And so it begins.....

I don't necessarily disagree with you here, at least, to a point. I am stating my personal belief on the matter.

Can you worship God without giving Him praise? The very act of worship is praise to God.

Then you haven't been reading the same posts I have.

There's no such thing as a half or fake Christian. You're either a Christian or you aren't. If someone can lay all their principles and beliefs aside once they step out of the church, then they are only acting like a Christian, not being a Christian.

I don't want a particular church to impose what should or should not happen in our government. I also do not want the government imposing what should or should not happen in my church. That is the separation to which I refer. Would you not agree?

Not saying they can't. But the Sunday morning sermon is not the time, nor the place. If they want to discuss such things in their free, personal time, provided it is Godly conversation, then I have no issue.

There is a vast difference, to me, when a preacher is in the pulpit, supposed to be delivering a sermon about Jesus Christ and him crucified, and resorts to "preaching" about taxes, affirmative action, illegal aliens, etc.

There are some issues which do directly touch the bible and involve Godly living...adultery, murder, lying, etc. I have no issue with preaching on these subjects for the betterment of the congregation in their walk with God.

It may take some discernment to know what is and isn't appropriate to talk about in a sermon, but a minister should go in praying that he preaches what is right and true and what is taught in the scriptures on those things. He is there to feed the sheep, not tell them how to vote. Feed them the good food, and they will know what is right and wrong.

That's all I'm saying.

 

Okay...maybe churches that require tithes from their membership could be taxable, but ours does not.

What do you do with a church where the majority of members are over 65?

 

Whether I agree with you about what is said in church or not, a solution with which most of us would agree would be to abolish the IRS. Then we wouldn't be having this conversation. Vote Ron Paul, btw.:thumbs:

Don't get me wrong. I don't think we should be 501c3 even at the expense of the truth and our freedom to worship. I just don't see where it compromises our beliefs in the least, especially since I don't believe we should be talking politics from the pulpit anyway.

If, however, the government was to say "you must do this, or else lose your exempt status", I can cheerfully say we would lost our exempt status. We will not compromise the truth for the sake of a building. I would sooner the church close it's doors forever than to preach something contrary to the truth.

btw, Did I mention "Vote for Ron Paul"?:saint:

 

Yeah, good point. If churches did have to pay property taxes, would the amount of the over-65 exemption be based on the percentage of membership that is over 65?

 

And so it begins...

CK4, I have already mentioned the members of the church have already paid and paid and paid. Why should the money taken up in the offering be taxed again (even though it never goes into the coffer for services as we all expect)? You think that when they pay their taxes at work and pay their taxes at the grocery and at the gas station and at the doctors office and at the barber shop and at the farm feed store .......now we have to pay them again at the church or we cant have a policeman come and do a report for us on say maybe vandalism or whatever? The police and firemen usually show up after the show is over anyway. (14 yrs L.E. experience speaking here).

I am trying to help you all remember that in America we are supposed to have freedom of religion. Now if it is taxed it is not freedom. Please do not consider a compromise here.

Can we all say that if you are taxed in the congregation and if you pay it .......you have controls on you?

Bartimaeus

 

And so it begins......

Bro Reed, You and I are very close to one another in our ideals. I appreciate your opinions and positions. I just want to speak specifically if I can.
Under the 501 c3, a pastor cannot speak to his congregation concerning legislation in a state assembly that may or may not be passed concerning moral issues. I know it happens all the time. I know good men do speak about these kind of things but they just don't realize that they have signed an agreement not to.
What are some of these issues? What about state supported gambling laws? What about laws that outlaw pornography? What about laws that require child molesters to register? What about laws that legalize sodomy and or sodomite marriage?
You see when moral/scriptural issues become political and or legislated issues under the 501 c3 we have agreed to stay out of the ring. We cannot speak (again I know many do) to our congregations about them.
Some on the board say that if I say call your congressman and tell him to vote yes or no, I am no longer preaching about Jesus. It is in my view a very glib answer. The Lord Jesus has given us His word and it is very clear on these issues. The c3 has helped to muzzle the good pulpits across our country.
Bartimaeus

 

This is a very limited view of worship.

I am not aware of how a church could impose anything on the government. However the church should be as vocal as ayone else on the issues.

I have ever seen this happen nor have I heard of any specific occurances. I do hear claims of it in general which is not all tat convincing. I believ mot of them are made up.

Agai I believe reports of such are greatly exagerated. But the church shoud be as involved in politics as anyone else.

 

If that is the case then they should pay their taxes like everyone else.

I can compromise and agree that perhaps property and other taxes might be something I should reconsider. Not conceding yet, but willing to think about it.

However, why should my tithe ever gain me a tax exemption? How many churches serve the community in a real, tangible way like the Red Cross. Folks, we simply don't provide for that kind of service to the community in the vast majority of cases.

I contend that one of the biggest reasons for such fervency is pragmatic - if our tithe no longer gains tax exemption for us personally it will affect our pocketbooks. To my mind tax exemption should have no impact on how much I give, but how many give extra gifts in December to gain an extra tax benefit, not out of worship?

 

Well, in the states giving to charities will always do so. I personally do not keep record of my giving nor do I file it on my taxes. I do not feel like I have given if I get something back as a result of it.

In some cases they may not. But I see many doing so every day. The only problem I have with many of those is that when they do something in the community they want to see a return on their investment by expecting them to come to their church. If they see no return they will stop as they see it as a waste of the churches money.

I am not aware of anyone who holds this idea. The exemption on a tax return for most giving is not substantial enough to worry about. Its like trying to eat a squirrel. It is more work than it is worth.

 

According to Merriam-Webster:

Please tell me how you can worship God without giving Him praise. Every aspect of worship involves our giving glory/praise to God.

 

Since thse are not scripture lets appeal to a higher authority. So now you add the word glory. It can be said that anything we do gives God the glory but simply saying praise invokes mainly singing with most folks. I never know what misconstrued idea people have of worship these days.

 

They might possibly think that because our government has (had?) a longstanding precedent of supporting and encouraging religion.

A few examples:

"It is the duty of all wise, free, and virtuous governments to countenance and encourage virtue and religion."
John Jay Original Chief-Justice U. S. Supreme Court

Thomas Jefferson once assured a Catholic religious school that it would receive "the patronage of the government"
(Letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Nuns of the Order of St. Ursula at New Orleans on May 15, 1804)

Jefferson urged local governments to make land available specifically for Christian purposes;
(Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Bishop Carroll, September 3, 1801)

John Hancock wrote - "Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement."
(Independent Chronicle, Boston, November 2, 1780.)

In 1812 President Madison signed a federal bill which financially aided a Bible Society in its distribution of the Bible.

The U. S. Supreme Court declared in Zorach v. Clauson, (1952) -
"We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. When the State encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it follows the best of our traditions."


Tax breaks for churches are maybe the last remnant of government support for religion, and some churches are worried that even that may be taken away. The ACLU (itself a tax-exempt organization) has stated it's opposition to tax-exempt status for churches since 1970.