Some would argue that pulpits are not the place for politics. Some believe that politics influenced by Christianity will bring about heaven on earth. I fall somewhere in between. If there is a politician behaving immorally and you pastor urges you to vote him out of office, what business is it of government to tell the pastor to censor his speech or suffer loss of the churches or his tax exempt status? Yet it is in the rules governing the  501c3. If a church agrees to and enjoy the provisions of the 501c3 then they can't complain.

Further, if a church is a 501c3 and can take advantage of its tax status, why not take advantage of it? However, if a congregation decides to never incorporate, which isn't needed to enjoy certain tax advantages because it is a church, then all the better. A church free from the entanglements of the state will be far better off in the long run, in my estimation. The church has survived most of its existence without it and flourishes not because of man's cleverness, but God's grace.

David

What this tells me is that God has given every person the ability to have faith. However, it is totally up to man where he places his faith. Some people choose themselves, a few choose God.

David

Unconditional Election: ...Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. Also, as some are elected into salvation, others are not...

Yet God foreknew who were His.

Limited Atonement: Jesus died only for the elect...

This seems to be a "rub your nose in it" kind of statement. God knows who the elect are. We don't. Why rub someone's nose in it?

Irresistible Grace: When God calls his elect into salvation, they cannot resist...

That presupposes that we know the workings of the Holy Spirit. In practical experience, I've seen LOTS of resistance when the Holy Spirit calls. Only when a person stops resisting and gives into the conviction of the Spirit is someone saved.

Perseverance of the Saints: You cannot lose your salvation...

I think it's bad policy to say that because someone who went through the motions but never surrendered their heart may remain lost forever believing they were saved and could live their lives as they would and end up in heaven anyway. Like Judas, who was numbered among the 12 but was not a true disciple.

David

You misunderstand. The KJV, IMHO, is the best English translation. If you don't speak English, hopefully there is a translation in your language that you can read from. But PTL the KJV existed so that as England and the U.S. spread their influence and language around the world, there was an accurate translation for people to learn English from and learn about God.

David

Where the Spirit can impart knowledge and reveal mysteries, we are called to test the spirits. We, as flawed mortals men, have to rely on the recorded Word of God to test with. When it comes to the various Bible versions, use the one that the Holy Spirit convicts you to use.

I have have gone from RSV to Living to NIV to KJV. I asked God to lead me to the version He wanted me to read. I am convicted to use the KJV. There is a great deal of meat between the pages of any Bible if one would just study it. And study is the key. If you had a bible from the church of Satan and never read from its pages, it would have little impact on you. Same for the Bible.

The NIV is in the majority of the churches. Its is typically the Bible version used for quotes in people's books and articles. Newer versions are beginning to have a larger share there. I will read the NIV in unison during worship services. But I'll re-read it in the KJV. What I find interesting is the my minister reads the NIV during his sermons, but for clarity will often times use a key word as used in the KJV. Sometimes he mentions it, sometimes he simply says, "other versions".

Whatever you do obey what you read from whatever version the Holy Spirit convicts you to read.

David

Agreed. But how do we learn about Jesus?

David

Especially when it forces translators to select alternate words. Grove for example. Poor choice.

I believe the the wrangling has more to do with, say, did Jesus mean to say its alright to eat with dirty hands or not. This would be a pointless wrangling over words in my opinion. Quite different than pointing out the differences between Bible translations.

Yet we are held accountable and are without excuse. We can't claim that we were mislead by men or Bible versions. While reading and studying a particular translation we discover inconsistencies, let's say, and discover heresy, what should we do? Allow such things to pass because we aren't experts or sound the alarm to help the church guard against the heresy from getting a foot hold?

Agreed.

What if a version was intentionally corrupted? Designed to mislead?

Yet, the Word is written on ink and page in order for there to be a standard.

Agreed. God has so designed His Word that the Gospel is visible in both the macro and micro sense. Where translators and do disservice down to the letter of a word, man cannot hide the Gospel written in entire books like Ruth, for example.

I do deal with specifics as did the pastor in the video.

Agreed. However people stop needing the milk and want to start cutting their teeth on the meat of the Bible and the example of Jesus going to the grove to pray might be missed by most, but what about those who themselves went to the groves to conduct their pagan rights?

David

I agree that any of God's Words can be used by the Holy Spirit to convict a heart.

Let me ask this question regarding wrangling over words, does this apply to mistranslations or words changed to avoid copyright infringement?

David

No, they haven't changed either! 

David

Liberal 501c3 organizations violate most of the rules like staying neutral on politics and stuff. Pastors are to refrain from endorsing or criticizing politicians from the pulpit. At least that is the general understanding.

Bad things about being incorporated. Tax deductions for contributions. The Lord loves a cheerful giver...but saving on taxes shouldn't be the source of our cheer nor the motivation to give. If we get a break on the offering, the sacrifice is lessened don't you think? Save tax on contributions to other organizations. Corporations enjoy limits on liability. When does the Bible teach us not to pay our debts? Permission to operate as a corporation by the government. Under who's authority is the church to operate? The 501c3 was created by President Johnson back in the mid 1960's. 501c3's are not-for-profit organizations and thus exempt from paying taxes. However in the case of churches and schools are exempt from paying taxes by nature of what they are. They don't need the 501c3. However, churches looked to have successful business men sit on their boards of elders and these men did what they did with their own businesses and incorporated them.

If a church starts up they falsely believe they need to incorporate. They don't. They can let the board of elders own the property and manage the finances. They can pay any employees as contractors. Churches in America can enjoy the First Amendment as long as allowed until the government becomes tyrannical and denies those rights.

David

We have such a church here that went from being a 501c3  and un-incorporated. They started paying their employees as contractors, what we call 1099 employees. These employees were paying all their own taxes. I've been living like that for years. However the feds didn't like something about the arrangement. The feds returned all the tax paid by the employees and then files suite against the church...the feds re-incorporated them...and charged them with failing to pay employee taxes. The feds, of course, won and seized the churches property, valued far higher than the judgment, and auctioned it off.

Later analysis discovered what the church had done wrong. There was still a mortgage on the property under the old 501c3 corporation. Had the church board of elders bought the property from the old corporation, retiring that debt and replacing it with a mortgage not tied to the old church corporation the feds would not have had any thing. Greg Dixon, the pastor then was very outspoken and ruffled a lot of feathers. He must have ruffled the wrong ones just enough times.

His son now leads the church.

David

I didn't know about THESE details, but I know that there are significant changes. However you may just have created the latest thread to get deleted. We haven't had one for awhile.

There are folks who have more faith in the scholarship of men over faith in God to preserve His word. What these folks fail to understand is that its not that the KJV is only accurate Word of God in the world, but that it is still the most accurate English translation. This is being discovered by independent students of the Bible. Yet these people get blasted by scholars and those who support "modern" scholarship.

But I agree with this teacher. Words mean things and God places value on His Word above all else. When you have something as seemingly innocent as changing the words "garden" to the word "grove" in and of itself doesn't seem so much a change, but placed in the broader context what activities happen in groves and what activities happened in gardens the potential damage that can take place by this word change becomes obvious. Especially if you are either in such a religion or cult or just coming out of one and understand the significance.

So what? you might ask? Well Paul takes a great deal of time telling his followers that where we are free to do what ever we please, not all that we do is right in the eyes of a weaker brother in the faith and we are to be considerate of them. Based on this example, it is a terrible thing to have our Lord teaching or praying or whatever in a grove.
If a grove existed I believe Jesus would have spoken against it. I can't find any direct mention of a grove in the NT. But throughout the OT groves are associated with idols and false gods.

The NIV translators had no problems or concerns, apparently,  with Jesus using something that God hates and in the OT is associated with false gods. Subliminal message? Are the NIV translators trying to tell us they don't believe in Jesus. That he's no more significant than Baal or other idols? Ridiculous?

OK. Watch this space for

David

She lucky shes a liberal. Had she been a conservative, there would have been no end of the calls for prosecution, firing, and other chastisement. But wait, there is no real equivalent entertainment personality on the liberal side....hmmm...never mind.

David

Yet, if you WERE going to dismantlement capitalism and wreck the economy what would you do any different than now?

David

The Separation of Church and State is not in the Constitution. This is an idea written about by Thomas Jefferson and presumed to be part of the First Amendment. However what it says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

1. The government cannot setup a religion.
2. The government cannot prevent people from worshiping, witnessing, teaching, singing, preaching, or reading and praying, silently or aloud etc. etc.

I also find it interesting that it is listed with freedom of the press, freedom of speech and calling on the government to essentially back off when accused of violating the rights of the people.

David