Should Christian groups that teach the Bible be deemed Republican and denied non-profit status?

Valletta · Jun 23, 2021

The IRS denied non-profit status to a Bible teaching group because they are assumed to be Republican and thus considered political. A number of people on this very site identify as Democrat and teach the Bible, thus I think the decision by the IRS (see article below) is wrong.

Christian Non-Profit Denied Tax-Exempt Status Because IRS Thinks Bible Teachings Are Republican

essentialsaltes · Jun 23, 2021

Valletta said:
The IRS denied non-profit status to a Bible teaching group because they are assumed to be Republican

No, because they literally campaigned in favor of specific candidates in elections.

Guinan · Jun 23, 2021

Apparently this group endorses specific Republican candidates in elections and that's the issue.

"educates individuals on how to choose between 'imperfect candidates,' urging members to look at what the candidate says about the issues and see if their beliefs align with the Bible." (First Liberty Appeals Denial of Tax Exemption for Group Alleged to Have Republican Ties).

The following excerpt from the article (linked above) further explains why this group was denied.

In May the IRS denied 501(c)(3) status to the Texas-based prayer group Christians Engaged because it encourages its members to vote for state and national leaders. The federal agency specifically noted in its rejection that the group supports Republican candidates.

In its letter, IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Stephen A. Martin concluded the group does not qualify as an organization described in IRS Section 501(c)(3) because it is not operated exclusively for religious and educational purposes. Specifically Martin noted, "You are engaged in prohibited political campaign invention" and "You are also not operated exclusively for one or more exempt purposes... because you operate for a substantial non-exempt private purpose and for the private interest of the 'D party.'" The "D party" is a reference to the Republican Party, according to a "legend" provided at the top of Martin's letter to the religious group.

Martin also contends, "While you educate voters on what the Bible says about issues, your educational activities are not neutral. The topics typically are affiliated with distinct candidates and specific political party platforms."

wing2000 · Jun 23, 2021

essentialsaltes said:
No, because they literally campaigned in favor of specific candidates in elections.

Hence the thread title is misleading.

Strathos · Jun 23, 2021

If a Christian group tried to endorse Democratic candidates with the same logic, they'd face the same issues.

public hermit · Jun 23, 2021

I don't think Christian groups should have non-profit status, regardless. The whole point of "Christian" is the common good. "For God so loved the whole world..." Pay up, slackers.

Handmaid for Jesus · Jun 23, 2021

public hermit said:
I don't think Christian groups should have non-profit status, regardless. The whole point of "Christian" is the common good. "For God so loved the whole world..." Pay up, slackers.

Yep. Lord Jesus paid His tax and He also paid Peter's. Now that is a novel idea. :idea:

Valletta · Jun 23, 2021

Guinan said:
Apparently this group endorses specific Republican candidates in elections and that's the issue.

"educates individuals on how to choose between 'imperfect candidates,' urging members to look at what the candidate says about the issues and see if their beliefs align with the Bible." (First Liberty Appeals Denial of Tax Exemption for Group Alleged to Have Republican Ties).

The following excerpt from the article (linked above) further explains why this group was denied.

In May the IRS denied 501(c)(3) status to the Texas-based prayer group Christians Engaged because it encourages its members to vote for state and national leaders. The federal agency specifically noted in its rejection that the group supports Republican candidates.

In its letter, IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Stephen A. Martin concluded the group does not qualify as an organization described in IRS Section 501(c)(3) because it is not operated exclusively for religious and educational purposes. Specifically Martin noted, "You are engaged in prohibited political campaign invention" and "You are also not operated exclusively for one or more exempt purposes... because you operate for a substantial non-exempt private purpose and for the private interest of the 'D party.'" The "D party" is a reference to the Republican Party, according to a "legend" provided at the top of Martin's letter to the religious group.

Martin also contends, "While you educate voters on what the Bible says about issues, your educational activities are not neutral. The topics typically are affiliated with distinct candidates and specific political party platforms."

There is nothing wrong with urging people to vote and pointing out Bible passages. Non-profits can urge members to vote for candidates who support certain issues, you just can't tell them to go out and vote for a specific person.

Guinan · Jun 23, 2021

Valletta said:
There is nothing wrong with urging people to vote and pointing out Bible passages. Non-profits can urge members to vote for candidates who support certain issues, you just can't tell them to go out and vote for a specific person.

I assume you are implying a general 'you' and not directly referring to me. Perhaps you could direct your disapproval to the IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Stephen A. Martin. He is the one who determined that this group doesn't qualify for a non-profit status. He made his decision clear: "While you educate voters on what the Bible says about issues, your educational activities are not neutral. The topics typically are affiliated with distinct candidates and specific political party platforms."

Valletta · Jun 23, 2021

Guinan said:
I assume you are implying a general 'you' and not directly referring to me. Perhaps you could direct your disapproval to the IRS Director of Exempt Organizations Stephen A. Martin. He is the one who determined that this group doesn't qualify for a non-profit status. He made his decision clear: "While you educate voters on what the Bible says about issues, your educational activities are not neutral. The topics typically are affiliated with distinct candidates and specific political party platforms."

"You" meaning representatives of the non-profit. Mr. Martin is mistaken.

Guinan · Jun 23, 2021

Valletta said:
"You" meaning representatives of the non-profit. Mr. Martin is mistaken.

Your opinion is noted.

essentialsaltes · Jun 23, 2021

Valletta said:
you just can't tell them to go out and vote for a specific person.

That appears to be what they did.

essentialsaltes · Jun 23, 2021

wing2000 said:
Hence the thread title is misleading.

To be fair, a lot of the reporting from Christian media (such as the link in the OP) has also been misleading.

Oompa Loompa · Jun 23, 2021

Valletta said:
The IRS denied non-profit status to a Bible teaching group because they are assumed to be Republican and thus considered political. A number of people on this very site identify as Democrat and teach the Bible, thus I think the decision by the IRS (see article below) is wrong.

Christian Non-Profit Denied Tax-Exempt Status Because IRS Thinks Bible Teachings Are Republican

Do Democrats not teach the Bible anymore?

Bradskii · Jun 24, 2021

Oompa Loompa said:
Do Democrats not teach the Bible anymore?

I'm pretty certain that they do. But if they operate as a business and they direct people to vote for a political party then they'll be paying tax for that privilege.

ViaCrucis · Jun 24, 2021

public hermit said:
I don't think Christian groups should have non-profit status, regardless. The whole point of "Christian" is the common good. "For God so loved the whole world..." Pay up, slackers.

The non-profit status of churches (with "church" being broad to cover any religious group of any religion) exists as part of the wall of separation between church and state.

What that wall does here is two things: It means that churches cannot "politic"; and likewise the state cannot tell churches what they can or cannot believe, teach, preach, etc.

Taxing churches places churches under the government, and conversely, brings government and church into collusion with one another. It gives churches/religious groups more influence in politics and it also opens the door for government influence in churches.

Religious or non-religious, conservative or liberal, I'd think we should be able to agree on this wall of separation being a good thing.

The example provided in the OP where the IRS denies non-profit status because the group campaigned for specific politicians is an example of that wall of separation working well.

There are two very specific things I have in mind when talking about the importance of this wall of separation.

The first comes from the writings of Dr. King who wrote,

"The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority." - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, Strength to Love

The second is the historical situation in Nazi Germany with the Deutsche Christen, the "German Christian" movement, the unification of the German Protestant Church with Nazi ideology, to which I also present this from John De Gruchy's book about Dietrich Bonhoeffer's student, friend, colleague, and biographer Eberhard Bethge,

"The Bethges were particularly bothered by what they experienced when they visited Falwell's church because so much that was referred to as `American Christianity' reminded them of aspects of the German Christianity of the 1930s. Eberhard later wrote,

'As we entered the foyer, an usher stepped forward and gave me two badges to fasten to my lapel: the one on the left said, Jesus First and on the right, one with an American flag ... I could not help but think myself in Germany in 1933 ... Of course, Christ, but a German Christ; of course, `Jesus First', but an American Jesus! And so to the long history of faith and its executors another chapter is being added of a mixed image of Christ, of another syncretism on the American model, undisturbed by any knowledge of that centuries-long and sad history.'

Bethge added some remarks that have an uncanny contemporary ring to them:

'The disturbing fact is this new element, the battle for a `Christian nation' against humanism. The flag has always been in the churches, but now it has come to represent the new threat of binding the political structure to an ideology, which models a whole new educational system, and a new kind of representation in Washington, and a newly interpreted Constitution.'" - John W. De Gruchy. Daring, Trusting Spirit: Bonhoeffer's Friend Eberhard Bethge

Edited: Fixed Dr. King quote and clarified myself in a paragraph.

-CryptoLutheran

durangodawood · Jun 24, 2021

essentialsaltes said:
To be fair, a lot of the reporting from Christian media (such as the link in the OP) has also been misleading.

Thats because they've wedded themselves to politics, and therefore dont so much report as campaign.

Should Christian groups that teach the Bible be deemed Republican and denied non-profit status?

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Well-Known Member

E pluribus unum

No one important

social troglodyte

You can't steal my joy

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Stranger in a Strange Land

Stranger in a Strange Land

Against both police brutality and cop killing.

Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?

Confessional Lutheran

Dis Member

Similar threads