme promulgated by the likes of Osteen, Warren, and Hybels, it is pastors must avoid controversy like the plague. Again, one must realize that the goal is NOT being faithful to Biblical principles; the goal is building a “successful” church as noted above.

It is time for Christians to acknowledge that these ministers are not pastors; they are CEOs. They are not Bible teachers; they are performers. They are not shepherds; they are hirelings. It is also time for Christians to be honest with themselves: do they want a pastor who desires to be faithful to the scriptures, or do they want a pastor who is simply trying to be “successful?” BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF, CHRISTIAN FRIEND.

Barna’s research blows the “ignorance” excuse out of the water. Again, it is not ignorance; it is deliberate disobedience.

Barna goes on to say, “Now all of those things [the five points of success listed above] are good measures, except for one tiny fact: Jesus didn’t die for any of them.” Wow! You nailed it, George!

See the report here:

Barna: Many Pastors Wary Of Raising ‘Controversy’

Where do you find anything in the New Testament that measures a pastor’s success by the number of people attending his church? Or by how large his offerings are? Or by how many programs his church has? Or by how many staff members he has? Or by how large his facilities are? In fact, the early New Testament church didn’t even own property or buildings.

When the Apostle Paul listed his ministerial pedigree, here is what it looked like (II Cor. 11):

*Stripes above measure

*In prisons frequently

*In deaths often

*Beaten with rods

*Stoned

*Perils

*Weariness

*Painfulness

*Hunger and thirst

*Cold and nakedness

I don’t see attendance, offerings, programs, staff, or square footage in that list at all, do you?

When Paul wrote his own epitaph, it read, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith.” (II Timothy 4:7). He didn’t say, “I had a large congregation, we had big offerings, we had a lot of programs, I had a large staff, and we had large facilities.”

In the world of Osteen, Warren, and Hybels (and 90% of America’s pastors), the Apostle Paul’s ministry must have been a dismal failure. And how many church pulpit committees would even consider the pastoral résumé such as the Apostle Paul wrote above?

Please understand this: America’s malaise is directly due to the deliberate disobedience of America’s pastors–and the willingness of the Christians in the pews to tolerate the disobedience of their pastor. Nothing more! Nothing less!

Oh, and get this: according to the survey conducted by Barna, guess what the number one reason is why pastors choose to be “successful” and not “controversial?” You guessed it: fear of the IRS 501c3 tax-exempt status. Who would have thought it? (Yes, that question is deliberately facetious.)

The release of this research by George Barna could not have come at a more opportune time. I announced just last week that we have officially launched the Liberty Church Project, whereby we will be helping people around the country to establish non-501c3 churches. I invite folks (pastors or laymen) who are serious about starting new non-501c3 churches–or helping to resurrect patriot pulpits within existing churches–to fill out our online application. We already have several groups that we intend to help and are looking for others. If you are someone who is serious about such an endeavor, and seeks our assistance, please fill out the online application here:

Liberty Church Project

And, in case you missed it, here is my column announcing the launch of the Liberty Church Project:

We Are Launching!

I want to commend George Barna for his research. I suspect that the vast majority of pastors and churches will ignore it, but, at least now we know the painful truth of the matter: by in large, pastors are deliberately choosing to not teach Biblical truth to their congregations for the selfish goal of being “successful.” But as we come to grips with this reality, we must also acknowledge that pastors are simply (and shamelessly) putting their fingers to the wind and finding that the people in the pews are more interested in their churches being “successful” than faithful to the teaching of Holy Scripture. As Barna noted, it is the churches, themselves, that have chosen to separate from the political affairs of their country.

In the end, it always comes down to We the People, doesn’t it? If you want a church where the pastor is willing to teach the Biblical principles that relate to our everyday lives–including our political lives–you might have to vote with your feet and go find one. That is, if that kind of thing is truly important to you.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2014, 11:31:47 pm
http://www.abpnews.com/ministry/congregations/item/29171-churches-facing-a-rethink-in-how-they-engage-aging-boomers
9/5/14
Churches facing a rethink in how they engage aging Boomers

Many churches rely on retirees as volunteers to keep some programs and activities vital and growing. Some congregations turn to mature adults for the basics — answering phones,stuffing envelopes and other office or maintenance duties — to help hold down administrative costs.

But as the Baby Boomer generation retires, church leaders who hope to continue to tap into retiree time and resources may need to rethink the ministries they ask mature adults to take on.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 2013 “Volunteering in the U.S.” report indicates volunteerism among 45- to 64-year-olds declined in the previous two years. What forces may be driving that trend, and what can congregations do to attract volunteers?

The generation preceding the Boomers — the Builders — tended to commit to an organization or group, such as church or a civic club, noted Amy Hanson, an expert on aging and Boomers.

“Boomers and subsequent generations tend to want to volunteer for a certain project or a cause that is near and dear to their heart,” noted Hanson, author of Baby Boomers and Beyond: Tapping the Ministry Talents and Passions of Adults Over 50.

Many Boomers move away from volunteering once their children leave home or as a result of downsizing their lifestyle, said Frank Fain, director of educational services for the Baptist Home in Missouri. Some give up volunteering for school events and church functions geared for children and youth because they gave their time when their own children participated in those activities.

Some give up volunteering so that they have time to travel or pursue other interests they did not have time to do before, Fain added.

Financial need also drives availability, he said. Some mature adults who lost their jobs in the market downturn in 2008 were unemployed for a year or longer. Those who volunteered during that time returned to the workforce once they found positions. Many now work two jobs, just to achieve the same income of their former employment, Fain said.

Much of the volunteer work Boomers do is not counted in most surveys. Family caregiving is a notable category, and the hours spent caring for parents and children aren’t registered” volunteer hours.

Church leaders sometimes do not recognize all the work volunteers do. “In our own congregational settings, involvement in ‘everyday’ ministries ... [such as] Sunday school, deacons [and] children’s ministry often gets overlooked,” noted Dennis Myers, a gerontology expert for the Baylor University School of Social Work.

He believes church members already committed to volunteering for long-time congregational programs, such as Bible study, will remain with them. However, churches might lose some volunteer hours to other activities.

“I do see some loss in ministries that depend on the discretionary time of retirees — extended mission involvements and ‘beyond-the-walls’ ministries in the community,” Myers said.

The key to enticing Baby Boomers to volunteer is to tap into their passions, Hanson and Myers agreed. And congregations must recognize and respect that Boomers prefer short-term commitments, rather than signing up for a multi-year stint.

“While the Builder generation was willing to sign on and teach the Sunday school class for 20 years, the Boomers want to know that they can be gone to see their grandkids play soccer or take a spontaneous trip with their spouse,” Hanson pointed out.

Focus on “small bites” and “passion” is Myers’ advice. “Linking the volunteer experience to a sense of call and a powerful opportunity to give back and do the things they always wanted to do but did not for a lot of reasons is compelling,” he explained.


“Boomers have an entrepreneurial spirit and an attitude that they can change the world,” Hanson added.

She calls on congregations to think beyond stapling papers and answering phones to unleashing the generation to lead ministries that use their skills and meet community needs. “This is a group that can make a significant difference for Christ, and we need to empower them to do it,” Hanson said.

Senior adult ministry? Not so much

Churches looking to the Boomer generation to bolster or revitalize senior adult ministry may be disappointed, Fain explained. While most congregations think Boomers will move right into the ministry, they likely will not, because they view it as something for their parents and grandparents.

Boomers do not want a connection to anything labeled “senior,” these experts agreed. “Volunteer recruitment in this cohort needs to be highly individualized, clearly focused and absent any link with ‘senior adult’ ministry,” Myers explained.

Just as volunteerism needs to be focused, so does giving. Myers sees Baby Boomers as “basically generous,” but appeals to the generation’s need to strike the same chords — passion and specific projects or social concerns.

Boomers — just like all believers — must be reminded of the biblical mandate to give, Hanson noted.

“Giving is a discipleship issue. It’s about continuing to grow as a follower of Christ,” she said.

“Our world sends the message that you should work hard and build up a nest egg in order to retire and enjoy life, but the Bible has a counter-culture message.”

Church leaders need to remember not all Boomers are relatively affluent and able to give, Myers pointed out.

“Boomers are also in poverty and struggle to meet basic needs on a day-to-day basis,” he said.

Others suffer health issues, and many struggle with early dementia, he added.

Congregations also must be aware that not all Boomers are believers, he noted. Meeting social needs with them may open opportunities to minister to them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now it's making even more sense why the Apostate Church is largely targeting young people to help "grow" their churches now.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 10, 2014, 04:54:08 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFfIx8DP4sM


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 14, 2014, 06:40:22 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaFtoBCLrh8


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 02:06:43 am
http://www.dailyindependent.com/news/article_9d735878-4359-11e4-b361-f7e7ad2b4df3.html
Kentucky churches being turned into mosques
9/23/14

LOUISVILLE The growing trend of former church buildings being turned into mosques and Islamic centers has reached Kentucky’s largest city where even some once-thriving Southern Baptist facilities are now occupied by Muslims.

“On a trip to England a few years ago, I recall seeing dozens of churches that had become mosques and wondering how it could happen there; now it’s happening here,” said Paul Chitwood, executive director of the Kentucky Baptist Convention.

Todd Robertson, pastor of Antioch Baptist Church in Louisville, said the religious makeup of the Bible Belt is rapidly changing with declining membership in many Christian congregations and growing participation in Islam and other religions.

“We have at least three former Baptist churches in Louisville that are no longer Baptist churches—two are mosques and one is a Sikh temple, and that’s a reality that’s troubling for many of us,” he said.

Robertson is urging Kentucky Baptists to “think strategically” to find ways to revitalize shrinking congregations and to protect the assets of those that end up closing. He is among those leaders calling for churches that have weakened to the point of closing to donate their buildings and property for church plants rather than putting them up for sale.

**Not quite - these 501c3 churches are GOVERNMENT RUNNED properties! IOW, once they shut down operations, it's in the hands of the federal government!

In Kentucky and throughout the Southern Baptist Convention, the number of Christian converts has been in steady decline in recent years, while other religions have been experiencing rapid growth. Louisville, for example, now has more than 20 mosques.

“This should be a call to action for Kentucky Baptists to get serious about telling others about Jesus,” Chitwood said.

Since becoming head of the KBC three years ago, Chitwood has preached the need for church revitalization. He has put together a troop of regional consultants to work with local churches on growth strategies, while also embarking on an ambitious push to plant hundreds of new churches across the state.

The needs are obvious: The number of new believers being baptized fell from 14,984 in 2012 to 13,970 in 2013, a decline of roughly 1,000.

“We are on the brink of a massive transfer of kingdom assets,” Robertson said. “I’m talking about property—buildings and things like that—of churches that, in their heyday of the ’50s and ’60s, were exploding with growth.”

Robertson said many of those churches are now on the brink of closing. Some, he said, will end up throwing their building on the market “and having it bought by who knows who for who knows what.”

**Please stop lying - you know very well that your Babel buildings are government-runned properties via the 501c3 status. Once you shut down operations, the federal government has control over who to sell/give it to.

Former church buildings typically need only minor renovations to be used as mosques and Islamic centers and are generally less expensive than constructing new ones from the ground up.

“We have to face the reality of it,” Robertson said. “We’ve got to look ahead and think how we are going to strategically address this issue so that we continue to leverage the assets that God has blessed us with for the sake of the kingdom so that the gospel will continue to be proclaimed.”

Robertson warned that unless Kentucky Baptists think strategically about how to change the tide of shrinking congregations, they’re going to see increasing numbers of church buildings turned into places of worship for other religions.

“Now, I know they’re just buildings, and that’s not the church, but yet I see them in the grander scheme as kingdom assets,” he said. “I think we should have a very different mindset about what happens to those assets.”


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 06, 2014, 06:50:49 pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/10/06/report-which-states-give-the-most-to-charity-the-ones-with-church-goers/
10/6/14
Report: Which states give the most to charity? The ones with church-goers.

Poor and middle-income Americans are reaching deeper into their pockets when donating to charity, while the nation’s wealthiest are giving less, according to a report by Chronicle of Philanthropy that analyzed taxpayers’ IRS data.

On average, Americans give about 3 percent of their income to charity each year, according to the report released Monday. But the giving gap between the rich and poor is significant, especially in view of the widening income gap. The report shows those who earned $200,000 or more donated 4.6 percent less of their income between 2006 and 2012; those who earned less than $100,000 gave 4.5 percent more.

Why? Chronicle editor Stacy Palmer noted one factor: church attendance.

Utah residents proved to be the most generous, with a giving rate of 6.6 percent — for every $1,000 they brought in, they handed out $65.60. Utah is also known for its large population of Mormons, whose church asks them to give at least 10 percent of their income to charity. New Hampshire residents were the least giving, with a rate of 1.7 percent. Maine and Vermont weren’t so charitable either, also ranking among the lowest.

Palmer suggested the meager handouts in northern New England are partly because of low rates of church attendance, but the low rankings also stem from residents’ “independent streak” and a tradition of self-reliance.

However, America’s wealthy are more inclined to support the arts and higher education than poorer donors, the report said.

The report analyzed tax returns filed by tax-payers who itemize their deductions, including charitable gifts.

Here are the top 10 most generous states:

    1. Utah: 6.6 percent giving rate
    2. Mississippi: 5.0 percent
    3. Alabama: 4.8 percent
    4. Tennessee: 4.5 percent
    5. Georgia: 4.2 percent
    6. South Carolina: 4.1 percent
    7. Idaho: 4.0 percent
    8. Oklahoma: 3.9 percent
    9. Arkansas: 3.9 percent
    10. North Carolina: 3.6 percent

Of the 50 largest cities, Las Vegas saw the biggest jump in generosity. Residents gave nearly 15 percent more of their incomes to nonprofits between 2006 and 2012. And Nevada was the state with the fastest-growing donation rate.

Buffalo-Niagara Falls, N.Y., was the city that took the deepest dive — 10.6 percent. And North Dakota was the state that saw the biggest decline in donations, despite its sudden riches from the boom in fracking.

Here are the top 10 most generous cities:

    1. Salt Lake City: 5.4 percent in 2012, up 2.7 percent from 2006
    2. Memphis: 5.1 percent, up 6.7 percent
    3. Birmingham, Ala.: 4.8 percent, up 1.7 percent
    4. Atlanta: 4.0 percent, up 6.5 percent
    5. Nashville: 3.9 percent, up 4.8 percent
    6. Jacksonville, Fla.: 3.8 percent, up 8.7 percent
    7. Oklahoma City: 3.7 percent, down 1.6 percent
    8. Dallas-Fort Worth: 3.6 percent, up 4.6 percent
    9. Charlotte, N.C.: 3.4 percent, down 5.5 percent
    10. Virginia Beach: 3.3 percent, down 6.1 percent


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 06, 2014, 07:07:22 pm
Quote
Why? Chronicle editor Stacy Palmer noted one factor: church attendance.

So contrary to what some of these rebrobates like those in the SBC want to make you to believe - attendance in these Babel buildings are actually UP...

Looks like the stage is really being set for the AC to make his appearance(on those flat screen tvs behind those pulpits to boot!).


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on October 20, 2014, 06:43:17 am
IRS agrees to monitor sermons in settlement with atheists

The IRS has agreed to pay closer attention to what is said in houses of worship after reaching a settlement with a secularist group in federal court last week.

On Friday, the IRS settled a lawsuit filed in 2012 by the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF). The Wisconsin group brought the lawsuit because it said the IRS was ignoring complaints about churches violating their tax-exempt statuses. Specifically, FFRF said many churches promote political issues, legislation, and/or candidates from the pulpit in violation of the 1954 Johnson Amendment, which requires that non-profits not endorse candidates.

According to FFRF, the IRS has not followed a 2009 ruling requiring it to hire someone to keep an eye on church politicking. The IRS says it hasn't ignored the ruling, but merely failed to follow it.

The government has put a moratorium on the IRS’ investigations of tax-exempt organizations after the scandal that broke in 2013 over its targeting of pro-life, pro-family, and Tea Party groups. FFRF says that even though the IRS will not enforce the agreement because of the moratorium, they can still bring the lawsuit again if needed after the moratorium is lifted.

FFRF said in a press release that it filed the lawsuit because of Pulpit Freedom Sunday, which in 2012 involved approximately 1,500 church leaders delivering sermons on the intersection between politics and Scripture.

The effort, launched by Alliance Defending Freedom in 2008, aims to generate test cases to overturn the Johnson Amendment.

According to FFRF, "Pulpit Freedom Sunday ... has become an annual occasion for churches to violate the law with impunity. The IRS, meanwhile, admittedly was not enforcing the restrictions against churches."

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom and head of the Pulpit Initiative, told LifeSiteNews that "the IRS has no business censoring what a pastor preaches from the pulpit."

According to Stanley, his organization is "attempting to bring the era of IRS censorship and intimidation to an end by challenging the Johnson Amendment, which imposes unconstitutional restrictions on clergy speech."

The tax-exempt status of churches is not an even trade-off to give up free speech, he said. “No one would suggest a pastor give up his church’s tax-exempt status if he wants to keep his constitutional protection against illegal search and seizure or cruel and unusual punishment,” he said.

Stanley insists that not only is the trade-off unequal, but "churches are automatically tax exempt out of recognition that the surest way to destroy the free exercise of religion is to begin taxing it."

"Churches are constitutionally entitled to a tax exemption and that exemption cannot be conditioned on the surrender of constitutional rights."

Stanley also advised the IRS to "adopt fair procedures for auditing churches” and said the agency “should publish those procedures for everyone to see.  Right now, the IRS is being very secretive about these procedures and that secrecy breeds mistrust."

Stanley says that trust is an issue "especially given the recent IRS scandal. Churches should be allowed to decide for themselves what they want to talk about. The IRS should not be the one making the decision by threatening to revoke a church’s tax-exempt status." He noted that the targeting scandal showed that the IRS was "used as a political tool of censorship to silence opponents."

"A pastor’s speech from the pulpit should not be subject to the whims of a government official," concluded Stanley.

Election years often bring out criticisms of churches from political opponents. Pastors who speak against abortion or same-sex relationships are often accused of being political, but Stanley says that's because "society has been taking issues that are biblical, slapping a political label on them, and telling churches that they are now off-limits. The church has not been invading the realm of politics.  Rather, politics has been invading the realm of the church."

The Alliance Defending Freedom's opposition to the Johnson Amendment has faced criticisms from liberal pundits and clergy, including the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Rev. Barry Lynn. In 2008, Lynn and Stanley engaged in an online debate, where Lynn said that ADF "is making a big mistake in urging pastors to violate federal tax law in their sermons."

Likewise, The Week contributor Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux wrote last month that the Johnson Amendment is "a contract of sorts with the government, where [religious non-profits] receive a sizeable financial benefit — tax exemption — in exchange for certain forms of oversight. And this isn't about targeting GOP-friendly religious...or stifling Christian freedom of expression. The prohibition on electioneering should apply equally to all houses of worship — be they Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, or any other faith."

Thomson-DeVeaux said the IRS should crack down on pastors who violate the Johnson Amendment, especially in light of Pulpit Freedom Sunday.

According to Stanley, his group launched Pulpit Freedom Sunday “to restore a pastor’s right to speak freely from the pulpit without fearing government control or intimidation.  It is the pastor’s job to decide what is said from the pulpit, not the IRS."

"Simply put," says Stanley, "we need to get the IRS out of the pulpits of America."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/irs-agrees-to-monitor-sermons-in-settlement-with-atheists


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 23, 2014, 09:03:44 am
Former Connecticut church sold for benefit of local Muslim community
10/23/14
http://episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/ens/2014/10/23/former-connecticut-church-sold-for-benefit-of-local-muslim-community/

[Episcopal Church in Connecticut] The Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT) has sold its property at 35 Harris Road, Avon, former home to Christ Episcopal Church, to the Farmington Valley American Muslim Center, Inc. (FVAMC).

The sale, for $1.1 million, was completed on Oct. 21.

The building was vacated after the congregation voted in 2012 to dissolve as a parish and close by the end of that year.

The following spring, Bishop Ian T. Douglas and other ECCT staff hosted a meeting of community leaders and interested residents to discern how the property could best be used “as an asset to God’s mission of restoration and reconciliation” in greater Avon and beyond.

At the meeting they learned that the local Muslim community needed a place to gather for prayers, teaching, youth programs and interfaith work. In September 2013, the ECCT entered into an interfaith partnership with FVAMC that included leasing the Avon building.

Since then the FVAMC has reached out to its neighbors with open houses and other interfaith efforts, expanded its worship and service work, and grown its programs, particularly for youth.

The several committees of the ECCT needed to approve the sale gave it their solid endorsement and support.

Both ECCT and the FVAMC share the understanding that the sale isn’t the end of their relationship but the beginning of a new phase in this interfaith collaboration.

Douglas said of the growing relationship between the Episcopal Church in Connecticut and the Farmington Valley American Muslim Center: “I thank God that through the stewardship of our property in Avon we have come into relationship with our Muslim neighbors in the Farmington valley. Together we are learning about what it means to be people of faith working together for peace and understanding. It is a blessing to cooperate with the FVAMC in the development of their new home.”

“We are grateful to our brothers and sisters in the Diocese for their partnership,” said Khamis Abu-Hasaballah, president of the Board of Trustees of the FVAMC. “This house of worship will serve as a foundation for our efforts to continue building bridges with our neighbors, the local community, and other faith traditions. Our relationship with the ECCT serves as a shining example in our region, and as a beacon of hope for inter-religious understanding and cooperation the world over.

The net income from the sale will be returned to the Missionary Society of ECCT, which provides funding for missional work, among other uses.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 23, 2014, 08:35:10 pm
Again(as we've all said here) - sodomites invading the land IS judgment(as Romans 1:18-32 clearly says) - it's NOT "judgment comes AFTER they've come".

With that being said - these 501c3 hirelings just go on and on like the energizer bunny for years - they keep saying "judgment WILL come...". Really? Then why are they reading out of some perverted, gender-neutral bible and putting out this CCM nonsense in their Babel buildings?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/ron-baity-ebola-gay-marriage_n_5987210.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592
10/14/14
Ron Baity, Baptist Preacher, Claims God Will Send Something Worse Than Ebola As Punishment For Gay Marriage

A Baptist preacher says the biblical "End Times" are upon us thanks to a federal judge striking down a ban on gay marriage in North Carolina.

According to Ron Baity of the Berean Baptist Church in Winston-Salem, N.C., God is so angry over the decision that He's about to send something even worse than Ebola.

"You think Ebola is bad now, just wait," Baity warned during his sermon on Sunday.

Baity spoke of hearing an official bless a gay marriage, something he claimed was a direct violation of the Bible.

“If you think for one skinny minute, God is going to stand idly by and allow this to go forward without repercussions, you better back up and rethink this situation,” Baity said in remarks transcribed by Raw Story. “I want you to understand, that is raw, pure blasphemy.”

Baity also drew comparisons between gay marriage and Sodom and Gomorrah, the cities destroyed by God in biblical stories.

"My friend, we are meriting, we are bringing the judgement of God on this nation as sure as Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed, don’t be surprised at the plagues. Don’t be surprised at the judgement of God," Baity said. “You think Ebola is bad now, just wait. If it’s not that, it’s going to be something else. My friends, I want you to understand, you can’t thumb your nose at God, and God turn his head away without God getting your attention.”

At times during the nearly hour-long sermon, members of his congregation can be heard shouting "Amen!" in the background.

Full audio of the sermon is available here.

Baity previously made headlines when he called for the prosecution of gays.

"For 300 years, we had laws that would prosecute that lifestyle," Baity was quoted as saying in 2012. "We've gone down the wrong path. We've become so dumb that we have accepted a lie for the truth, and we've ... discarded the truth on the shoals of shipwreck!"

He's also on record comparing gay people to maggots, according to The Daily Beast.

The website reports that in 2012, Baity was given something called the "Watchmen Award," ostensibly a pro-family honor, by the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian organization.



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 13, 2014, 07:32:45 pm
http://christiannews.net/2014/11/13/appeals-court-overturns-ruling-striking-down-tax-free-clergy-housing-allowances/
11/13/14
Appeals Court Overturns Ruling Striking Down Tax-Free Clergy Housing Allowances

MADISON, Wisc. – An appeals court has overturned a lower court ruling that struck down a law granting U.S. pastors tax-free housing allowances.

As previously reported, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) had filed suit in August 2012, challenging the 1954 “parish exemption” granted by Congress.

“In the case of a minister of the gospel, gross income does not include (1) the rental value of a home furnished to him as part of his compensation; or (2) the rental allowance paid to him as part of his compensation, to the extent used by him to rent or provide a home and to the extent such allowance does not exceed the fair rental value of the home, including furnishings and appurtenances such as a garage, plus the cost of utilities,” the pertinent statute states.

U.S. Representative Peter Mack, who introduced the legislation, was said to have introduced the law in order to reward ministers for working to fight against wickedness in the land.

“Certainly, in these times when we are being threatened by a godless and anti-religious world movement we should correct this discrimination against certain ministers of the gospel who are carrying on such a courageous fight against this foe,” he stated. “Certainly this is not too much to do for these people who are caring for our spiritual welfare.”

**Really? Have you been in any of these Babel buildings nowdays? You know, how they put out this contemporary/rock "worship" music, and preach out of bibles that promote fornication and sodomy?

FFRF had sued U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and acting IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, asserting that the tax exemption violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and the equal protection provision of the Fourteenth Amendment. The organization claimed that it was unfair for clergy to receive the tax break while others, such as the founders of FFRF, must pay taxes on their housing allowance.

**Hate to say it, but this anti-Christian organization is right - the 1st ammendment in the US Constitution says to that Congress shall make no law respecting one religion over another. And FYI - they ended up putting out this law b/c Rick Warren made a big fuss over not being able to deduct more than he wanted on his tax returns.

t is pure discrimination to deny atheist leaders the housing allowance privileges given to clergy as a reward for fighting ‘godless foe,’” co-founder Annie Laurie Gaylor stated.

**Actually, not quite correct - they're not contending for the faith anymore, nor feeding their sheep.

Last November, U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, appointed by Jimmy Carter, agreed with FFRF, declaring section 2 of the tax code unconstitutional.

“Because a primary function of a ‘minister of the gospel’ is to disseminate a religious message, a tax exemption provided only to ministers results in preferential treatment for religious messages over secular ones,” she wrote.

But on Thursday, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago reversed Crabb’s ruling, opining that FFRF has no standing in the matter and thus throwing out the legal challenge. FFRF suffered no personal injury, the court said, because it has never sought to obtain the exemption and therefore cannot show that it had been denied under the law.

“The plaintiffs were never denied the parsonage exemption because they never asked for it, ” the three-judge panel stated. “Without a request, there can be no denial. And absent any personal denial of a benefit, the plaintiff s’ claim amounts to nothing more than a generalized grievance about §107(2)’s unconstitutionality, which does not support standing.”

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Christian legal organization that filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of approximately 600 churches nationwide, applauded the decision.

“The atheists who filed this suit may have an axe to grind against religion, but as the 7th Circuit found, that doesn’t give them sufficient standing to challenge a tax benefit for which it has never applied and that has been provided to pastors for decades,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley. “The allowance many churches provide to pastors is church money, not government money. It is constitutional and should continue to be respected and protected.”

As of press time, FFRF had yet to issue a statement about the matter.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 18, 2014, 01:37:49 pm
IRS Agents Can Pose as Clergy to Spy on Churches

A New York Times front-page story shared that IRS rules allow that "an undercover employee or cooperating private individual may pose as an attorney, physician, clergyman or member of the news media."

The New York Times also goes on to state that the IRS allows much more "latitude" than other federal agencies in gathering information.

Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, states:

"It is troubling and an outrage that members of the IRS can pose as members of the clergy to gather information for the government. The First Amendment and the foundational principles of religious freedom that have long been embraced and honored by our nation are being trampled by these rules.

"The church and faith community are now being faced with the reality that the government is sending IRS agents pretending to be members of the clergy into Christian meetings, gatherings and services for the distinct purpose of the government "spying" on them. Also, American citizens must confront the fact that when they share their concerns with a member of the clergy, they may be talking to an IRS agent.

"This is clearly a trampling of the First Amendment which affords to every American the right to freely worship according the the dictates of their conscience without government interference and harassment. It is the role of the government to protect religious freedom and faith not use it as tool to try and gather information or spy on their citizens.

"What  makes this policy even more disturbing is the fact that the IRS is implementing it. This is the same organization that is facing blistering criticism and Congressional hearings for attacking the political beliefs and views of citizens and groups that the government does not agree with. Simply stated, this policy by the IRS must be dropped immediately."

Here is a link to The New York Times story.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/us/more-federal-agencies-are-using-undercover-operations.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Aw%2C%7B%222%22%3A%22RI%3A14%22%7D&_r=0

http://www.charismanews.com/us/46175-irs-agents-can-pose-as-clergy-to-spy-on-churches



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 09, 2014, 11:34:37 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmYLjjQwCww


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on December 11, 2014, 03:41:04 pm
FEMA Pastor Speaks Out and Reveals a Dirty Little Secret About What They’ll Be Called to Do by the Government When Asked…Warning You May Not Like What You’re About To Hear…

By now most of you are aware of the infamous group formed by FEMA and DHS who recruited 28,000 pastors to be part of the Clergy Response Team—a team of pastors who duty it will be in the event of any beckon call from the Government to round up citizens—be it for a catastrophe, an outbreak, or whatever them deem necessary. These pastors have sold not only their congregations out but also left God at the doorstep by doing so.

Recently Pastor Walt Mansfield, one of the first to be recruited by FEMA, boldly shares with Dave Hodges The Common Sense Show, all the devious workings the government is attempting to do through this organization. Everything from rounding up dissidents, to promoting servitude to the government, to forcing people into camps is involved.

In the video below I dive through all this and more but be aware you may not like what you’re about to hear…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUBDrbqudUtPUQxAK_K2JaNQ&v=UpEadl-MaGk&feature=player_embedded

http://beforeitsnews.com/police-state/2014/12/fema-pastor-speaks-out-and-reveals-a-dirty-little-secret-about-what-theyll-be-called-to-do-by-the-government-when-asked-warning-you-may-not-like-what-youre-about-to-hear-466.html


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 12, 2014, 06:10:11 pm
The pastor at my last church in Louisiana seemed to be in alot of secrecy - he said he went to Washington, DC every week to see some of the local area politicians like Bobby Jindal(and he's also friends with David Vitter). Jindal was Congressman back then(he's governor now). He claimed he did so b/c Jindal's a man of faith(on the contrary, Jindal's a ROMAN CATHOLIC).

Pt being that I didn't know it back then, but it's pretty obvious he's been with the Clergy Response Team all along(ie-a group of clergy acted as such when Katrina happened). He's also part of some Interfaith group at the New Orleans RCC Archdiocese(something he never told his church about).

Throughout my lifetime - all of these 501c3 pastors just operated in so much secrecy - it was hard to get access to them(except for shaking your hand with them on the way out the Sunday morning service door). When you did, they really didn't answer any of your questions. They were always pre-occupying themselves with others. The list goes on.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 12, 2014, 10:58:44 pm
http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/12/10/a-clergy-response-team-insider-reveals-the-duties-of-a-pastor-inside-of-a-fema-camp/
12/10/14
A Clergy Response Team Insider Reveals the Duties of a Pastor Inside of a FEMA Camp

Many people in the independent media have reported that an estimated 28,000 pastors were recruited by FEMA/DHS, as part of the Clergy Response Team, and that their initial and primary training was to tell their flock to obey the DHS version of Romans 13. Romans 13, in the King James version of the Bible, begins:

“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.” Romans 13:1
 
Many of us have been quick to point that this bastardization of the Romans 13 is designed to force compliance to government edicts who might not otherwise comply.

Certainly all governments are not established by God. Were the governments of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, all ordained by God? What about George the III? Most people in the independent media think that this is the extent of the threat posed by the existence of the Clergy Response Teams.

Romans 13 Is Just the Tip of the Iceberg

I have discovered that the Clergy Response Teams are taking on much more nefarious duties and it can be accurately stated that the pastors associated with the DHS/FEMA/Clergy Response Teams are going to be doing a whole lot more than encouraging their flock to obey the government.

On December 9, 2014, I conducted a telephonic interview with Pastor Walt Mansfield. Pastor Mansfield was among the first of the pastors recruited to become a part of the Clergy Response Team. The revelations he conveyed to me about this program had pastors doing a whole lot more than preaching Romans 13. But before going to the disturbing contents of the interview, let’s take a look at relevant legislation which helps to legitimize Pastor Mansfield’s outrageous claims.

Background Legislation

On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law which in addition to allocating $662 billion to the Pentagon also contains a measure which allows U.S. citizens to be taken into custody and held indefinitely without ever being charged with a crime.

Not only can any citizen deemed a threat to “national security interests of the United States,” be held forever without receiving a trial, but the military will be the ones arresting those citizens.

NDAA Section 1022, subsection c allows “(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.”

The National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.

The legislation also states that the camps will be used to “provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations”.

The bill also provides that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs”, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. This a carte blanche mandate that many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting following a national emergency or a total economic collapse.

Pastor Mansfield’s “Insider” Revelations

Pastor Mansfield was recruited to become a member of the Clergy Response Team which would operate under the control of NOVAD and DHS. Mansfield’s revelations about his experiences are stunning and concerning at the same time.

Pastor Mansfield attended several briefings and he could barely believe his ears. He learned of the government’s plan to enact martial law as well as to implement forced population relocations. Mansfield emphasized that when martial law is enacted, the enforcement would be immediate. In other words, family members will be separated from each other and part of the training that the clergy received was how to comfort separated family members.

Pastor Mansfield emphasized that the FEMA/DHS drills were predicated on bioterrorism. The pastors were trained to go to homes were people refused to be relocated by the authorities and  their immediate job was to convince the reluctant to willingly go to the relocation camps. Ostensibly, this was to be done in lieu of sending in the SWAT teams.

I asked Mansfield if FEMA camps were real and he stated that much of the clergy training focused around this scenario of pastors operating within the forced relocation centers. The main goal of a pastor assigned to a FEMA was to bring order and encourage compliance with DHS requests, hence, the emphasis on Romans 13.

The pastors were forced to sign non-disclosure. Interesting, the pastors were told not to quote Scripture. The DHS document which was prepared for the pastors clearly stated that Scripture had been used to “oppress” people in the past and the presenters strongly discouraged the its use. Please see the following excerpt from one of the DHS training manuals:

Quote
Healing Scripture and Prayer In the Pastoral Crisis Intervention

“During a time of crisis people do go through a  “crisis of faith.”

Sometime quick mention of God and scripture may not be helpful. As we all know the Scripture has been used to oppress, dominate and at the same time used for healing and reconciliation- renewing of relationship with God and people. If the pastor senses it is appropriate to use the scripture and prayer, it must carefully be done for healing of victims not to uphold pastoral authority.” (Page 14)
 

In other words, all legitimate pastoral authority was abrogated by the pastors who participated in the roundup of American citizens.
 
Also on page 14 of the same training document, pastors were admonished to avoid “Unhealthy God talk….” Specifically pastors are ordered to avoid using references to God when helping people cope with the loss of a loved one:

        “4. God must have needed him/her more than you.”
        “5. God never gives more than we can handle.“
 
Pastor Mansfield also revealed that pastors will be issued badges under the Clergy Response Team program. Any pastor not displaying the badge, indicating that they have been trained under these guidelines, will not be permitted into the established and designated “DHS safety zones”. This reminds me of the banishment of religious figures from Plymouth Colony who, in good conscience, refused to go along with some of the extremism of that day. Along these lines, the Clergy Response Team is also a “Kool-Aid drinking program”. Pastors are absolutely forbidden to publicly to speak about any aspect of the program. If you were to ask your pastor if they are a FEMA trained pastor, they will not likely tell you.

Disturbingly, Pastor Mansfield reiterated several times that the number one job of these pastors is to calm down people and encourage their compliance within the people’s new surroundings.

Pastor Mansfield also stated that pastors will be utilized as informants. This violates the legal privilege of confidentiality between pastor and church-goer, that is currently recognized by law. All church-goers can no longer trust the sanctity of personal confessions and revelations made to pastors, priests or rabbis’. This one illegal act by DHS completely undermines the Christian Church in America!

Summary

What pastor could, in good conscience, participate in this heinous program? Mansfield told me that there are an estimated 28,000 FEMA trained pastors. The pastors in America are being coerced to participate because when an emergency is declared, no pastor, who does not have the “FEMA-trained government badge” will be allowed to be in a declared “emergency” area. Pastor Mansfield felt strongly this was the government’s way of removing Jesus from America’s landscape and set the stage for the ushering in of a new-age religion.

It is mindboggling to fathom how so many reporters and media types deny the existence of FEMA camps under these circumstances. It is also disturbing that any pastor would agree to participate in a program in which Jesus and the Bible end up on the cutting room floor.

Since interviewing Pastor Mansfield, I have been contemplating the potential wisdom of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in which made the following quote:

Solzhenitsyn once said that
“We should have resisted the KGB at the front door. If the KGB thought that they might not go home that night, the Russian people might have had a different fate”.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 21, 2014, 11:24:04 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OdJRWIivlU


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 21, 2014, 11:30:16 pm
FYI, Martin Luther SUPPORTED the whole church/state unholy marriage!

http://www.mennosimons.net/horsch01.html

Excerpt:

Both Luther and Zwingli, the leading state-church reformers, advised the priests in the states whose rulers favored their cause to continue in their office and say Mass "in appearance" until the governments of these states would decide to introduce the Reformation, establish the new creed and raise the new church to the position of the state-church. This principle has found classical expression in Luther's tract A Faithful Admonition published in January, 1522, in which the reformer advances the opinion that changes in worship and practice must not be made without the consent of the heads of the state. The secular authorities, he says, should take this matter into their hands. "every prince in his own land," and nothing in the way of actual reformation of the church should be done without the initiative of the authorities or the command of the government. Luther says further:

"Therefore, look upon the government, as long as they do not undertake anything and do not give a command, you should keep quiet with hand, mouth and heart and should not concern yourself about it. If you can persuade the government to proceed and give a command, you may do so. If the government be not willing, neither should you be. But if you proceed, you are in the wrong and are far worse than the other party [the Romanists]." (6)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 15, 2015, 05:52:01 pm
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hhs-publishes-sample-church-bulletin-insert-promote-obamacare_852728.html
HHS Pushes Church Talking Points, Bulletins to Promote Obamacare
2/15/15

In an effort to sign up as many consumers as possible for insurance under the Affordable Care Act (or Obamacare), the Obama administration has gone to extraordinary lengths to partner with churches and other faith-based groups, even publishing sample church bulletin inserts, flyers, and scripts for announcements, as well as "talking points." These materials are part of the "Second Sunday & Faith Weekend of Action Toolkit," which is available on the website of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

From the beginning, HHS has sought to develop partnerships with faith-based organizations to promote the Obamacare. This "toolkit" has been available since 2013. However, the details of these partnerships have largely escaped the attention of the national media. The Second Sunday & Faith Weekend of Action program encourages churches to use the second Sunday of each month during open enrollment to hold informational meetings and sign-up events. The sample bulletin insert appears as follows:

(http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/unnamed-8_3.preview.png)

The suggested announcement includes insertion points for the name of the church promoting the event:

(http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/unnamed-9_0.preview.png)

The materials also include two full pages of "talking points," which end with an admonition to churches that "[y]ou are trusted messengers in this community. We hope you share this information with those around you so they can be connected with the care they need."

Non-profits such as Community Health Connectors have also brought togeather churches and faith-based organizations with government officials for information regarding the ACA, recently even hosting an "off the record" conference call with First Lady Michelle Obama "to discuss how the Affordable Care Act is impacting the lives of your congregation members."

HHS also offers to make officials from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) available to speak at church events. The CMS "2nd Sunday HIM [Health Insurance Marketplace] Enrollment for Faith and Community Event" form asks for contact information, desired topics and dates, and an audience profile, including if any "other CMS, HHS, Congressional Members or any other VIP officials expected to attend."

In at least one case, a marketplace even invoked scripture as part of the enrollment push. In March 2014, D.C. HealthLink, the insurance marketplace for the nation's capital assigned a theme to their Weekend of Action, "The Body is a Temple and it Must Be Insured," drawing on I Corinthians 6:19, which says that "your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit."

(http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/unnamed-10_0.preview.png)

According to a recent blog post on the HHS website, more than 5,500 faith leaders have "promoted health insurance enrollment within their communities through efforts like the Second Sunday program." The deadline for open enrollment for 2015 coverage is Sunday, February 15.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2015, 01:52:53 pm
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/immigration-651234-help-church.html
Churches ask: What can we do to help undocumented immigrants?
Feb. 13, 2015 Updated 8:45 p.m.

The presentations at two Orange County church meetings were similar. The crowds were not.

One was predominantly Anglo. The other was Latino.

Both focused on President Obama’s upcoming immigration plan and what church members could do to help 100,000 eligible undocumented immigrants across the county apply for deportation relief.

The first application opening is days away. Local churches and other organizations are busily working to organize forums and training sessions. They’re looking for volunteers. They aim to help eligible immigrants apply for temporary reprieves from deportation that come with work permits.

Such sessions are happening nationwide.

A federal judge in Texas, meanwhile, is expected to deliver a ruling in a case that pits about half of the nation against the president. More than two dozen states sued Obama, saying he unilaterally –and unlawfully–rewrote immigration law.

A calling or 'unholy alliance'?

“I’m here to help myself and to help others,” said Nelva Resendiz, a Costa Mesa mother of three who hopes to qualify for the president’s three-year deferment from deportation plan for parents of U.S.-born children.

Resendiz was one of some 35 residents who attended an informational forum and training at the Crossing Church in Costa Mesa last Tuesday night.

A couple of days earlier, more than 40 church members from the Tapestry Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Mission Viejo and Irvine United Congregational Church gathered for lunch to learn more about the president’s plan at the Irvine church.

“Our prayers were answered. Now we have to respond,” Minerva Gomez, of the Orange County Congregation Community Organizations, told the assembled church members.

Rev. Paul Tellstrom, the pastor for the progressive Christian congregation in Irvine, said immigration issues resonate with his congregation.

“But it’s not the slam dunk of Prop. 8,” he said, referring to a California ballot against gay marriages that his church members opposed.

His congregation will spend the next year learning about immigration issues and looking into different points of view, said Tellstrom, who referred to the country’s immigration system as broken and riddled with injustices.

Don Bjorklund, a retired attorney in Mission Viejo, left the luncheon saying he wants to volunteer.

“Something has to be done,” Bjorklund said. “I applaud president Obama for taking the executive actions that he did and I want do do what I can to help.”

Californians who oppose the president’s actions say support and money would be best spent on American citizens. Next Thursday, they plan two rallies in Orange County.

“It is an unholy alliance that church groups, the government and illegals have joined together, at the expense of the U.S. taxpayer,” said Robin Hvidston, of the Claremont-based We the People Rising, which opposes illegal immigration.

“It is inconceivable that the Obama administration neglects the American people as he funds, protects and encourages illegal immigration, at this time of high unemployment and U.S. poverty,” Hvidston said in an e-mail.

Executive Action

On Nov. 20, President Obama announced a series of executive actions. They include expanding the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, known as DACA: a program for immigrants who entered the country before the age of 16 and meet other criteria. The government will begin accepting applications for the expanded program Wednesday.

The program garnering the most attention is one that will help an estimated four million people get another version of DACA. The new program for immigrant parents is called DAPA, or Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents. That one will begin taking applications in May.

But the programs have hit roadblocks.

The U.S. House of Representatives approved a spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security that not only blocks the expanded DACA but would get rid of the three-year program altogether.

And a ruling is expected any day from a federal district court judge on the lawsuit by 26 states. Those governors argue that the new relief programs will cause irreparable harm to their states, leading to increased costs.

“This lawsuit is not about immigration. It is about the rule of law, presidential power, and the structural limits of the U.S. Constitution,” reads the lawsuit.

California is on the other side, joining 11 other states and D.C in filing a court brief backing the president.

Legal experts have said they expect Judge Andrew Hanen to rule against the administration, citing his comments on an earlier case involving unaccompanied minors arriving at the border.

“We’re all waiting to see what the judge actually says and does,” said Crystal Williams, spokeswoman for the American Immigration Lawyers Assn.

Most observers expect the case will likely be decided through the appellate process and reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, it’s unclear what will happen to the programs during that process. They may be frozen. They may be able to proceed in whole or in part. They may be frozen only for the people in the court’s immediate jurisdiction. There may be other permutations, Williams said.

Much will depend on the actual language and scope of any order.

What’s next?

Supporters are pushing through to help implement the plans, despite the obstacles.

A coalition of labor, legal service and faith-based organizations in Orange County have been meeting regularly to develop a plan and see who is doing what.

Catholic Charities of Orange County has identified at least seven parishes to train volunteer leaders, who in turn will train others. They plan to hold workshops to help immigrants living in the country illegally gather documents and fill out paperwork, said Deana Gullo, the director of immigration services program.


By November, Catholic Charities, an authorized provider of immigration services, hopes to help about 8,000 residents, less than 10 percent of the expected eligible population locally.

World Relief, a global non-profit with an office in Garden Grove, also has members who are accredited to provide these services. And they’re looking to train 100 more churches throughout Southern California to become authorized providers too, said Jose Serrano, a spokesman for the local office.

Meanwhile, like other organizations, World Relief is hosting forums to provide information, warn against potential scammers, remind immigrants to research and copy personal documents. Prospective applicants also need to start saving. Supporters estimate the fee will be similar to a current DACA application, $465.

Supporters say the fees will cover expenses. Opponents say it won’t be enough, and taxpayers will end up footing the bill.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 24, 2015, 08:11:43 pm
The silver underlying over all of this is that 99% of Idaho "churches" are (likely)501c3s.

Smokescreen, can we say?

http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-propose-declaring-idaho-christian-state-233031805.html
2/24/15
Republicans propose declaring Idaho a 'Christian state'

SALMON, Idaho (Reuters) - Members of a county Republican Party in Idaho are to take up a measure on Tuesday evening that would declare the state a Christian one to bolster what the proposal calls the "Judeo-Christian bedrock of the founding of the United States."

The resolution to be voted on by the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee is non-binding, meaning it does not have the effect of laws or rules.

The proposal seeks that Idaho be "formally and specifically declared a Christian state," guided by a Judeo-Christian faith reflected in the U.S. Declaration of Independence where all authority and power is attributed to God, the resolution reads.

The measure argues that the Christian faith is under "strident attack" in the United States, and cites as evidence the absence of Christian traditions and symbols in public institutions such as schools.

The issue has sparked debate within the Republican stronghold of northern Idaho, once known for harboring leaders of the so-called Christian identity or white supremacist movement such as the late Aryan Nations founder Richard Butler.

Supporters say the measure echoes the Christian principles espoused by early U.S. presidents such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and that it has added significance at a time when Christians are subject to persecution in countries such as Syria where it is not the dominant religion.

"We're a Christian community in a Christian state and the Republican Party is a Christian Party," said Jeff Tyler, a member of the committee and backer of the draft resolution.

"It's important that Christians stand up and be unashamed to say they're Christians."

Other committee members said they opposed the proposal, but that it placed them in a difficult position because if they voted against it they risked being unjustly labeled as anti-Christian.

Bjorn Handeen, a committee member who described himself as a Republican with libertarian leanings, said he is opposed to any document that puts the government in charge of defining Christianity.

He said the resolution was pushed by a small group within the committee that is bent on creating division among its about 70 members.

"Ultimately, I'm not in favor of dividing us by religion; I'm in favor of uniting us by freedom," Handeen said.

If approved, the resolution would be submitted to the state Republican Party for a vote by its members.

Idaho has long been a Republican bastion, with party members holding the majority of state offices.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 16, 2015, 10:26:27 am
http://mashable.com/2015/03/16/billy-graham-deploys-clergy-to-ferguson/
3/16/15
Prayer and protest: Ferguson attracts Billy Graham's rapid response team

FERGUSON, Missouri — The city of Ferguson once more came back into the news.

Last week, a police shooting left two officers injured and, soon after, protesters and journalists began to gather in front of the city's police department as they had before.

But this time demonstrators and reporters were joined by a third group on South Florissant Road: Evangelical Christians.

On Saturday night, a half a dozen friendly, clean-cut men and women could be seen milling around in the police station parking lot, dressed in matching blue button up shirts, spelling out: Billy Graham Rapid Response.

" People have asked if we could come and help the community heal People have asked if we could come and help the community heal," said Jeff Naber, who handles ministry relations for the team.

When a police officer shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager, here in August, Ferguson erupted in protests. The shooting also sparked a nationwide debate about rights, race and police brutality. The announcement by authorities in November that the police officer, Darren Wilson, wouldn't be charged in the shooting death of Brown, only further fueled demonstrations across the country.

Naber, who has visited Ferguson several times in the past few months, says that his group has simply come to offer a helping hand while delivering a message of "Jesus' love."

The evangelical group was originally founded by Billy Graham, who in the 1950s became one of the leading religious figures in America. (He preached racial equality and became friends with Martin Luther King Jr., at one point posting bail for King when King was arrested.)

However, over the weekend, it was clear that not everyone in Ferguson was happy to see the evangelical "mobile command unit" roll up to the protests.

“It's disrespectful," said one young Ferguson resident named Loki. "They call it rapid response — what have they responded to?” said Loki, who spoke on condition that only his FIRST NAME be used. "They stand in that van...they watch TV and pass out coffee,” said Loki."It's not helping the community at all." Besides, he said, for those seeking God, there are already several churches in the community.


The truck had been parked for several weeks in Ferguson following the decision not to indict Wilson in November, and residents came into the truck to speak with the volunteers and to pray with them, said Naber. It had been located in the section of town where Brown was killed, but was brought back to the community after this week's police shooting. Though on this Saturday night, the rapid response truck remained largely empty save for the evangelical volunteers.

Still, many Ferguson residents invoke faith when talking about the path ahead. And conversations with residents inevitably veer toward religion. In the Canfield apartment complex, where Brown lived before he was killed, neighbors often reference God and healing when discussing the future of the city.

Along South Florissant Road, a place that has seen its share of fear and uncertainty since August, brightly colored messages of prayer and hope has been tacked to the boarded-up windows.

"People are confused, they are tired, they don't know whats going on and they just wanted to have someone to talk to, someone to pray with," said Rev. Jose Aguayo of the Church of Divine Grace in St. Louis who volunteers with the evangelical group.

Bishop Derrick Robinson, one of the de facto leaders of the protest actions, and a member of the clergy, himself believes that the group needs to make connections with some of the stakeholders in the activist movement that has become a visible staple in the community.

"I think they should partner with some of the local leaders here, and they are definitely doing a poor job of that," said Robinson, who was leading the protesters in rousing chants through a megaphone pointed at the police department on this particular Saturday night. "We have to make sure that the relationships are built to be one."

Loki also believes the group is out of touch with the needs and concerns of the protesters.

“If the police are killing us, we are being tear-gassed, people are being hog-tied and beat up by the police, how is a BIBLE going to help us in that situation?” he asked. "What are we going to say? 'No I’m a Christian — don’t shoot me?’"


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on April 10, 2015, 02:40:02 pm
Christians Sue IRS for Covert Deal Against Churches

Alliance Defending Freedom filed a federal lawsuit Thursday against the Internal Revenue Service for failing to produce records on its secret deal with an activist group to investigate churches. Federal law requires the tax agency to produce the records that ADF requested under the Freedom of Information Act in July 2014, but the IRS missed its legally required deadline months ago and has continued to stonewall the request.

Judicial Watch attorneys are representing ADF in the lawsuit over the FOIA request, which asked that the IRS produce documents related to a legal settlement in which the agency apparently adopted new protocols and procedures for church investigations. ADF is requesting the same information already provided to Freedom From Religion Foundation, which struck a deal with the IRS to end the lawsuit Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Koskinen.

"Americans deserve to know what the IRS is up to," said ADF Litigation Counsel Christiana Holcomb. "The agency's unwillingness to produce these records only furthers the perception that it makes secret deals with activists that it wishes to hide from the public. The IRS's delays make no sense because we only asked for the same information that it already provided to Freedom From Religion Foundation. The IRS has forced us to file this lawsuit just so we can obtain what the agency is already legally obligated to produce."

"The Obama IRS seems oblivious to the federal court's orders to provide full information," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "With the help of a compromised Justice Department, the IRS has engaged in prolonged stonewalling. The IRS thinks it can toy with a federal court, Congress, and the American people. For over two years, the administration has been hiding information on the IRS's targeting of Obama's political opponents. It is certainly in the public's interest to know what the new IRS guidelines are for investigating a basic First Amendment right."

In July 2014, a Freedom From Religion Foundation press release announced it had reached a settlement with the IRS in its lawsuit against the agency. As the release revealed, "The IRS has now resolved the signature authority issue necessary to initiate church examinations. The IRS also has adopted procedures for reviewing, evaluating and determining whether to initiate church investigations."

The FFRF press release mentioned the ADF-sponsored "Pulpit Freedom" movement as a motivation for its lawsuit, which urged the IRS to enforce what's known as the "Johnson Amendment" against churches. Currently, the Johnson Amendment authorizes the IRS to regulate sermons and requires churches to give up their constitutionally protected freedom of speech in order to retain their tax-exempt status.

"The IRS cannot condition tax-exempt status on the surrender of a constitutionally protected freedom," explained ADF Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley, who heads the Pulpit Freedom effort. "Churches don't have to give up their freedom of speech to remain tax-exempt any more than they have to give up their protection against illegal search and seizure. Nonetheless, behind closed doors, the IRS appears to be sharpening its procedures for monitoring sermons and performing additional audits. It should stop playing games with the American people, who can only assume by this continual and illegitimate secrecy that the agency has something to hide."

The lawsuit Alliance Defending Freedom v. Internal Revenue Service was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Several members of Congress, at least one state attorney general, and a number of concerned organizations have also asked the IRS to come clean on its settlement with FFRF.

http://www.charismanews.com/us/49151-christians-sue-irs-for-covert-deal-against-churches


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on April 22, 2015, 08:16:36 am
The IRS Assures an Atheist Group It Will Monitor Churches

It was bad enough, as I wrote here last August, that the Internal Revenue Service appeared to reach an agreement to monitor the pulpits of ill-favored churches. What’s worse is that the IRS, directly counter to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requirements, steadfastly has refused to make public key documents pertaining to that decision.

So the IRS, acting with the whole power of government behind it, seems to be saying it can monitor and presumably punish churches for the content of their sermons, but the churches can’t know exactly if, how, and why they are being monitored.

To fight this combined assault on religious liberty and on government transparency, conservative legal stalwarts Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and Judicial Watch together filed suit April 9 to force release of the IRS documents. ADF asserts that the IRS already has shared the documents with the atheist Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). Once again, the IRS bends over backwards on behalf of leftists while harassing and ignoring the rights, on multiple levels, of conservative groups or faith communities.

And if the IRS continues to flout FOIA, we ought to treat its obstinacy as a major scandal. Then again, the IRS’s connivance with FFRF is itself a scandalous and deliberate trampling of our founding freedom of religious exercise and expression, guaranteed by the First Amendment.

The controversy arose when FFRF sued the IRS to force it to monitor churches (the IRS apparently monitored at least 99 churches) for alleged lack of compliance with rules against express electioneering by nonprofit organizations. As executive agencies under Barack Obama so often have done, the IRS reached a friendly settlement to dismiss the suit. FFRF was so pleased with the settlement that it claimed, in a headline: “Anti-church electioneering victory is final.” FFRF described how it achieved its “major victory”:

FFRF agreed to voluntarily dismiss its closely watched federal lawsuit against the IRS after being given evidence that the IRS has authorized procedures and “signature authority” to resume initiating church tax investigations and examinations.

The ADF, on behalf of threatened churches, merely demanded through FOIA that the IRS share that same “evidence” with it, including details about the new “procedures.” Pretty basic stuff. Not only does the public in general have the right to know the basis for and substance of a federal agency’s procedures, but the parties directly affected (or targeted) by those procedures, as per a legal settlement, are especially entitled to that information. That’s the law. It’s also Common Sense 101.

In an August 28, 2014, letter to ADF attorney Christiana Holcomb, IRS “tax law specialist” Bonnie Mullins acknowledged that the ordinary deadline for compliance with ADF’s FOIA demand was a day earlier, on August 27, and that she had exercised supposed authority to extend that deadline by ten business days, to September 11, “after which you can file suit.” But even at the start of that extension, Mullins wrote that she did not expect to be able “to locate and consider release of the requested records by Sept. 11, 2014, [so] we have extended the response date to Sept. 29, 2014 when we believe we can provide a final response.

” But no response came in September. Or October. Or November. The IRS instead continued to stonewall. On January 29, a new “tax law specialist,” Corinna Smith, wrote to Holcomb to say that while she (Smith) had on November 26 “asked for more time to obtain the records you requested,” she now “need[ed] additional time to March 31, 2015.” Smith concluded: “I will contact you by March 31, 2015 if I am still unable to complete your request.

” Holcomb told me there are two problems with that. First, ADF never received any November request for “more time” (nor was it warranted by law, and neither was there an explanation why or when Smith had taken the case from Mullins). Second, March 31 came and went without the promised further contact from Smith, or Mullins, or anybody else from the IRS. Thus, even though the IRS originally acknowledged that the ordinary statute of limitations for complying with FOIA was August 27, 2014, and that the legally allowed extension ran out on September 11, 2014, the agency now has allowed more than seven months to pass beyond the legal deadline — without justification, indeed without any explanation other than a mere statement that it needed more time.

And the IRS now has violated even the latest deadline it set for itself, after its first illegal extension, without even bothering to give further notice that it is doing so.

“They have stonewalled month after month after month,” Holcomb said.

This is the same government confiscation-machine–cum–​star-chamber that will and does impose severe fines on ordinary Americans for missing a single tax-filing deadline and that will garnish the wages (effectively at the point of a gun) of anybody who won’t pay those fines. If the IRS’s own standards were applied to “tax law specialist” Mullins, Smith, or any other personnel involved in the suit with FFRF or the decision to “authorize procedures” for monitoring churches, it is conceivable that those individuals might now be subject to criminal prosecution.

Comparing the current impasse to the concurrent but unrelated scandal involving the IRS’s targeting and abusive treatment of conservative groups involved in the public-policy process, Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said this in a press release:

For two years, the administration has been hiding information on the IRS’s targeting of Obama’s political opponents. It is certainly in the public’s interest to know what the new IRS guidelines are for investigating a basic First Amendment right.

Completely apart from the administrative law-breaking, it is that First Amendment right that remains the nub of the underlying case. The public has been bombarded in recent weeks with stories of battles about the limits of private expressions of faith in the business world. What the IRS apparently is doing, at the atheist group’s request, attacks faith at an even more fundamental level than that: inside the churches’ own doors, at their very pulpits.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1808, “I consider the government of the U.S. as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, disciplines, or exercises.

” Surely, if a government agency is monitoring religious institutions in a way that could lead to such intermeddling, the public deserves an explanation of how, why, when, and where such monitoring is taking place. But this is Obama’s IRS. It seems to think it answers to nobody. The courts must disabuse it of that virtually criminal notion, with every power at the courts’ disposal.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417153/irs-assures-atheist-group-it-will-monitor-churches-quin-hillyer


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on April 28, 2015, 06:32:26 am
EPA Grant to Study How Churches Can Preach Climate Change

The Environmental Protection Agency is funding an $84,000 grant to study churches and faith-based groups that encourage members to fight climate change, The Washington Free Beacon reports.

The public money is backing a graduate fellowship at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor that is looking at "sustainability initiatives" at 17 faith-based institutions in order to develop workshops for religious leaders to teach their followers to work to combat climate change.

"Climate change — which affects traditional faith-based efforts to improve human health, mitigate poverty and redress social inequity — is inspiring religious organizations to advocate for clean air and water, restore ecosystems, and conserve resources," the grant for the project reads.

The project began last fall and is scheduled to continue through September 2016.

The project was initiated because "no systematic studies examine why particular activities arise in specific faith communities, what factors contribute to the durability and efficacy of some faith-based sustainability initiatives, or what outcomes emerge from those initiatives," the grant reads.

"Preliminary analysis suggests that successful initiatives follow similar processes of organizational innovation that integrate sustainability into faith-community social norms, thereby creating expectations for collective and individual behavior," it continues.

The funding supports one doctoral candidate at the University of Michigan, EPA Deputy Press Secretary Laura Allen told the Free Beacon. "The student’s research is intended to be a resource for faith-based organizations to determine the best actions to take to combat harmful impacts from climate change," she said.

If any workshops occur, they would be developed by the student receiving the fellowship, not EPA, Allen said.

Climate change is a subject of debate within churches much as it is in society in general. Faith-based groups tend to fall along conservative and liberal ideological lines, though some otherwise conservative evangelicals also have supported climate change initiatives.

Pope Francis is expected to release an encyclical this summer on the issue. He previously has stated "I don't know if it is all [man's fault] but the majority is, for the most part, it is man who continuously slaps down nature."

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/epa-grant-churches-preach/2015/04/27/id/641113/#ixzz3YbQkoDOZ


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 01, 2015, 11:03:46 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmdLYDAGPoQ


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 06, 2015, 05:34:46 pm
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=2915729383
Who Is Jesus - to YOU
   
The Preeminence of Christ
   
   
2/1/2015 (SUN)  |  Bible: Colossians 1:1-22

Audio: http://www.sermonaudio.com/playpopup.asp?SID=2915729383

The Lord Jesus Christ accepts no competition; He not only DESERVES the place of preeminence in our lives, AND in our churches; but he DEMANDS it as well.

After presenting what God did for us and IN us when He not only saved us, but also delivered us from the power of darkness and TRANSLATED us into the kingdom of His dear Son, this expository sermon through Colossians 1, one of the greatest chapters in the Bible, and one of the most insightful passages into the nature and person of the Lord Jesus Christ, delves into the humanity, the deity, and the exalted position the Lord Jesus has been given as the ruler of this universe. Paul says in Colossians 1:18 that Christ is head over the body, the CHURCH as well, that in ALL THINGS - He should have preeminence. However, it is an undeniable fact of civil law that the incorporated 501c3 churches today have stripped Christ of His preeminence in their churches, and given it to the state instead.

What about YOU? Does Christ have the place of preeminence in YOUR life that he deserves and demands?


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 07, 2015, 11:16:50 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkEbnX8OOQk


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on May 28, 2015, 05:37:06 am
The Johnson Amendment and the Agenda to Silence Christians

We did not get here overnight. Attacks on religious freedoms and on the speech of Christians in America did not just appear in the last several years. The attempted muzzling of Christian churches and religious groups has gradually increased since a pivotal law was passed by a shrewd politician to intimidate people of faith. The repercussions have been devastating.

The 1954 Johnson Amendment passed by Congress stated that non-profits (read: Christian churches and organizations) could not speak in favor of any political candidate. Was this even constitutional?

This key but forgotten event paved the way for the increased squelching of free speech and because of the confusion and misinformation about the law, many religious leaders have been unnecessarily self-censoring for decades.

The following is an excerpt from the chapter, “The Separation of Christianity and State” in the book, The Cost of Our Silence:

“Texas Democrat, Lyndon B. Johnson, was a powerful politician running for reelection as Senator, but two anti-communist, tax-exempt groups were opposing him and passing out literature during the campaigns. He contacted the IRS and found the group’s activity was legal, so he sought other options to fight them.

Johnson shrewdly appeared on the Senate floor on July 2, 1954, and offered his amendment to a pending, massive, tax code overhaul bill. The bill was supposed to modernize the tax code. Records indicate an absence of committee hearings on the amendment. No legislative analysis took place to examine the effect the bill and the amendment would have, particularly on churches and religious organizations. The amendment was simply created to protect Johnson.

The Johnson Amendment was passed by Congress as an amendment to section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code… stating entities that are exempt from federal income tax cannot “Participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of – or in opposition to – any candidate for public office.”

1954 johnson amendment

The Left uses this to bully Christian pastors and groups with threats of losing their nonprofit status should they dare talk about the Bible as it relates to cultural, political, fiscal, and social issues, which all fall under the category of moral issues.

Erik Stanley, author and Senior Legal Counsel of the Alliance Defense Fund, explained the Johnson Amendment was a bill that got inserted into the tax code through back-room deals made by a powerful Senator seeking reelection at any cost. As a result of the bill, freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion have been trampled. Stanley stated:

    We have grown up with a generation of churchgoers that believe it is illegal for their pastor to address candidates and elections in light of Scripture or church doctrine when there is no valid justification for believing that.

Johnson knew how to use the political process to silence his enemies. The new amendment not only protected him from the conservative nonprofit groups opposing him, but many pastors stopped speaking about any issue from the pulpit that might be deemed political either out of ignorance of the new law or out of fear. By this self-censoring, the church has chosen to ignore open immorality in culture and in government while at the same time neglecting to call attention to those political leaders who do strive to live according to Christian morals and values.

One might conclude Lyndon B. Johnson not only silenced America’s churches, his legislation has turned many of them into agents of the state. What about labor unions, liberal churches, and leftist organizations? Why have many of them apparently been allowed to not only endorse and support political candidates, but openly fund their campaigns? This is the hypocrisy of selective law enforcement by the (in)Justice Department and the IRS, a partisan government agency recently exposed in the targeting of conservative groups…

Have we also hesitated to address the severe persecution of our Christian brothers and sisters around the world due to radical Islam? I have to believe we all care about Christian suffering and the fact millions have lost their lives because of their faith in Jesus Christ. What I also want to believe is that religious leaders in America are not afraid to talk about why this is happening.

In an article for American Thinker, Bill Warner wrote about persecution in Islamic nations “caused by Muslim jihadists who are following the Islamic doctrine of jihad against the Christian as found in the Koran, Sira, and Hadith.” Warner points to pastors and church leaders who have become comfortable operating their churches more like 501(c)(3) institutions that have meetings on Sunday. They have a corporate mentality which he believes is one of the reasons for the denial of Christian suffering.

    If you are willing to see the doctrinal roots of the ongoing murder of Christians by Muslims, then you might have to speak about it from the pulpit, and that could be seen as political speech. In spite of the fact that there has never been a 501(c)(3) revoked because of political speech by a minister, the imagined loss silences ministers. Hmmm… if a minister is worried about the IRS revoking his 501(c)(3), then whom is the minster serving? Caesar or Christ?

Are these harsh words any less true of at least a small number of religious leaders in America? If your pastor resembles more of a business person or CEO than a military leader preparing his troops for battle, it may be time to approach him in love and encourage him to address persecution, sin, the culture war, and politics from time to time.

Because many misunderstand why politics were supposedly forbidden in church, some Christians have mistakenly assumed that the process of voting and electing America’s leaders is either unbiblical or unimportant. Only about 25 percent of Christians vote in elections today. Some pastors do talk about their own obligation to impact society by equipping the saints, and do address the controversial issues of today. We need to pray for and rally around Christian leaders such as these.

Though the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment will continue to be wrongly applied to cases involving religion, we can help by raising awareness. We can also elect representatives who revere the Bible they place their hand on when taking their oath of office. Enemies of Christianity and of America have become emboldened, and people of faith need to be reminded we are provided the freedom of religion and its expression under the Constitution.

Our ultimate allegiance and responsibility however, is to the Word of God.

The truth is churches have a tremendous amount of freedom. From the pulpit, actual limitations include: Pastors cannot openly endorse a particular candidate, tell people whom to vote for, or contribute church money to a campaign. A pastor is absolutely free to do so as an individual outside the church. Pastors, churches, and nonprofits can lawfully speak in detail about all biblical issues. They may also quote any Scripture in the Bible, discuss unethical abortion funding and the protection of marriage, and distribute voter guides and information as well as register folks to vote. Churches can invite politicians to come in and speak to their congregations as long as they extend an invitation to both parties.

I do understand the concern some pastors have about mixing religion and government, but we cannot divorce our faith from our politics. If we do, we’d have to leave Jesus at home or outside when we enter the voting booth if that were even possible. Politics affect many areas of our lives, and the Bible has answers and instructions for every single one. Christians must have a voice when it comes to who is elected, what policies get promoted, and which laws get passed.

Someone’s legislation and worldview will surely be enacted and enforced in America – so will it be those who oppose Christianity or those who support it?

Are we willing to remind and inform this generation about who we are and what America once was? Are we willing to speak the truth about Christ and culture no matter how unpopular we may become? The nation has not yet declined to a point of total ungodliness and destruction, and our government needs our prayers and our participation to generate a revival. Concerned Christians must unite again. Every believer should see the need to speak up with a sense of urgency whether you are a parent, a pastor, or a person in the public square.

The Reverend Don Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association, has been instrumental in fighting for the family and Christian values in our country. He wrote the following over ten years ago:

    Today, 4,000 innocent precious lives of unborn babies were snuffed out . . . And 300,000 pulpits are silent . . . The networks make a mockery of Christians, the Christian faith and Christian values with nearly every show they air. Greed, materialism, violence, sexual immorality are standard fare. Program after program, movie after movie contains anti-Christian episodes and plots. News articles condescendingly refer to the “fundamentalists, right-wing Christians.” Those who speak out for the sacredness of life are branded as extremists. And 300,000 pulpits are silent.

    Teenage suicide is the highest it has ever been . . . Christian morality cannot be taught in schools, but atheistic immorality can . . . And 300,000 pulpits are silent. **** has increased 700 percent in the last fifty years, and that takes into consideration the population growth . . . And 300,000 pulpits are silent.

    Rock music fills the airwaves and our children’s minds with music which legitimizes ****, murder, forced sex, sadomasochism, adultery, satanic worship, etc. And 300,000 pulpits are silent. A majority of states now have lotteries [gambling has been legalized, no longer a crime]. And 300,000 pulpits are silent.

Perhaps your pastor or church leader has in fact been speaking out on these and many other problems in our society. Thank him and encourage him! You are blessed to have him and the church in America needs more like him. Our hope is for Christian leaders to do what Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Confessing Church in Germany chose to do; put the Word of God above all things. We must not have any gods besides the one true God. Real faith cannot be silenced by government orders.

If we do nothing and the majority remains silent, the secular progressives win. Then, with God removed from all aspects of American society, they will be the ones to rule, deciding what is right and wrong, true and false, moral and immoral.

As the great Reverend Charles Finney once said,

    “God will bless or curse America depending on the course Christians take in politics; they must vote for honest men and take consistent ground.”

We have been losing ground because Christians have not first been firmly established in their faith, and second; we have not been openly preaching and living the Word of God without compromise. I admit my past failures in this area and have confessed them to the Lord; how about you?

The most important thing is not winning battles for culture or country, but winning eternal battles for the kingdom of God. To win the souls of men, the whole truth of the whole gospel must be proclaimed. True Christianity cannot be confined behind the walls of any church…

http://davidfiorazo.com/2015/05/the-johnson-amendment-and-the-agenda-to-silence-christians/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 06, 2015, 09:34:38 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMl5avIGVU4


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on June 17, 2015, 06:43:48 am
Couple says they were banned from Kernersville church by pastor on social media

Chris and Christina Yarbrough are looking for a new place to worship after being banned from their church through their pastor’s Facebook post.

For more than three years, the couple attended The Bridge Fellowship where Chris served as a deacon.

But that changed Thursday when senior pastor David McGee posted a Facebook status banning the couple along with two other members.

McGee writes:

“We are defellowshipping them. . . this means they cannot come to The Bridge, they are no longer welcomed at The Bridge unless they repent.”

The pastor does not specifically state what the former members did wrong but later writes:

“I will block them because Jesus and the word tell me to, and I don’t want to hear the gossip and lies anymore.”

The Yarbrough’s say the post was the first time they were asked to leave the church and were never spoken to directly about no longer being members there.

“I feel that it was wrong,” Christina said. “I feel more abused and hurt by the church because why didn’t you come to us first.”

Christina says the couple stopped tithing to the church a year ago and instead gave money to other ministries and nonprofits, a decision she claims caused tension between the couple and church leaders.

“The only issue that they had they’d ever come to us about is tithing,” she said.

“If it’s not on your heart to give 10 percent to them, that’s not arguing or being disobedient to them.”

FOX8 reached out to Pastor McGee through two Facebook messages and two voice messages.

McGee has not commented.

http://myfox8.com/2015/06/11/couple-says-they-were-banned-from-church-by-pastor-on-social-media/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2015, 04:47:54 pm
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/26/scotus-to-churches-hey-no-worries-you-can-still-advocate-for-traditional-marriage/
6/26/15
SCOTUS to churches: Hey, no worries, you can still “advocate” for traditional marriage

On this slender thread does the promise of religious liberty hang. Justice Anthony Kennedy, in his majority opinion in Obergefell that declares same-sex marriage a constitutional right, barely mentions the means by which most Americans conduct their weddings — houses of worship. Only on page 27 does Kennedy get around to addressing the connection between church and state, and the assurances in this paragraph are less than compelling, to say the least:

Quote
Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate. The Constitution, however, does not permit the State to bar same-sex couples from marriage on the same terms as accorded to couples of the opposite sex.

Uh …. sure, you can still advocate for traditional marriage. You betcha. Where have we heard these protestations of modesty before?

Note here that Kennedy only mentions that houses of worship and those who attend them can still “advocate” against condoning same-sex marriage (SSM). This ignores the long-standing partnership between churches/synagogues/mosques and the government in officiating legally recognized marriage ceremonies. This decision now makes marriage for those same-sex couples a constitutional right, and that will eventually impact those partners for government who officiate such ceremonies.

It won’t be long before lawsuits appear to force churches into performing same-sex weddings, which then becomes a RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) test against state interests. That’s not going to be a slam dunk for the churches, either — not by a long shot. The state interest in enforcing constitutional rights is presumed to be strong, plus Kennedy’s opinion lists a number of ancillary state interests that makes SSM an Equal Protection Clause issue:

Quote
The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. … Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated through no fault of their own to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue here thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples.

And pay particular attention to this passage:

Quote
Many who deem same-sex marriage to be wrong reach that conclusion based on decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises, and neither they nor their beliefs are disparaged here. But when that sincere, personal opposition becomes enacted law and public policy, the necessary consequence is to put the imprimatur of the State itself on an exclusion that soon demeans or stigmatizes those whose own liberty is then denied.

Will a court, reading this holding, decide that the harm of this “exclusion” and the denial of a constitutional right by an agent of the state in performing weddings override the First Amendment right of free exercise of religion? Some may not, but don’t bet on that as a consistent outcome. Furthermore, the legal challenges that will occur will punish these churches, especially smaller congregationalist entities without significant resources. The process will be the punishment — although I’d bet that the first target will be the Catholic Church, which at least has resources to fight it.

I’d also note that Kennedy, who brought up the topic, could have written explicitly that houses of worship and individuals have a First Amendment right not to participate in these ceremonies. That issue has been raised on a number of occasions in the courts. The absence of any such language sends a very disturbing message on religious freedom, in this and many other contexts.

Chief Justice John Roberts sounded the warning in his dissent:

Quote
Federal courts are blunt instruments when it comes to creating rights. They have constitutional power only to resolve concrete cases or controversies; they do not have the flexibility of legislatures to address concerns of parties not before the court or to anticipate problems that may arise from the exercise of a new right. Today’s decision, for example, creates serious questions about religious liberty. Many good and decent people oppose same-sex marriage as a tenet of faith, and their freedom to exercise religion is—unlike the right imagined by the majority— actually spelled out in the Constitution. Amdt. 1. …

The majority’s decision imposing same sex marriage cannot, of course, create any such accommodations. The majority graciously suggests that religious believers may continue to “advocate” and “teach” their views of marriage. Ante, at 27. The First Amendment guarantees, however, the freedom to “exercise” religion. Ominously, that is not a word the majority uses.

Hard questions arise when people of faith exercise religion in ways that may be seen to conflict with the new right to same-sex marriage—when, for example, a religious college provides married student housing only to opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married couples. Indeed, the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage. See Tr. of Oral Arg. on Question 1, at 36–38. There is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this Court. Unfortunately, people of faith can take no comfort in the treatment they receive from the majority today.

Justice Clarence Thomas also warns that the majority has provided a body blow to religious liberty:

Quote
Aside from undermining the political processes that protect our liberty, the majority’s decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect. …

In our society, marriage is not simply a governmental institution; it is a religious institution as well. Id., at 7. Today’s decision might change the former, but it cannot change the latter. It appears all but inevitable that the two will come into conflict, particularly as individuals and churches are confronted with demands to participate in and endorse civil marriages between same-sex couples.

The majority appears unmoved by that inevitability. It makes only a weak gesture toward religious liberty in a single paragraph, ante, at 27. And even that gesture indicates a misunderstanding of religious liberty in our Nation’s tradition. Religious liberty is about more than just the protection for “religious organizations and persons . . . as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths.” Ibid. Religious liberty is about freedom of action in matters of religion generally, and the scope of that liberty is directly correlated to the civil restraints placed upon religious practice.7

Although our Constitution provides some protection against such governmental restrictions on religious practices, the People have long elected to afford broader protections than this Court’s constitutional precedents mandate. Had the majority allowed the definition of marriage to be left to the political process—as the Constitution requires—the People could have considered the religious liberty implications of deviating from the traditional definition as part of their deliberative process. Instead, the majority’s decision short-circuits that process, with potentially ruinous consequences for religious liberty.

Get ready for a massive legal assault on houses of worship that refuse to accommodate same-sex weddings. Even legislation on the federal and state level may not be able to undo the broad opening that Kennedy et al has forced on the religious institutions and people in the US. It’s clear that the Supreme Court has become unmoored from the Constitution, and in doing so has unmoored all of us as well.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 02, 2015, 05:14:37 am
From Scott's Email

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2015
To: Contending for Truth by Dr. Scott Johnson
Subject: How One 501c3 Pastor is Reacting to the Gay Marriage Ruling

Thank you so much for your teaching on the 501c3 church. My husband got very angry with me several months ago when I told him I would no longer go to church because it was 501c3. I even emailed the pastor about the issue which infuriated my husband to no end. Today my husband went to church. I told him the pastor would not say anything about the homosexual marriage ruling. My husband told me repeatedly that the pastor would certainly address it. I watched the sermon online because they have a live stream. NOTHING was said. Not even a single prayer for our country. NOT A WORD. Thank you so much for opening my eyes to the 501c3 issue. I didn't have to go to church and be shocked that the pastor was spineless.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 02, 2015, 08:22:34 am
Gay marriage ruling, liberal activists, plus the IRS equals big trouble for 'corporate' Churches

Since the IRS code was amended in 1954 to include “churches” as 501(c)(3) “tax exempt” corporations, only one church has lost its tax-exempt status for violating the IRS code.  Unfortunately, that statistic may be about to increase drastically due to the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage.

Thanks to the efforts of Texas Democrat senator Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954, almost every church in America today is registered under the 501(c)(3) IRS code.  Johnson promoted the amendment to change the IRS code as what he called a “favor” to churches, but a closer look at history reveals that his ulterior motive was to encourage churches to “formally” register with the IRS for mostly political reasons.  It seems the real reason Johnson wanted to have churches under the control of the IRS was because he believed they were gaining too much political power through their influence from the pulpit over millions of registered voters.  In essence, Johnson wanted to legally silence churches by having them relinquish their constitutional rights under the First Amendment by becoming legal corporate entities subject to the dictates of the State and enforced by the IRS.

Based on last week’s gay marriage ruling by the Supreme Court, churches registered as 501(c)(3) corporations may find Johnson’s efforts less of a “favor” and more of a catastrophe.

While most church leaders ignorantly believe that their “churches” have some sort of protected constitutional rights, as registered 501(c)(3) corporations, they actually have none.  When churches register with the State as 501(c)(3) corporations, they relinquish all “personal” constitutional rights and are governed totally by the dictates of the IRS law through what is known as an “artificial person.”  And since this artificial person is created solely by the power of the State, all churches’ rights, along with their existence, are subject to and limited by the dictates of the 501(c)(3) IRS code – not the Constitution.

Since the SCOTUS ruling on gay marriage, there has been much talk and alarm about churches losing their tax-exempt status.  And because most churches have voluntarily decided since 1954 to become “unequally yoked” with the State, their fears are well founded.  With regard to the State’s power over churches in the matter of upholding Supreme Court Rulings under federal law, what Caesar giveth – Caesar can take away!

Regardless of why churches choose to register with the IRS as tax-exempt corporations, based on the following excerpt from one study, under the new court ruling on gay marriage, 501(c)(3) churches are now stuck between a rock and a hard place:

    By incorporating, the pastor and elders of a church need to realize that they have, in effect, signed a contract with the federal government which they have become legally and morally liable to obey. They cease to exist as a "real" person under the First Amendment with "unalienable" rights, and are transformed into a federal institution under the complete jurisdiction and control of "Acts of Congress." A church can no more change the nature of a contract after the fact than a private individual.” Ecclesia.org

    "As a general proposition, a party is held to what he signs.... One cannot obtain a release from contract liability upon the ground that he did not understand the legal effect of the contract" Len Young Smith and G. Gale Roberson, Smith and Roberson's Business Law, p. 70

Most church leaders believe they are obligated by law to register with the IRS to get their tax-exempt status, but the First Amendment clearly dictates that there has never been any need for churches to formally register with the IRS – neither before the First Amendment’s adoption in 1791 nor since the 1954 IRS law change.

Churches have always been tax-exempt since the First Amendment was enacted.  This excerpt from another study lays out the facts:

    “Does the law require, or even encourage, a church to organize as a 501c3? To answer that question let's turn to what the IRS itself has to say. Churches Need Not Apply.

    In order to be considered for tax-exempt status by the IRS an organization must fill out and submit IRS Form 1023 and 1024. However, note what the IRS says regarding churches and church ministries, in Publication 557:

      Some organizations are NOT required to file Form 1023. These include:

    “Churches, interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).

    Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Exempt”

    According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):

      Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations.

    (a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status.

      (c) Exceptions.

      (1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall NOT apply to—

      (A) Churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches.

    This is referred to as the "mandatory exception" rule. Thus, we see from the IRS’ own publications, and the tax code, that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for tax-exempt status. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-exempt.”

    Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Deductible”

    So what about tax-deductibility? Doesn’t a church still need to become a 501c3 so that contributions to it can be taken as a tax deduction? The answer is no! According to IRS Publication 526:

      Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions

    You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS.

    In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-deductible.”

The government has shown since 1954 to be very lenient in its assessment of what could be considered violations of the IRS law, but Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage, along with a highly volatile liberal social climate in America, may lead liberal activists to demand that the government begin scrutinizing more closely the actions and speech of churches regarding gay rights.” Hushmoney.com

The bottom line for corporate churches is this: if a church is registered with the IRS under the 501(c)(3) code, then whatever happens now is completely “on them.”  In essence, the church has no one to blame but itself for the mess it is in now.

Fortunately for churches that are not formally registered with the IRS, they can continue operating without any fear of government or IRS retribution.  (Notwithstanding the forthcoming liberal social persecution, which will be quite intense.)  Not being registered as a 501(c)(3) renders the IRS impotent, leaving the State with no legal mechanism or right to revoke a church’s guaranteed First Amendment tax-exempt status.

In conclusion, if there is any notion that this court ruling is the “end-game” for the liberal gay agenda, think again.  President Obama sent this tweet out after the court ruling.

    “Today is a big step in our march toward equality. Gay and lesbian couples now have the right to marry, just like anyone else.” President Barack Obama/Twitter

Note that President Obama did not say today was the “final” step; which means the march will continue for the LGBT movement.  So are churches the “next” big step in the liberal march toward equality?

Surely in some Democrat political back room, someone is saying he wishes LBJ were here to see this.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/07/gay_marriage_ruling_liberal_activists_plus_the_irs_equal_big_trouble_for_corporate_churches_.html#ixzz3ejwohYNu



Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 02, 2015, 08:23:37 am
Ending Tax Exemptions Means Ending Churches
A call for ending tax exemptions for churches and religious institutions is a call to close them down—or at least to plunder them of their property.


Mark Oppenheimer of The New York Times is now calling for the government to remove tax-exempt status from churches. After I posted a link to his article on Facebook, a pastor friend commented: “I’m not sure our small church could survive.” That, my friends, is the point. And Oppenheimer knows it.



Legal gay marriage is not the endgame for the gay-rights movement. It never was. Moral approval is the endgame. The agenda is not tolerance for different beliefs and lifestyles. The agenda is a demand that everyone get on board with the moral revolution or be punished. That means if you or your church won’t get with the program, then the revolutionaries will endeavor to close you down.

But they aren’t going to say,”We’ll close you down,” in so many words. They will cover it in propaganda that conceals their real aim. They’ll say, as Oppenheimer does, that taxpayers are “subsidizing” churches, that ministers make fat-cat six-figure salaries, and that government should get those rich priests and preachers off the government dole.

Never mind that the average base salary of a full-time senior pastor ranges from $33,000 to $70,000 (source). Never mind that ministers do pay income taxes. Never mind that it is absurd to suggest not paying taxes is a subsidy. Never mind that exemptions do function to keep church and state out of one another’s business. That doesn’t fit the fictional narrative activists wish to advance—that these churches don’t deserve to have their “subsidy” continued in light of their intolerable views on sexuality.
The real intent of removing tax-exempt status is to cripple the institutions that continue their dissent from the sexual revolution.

No, the real intent of removing tax-exempt status is to cripple the institutions that continue their dissent from the sexual revolution. When tax exemptions are removed, donors will give far less than they are giving now. Churches will become liable to property taxes. That means that many churches will have to forfeit their property to the government because they won’t be able to afford the taxes they have to pay on it. Many of them wouldn’t be able to pay them now. If donations went down, they would be that much further from being able to pay them. As a result, churches that reside on valuable properties in urban locations would be immediately vulnerable. Eventually, so would everyone else.

Oppenheimer knows this. That is why he argues that if churches can’t raise the money for their new tax burden, then they don’t deserve to retain their property. After all, he argues, the government would do a better job than churches at meeting the needs of their community. He concludes, “So yes, the logic of gay-marriage rights could lead to a reexamination of conservative churches’ tax exemptions… When that day comes, it will be long overdue.”
A call for ending tax exemptions for religious institutions is a call to close them down—or at least to plunder them of their property.

So let’s put aside the propaganda and say clearly what Oppenheimer is calling for. A call for ending tax exemptions for religious institutions is a call to close them down—or at least to plunder them of their property. That is what is going on here. Think of the irreparable harm that would follow if and when these many small churches are effectively forced to close their doors—harm that will come not only to these ministers and parishioners themselves, but also to the poor and vulnerable: lost foster-care services, tutoring of teens, material and spiritual relief for the poor, and character development, often in the places it is needed most.

I am wondering if the average gay-marriage supporter flying the rainbow on his or her Facebook profile knew he or she was signing-up for this when agreeing to support gay marriage? I doubt it. Surely we can come up with more sensible ways for people of good will to hold their differing views—ways that don’t involve annihilating one another. Oppenheimer’s suggestion is not an encouraging sign. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail.

When some of us warned of the religious-liberty implications of making gay marriage a fundamental constitutional right, we were told that such things would never happen. What they really meant was, “That will never happen, but when it does you Christians will deserve it.” Oppenheimer is making the case for why he thinks we deserve it.

Oppenheimer says the Supreme Court has now “settled” the issue. Hardly. This is far from over.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/29/ending-tax-exemptions-means-ending-churches/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 02, 2015, 09:39:32 am
From Scott's Email

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2015
To: Contending for Truth by Dr. Scott Johnson
Subject: How One 501c3 Pastor is Reacting to the Gay Marriage Ruling

Thank you so much for your teaching on the 501c3 church. My husband got very angry with me several months ago when I told him I would no longer go to church because it was 501c3. I even emailed the pastor about the issue which infuriated my husband to no end. Today my husband went to church. I told him the pastor would not say anything about the homosexual marriage ruling. My husband told me repeatedly that the pastor would certainly address it. I watched the sermon online because they have a live stream. NOTHING was said. Not even a single prayer for our country. NOT A WORD. Thank you so much for opening my eyes to the 501c3 issue. I didn't have to go to church and be shocked that the pastor was spineless.

Well, the guest pastor at the "church" I and my parents go to preached against it(the other pastor's wife had a baby recently, so he took off).

Anyhow - pt being that while most didn't say anything(and to be frank, they've been silent about it for a long time now), these "some" that did...we're all going to find out if they continue to hold fast to God's word and take a stand, or were they just merely paying lip service.

Otherwise, if they were really serious about taking a stand, they would have done so a long time ago.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 07, 2015, 06:24:37 am
Homosexual Advocates Call for Churches to Lose Tax-Exempt Status Following ‘Gay Marriage’ Ruling

At least two outspoken homosexual advocates are calling for churches nationwide to lose their tax-exempt status following last month’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring that all 50 states must legalize same-sex “marriage.”

“[N]ow that the U.S. government formally recognizes marriage equality as a fundamental right, it really shouldn’t skew the tax code so as to give millions of dollars in tax breaks to groups which remain steadfastly bigoted on the subject,” wrote Felix Salmon, senior editor for Fusion, in an article entitled “Does Your Church Ban Gay Marriage? Then It Should Start Paying Taxes” last Monday.

He pointed to the Supreme Court ruling that resulted in the revocation of Bob Jones University’s tax exemption because of its stance surrounding interracial couples.

“The same argument can and should be applied to gay marriage,” Salmon stated. “If your organization does not support the right of gay men and women to marry, then the government should be very clear that you’re in the wrong. And it should certainly not bend over backwards to give you the privilege of tax exemption.”

He said that while he understands the concept of religious freedom, he doesn’t believe churches should be “rewarded” with tax exemption if their beliefs are contrary to Supreme Court rulings.

“[W]hen those views are fanatical and hurtful, they come into conflict with the views of any honorable legislator who believes in freedom and equality. And at that point, it makes perfect sense for our elected representatives to register their disapproval by abolishing the tax exemption for organizations who cling to narrow-minded and anachronistic views,” Salmon wrote.

TIME columnist Mark Oppenheimer made similar statements the day before in an article entitled “Now’s the Time to End Tax Exemptions for Religious Institutions”, commenting on a bill introduced by Utah Sen. Mark Lee, which seeks to protect the tax-exempt status of churches in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

    Connect with Christian News

“Rather than try to rescue tax-exempt status for organizations that dissent from settled public policy on matters of race or sexuality, we need to take a more radical step. It’s time to abolish, or greatly diminish, their tax-exempt statuses,” he wrote.

Oppenheimer then sought to dispute reasons for allowing the exemption to remain in place.

“Defenders of tax exemptions and deductions argue that if we got rid of them charitable giving would drop. It surely would, although how much, we can’t say,” he said. “Of course government revenue would go up, and that money could be used to, say, house the homeless and feed the hungry. We’d have fewer church soup kitchens—but countries that truly care about poverty don’t rely on churches to run soup kitchens.”

“[T]he logic of gay-marriage rights could lead to a reexamination of conservative churches’ tax exemptions,” Oppenheimer repeated. “But when that day comes, it will be long overdue.”

Aaron Goldstein, a writer for the American Spectator, disagreed. While he divulged that he personally supports same-sex “marriage,” he doesn’t believe the government has a right to meddle in the beliefs of the Church and noted that the Bob Jones ruling only applied to schools.

“Contrary to Salmon’s claims that the government should be very clear in telling churches they are in the wrong for not supporting same-sex marriage, there is absolutely no governmental interest where it concerns the affairs of churches or purely religious institutions,” he wrote. “Simply put, the government has no business telling churches and purely religious institutions that they are wrong about opposition to gay marriage or any other matter.”

“The federal government must leave churches, synagogues, mosques and other religious assemblies alone in this matter,” Goldstein said. “If they do not see fit to leave them alone, then the very concept of separation of church and state will have lost all meaning. It would end the separation of church and state as we know it.”

As previously reported, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Patrick Henry College Chancellor and Chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) Michael Farris warned that if the court ruled in favor of homosexual nuptials, the decision could result in tax exemption revocation for Christian schools. However, he also opined that the threat will not likely end there.

“No one should think that IRS implications will stop with colleges. Religious high schools, grade schools and any other religious institution will face the same outcome. And this includes churches,” Farris said. “Even if it takes the IRS years to begin the enforcement proceedings against such institutions, we can expect other fallout from this decision to begin shortly after the release of the Supreme Court’s opinion.”

According to the documentary “A Defense of God’s Law,” the nation’s decision to allow tax exemption for churches was grounded in Scripture. It cites Ezra 7:24, which outlines, “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

http://christiannews.net/2015/07/06/homosexual-advocates-call-for-churches-to-lose-tax-exempt-status-following-gay-marriage-ruling/


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 10, 2015, 07:38:36 am
For Churches That Won't Perform Same-Sex Weddings, Insurance Begins to Look Iffy

In the aftermath of Obergefell v. Hodges, pastors and church members are experiencing a wave of anxiety over what many of them deem the "nightmare scenario": lawsuits or government action designed to force them to perform or recognize same-sex marriages. While there are — so far — no meaningful judicial precedents that would permit such dramatic interference with churches' core First Amendment rights, lawsuits challenging church liberties are inevitable.

Indeed, the Iowa Civil Rights Commission has declared that prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity "sometimes" apply to churches and has stated that a "church service open to the public" is not a "bona fide religious purpose" that would limit application of the law. In 2012 a New Jersey administrative-law judge ruled that a religious organization "closely associated with the United Methodist Church" wrongly denied access to its facilities for a same-sex wedding.
ADVERTISEMENT

Churches, like virtually every functioning corporation, protect against liability risks and the potentially ruinous costs of litigation through liability insurance. With same-sex marriage now recognized as a constitutional right — and with news of Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries awarding a lesbian couple $135,000 in damages for "emotional, mental and physical suffering" after a Christian bakery refused to bake their wedding cake — pastors are reaching out insurance companies to make sure they're covered. And at least one insurer has responded with a preemptory denial: no coverage if a church is sued for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding.

On July 1, David Karns, vice president of underwriting at Southern Mutual Church Insurance Company (which "serve[s ] more than 8,400 churches"), wrote an "all states" agents' bulletin addressing same-sex marriage. It begins: "We have received numerous calls and emails regarding the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriages. The main concern is whether or not liability coverage applies in the event a church gets sued for declining to perform a same-sex marriage." Karns continues:

The general liability form does not provide any coverage for this type of situation, since there is no bodily injury, property damage, personal injury, or advertising injury. If a church is concerned about the possibility of a suit, we do offer Miscellaneous Legal Defense Coverage. This is not liability coverage, but rather expense reimbursement for defense costs. There is no coverage for any judgments against an insured.

In other words: Churches, you're on your own. National Review has tried to reach Mr. Karns and Southern Mutual's corporate office, and they have not yet returned our calls.

It is unusual for an insurer to deny purely hypothetical claims. Typically, coverage decisions are made only after evaluating the claims in the complaint and the terms of the insurance policy. Indeed, when National Review reached out to other church insurers to see if they had made similar communications to their insureds, State Farm responded simply: "It can be confusing to customers to publicly address broad, hypothetical situations. Every claim is assessed on its own merits, in line with the language of the policy, coverages, and endorsements purchased." Other church-insurance companies, including Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company and Church Mutual Insurance Company, stated that they had made no blanket communications to their insureds regarding coverage. Brotherhood did, however, post a brief legal analysis of Obergefell that included suggested steps for avoiding litigation.

Moreover, if past practice is any guide, litigants are very likely to allege that they suffered "personal injury" if a church refuses to perform or host their wedding ceremony. Indeed, in the Oregon bakery case, the lesbian couple alleged an array of injuries, including "impaired digestion," "high blood pressure," "excessive sleep," "migraine headaches," and "anxiety." And those allegations were over a mere cake (a cake they were able to immediately replace), not the entire wedding.

The defense of religious liberty is about more than legal doctrines. Even the most robust of legal protections can seem hollow indeed if a church risks financial ruin in response to a lawsuit. Erik Stanley, a senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom (disclosure: I'm a former senior counsel at ADF and occasionally give speeches at ADF events), notes that even though churches can obtain high-quality pro bono counsel, legal nonprofits do not and cannot indemnify a church's potential liabilities. That's what insurance is for. Yet, as of July 1, it appears that thousands of American churches are more exposed than they imagined. And what's the real-world result of Southern Mutual's decision? Stanley, who focuses much of his practice on defending the religious-liberty rights of pastors and churches, was blunt: "More fear." And fear can mean that the battle for religious freedom is lost even before it's fully joined.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/for-churches-that-wont-perform-same-sex-weddings-insurance-begins-to-look-iffy-141329/#Ovrr8vAfxFCLt8Z3.99


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2015, 05:22:38 pm
http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/hillsborough-regional-news/church-members-complain-about-collection-notices
Church members complain about collection notices
7/14/15

Most people who attend church are used to seeing the offering plate passed around the pews.  People donate what they can as a proud member of the congregation.
 
But a Tampa woman told ABC Action News her church says she must pay more than $1,000 a year in donations or she wouldn't be considered a member.
 
"People were really friendly there, and I really enjoyed being there," said Candace Petterson.
 
Petterson said finding the Greater Mount Moriah Primitive Baptist Church was a blessing. The single mother had been looking for a church closer to her new home and six months in, things were going perfectly. That is, until she received an odd letter at her home last week.
 
"To be a member in good standing and have the right to vote, adults are to contribute the minimum amount of $50 per month," read Petterson.
 
To her surprise it was from the church stating she was delinquent in her financial support.
 
"Fifty dollars per month, now this shocked me because I haven't heard about the $50 per month.  So where did this come from?" asked Petterson. "Then Mount Moriah day is on there, $150."
 
The letter goes on to tell Petterson along with those two charges, she would also be on the hook for a yearly church anniversary fee of $250-- a total of $1,000 in required donations a year. Petterson says she was told one of the fees is to help pay off debt held by the church.
 
"What church charges you to help pay off what they're going through, I'm not there for that," said Petterson.
 
Even Petterson's 11-year-old child would have to meet the financial obligations, or also face possible scrutiny.
 
"My child don't have a job, I'm her parent. She's 11 years old.  Why would you charge a child $5 a month to be a member of a church?" said Petterson.
 
We reached out to church leaders who acknowledged the letter had come from them, but did not offer any other explanation.
 
We also left several messages for the church's pastor, but so far, have not heard back.  At this point, Petterson says she'll now try and find a new place of worship. But she worries others might be being taken advantage of by what amounts to a membership fee.
 
"It's like you say to me, if you want to be a member of this church, you need to pay this.  If you want to find God, it don't say anything like that in the Bible," said Petterson.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 06, 2015, 05:52:27 am
Will Your Church Be Turned Into a FEMA Camp?

We are entering a dangerous period of time for Christians, one in which we will see the metaphorical feeding of the Christians to the Lions.

Now, more than ever before, it is important to get one’s spiritual house in order. Now, more than ever before, it is becoming increasingly more difficult to practice your Christian faith without experiencing serious consequences. And to compound these issues, many pastors have forsaken their calling and have betrayed their flock.

The purpose of this article is to call attention to the major failings of the modern American church, identify how your pastor could be a threat to your freedom and even your safety and most importantly, address the question of whether or not your church will be turned into a FEMA camp? Is there anything that you can do about this?Your Pastor and 30 Pieces of Silver

Pastor’s have let Judas’ fate become their own.

We all know the story about how Judas betrayed Jesus for a relatively small amount of money. Today, almost all churches place money over spreading the true word of God. If you doubt the veracity of this statement then ask yourself when was the last time that your pastor spoke to you about the evils of abortion, Planned Parenthood selling aborted fetus body parts for profit, our government’s wars of occupation for corporate profit and the unwarranted attacks upon Christianity by the present administration? If your pastor isn’t speaking to you about the evils of these and other contemporary issues in American society, presented within the framework of Biblical doctrine, then you are not attending a church that preaches the word of God.

In Timothy 6:10, it says that the “For the love of money is the root of all evil…”. And your pastors have sold out their flock for a small tax break that we refer to as a 501-C-3 tax exemption. However, when a church travels down this slippery slope, it ultimately sells its soul to the devil.

501-d (1)[4]501[5]Is your church a friend or foe with regard to your salvation? Is your church a 501-C-3 tax exempt church? Is your church an agent of the government? If your church leadership does not condemn anything controversial, no matter how antithetical to the word of God, you are not worshiping in a Christian church. If your church is a 501-C-3 tax exempt church, your church is not a church of God.

If your church is a 501(c)(3) organization, then your church has a significant financial motivation to not truthfully interpret the true message of the Bible. The tax exempt status of being a 501(c)(3) organization is the other cornerstone of this shift away from allegiance to God and towards worshiping our new Savior, the federal government. Unless I missed the fact that God personally rewrote sections of the Bible, your pastor’s failure to stand up to the liberalism of the New World Order should have tipped you off that something was terribly wrong with your church.

According to the Internal Revenue Service, no substantial part of a religious, tax exempt church may engage in any activity which may be attempting to influence legislation and the church may not intervene in political campaigns. In other words, if the government decides to secretly disappear dissidents under the NDAA and/or Jade Helm, the church must remain silent or risk losing its tax exemption. If the government continues to expand its infanticide policies by extending the murder of babies to include post-delivery abortion, then the church must remain silent. If the government engages in any heinous, genocidal act, such as the murder of 1.2 million Iraqi’s, under the false pretense of looking for weapons of mass destruction, the church must remain silent or risk losing the tax advantages for being a 501 (c)(3) tax exempt organization in a case of money over God.

The Clergy Response Team

Serving government over God!

Many of your 501-C-3 pastors have gone so far as to put on the uniform of the enemy and it is called the Clergy Response Team. The Clergy Response Team falls under the umbrella series of programs known as DHS’ controlled National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (NOVAD) which is a non-profit, member organization which shares knowledge and resources throughout a disaster. The organization helps to prepare, respond, recover and to mitigate the damage caused by some unknown disaster presumably which lies in the future of humanity.

Amazingly, NOVAD claims to be a faith-based coalition which is structured as a non-governmental organization and operates on a national scale and is supported by tax dollars funneled to the DHS.

Instantly, Bible believing Christians should smell a rat. Since when, in the modern era, has the federal government ever sponsored organized religion? The answer is not since well before the advent of the atheist activist, Madalyn Murray O’Hair, who was successful in banning prayer in the public schools in 1963. Then why would the government suddenly fund and support a “faith-based organization” on a national scale? The simple answer is that Homeland Security is seeking to control our churches and ministers, before the impending economic train wreck comes to fruition inside of America. DHS desperately is seeking to control all Christians through the perversion of Romans 13 and this is one of two cornerstones in this movement designed to control Christian leaders. And this government foothold into the control of our churches begins with accepting the 501-C-3 tax exempt status which gives the government license to control the message and to ultimately pervert the word of God. There can only be one outcome for this kind of training, making the people docile when martial law is rolled out.

Mark 8:39 clearly states, “What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?” This page must be absent from almost all the pastor’s Bibles in today’s pulpits. Mark possessed the courage to pay a price for his faithfulness. This kind of faithfulness should be embraced by all who claim to lead our congregations in the name of God. The irony of the situation can be accurately expressed with the following gross misinterpretation of the Bible.

The Bastardization of Romans 13

DHS now demands that the pastors preach a bastardized version of Romans 13 during times of declared national emergency. Does your pastor command you to follow the will of the government because it is your Christian duty to do so under Romans 13? In the following paragraphs it will be revealed that your pastor is likely bought and paid for and you will be told how to prepare for martial law, “quarantining” and firearms confiscation and that it is your “Christian duty” to comply with the government.

When the Pope addresses the United , on September 15, and tells all Catholics worldwide to submit to the New World Order under Romans 13, will you obey this anti-Christian directive?

jesus and the money changers[7]The modern interpretation of Romans 13 is pure blasphemy. This scripture has been morphed into a doctrine espousing the “Divine Right of Kings” in which God has somehow chosen a king to ruthlessly rule over a people and it is incumbent upon the people to accept their “God-given fate”, The flock are commanded to “…submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.” This false interpretation is nothing but a divine coronation of a ruthless, self-serving government and Christians are expected to capitulate and honor the same kind of thievery, lawlessness and murder which inspired Jesus to expel the moneychangers from the Temple.
When Martial Law Comes to America, What Role Will Your Pastor Play?

Eight months ago, I interviewed Pastor Walter Mansfield by phone and the content related to this interview sent chills up and down my spine when I asked him about the Clergy Response Team.

Pastor Mansfield was recruited to become a member of the Clergy Response Team which would operate under the control of NOVAD and DHS. Mansfield’s revelations about his experiences are stunning and concerning at the same time.

Pastor Mansfield attended several briefings and he could barely believe his ears. He learned of the government’s plan to enact martial law as well as to implement forced population relocations. Mansfield emphasized that when martial law is enacted, the enforcement would be immediate. In other words, family members will be separated from each other and part of the training that the clergy received was how to comfort separated family members.

Pastor Mansfield emphasized that the FEMA/DHS drills were predicated on bioterrorism. This is exactly what my relocated FEMA source told me before he and his family left. The pastors were trained to go to homes were people refused to be relocated by the authorities and their immediate job was to convince the reluctant to willingly go to the relocation camps. Ostensibly, this was to be done in lieu of sending in the SWAT teams.

I asked Mansfield if FEMA camps were real and he stated that much of the clergy training focused around this scenario of pastors operating within the forced relocation centers. The main goal of a pastor assigned to a FEMA was to bring order and encourage compliance with DHS requests, hence, the emphasis on Romans 13.

The pastors were forced to sign non-disclosure. Interesting, the pastors were told not to quote Scripture. The DHS document which was prepared for the pastors clearly stated that Scripture had been used to “oppress” people in the past and the presenters strongly discouraged the its use. Please see the following excerpt from one of the DHS training manuals:

Healing Scripture and Prayer In the Pastoral Crisis Intervention

    “During a time of crisis people do go through a “crisis of faith.”
    Sometime quick mention of God and scripture may not be helpful. As we all know the Scripture has been used to oppress, dominate and at the same time used for healing and reconciliation- renewing of relationship with God and people. If the pastor senses it is appropriate to use the scripture and prayer, it must carefully be done for healing of victims not to uphold pastoral authority.” (Page 14)
    In other words, all legitimate pastoral authority was abrogated by the pastors who participated in the roundup of American citizens.
    Also on page 14 of the same training document, pastors were admonished to avoid “Unhealthy God talk….” Specifically pastors are ordered to avoid using references to God when helping people cope with the loss of a loved one:

    “4. God must have needed him/her more than you.”
    “5. God never gives more than we can handle.“

Pastor Mansfield also revealed that pastors will be issued badges under the Clergy Response Team program. Any pastor not displaying the badge, indicating that they have been trained under these guidelines, will not be permitted into the established and designated “DHS safety zones”. This reminds me of the banishment of religious figures from Plymouth Colony who, in good conscience, refused to go along with some of the extremism of that day. Along these lines, the Clergy Response Team is also a “Kool-Aid drinking program”. Pastors are absolutely forbidden to publicly to speak about any aspect of the program. If you were to ask your pastor if they are a FEMA trained pastor, they will not likely tell you.

Disturbingly, Pastor Mansfield reiterated several times that the number one job of these pastors is to calm down people and encourage their compliance within the people’s new surroundings.

Pastor Mansfield also stated that pastors will be utilized as informants. This violates the legal privilege of confidentiality between pastor and church-goer, that is currently recognized by law. All church-goers can no longer trust the sanctity of personal confessions and revelations made to pastors, priests or rabbis’. This one illegal act by DHS completely undermines the Christian Church in America!

Conclusion

At one time in American history, churches were viewed as sanctuaries for the downtrodden. That is not the case any longer for most churches and their pastors. Most of the medium to large size churches are completely compromised and are serving as virtual agents of the government. Pastor Mansfield told me that as many as 28,000 pastors have been recruited by the Clergy Response Team. Other estimates place this number as high as a 100,000 pastors have forsaken their duty God and have sold out to the dark side in order to save a little bit of tax money.

If what I am reading is correct and the Pope is declaring a New World Order on September 15 and the global currency reset will follow in a month and your money will be devalued by 90%, what will you do? Please allow me to suggest that if these people are correct in their projections, you have one month to obtain what you need to survive. Secondly, you should scrutinize your place of worship and leave if they are not preaching the unadulterated word of God. Form home Bible study groups, take back the salvation of your soul. This life is temporary, hell is forever!

Is your church going to turn into a FEMA camp? For most of us, it already has and the prisoner is your soul. DHS may not build bars around your church and confine your body, but the move on your soul has already been made. Exercise the free will to say no to this illegitimate authority.

Endnotes:

http://endtimesandcurrentevents.freesmfhosting.com/index.php?action=post;topic=530.180;num_replies=209


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 20, 2015, 12:25:42 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_a0O3TdthE


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 21, 2015, 11:37:16 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iata8CuzX-I


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 28, 2015, 04:18:22 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rro-RHlbg0


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 15, 2015, 01:29:16 pm
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1013152325546
Audio Inside Link: Constantine, Rome & The Donatists: The Beast Attacks the Baptists
Series:  The Baptist Battle for Liberty  · 3 of 3
10/13/2015 (TUE)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on November 23, 2015, 08:09:37 pm
Non-Profits Unhappy With IRS Proposed Rule On Charitable Giving

Non-profit groups are crying foul at the Internal Revenue Service’s proposed rule that would give organizations the option to collect and send to the IRS the social security numbers of their donors who give $250 or more.

Although the rule under consideration is optional for now, organizations are concerned the IRS may require them to collect and send such information to the agency in the future.

According to the proposed rule, “the collection of information is necessary to properly substantiate charitable contribution deductions under the exception to the general requirements for substantiating charitable contribution deductions of $250 or more.”

Organizations that are 501(c)(3) groups include charities, religious organizations, and universities. A non-profit contributor can claim a deduction on their annual income taxes from their donation to the organization. Those opposing the rule appear to come from all areas of the political spectrum.

“This is a huge issue for nonprofits — and the American public,” Tim Delaney, CEO of the National Council of Nonprofits, which opposes the rule, told Fox News.

Currently, organizations are only required to send a contributor who gives $250 or more “contemporaneous written acknowledgement (CWA)” which shows how much was donated and if any services or gifts received in return.

The rule under consideration by the IRS would instead, if a 501 (c)(3) decides to, require the organization to send donors’ social security numbers to the IRS on a form to the agency every year by February 28. Each donor would receive a copy of what is sent to the IRS.

“This is part of the IRS’s continued efforts to reduce the reach and effectiveness of non-profit organizations. Many of you will remember the proposed regulations from last year that would have narrowly defined ‘social welfare’ to shut down conservative organizations critical of the IRS,” stated Freedom Works, a 501c3 organization, about the rule.


Additionally, concerns about privacy and hacking of personal information could keep nonprofits away from asking their donors for their social security numbers to deliver to the IRS later on.

Republican media specialist, T.J. McCormack, told Fox News “there is a dog whistle aspect to this.”

“Everybody knows that everybody’s being hacked, and it’s just a little uncomfortable,” he said. “And there’s also this feeling that the government is overreaching…. and that still leaves a little bit of a bad taste in everybody’s mouth.”

Basil Smikle, the executive director of NYS Democratic party, agreed telling Fox News, “I do think the nonprofit lobby in this will push back really hard. My guess is that they will succeed,” he said.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/23/non-profits-unhappy-with-irs-proposed-rule-on-charitable-giving/#ixzz3sN3WsrjL


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 05, 2016, 04:28:15 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D6gZAKce6I


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 23, 2016, 07:01:46 pm
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-23/membership-for-health-sharing-ministries-soars-under-obamacare
2/23/16
Christians Find Their Own Way to Replace Obamacare

Health sharing ministries allow devout Americans a safety net of care, but regulators say more consumer protection is needed.


The use of so-called “health sharing ministries” has soared in the wake of President Barack Obama’s health care reforms, but long-skeptical regulators are raising new questions about the plans’ aims to assist in the cost of medical bills while remaining exempt from rules placed on traditional insurance.

Since Obamacare’s passage, health sharing membership has more than doubled, from about 200,000 to about 530,000, according to the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries. The law exempts health sharing members from having to abide by its “individual mandate,” which obligates people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.

Begun more than 20 years ago as an alternative approach to managing growing health care costs in the U.S., members “share” in medical bills instead of paying for insurance. In some ministries, participants receive a letter about another member’s medical bills each month and send a check for a set amount directly to that member. Sometimes they include notes of encouragement, Bible verses or even gifts.

[READ: How Obamacare Can Cover Your Over-the-Counter Meds]

The organizations require that members follow a code of conduct consistent with biblical values, which often means attending a church regularly and making a profession of faith. It means no sex outside of marriage, no drinking to drunkenness, no drugs and no tobacco outside of a cigar at a wedding or at the birth of a child. If a teenager were to become addicted to drugs, become pregnant or get a sexually transmitted disease, the associated medical costs would not be shared.

Fifty-four-year-old Pennsylvania resident Jennifer, who asked that her last name not be revealed to protect her privacy, said she and her family have participated in a Christian nonprofit plan provided by Samaritan Ministries for 18 years and passed on the tax-subsidized, private health insurance Obamacare offered through online exchanges.

Jennifer, whose family’s membership in the ministry means they won’t incur the $2,085 maximum fine families have to pay for going uninsured in 2016, estimates that members have shared $30,000 of her family’s medical bills. Every month, her family receives a letter about another member's medical need and sends a $405 check directly to that member. In the years they have been part of Samaritan Ministries, she estimates the monthly share has increased about four times after members voted to do so.

“I haven’t felt like I’ve been throwing my money away to grease some CEO’s pocket,” she says.
 
People say they join health sharing ministries for a variety of reasons – whether they’ve found exchange plans to be prohibitively expensive or because they prefer sharing medical costs with others who hold their faith and will pray for their medical hardships. Some say they don’t want to pay into a plan that violates their religious objections, such as those that cover abortions or emergency contraception, the latter of which is obligated under Obamacare for all private plans.

“We do know that people are objecting to the requirement of contraception as coverage or to not being allowed to find a plan that doesn’t offer it,” says Twila Brase, co-founder and president of Citizens Council for Health Freedom, a nonprofit based in St. Paul, Minnesota, that has encouraged enrollment in health sharing.

But critics say the plans offer members no guarantee their medical bills will be shared, and ministries aren’t obligated to include a range of care that insurance companies are, such as mental health, preventive care, birth control, dental and vision for children, or managing pre-existing conditions. 

Commissioners or judges in Washington, Kentucky and Oklahoma tried to shut health sharing ministries down in recent years, but state lawmakers stepped in, allowing them to run without the same regulations insurance companies face. According to the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries, 30 states have such exemptions.

Under Obamacare, meanwhile, health insurance plans are required to include a range of medical services – some of which come at no cost to patients.

“This strikes me as having a lot of the features that many people were looking to get rid of prior to the Affordable Care Act,” says Kevin Lucia, senior research professor at Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms.

Some people, however, have complained that the plans include services they never wanted or asked for in the first place. Tim Jost, professor of law at the Washington and Lee University School of Law, says he’s concerned people may be joining ministries for reasons other than religious convictions.

“I’m concerned that you have people joining because they’re trying to find cheap coverage or because they’re ideologically opposed to the Affordable Care Act, or people who aren’t committed,” he says.

He points out that those who sign up because of inexpensive monthly sharing may not understand all the terms they are agreeing to and also may not be committed to making the ministries work.

For its part, another group called Christian Healthcare Ministries does not see itself as protesting Obamacare.

“A health cost sharing ministry isn’t anti-Obamacare; in reality, it’s part of the total approach to health care cost support in America,” says Lauren Gajdek, a spokeswoman for the group. “We aren’t a protest movement; we’re part of the solution.”

Rachel Sachs, academic fellow at the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology and Bioethics at Harvard Law School, says some academics are concerned that the sudden growth in membership within health sharing ministries could threaten the private, individual health insurance market. Members of sharing ministries tend to be healthier because they avoid risky behavior, meaning that people who are sicker or have more expensive conditions to manage turn to the marketplace or to publicly funded Medicaid because ministries won’t share in many of their health needs.

This results in adverse selection, particularly as the federal government and states are trying to enroll healthy, young citizens in tax-subsidized private insurance so they can balance the costs for people whose medical needs are more expensive and complex.

“I think health sharing ministries seem to be terrific institutions for most of the people in them, but I do have concerns about their effects externally,” Sachs says.
 
Lucia also points out that, because coverage is so limited under the ministries, people who initially sign up are likely to enroll in more traditional insurance when they actually get illnesses that require long-term management, citing hypothetical examples such as Type 1 diabetes, needing treatment for psychiatric disorders or the onset of multiple sclerosis.

Regulators and academics are also concerned about internal effects on members. Because health sharing ministries are not regulated by any outside body, members cannot go to state insurance commissioners with a complaint as they would with typical insurance. If a ministry runs out of money, they are not required to have reserves that would handle unusually expensive cases.

“When it’s regulated as an insurance product you have a structure behind it,” Lucia says. “They are working on behalf of you to make sure that what you bought is covering what it’s supposed to. … You need to know the regulatory body is there to make sure you’re not getting shortchanged.”

Lack of oversight resulted in mismanagement in the past. Christian Healthcare Ministries, formerly known as the Christian Brotherhood Newsletter, was placed under court-ordered receivership in 2000 after members complained to the Ohio attorney general’s office about $34 million in unpaid claims. The Rev. Bruce Hawthorn, founder of the newsletter, and his nephew, Daniel Beers, were found liable for civil and solicitation fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and unjust enrichment.

The lawsuit was filed by the Ohio attorney general and the mission associated with the newsletter in an attempt to recover donations attorneys say were used to buy luxury houses, motorcycles, fund high salaries, vacations and the living expenses of a stripper. Hawthorn and family members were ordered to pay $14 million in punitive and compensatory damages.

To help avoid circumstances like this, under Obamacare ministries must conduct annual audits performed by an independent accounting firm, which are to be made publicly available upon request. Christian Healthcare Ministries now has an independent board of directors, and no board member is an employee or relative of an employee with the exception of the president, according to a spokeswoman for the group.

In 2007, members of another group, Medi-Share, filed a lawsuit in Montana claiming the ministry refused to pay for heart-valve surgery after an infection, saying it was a pre-existing condition. A pastor in Nevada also sued Medi-Share after it refused to pay for treatment of a heart condition, eventually reaching a settlement. Medi-Share is no longer available in the state.

In Oklahoma, members shared in $450,000 of treatment for Karen Niles, a woman who had a brain tumor. In 2008, Medi-Share told her it wouldn’t continue to share in treatment costs because the state regulators at the time had ordered the group to cease its operations. Niles sued, claiming the real reason for the denial was that Medi-Share didn’t have the money.

The case was resolved through arbitration, which found in favor of Medi-Share. The ministry didn’t continue to share in costs, and Niles joined a high-risk, expensive health insurance pool to get surgery.

“Getting together with a group of like-minded people sounds good and works well until it doesn’t,” says a spokesman from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. “You don’t have any protections in terms of making sure your claims can be paid.”

Health sharing ministries typically don’t let members sue, and some immediately drop members who do so. Disagreements have been settled by member panels. 

They vary in whether they have safety-net funds in place for people who lose their jobs, exceed a maximum sharing amount where it exists or face pre-existing conditions. Members understand that sharing is never guaranteed, leaders of the organizations say.

At Samaritan Ministries, members vote themselves on what should be covered, and individuals can appeal decisions to a panel of 13 randomly selected members. At times this has resulted in policy changes. James Lansberry, executive vice president for the organization, says he’s seen about four disputes in 21 years: one is in process, another involved membership status and another resulted in needs not being shared.

In the fourth case, which resulted in sharing, a female member who needed tubal litigations asked for Samaritan Ministries to share in costs, as her doctor said it would be life-threatening for her to get pregnant again. The panel decided to approve her appeal, and moving forward the organization has changed its policy to share costs for other women who face the same medical need.

Samaritan Ministries would not disclose the case in which sharing was rejected, saying it needed to protect members’ privacy.

“We can tell you that in the membership status appeal, the person was not meeting his membership responsibilities,” a spokesman for the group said. “We had given him multiple opportunities before terminating the membership. The member panel indicated that we should have ended his membership sooner than we did.”

Tony Meggs, president and CEO of Christian Care Ministry, acknowledges that to people who aren’t Christians the structure of health sharing ministries will appear odd and says the model isn’t for everyone.

“Someone who isn’t of the faith doesn’t have a familiarity of the commands and requirements of the scripture,” he says. “We live our lives in a way that we share in each other’s needs. That’s a biblical mandate Christ gives us in scripture.”

When asked about what can be done when families have a teenager who makes decisions outside of biblical teachings their parents hold, Meggs acknowledged the difficulty, saying: “Those are the types of issues we grapple with. Our process of grappling with them is to take the hard questions and decisions and to give them to the members to decide.” 

Still, the organization doesn’t police its members. If they discover through a medical bill that someone has engaged in activity outside of biblical teachings, they encourage members to recommit themselves to the guidelines.

Ocieanna Fleiss, 46, a mom in Seattle who home-schools her four kids, faced $125,000 in medical bills after a sudden cardiac arrest five years ago. Her husband had been laid off in 2008 after the mortgage crisis, and they took several part-time jobs as they struggled to make ends meet.

Her husband told her Medi-Share, the health sharing ministry they belonged to, would share in all but $1,000 of the cost. “That’s when I started weeping because it was such an amazing relief,” she says.

The organization had also shared in $20,000 in costs after her husband broke his ankle. It did not, however, cover her son’s ongoing care for Type 1 diabetes after he was diagnosed last year, though Medi-Share did share the costs of the initial hospital visit. The hospital they were using helped sign him up for Medicaid – the state-federal program for low-income Americans – to assist the Fleisses with costs of insulin and other care.

Fleiss says the experience did not discourage their membership to Medi-Share, but added that she was fine with adding Medicaid in order to provide for her family.

“We knew going into it,” Fleiss says. “Medi-Share protected us from financial despair.”


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 12, 2016, 12:25:26 pm
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=41216617550
Separaton of Church and State: The Biblical Principles and the American Application - Jerald Finney
4/12/2016 (TUE) 
Audio: http://www.sermonaudio.com/playpopup.asp?SID=41216617550


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 18, 2016, 07:34:28 pm
Trump vows to end ban on churches endorsing candidates

‘We’re going to let evangelicals, we’re going to let Christians and Jews and people of religion talk without being afraid to talk,’ says presumptive Republican nominee   

http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-vows-to-end-ban-on-churches-endorsing-candidates/

They can already do that, but they want to worship the almighty dollar than GOD


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on July 22, 2016, 11:16:11 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7BjGdduGvI


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 08, 2016, 09:13:00 pm
This is by far the most balanced teaching on this issue (a lot of the others I've heard are at one extreme or the other).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWyfB-fw6Qk


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 31, 2016, 12:27:24 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2NHMNqRKB0


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 08, 2016, 02:37:48 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJRDkgY4p_I


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on February 03, 2017, 07:11:29 pm
Trump’s Promise to Evangelicals: I Will 'Destroy' the Johnson Amendment

On Thursday, President Donald Trump told thousands of faith leaders he would destroy a law that keeps pastors from speaking politically from the pulpit.  “I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution. I will do that, remember,” he promised at the annual National Prayer Breakfast. ....

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2017/february/trump-rsquo-s-promise-to-evangelicals-i-will-destroy-the-johnson-amendment


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on April 10, 2017, 07:28:04 pm
Study: Increasing Number of Americans ‘Love Jesus but Not the Church’
Denison Forum on Truth and Culture

An official who served in the Obama administration has revealed that the administration was aware that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had access to chemical weapons.

This news emerged after forces of Assad dropped deadly chemical weapons on Syrian civilians in the town of Khan Sheikhoun last Tuesday. More than 80 people were killed in the attack, including at least 10 children.

In response to the attack, President Trump approved the launch of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles targeting a Syrian airbase.

Now, the situation in Syria and the U.S.’s involvement is complicated by the fact that the Obama administration allegedly had knowledge that Assad still had chemical weapons, despite what the administration had told the public.

"We always knew we had not gotten everything, that the Syrians had not been fully forthcoming in their declaration," Tony Blinken, a former deputy secretary of state and former deputy national security adviser under Barack Obama, told the New York Times, as reported by the Washington Examiner.

John Kerry, Secretary of State in the Obama administration, had praised an agreement the U.S. made with Syria in 2013 that purportedly ensured Assad did not have access to chemical weapons. Kerry even said in 2014 that the agreement ensured Syria had gotten rid of “100 percent” of its chemical weapons.

Many have criticized the administration for this apparent dishonesty, but others maintain that the blame rests with Assad who they say did not disclose all relevant information to the U.S. 

http://www.christianheadlines.com/blog/study-increasing-number-of-americans-love-jesus-but-not-the-church.html


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 19, 2017, 12:01:00 pm
(http://media.sermonaudio.com/gallery/photos/CooleyJason-02.jpg)

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=51917533540
Is Donald Trump The Next Constantine? 501c3 & Donalds Decree
Series:  OPBC ONLINE Radio Show  · 4 of 4
5/19/2017 (FRI)
Audio: http://www.sermonaudio.com/saplayer/playpopup.asp?SID=51917533540


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2017, 05:37:26 pm
http://www.wnd.com/2017/06/supremes-side-with-preschool-in-major-church-state-decision/
6/26/17
Supremes side with preschool in major church-state decision
Blocking religious institutions from taxpayer funding 'unconstitutional'


The state of Missouri violated the First Amendment by refusing to allow a child care center to participate in a state-funded playground program solely because of its church affiliation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision released Monday.

“The [Missouri] department’s policy violated the rights of Trinity Lutheran under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment by denying the church an otherwise available public benefit on account of its religious status,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts regarding the case brought by Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia.

The church had applied for a benefit that was routinely available to early learning centers in the state but was rejected by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources only because of its faith affiliation.

The Supreme Court said on Monday: “This court has repeatedly confirmed that denying a generally available benefit solely on account of religious identity imposes a penalty on the free exercise of religion. … The department’s policy expressly discriminates against otherwise eligible recipients by disqualifying them from a public benefit solely because of their religious character. … The department’s policy puts Trinity Lutheran to a choice: It may participate in an otherwise available benefit program or remain a religious institution. When the state conditions a benefit in this way, [precedent] says plainly that the state has imposed a penalty on the free exercise of religion that must withstand the most exacting scrutiny.”

more


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 25, 2017, 05:09:52 pm
Jubilee Park to 'make a real difference' in southern Dallas with new mental health services

7/23/17

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/health-care/2017/07/22/jubilee-park-make-real-difference-southern-dallas-new-mental-health-services

Ben Leal, CEO of Jubilee Park and Community Center, remembers when the center's neighborhood near Fair Park was known as "the military zone."

Back then, the police wouldn't come when called and Leal spent nearly every morning with volunteers in the Jubilee neighborhood cleaning alleys and streets filled with trash, used condoms and old dime bags for drugs.

But much has changed since the community center first opened its doors in 1997. Now, the corners have security cameras and crime has dropped 67 percent, according to tracking by the center.

And more change is on the way July 25, when The Old Church at Jubilee Park will begin hosting new mental health care services through a partnership with the community center and Jewish Family Service of Greater Dallas. The church is on Gurley Avenue, across the street from the community center.

For Leal and others who believe mental health services in South and southern Dallas have been lacking for years, the new programs — including family therapy, play therapy and individual counseling — are a chance "to make a real difference."

He noted that in Jubilee Park, 99 percent of children in the center's lengthy list of programming, from after-school programs to summer camp, qualify for free or reduced-price lunches. The average household income is just below $15,000.

"When you're growing up in poverty, you're already dealing with trauma and stressors in your life," Leal said. "These children are in need, and these families are in need of an outlet, someone to talk to, someone to speak out with. I think that's why it's so great that we have Jewish Family Service with us now."
For the children

Maria Andrande has lived in the Jubilee neighborhood for 20 years and thinks the new services will make a big difference.

Andrande said she plans to seek help, too, to have someone outside of her family who will listen.

The new programming at the church will have two clinicians, both bilingual, and a psychiatrist, who will be able to provide prescriptions to clients.

In addition, clients will be able to receive individual counseling, diagnostic evaluation, family therapy, child play therapy and more.

Play therapy is specifically for children ages 3 to 12 who have difficulty verbalizing their emotions. This form of therapy lets kids use toys like words to play out their anxieties, fears, aggression and other emotions and thoughts, according to Gustavo Barcenas, one of the center's new therapists.
Making an impact

"There are lots of organizations that acknowledge that mental health is a significant issue. It's a bigger step to say not only do we acknowledge it, but we have the conviction to take action steps to make mental health services available," said Fleisher, who retired as CEO in March. "The results will prove themselves."

A grant for $162,000 paid for a part-time psychiatrist and two full-time clinicians to provide play therapy, diagnostic testing and counseling services.

The grant came from The Rees-Jones Foundation, an organization that has funded mental health services in Dallas since 2006.

Since it began, the foundation has awarded 167 grants totaling nearly $27 million to help improve mental health services in Dallas, according to Adrian Cook, the foundation's director of research and evaluations.

Jewish Family Service is providing staff to Jubilee through The Rees-Jones Foundation.

Terese Stevenson, the foundation's vice president of grants, said Jubilee is an example of how the foundation wants to provide "not just access to services, but access to high-quality services that are going to make an impact.

"We're very focused on ensuring that all children in our communities who are struggling with mental health issues have counseling and therapy. We see that there's such a large percentage of the population that have mental health issues and if those aren't addressed early they can obviously lead to some very negative consequences in the lives of young people."

The Foundation and Jewish Family Service wanted mental health services locations in southern Dallas, where mental health options are limited.

Ariela Goldstein, director of clinical services at Jewish Family Service, thinks "every community needs to have mental health services equally to medical services." She said that is because "whether it's poverty, life stressors, losses, special needs, you name it, you have to have that support."
Feeling understood

Another important factor in providing the services is making sure that the providers can relate to their clients. About 79 percent of the Jubilee community is Hispanic, so having therapists on board who speak Spanish will "let people feel heard and understood," said Nancy Hall, the new family therapist.

"Lots of times with trauma, the way we deal with it is we learn to experience it, we learn to tolerate it, and we accept it," she said. "We're just part of that wraparound model that is going to intercede for children, that is going to make a difference at an early age."

Barcenas, the play therapist at Jubilee, said that being culturally sensitive is an important part of mental health help. Stigma, he said, is already a deterrent for many ethnic communities, but bringing in people who "could understand more of the culture" will make long-term help more effective.

"A lot of clients actually don't come because of the language barrier," he said. "As a counselor, we need to be trained in how to provide culturally sensitive interventions."

For more information about Jubilee Park and Community Center, click here

CORRECTION, 11:30 a.m., July 25, 2017: An earlier version of this story incorrectly said that Michael Fleisher is the former CEO of Jubilee Park and Community Center. Fleisher is the former CEO of Jewish Family Service.


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2017, 08:05:28 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOCvsB2ObPI&t=0s


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Mark on August 26, 2017, 07:43:20 pm
'Taxman Has No Business' Editing Sermons, but Atheist Group Is Suing IRS to Do It

The Freedom From Religion Foundation has filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump and IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, asking a Wisconsin federal court to order the IRS to enforce the 1954 Johnson Amendment.

Under that law, the IRS has required churches to censor their sermons, forbidding non-profits and churches from engaging in politics, and taking away their tax-exempt status if they do.

President Trump issued an Executive Order in May, stating the IRS should not enforce the regulations. FFRF then filed its lawsuit, calling on the IRS to start enforcing the amendment.

A group of religious leaders told the court this week that the government nor FFRF should be allowed to edit sermons.

In the case, the proposed defendant-intervenors are Rev. Charles Moodie of Chicago City Life Center, Wisconsin-based Pastor Koua Vang of Hmong Baptist Ministry, Father Patrick Malone and Father Malone's church, Holy Cross Anglican Church of Milwaukee. 

The non-profit Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is representing these leaders.

Becket asked the Court to reject FFRF's lawsuit as a violation of the separation of church and state, writing, "There is a reason that the IRS has never actually enforced its regulations against internal church speech: because it knows it won't hold up against a First Amendment defense."

"Even in the context of public governmental religious speech, courts have been clear that '(g)overnment may not seek to define permissible categories of religious speech.' Town of Greece, 134 S. Ct. at 1822 (upholding legislative prayer). That is even more true for the internal church teachings at issue here," Becket continued.

"Pastors, priests, imams, and rabbis shouldn't have to get the IRS's permission just to preach candidly to their congregations," said Daniel Blomberg, legal counsel at Becket. "IRS sermon censorship is bad for the church and it's bad for the state. This is one place where a little more separation of church and state would go a long way."

"While Americans have good-faith disagreements about religion and politics, we should all agree that the taxman has no business telling religious leaders what to say during worship services," he continued.

http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2017/august/religious-liberty-attorney-taxman-has-no-business-editing-sermons


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 13, 2017, 06:03:18 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcXxM1vemyI&t=0s


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 14, 2017, 01:08:30 am
^^ Lawson mentioned to give to Samaritan's Purse (Franklin Graham's organization).

Lawson's church is a non-501c3, KJB-only church - he DEFINITELY should know better. He's not being ignorant at all.

I don't expect a preacher to be perfect, but nonetheless one that acts RESPONSIBLY. This is just me, but I believe Lawson has some sinister motives. Again, we're dealing with THE GRAHAMS (and the chaplain team for disaster responses) here. We're not dealing with a pastor who endorses a somewhat controversial guy (ie, Peter Ruckman), which itself is a non-issue anyways. (ie, I don't like Ruckman, but it doesn't bother me whether or not others like him)


Title: Re: The 501c3 Thread
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 12, 2017, 05:25:25 pm
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article178393071.html
‘Kneel-In’ protest planned outside stadium before Panthers-Eagles game

By Joe Marusak And Michael Gordon

October 11, 2017 8:42 PM

A “Kneel-In” protest outside of tonight’s Panthers-Eagles football game was inspired by the recent police shooting of Ruben Galindo, one of the event organizers said.

The demonstration is part of a controversial movement sweeping through the country and its most popular sport. Bishop Kevin Long of Temple Church International-Charlotte said Thursday night’s event outside of Bank of America Stadium will have a local bent.

“Not only does our protest include Mr. Galindo, it was inspired by the recent discovery of his unfortunate and unnecessary demise,” Long told the Observer on Thursday.

Video of the Sept. 6 incident was released last week under a court order at the request of the Observer and the Charlotte nonprofit, Action NC.

The footage shows Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officers opening fire on the 29-year-old after a brief confrontation outside his home. Police Chief Kerr Putney says lethal force was used – and justified – in the stand-off because Galindo refused to put down a gun. Galindo had his hands in the air when he was shot, less than 4 seconds after police first ordered him to drop his weapon.

Police-shooting experts who have watched the video questioned whether Galindo posed the “imminent threat” necessary to justify the use of deadly force, and whether the officers gave Galindo enough time to respond to a series of commands about his handgun. Galindo had called 911 that night to ask police to pick him up for a future court date. He also told dispatchers that he had a gun but it was not loaded. Police say the handgun recovered at the scene was empty.

The case remains under investigation by the Mecklenburg County District Attorney’s Office and police.

“The Galindo tape is disgusting,” said Braxton Winston, a Charlotte activist and Charlotte City Council candidate. “It’s one of the most egregious forms of police-shooting videos that I’ve ever seen.”

Robert Dawkins of Action NC, who helped persuade a judge to release the footage, has complained for days on social media that the case has not drawn the attention it deserves, and urging other local groups to become publicly involved.

“Tell me what U have 2 do 2 get national coverage for police killings?” Dawkins tweeted over the weekend. “Cause I can’t figure out why nobody wants to cover Galindo case in CLT.”

Thursday’s 7:30 p.m. event at Mint and Graham streets by the new Pastors and Community Leaders Coalition might change that. Nearly 100 pastors and community leaders plan to take part in the “Kneel-In,” Long said.

The protest, which organizers say will draw participants mostly from the Carolinas, intends to highlight ongoing police brutality and social and racial injustice, just as former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick did while the national anthem was played before a 2016 NFL game, Long said.

The protests at NFL games have drawn the ire of President Donald Trump and set off a coast-to-coast debate on respecting the flag vs. the players’ rights to comment on public issues.

In a statement Wednesday night, the coalition said the kneel-in aims to shed light on “police brutality, lack of accountability for officers who’ve killed innocent and/or unarmed citizens, and the high rates of unemployment for minorities.”

“This is a call for accountability,” the coalition said. “Kneeling is merely the method we have chosen, it is not the message in its entirety. The message is that there is a deep and very wide gulf between the Black and Brown communities and others in this country, and we are not compelled to stand that.”

Other kneel-in protests are scheduled in Baltimore and other cities in coming days, according to the coalition.

The last demonstrations outside the stadium followed the September 2016 shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, an African-American shot outside his home in north Charlotte. Police say Scott also refused to put down a gun.

Georgia Ferrell, the mother of a Charlotte man fatally shot by a CMPD officer in 2013, is expected to attend the Thursday night event, Long said.

According to Dawkins, the Charlotte event initially did not include the Galindo case. But he said Thursday that he has been assured by Long that the oversight has been corrected.

Long told the Observer that the protest organizers “are not excluding members of the Latino community.”

“We do not want the narrative hijacked that this is exclusively a black issue,” he said. “It’s about people of color who at a disproportionate rate have been the victims of unnecessary and unprovoked police shootings.”

Across town tonight, Putney will meet with the Latino community to discuss issues surround the shooting during a 6:30 p.m. gathering in north Charlotte.