501(c) status

[Mark C]

And what I do know about a contract is that for any provision to be valid it actually has to be laid out in the contract.

Wrong. Sorry, but do a bit of research. Look up "adherent contract," or "warranty for fitness of purpose," or a hundred other things that are BINDING but not in the text - DEPENDING on the JURISDICTION!!!!! (Note: English common law differs from UCC.)

 

[Mark C]

Mainline churches were corrupt at start of last century, before 501(c) has arrived.

The Roman church was corrupt by the 4th century, but the corporate-state-church was a big part of WHY the Founders put the "establishment" and "free exercise" clauses in the First Amendment.

 

[MemeFan]

"Who is in charge" is either YHVH or it is "another master."

Read the 14th Amendment, and note "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." A 'person' is a legal "term of art." A 'corporation' is a "person." (Which no doubt surprises many.) But it does not have a soul.

But a corporate creation of the state (like a 501c(3) 'church') is a 'person' "subject to the jurisdiction" of its creator. Which is NOT, repeat NOT, YHVH.

Note, if you don't otherwise understand: A "US citizen" in Texas is NOT 'subject to the jurisdiction' of the King of France - even if he still existed.

You even ignored "item 3" - "extent of authority or control." Look again:

"a family matter beyond the GOVERNMENT's jurisdiction"

I didn't ignore point 3. It's just someone else in charge, not the governemnt.

As practical matter, it's humans who are in charge. It's true even if people claim it's LORD. Here just people claim to act in LORD's name. Only exception is when LORD personally arrives.

@Mark C, are you anarchist? If government shouldn't be in charge, then it's voluntary association.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Wrong. Sorry, but do a bit of research. Look up "adherent contract," or "warranty for fitness of purpose," or a hundred other things that are BINDING but not in the text - DEPENDING on the JURISDICTION!!!!! (Note: English common law differs from UCC.)

No. I’m not going to do that. God is not bound by the corrupt contractual shenanigans of men. A made up of system of regulations that are not publicized do not effect Him or His people. Jesus participated in taxation. He even used Caesar’s coins to do it. He is not going to allow me to be enmeshed in something I know nothing about and didn’t agree to. He’s more powerful than a sleazy IRS lawyer.

 

[Mark C]

Jesus participated in taxation. He even used Caesar’s coins to do it.

You didn't really understand either of those stories, did you?


PS> For those that might want to, this is an easy read:

“Licensed marriage” and SCOTUS | Come out of her, My people…

 

[Mark C]

@Mark C, are you anarchist? If government shouldn't be in charge, then it's voluntary association.

I'm not sure you know the meanings of either of those words: "anarchist" or "voluntary association."

And I am convinced you are utterly ignorant of the history and meaning of the American "Declaration of Independence." Before making stupid accusations, at least please listen to an explanation that I am quite sure you have never heard, but addresses the heart of your misunderstanding:

Meat - Declaration of Independence Special

I contend that the Declaration of Independence is the most important document ever written ORIGINALLY in the English language. And that it has never been more important to understand why...

biblicalfamilies.org

Then, and only then:

Do you understand what "Choose this Whom you will serve," means? OR - finally - why you cannot serve two masters?

Maybe, even the concept of "legitimate" government, at least in a "nation of law, not of men," might start to make sense.

 

[The Revolting Man]

You didn't really understand either of those stories, did you?


PS> For those that might want to, this is an easy read:

“Licensed marriage” and SCOTUS | Come out of her, My people…

I understand that you’re not a very serious person. There is no secret, third party declaration, not disclosed that God would considering binding on Him. You’re concocting some kind of behind the back crossed finger trick that trumps salvation. It’s just ridiculous.

 

[Michael Moon]

I don't believe Mark is saying Christians in registered churches are unsaved... @Mark C is that what you're saying?

Either way, I don't believe that (at least, I don't believe that is why they are unsaved). I do believe that the modern American church's ability to truly worship and teach is hindered by their incorporated status. I think even more damaging is the corporate structure adopted by most of them (which causes an even bigger gap between laity and clergy and wastes the resources of the assembled people).

My question (which still hasn't truly been answered) is what the practical next step is for an already incorporated and nonprofit church. Is it even possible to sell all the church property and transition to being an unregistered home church (is that even the best step)?

The story of IBT really didn't tell me anything I didn't know already. They didn't keep the nonprofit status but stayed a corporation. Then as a corporation they didn't pay taxes. The only thing surprising about the story to me was that the government was less evil than I thought it would be when forcefully removing them from the property.

 

[Mark C]

I don't believe Mark is saying Christians in registered churches are unsaved... @Mark C is that what you're saying?

If it could even be TWISTED into something even REMOTELY like that - the Revolting One would censor it. So, obviously, no.


I have said what I mean, and what I contend Scripture says - many, MANY times, and many ways: The Whore Church, direct descendant of the lost ten tribes, the whoring wife sent into exile for idolatry, and still in exile, serves "another master." They did then, still do.

The 501c(3) license is just another - obvious - proof. Indicator. Example. Warning.

 

[Mark C]

My question (which still hasn't truly been answered) is what the practical next step is for an already incorporated and nonprofit church. Is it even possible to sell all the church property and transition to being an unregistered home church (is that even the best step)?

The best solution - hindsight being key - is not to be entrapped in the first place. As the IBT lesson, at least in part, makes clear. "In for a penny, in for a pound."

I will suggest the only real solution is just "walk away." Such property belongs to 'another master'. (They/he/it "stole it fair and square.") A tough lesson learned.

Having been redeemed, learned the lesson, repented, returned - do not test Him, put Him to shame...again.

I do not know of a successful escape attempt. But I know of MANY who have had the same question.

As for the second part: You do not EVER 'ask permission' to DO THAT which you have a "God-given, Constitutionally-protected RIGHT to do." Even if some blind guides will tell you otherwise. What harm could it do? "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge."

Finally, an aside: I know better than to be caught trying to give "legal advice" on a public forum without a "license". (Zec would no doubt be the first to rat me out.)

This is a warning, explicitly from Scripture, with second witnesses (plural) from precedent, American 'law' (back when it existed) and history.

Even the way the question is phrased raises obvious red flags:
Are you trying to sell 'state-owned' property and avoid 'taxes' - some kind of fraud on that 'other master'? (Don't think I'm kidding! The FBI may cover up a Deep State Hit, but not a threat to the fiat system.) Don't fall for entrapment, it is nothing new.

 

[Earth_is-]

"Violate fundamental public policy."

Explains why all these 501c3 churches forbid polygyny. The public policy is that polygyny is illegal in the Western world. All of these 501c3 translations always mis-translate pro polygyny verses in the New Testament. The most popular one is Matthew 5:28. The Greek does not say "woman." It says "wife."

This tells me that they are serving an additional master. These 501c3 churches should do a very careful study of adultery and the punishment for adultery; because the church represents the wife. And a wife can not have more than one husband. She can not sleep with another man.

 

[Mark C]

I understand that you’re not a very serious person. There is no secret, third party declaration, not disclosed that God would considering binding on Him. You’re concocting some kind of behind the back crossed finger trick that trumps salvation. It’s just ridiculous.

You didn't read that link, did you.

And I have no doubt that you are likewise clueless about what is involved in incorporation under 501c(3) (or any other, for that matter!) status.

Some, but not all, are referenced in the 'incorporation.'

@Michael Moon, perhaps you could inform the Sage what the requirements for the 501c(3) 'person' with respect to their obligations to the Secretary of State (of wherever) are: What they have "signed up for." What the penalties for 'rebellion' to that master are. And so forth.

 

[Mark C]

"Violate fundamental public policy."

You correctly nailed the Satanic 'tar baby.'

 

[Earth_is-]

You correctly nailed the Satanic 'tar baby.'

Satan says go left. Yahushua says go right. And if the 501c3 churches are choosing to go left on some (pretty major) instructions. Well then - you’ve got yourself a whore church.

And the Creator says if you’re hostile to me and dis obey my instructions - “Your enemies will rule over you. Those who hate you.” You know like the Kamala’s and the Bidens. Europe has a similar problem. So we have a spiritual problem. Not a political problem.

 

[frederick]

The Greek does not say "woman." It says "wife."

γυναῖκα is a feminine accusative singular noun from γυνή, the Greek word for woman.

 

[Earth_is-]

γυναῖκα is a feminine accusative singular noun from γυνή, the Greek word for woman.

I don't know my Greek, but I know that the majority of the time it's translated to 'wife' in the New Testament. Also:

 

[frederick]

View attachment 8203
View attachment 8205

I don't know my Greek, but I know that the majority of the time it's translated to 'wife' in the New Testament. Also:

View attachment 8204
View attachment 8206

Matt. 22:28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”
wife γυνή a feminine nominative singular noun, from γυνή the Greek word for woman.

It is the context which determines whether the English word woman or wife is used to translate the various forms of the Greek word. Cheers

 

[The Revolting Man]

Just post a link to the clause in the contract. Just show us the text. Show me one thing that says “we now own your soul, you’ll play a mean blues guitar but will spend all eternity in servitude to a secret group of satanic government beuracrats.”

 

[MemeFan]

View attachment 8196
View attachment 8197
"Violate fundamental public policy."

Explains why all these 501c3 churches forbid polygyny. The public policy is that polygyny is illegal in the Western world. All of these 501c3 translations always mis-translate pro polygyny verses in the New Testament. The most popular one is Matthew 5:28. The Greek does not say "woman." It says "wife."

This tells me that they are serving an additional master. These 501c3 churches should do a very careful study of adultery and the punishment for adultery; because the church represents the wife. And a wife can not have more than one husband. She can not sleep with another man.

Thank you answering my question.

You are best.

 

[MemeFan]

I'm not sure you know the meanings of either of those words: "anarchist" or "voluntary association."

And I am convinced you are utterly ignorant of the history and meaning of the American "Declaration of Independence." Before making stupid accusations, at least please listen to an explanation that I am quite sure you have never heard, but addresses the heart of your misunderstanding:

Meat - Declaration of Independence Special

I contend that the Declaration of Independence is the most important document ever written ORIGINALLY in the English language. And that it has never been more important to understand why...

biblicalfamilies.org

Then, and only then:

Do you understand what "Choose this Whom you will serve," means? OR - finally - why you cannot serve two masters?

Maybe, even the concept of "legitimate" government, at least in a "nation of law, not of men," might start to make sense.

This is all BS.

First, I asked what causes bad repute for 501(c) organization. Well, it's wasn't money bribery. Now instead of getting answer (point of intelectual division of labor and reason to participate in forum) which you know, you tell us to research whole thing and keep repeating choose your master.

Well, this caused wastage of two days. It would be more if @Earth_is- didn't find answer.

And stop living in clouds. We don't get to choose master in this life. Reality is that any government is way superior to us. We can, sometimes, choose which rules among ones provided by government we can choose.

For example, couple who lives together can select between husband/wife or boyfriend/girlfriend rules. But you can't choose do you want family violence rules. *

This isn't real freedom. Real freedom would be choosing according to which rules to live under, including inventing your own rules. This is impossible under states sticking it's fingers everywhere.

And stop choose your master question. It's a trick. Answer is obvious: Christ. Where is trick? You are implying that we can choose not to live according to state rules. Fine, you first. Stop paying all taxes and drive as you wish. See how it goes.

So, we don't have any freedom on this planet. At best we can choose which plantation owner we like best.

So, if you consider that state may dislike is your desired Christian lifestyle, then best solution is to move into more hospitable state. Second best is to avoid state's attention to live in peace. You would be way more useful if you could just say which rules in 501(c) are bad for Christian and why to avoid.

*Voluntary spanking is great example. State can decide that any spanking, even voluntary is jail time for man.