The paperwork doesn’t give the assembly authorization. It allows people who donate to the assembly to claim a deduction on their taxes. That’s it.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
501(c) status
- Thread starter MemeFan
- Start date
Ecclesiastes 8:11
"Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil."
You have lost nothing since you never had any sovereignity.
If you had sovereignity, first state would be state, and second anything involving you would requires state first to ask permission.
State can't send it's troops legally into another state (it's invasion and crime), unless it has receive permission first. Yet, cops can visit you anytime. And regarding warrant, state (cops) asks itself (judge) can it pay a visit, never you.
Also, regarding courts, you and state would first have to agree which court is relevant if you were sovereign. Instead state will use it's courts and make decision for you.
So it has nothing regarding 501(c) which proves 501(c) can't be trap.
It is a slippery slope that doesn’t look dangerous when taking that first step.
The obvious answer is to follow the same path that you are and not build a business/corporation out of a fellowship.
We don’t have any examples of anything other than organic fellowships in the NT. Even the title of pastor was just part of a list of jobs that were to be expected to exist in each fellowship. Nobody declared them the spiritual leader.
This is a fair assessment and a measured and thoughtful opinion. Unlike the hysteria that was getting batted around by a few of the participants in the conversation.
The size of a church plays a role. A small congregation can probably get by without any status as a separate legal entity. Those mega churches need it for legal liability. Do you really trust the other 10,000 people in the church and are prepared to be financially liable if they screw up? No? Then incorporate.
And what is next step of slippery slope?
We've already seen several of them. Masks, and lockdowns, obviously. There'll be more with Bird Flu et al. And of course more Death by Lethal Injection. Probably with support of the CRT.
Final step is also obvious: Mark of the Beast. All the pieces are in place, from RFIDs and now biometrics, to constitutional over-rides (easy example, in US: if the one single class of property enumerated in the entire Constitution can be "infringed," and prior purchase restrained, and stolen without even a pretense of 'due process' - then what property can NOT be!?)
CBDC is arguably pretty close to the last tech piece; internet control (if you can't log on with a biometric ID, what good is your bitcoin?)
I know: Some here would rather ignore the trend. Fine. But why did He bother to warn us at all then?
Bad logic 101:
Said the mouse to the bear, looking a big steel set of jaws anchored to a tree:
"So it has nothing regarding cheese, which proves it can't be trap."
Said the mouse to the bear, looking a big steel set of jaws anchored to a tree:
"So it has nothing regarding cheese, which proves it can't be trap."
This is still unhinged.
State doing you favor by less taxation of donation is part of slippery slope towards dictatorship.
Neither of totalitarian control requires tax-free donation. Making priest disappear isn't problem for regime.
Here is top Catholic priest from Croatia persecuted by Communists:
Aloysius Stepinac - Wikipedia
I don’t believe in mega churches, so I don’t subscribe to their needs.
I’d rather see 500 20 person fellowships than a church of 10,000.
I know all of the arguments, I was part of an almost-mega church.
Edit to add;
The collapse of a mega can create greater destruction in people and families than you can possibly produce from smaller congregations. And don’t bother with the “If it’s done right…”. The US is a great example.
If it goes up, it will come down.
Last edited:
Another reports from Tax Foundation:
taxfoundation.org
So basically, most of organizations under 501(c) aren't religious. They are health insurance, university, and education sector making sure their business-like income isn't taxable.
It also interesting that business-like income makes 23% of religious organizations income. So income would be dominately be made by megachurches. So megachurches are actually combination of large Lord's service and business organizations selling religious theme materials.
Reining in America’s $3.3 Trillion Tax-Exempt Economy
For over a century, lawmakers have exempted politically favored organizations and industries from the tax code. As a result, the tax-exempt nonprofit economy now comprises 15 percent of GDP, roughly equal to the fifth-largest economy in the world.
taxfoundation.org
So basically, most of organizations under 501(c) aren't religious. They are health insurance, university, and education sector making sure their business-like income isn't taxable.
It also interesting that business-like income makes 23% of religious organizations income. So income would be dominately be made by megachurches. So megachurches are actually combination of large Lord's service and business organizations selling religious theme materials.
Hold up, don't make assumptions. Many churches actually own assets that bring in an income. The church we attend has a manse, which when not needed by a pastor is leased out to tenants. That leas is a "business-like income" and forms a sizeable chunk of the church's income. Other churches have instead of a single-purpose "church" building, a multi-purpose hall, which they lease out through the week for other purposes but use on Sundays for services. Again, business-like income. Others even own assets like farmland which have been donated specifically so that the income from it will support the church. These are not megachurches, just regular sized congregations. 23% sounds reasonable for many normal churches, not megachurches.
Have you been watching?
What makes you assume those corporate entities aren't pushing "religion"?
It's just not the one you think.
Makes me wonder about the IOC...
I would be expecting megachurches to have more income sources. And pastor's celebrity should influence this. This is my reasoning.
Just out from the Indiana Attorney General.
Attorney General Todd Rokita provides guidance to religious leaders and churches on how to participate in the election season.
It highlights much of what has been discussed in this thread.
Attorney General Todd Rokita provides guidance to religious leaders and churches on how to participate in the election season.
It highlights much of what has been discussed in this thread.
WOW !!!!!
I just noticed that you rewrote my questions.
It wasn't clever just disingenuous.
An "assembly" that is not beholden to the This State doesn't have to ask permission to speak on anything that He guides His people to, whether somebody considers it "partisan" or not.
(HINT: There is a Preferred Candidate, and the Other. Guess where the "burden of proof" ends up.)