C4K, what makes you think that you have any God-given right to control what another pastor says?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Pastor Accused of Politics From Pulpit
- Thread starter RodH
- Start date
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
??
Where did I make that claim, cmg? The government who supports his church through tax breaks is a different matter.
Churches want the benefits of tax exemption without any responsibilty. Refuse tax expempt status and say whatever you want.
Jim,
If we simply preached the whole counsel of God the people in the church would have the ability to make decisions on their own, without pastors telling them how to think.
Where did I make that claim, cmg? The government who supports his church through tax breaks is a different matter.
Churches want the benefits of tax exemption without any responsibilty. Refuse tax expempt status and say whatever you want.
Jim,
If we simply preached the whole counsel of God the people in the church would have the ability to make decisions on their own, without pastors telling them how to think.
This thread is insane. The government never had any right to tax any church ever! C4K, you have been in Europe so long that you think that rights come from government and not God. LBJ was trying to destroy freedom. Now you are thinking like LBJ. What next?
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
What "right" do churches have to be tax exempt? It is a privilage. What right does the government have to tax any organisation?
That is what the evangelical pastors did in countries under communism.
I would never want to try and pastor people who don't allow themsleves to think. Too many check their brains at the door of the building when they wouldn't dare do at any other location or issue.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
And too many pastors take advantage of that by trying to carry out their own political agenda. through their listeners.
The US Supreme Court has ruled that the power to tax is the power to destroy. LBJ and the liberals want to destroy the church.
That may or may not be true. Just look at the cars in the parking lot. People today have more discretionary spending money than ever. They spend more on entertainment than any other single thing. If one were to add the mortgage and food together it would not add up to very much compared to their other bills. If families gave ten percent of their income it would only take ten families to pay the salary of the pastor. Sometime look at who gives ten percent or more of their income. You might be surprised.
People who are winning others to Christ and discipling them are not greedy with anyone. They are too busy doing the work God has called them to.
God's work is not dependent upon tax exempt status. Every pastor knows there are those who will pay the pastor less because they know he can claim a housing allowance. Personally when I was pastoring I would rather have taken no salary than to have a church that wouldn't work.
We live in a republic where our elected representatives act in our behalf. Majority rules but the minority has rights. The Bill of Rights gives the minority free speech and freedom of religion.
LBJ sought to abridge minority rights in 1954. He wanted to use the power of the government to stop free speech so that he himself could cover up some of his shady activities in Texas on his way to the top. LBJ sought to contradict the American Revolution and install government as the giver of rights--but Jefferson said that rights were God-given and inalienable.
LBJ sought to abridge minority rights in 1954. He wanted to use the power of the government to stop free speech so that he himself could cover up some of his shady activities in Texas on his way to the top. LBJ sought to contradict the American Revolution and install government as the giver of rights--but Jefferson said that rights were God-given and inalienable.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Just a note, I really (seriously) appreciate the tenor of this debate, even from those who disagree vehemently with me. Thanks to all.
Saying that, Jefferson is not scripture. His words were the words of a man, a Deist, at that, who really had not concept of a True God.
Saying that, Jefferson is not scripture. His words were the words of a man, a Deist, at that, who really had not concept of a True God.
From what I have heard your remark about Jefferson may be debatable. However, that is beside the question. We are talking about the intent of the Founding Fathers--and that intent remained until 1954. You almost imply that restoring freedom to the American church would require a stream of political statements from the pulpit. Furthermore, you have never explained selective enforcement of the law nor have you explained how there could be universal enforcement of the law. There are tens of thousands of churches. Are you going to require transcripts and tapes to monitor each church to check for violations? Finally, Falwell says that no church has ever lost tax-exemption.
King James Version.
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
King James Version.
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
CMG,
You will note that not once have I favoured selective enforcement. Your point about universal enforcement is well made though.
The feasability of enforcement does not change the point of whether it is right or wrong. Organisations who involve themselves in politics shoudl pay tax - IMHO it is that simple.
You will note that not once have I favoured selective enforcement. Your point about universal enforcement is well made though.
The feasability of enforcement does not change the point of whether it is right or wrong. Organisations who involve themselves in politics shoudl pay tax - IMHO it is that simple.
Terry_Herrington
New Member
CMG, you continually refer to LBJ and 1954 as the reason for this "offensive" law.
My question is that, since this law has been in effect for 50 years, why has not any republican president even attempted to change it? There have been times that the republican party has controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency, such as now, yet neither of the Bush boys or Reagan have done anything to stop it.
Also, I have watched Falwell on political television shows many times, yet I have never heard him even bring up this issue.
My question is that, since this law has been in effect for 50 years, why has not any republican president even attempted to change it? There have been times that the republican party has controlled both houses of Congress and the presidency, such as now, yet neither of the Bush boys or Reagan have done anything to stop it.
Also, I have watched Falwell on political television shows many times, yet I have never heard him even bring up this issue.
Alcott, you have hit the nail on the head again!
Dr. D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, has a petition on this issue. The petition reads:
As a concerned citizen, I am greatly disturbed that a law passed in 1954 places an I.R.S. "gag order" on our houses of worship. Local religious leaders play a vital role in preserving our culture. It is time to lift the "gag order" that has been placed on our churches and religious leaders. Please take a stand to restore free speech to our houses of worship.
Click here for source of the petition.
Also, Dr. Kennedy has an article on the subject posted on one of his church's website. It is called While Colonial-Era Pulpits Preached Liberty LBJ Law Silenced Church and dated Thursday, June 01, 2000.
While Colonial-Era Pulpits Preached Liberty LBJ Silenced Church by John Aman
Dr. D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, has a petition on this issue. The petition reads:
As a concerned citizen, I am greatly disturbed that a law passed in 1954 places an I.R.S. "gag order" on our houses of worship. Local religious leaders play a vital role in preserving our culture. It is time to lift the "gag order" that has been placed on our churches and religious leaders. Please take a stand to restore free speech to our houses of worship.
Click here for source of the petition.
Also, Dr. Kennedy has an article on the subject posted on one of his church's website. It is called While Colonial-Era Pulpits Preached Liberty LBJ Law Silenced Church and dated Thursday, June 01, 2000.
While Colonial-Era Pulpits Preached Liberty LBJ Silenced Church by John Aman
Rev. Falwell discussed this subject recently in an article published on his website. He said:
FRIGHT LETTERS TO CHURCHES ARE COMING
About this time each election year, AU sends what I term a "fright letter" to thousands of conservative evangelical pastors, telling them - quite incorrectly - that any use of voter guides, political discourse or other such activity could result in a loss of tax-exempt status for their churches.
However, no such letter is sent to African-American churches or to liberal main-line denominational churches. Traditionally, the Democratic candidates speak in many African-American churches during their presidential campaigns.
Last Sunday, July 18, Sen. John Edwards spoke in the pulpit of the St. Mark AME Church in Orlando. As reported in wire stories and on NBC Nightly News, the pastor of the church strongly endorsed the Kerry-Edwards ticket. As also shown on this same NBC broadcast, Sen. John Kerry, on April 4, spoke in a large African-American church where the pastor introduced him as "the next President of the United States."
Bill Clinton and Al Gore routinely conducted similar church-based campaigning.
Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards will certainly follow this tradition right up to election time. I have been documenting this "church activity on the left" for many years. Neither AU nor the so-called "mainstream media" have expressed any outrage over this seeming violation of IRS tax regulations. This glaring and gross hypocrisy is obvious to all but those who are blinded by their leftist biases.
Click here for Barry Lynn Is Trying To Scare Churches...Again by Rev. Jerry Falwell.
FRIGHT LETTERS TO CHURCHES ARE COMING
About this time each election year, AU sends what I term a "fright letter" to thousands of conservative evangelical pastors, telling them - quite incorrectly - that any use of voter guides, political discourse or other such activity could result in a loss of tax-exempt status for their churches.
However, no such letter is sent to African-American churches or to liberal main-line denominational churches. Traditionally, the Democratic candidates speak in many African-American churches during their presidential campaigns.
Last Sunday, July 18, Sen. John Edwards spoke in the pulpit of the St. Mark AME Church in Orlando. As reported in wire stories and on NBC Nightly News, the pastor of the church strongly endorsed the Kerry-Edwards ticket. As also shown on this same NBC broadcast, Sen. John Kerry, on April 4, spoke in a large African-American church where the pastor introduced him as "the next President of the United States."
Bill Clinton and Al Gore routinely conducted similar church-based campaigning.
Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards will certainly follow this tradition right up to election time. I have been documenting this "church activity on the left" for many years. Neither AU nor the so-called "mainstream media" have expressed any outrage over this seeming violation of IRS tax regulations. This glaring and gross hypocrisy is obvious to all but those who are blinded by their leftist biases.
Click here for Barry Lynn Is Trying To Scare Churches...Again by Rev. Jerry Falwell.
Terry_Herrington
New Member
CMG, I'm waiting for your answer as to why both Bush Sr. and Reagan did not change the 501-C-3 tax-exempt rules and allow churches to be involved in politics?
KenH
Well-Known Member
Terry, you see there are some folks, like cmg, who support the Republican Party in spite of the fact that it only gives them rhetoric for their issues with no follow through. Just as there are some folks who support the Democrat Party in spite of the fact that it only gives them rhetoric for their issues with no follow through.
That is why I cannot be wedded to any political party, not even the Constitution Party. I support candidates, not parties.
That is why I cannot be wedded to any political party, not even the Constitution Party. I support candidates, not parties.
If you had read Dr. Kennedy's posted article, you would not ask that question. Also, you have to look at history and see that the American people have voted for gridlock on purpose so that Ike had a GOP Congress for a couple of years and Bush has had a paper-thin margin in Congress, and other than those two examples, the government has been divided.
This is not really a political issue but the two of you are doing a fine job of pointing out that the Democrat Party is against giving freedom to churches. Also, if you would read Falwell's link, you would read of Democrat Party abuse of the LBJ system.
Ike became a Presbyterian while he was President. Reagan proclaimed one year as the year of The Holy Bible. Other than that, Evangelicals have had little influence. The SBC, for example, has spent the last 25 years kicking liberals out of authority within SBC institutions.
Life will be better when liberal influence wanes. Like the communist party, liberals are ideologues who never change.
This is not really a political issue but the two of you are doing a fine job of pointing out that the Democrat Party is against giving freedom to churches. Also, if you would read Falwell's link, you would read of Democrat Party abuse of the LBJ system.
Ike became a Presbyterian while he was President. Reagan proclaimed one year as the year of The Holy Bible. Other than that, Evangelicals have had little influence. The SBC, for example, has spent the last 25 years kicking liberals out of authority within SBC institutions.
Life will be better when liberal influence wanes. Like the communist party, liberals are ideologues who never change.