Should the 33rd Annual UBF Meeting be Cancelled?

Greg J. Dixon

Recently a pastor said to one of our unregistered church pastors, "Now that Trump has solved this issue (by eliminating the Johnson Law), that you have put so much time and energy in over the past thirty years, I guess there is no need for you to have the Unregistered Baptist Fellowship Meeting, is there?  (Referring to the 33rd Annual Unregistered Baptist Fellowship Meeting announced for Indianapolis Oct. 16-18.)

When he said this to me, it reminded me of what Satan said to God concerning Job.  "Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land."

The implication is clear.  The only reason that Job feared and served God was because God had built a hedge around him and blessed him.  Satan said, "remove the hedge, take away his riches and he will curse you to his face."  Of course, we all know the story that this is exactly what happened, and to Job's everlasting credit he didn't curse God even after he lost everything including having his own wife turn against him and actually telling him to, "Curse God, and die."  But the scriptures say that Job did not lose his integrity.  In other words, he remained true to his honesty and moral principles, and continued to worship God in unbelievable poverty, pain and persecution, even from his friends. 

So, what did this pastor mean when he asked the question, "Are you going to have the UBF meeting at the Indianapolis Baptist Temple in Indianapolis this fall?  He was referring to the erroneous idea that President Trump has rescinded the Johnson Amendment in his recent signing of the Executive Order supposedly rescinding the Johnson Amendment which simply ordered the IRS to basically, not enforce the Johnson Amendment against the churches and religious organizations.  So, what he was saying was, since there is no threat any longer from the government, there is no need for churches to be unregistered, therefore no need for the Unregistered Baptist Fellowship.

First this pastor has made a clear admission that he knows that there is such a thing as an unregistered church.  That is quite an admission within itself, in that for years attorney's like David Gibbs of the Christian Law Association (CLA), Terry Hamilton and others have been telling the pastors that incorporation is not licensure and it makes no difference whether a church is unregistered or not.  Obviously, here is one pastor who believes that these things do change the status of a church.  At least this is a move in the right direction.

This pastor is also making an admission that what we have been saying is correct that the unregistered position allows a church to claim their First Amendment guarantees and that the state registered churches have waived those precious God given rights when they become 501 (c)(3) tax exempt organizations.         

The real issue at stake here is the Biblical position, not whether a church should make a decision based on what the President does or does not do, or whether a church receives a benefit from the state or not. If it is right for a church to be unregistered, it is right whether there is a Johnson Law or not.  That was the whole issue that was involved in the discussion between God and Satan concerning Job.  Job's loyalty to God had nothing to do with the hedge and blessing that God had put around Job.  He should love and serve God whether he is rich or poor and for Satan to accuse Job otherwise was to slander Job, and for this preacher to accuse the unregistered churches of being unregistered, just to take advantage of their First Amendment guarantees, is also slanderous.   Churches should be unregistered, that is unlicensed (not state recognized non-profit organizations – 501 (c)(3) Public Charities) whether a country has a system of government like America has with a Constitution and Bill of Rights or not.  Or whether people receive tax deductions from their tithes and offerings or not.  In fact, most nations in the world have no benefits of this type. 

At this juncture because of so much confusion over the Johnson Amendment (JA) we are going to take a brief look at the amendment and try to get a handle on exactly what it is and what the President did when he issued his Executive Order (EO) on May 5th in the Rose Garden in the presence of priests, nuns and faith leaders along with a stringed orchestra adding some atmosphere.

The (JA) was the brain child of Sen. Lyndon Baines Johnson of Texas because he was angry over preachers using his voting record against him.   Prior to his amendment to the Internal Revenue Code in 1934 an important change was made by establishing an additional qualification for tax-exempt status and contributions to them. "This change made…the deduction for contributions to an organization a substantial part of whose activities is participation in partisan politics or in carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation." The reason for this Revenue Act, according to its proponents in Congress, was to close loopholes which would result in raising an additional $258 million in otherwise "avoided taxes".  On April 2, 1934 Senator Harrison of Mississippi gave the following reason for adding this condition: I may say to the Senate that the attention of the Senate committee was called to the fact that there are certain organizations which are receiving contributions in order to influence legislation and carry on propaganda. The committee thought there ought to be an amendment which would stop that.

In 1935 Congress made an addition to the law which allowed a deduction for charitable contributions by corporations.

In 1936 Section 101(6) was changed to Section 501(c) (3) of the IRC.

In 1954 an important change was implemented by Congress, which originated in the Senate from the floor rather than in the committee on Finance. On July 2nd, then-Senator Lyndon B. Johnson offered an amendment to Sec. 501(c)(3). L.B.J. believed a private foundation was indirectly contributing to the campaign of one of his political opponents. His amendment added "and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office" directly after the earlier prohibition against influencing legislation. In 1987, the parenthetical phrase "(or in opposition to)" was inserted after "on behalf of." The effect is clear, the new prohibition against campaigning is stricter than the old one against influencing legislation. The latter prohibits any amount of influence in the political arena, while the former allows a rather uncertain "substantial part". However, they are still using this "substantial part" test today, which shows that they are leaving themselves some wiggle room in the matter of revoking tax-exemptions. However, the entity does so at its own risk, because the IRS is totally arbitrary at this point and may interpret this "substantial part" and have, in any way they wish.

Explanation on President Trump's EO

First President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO).  The law has not been changed, only Congress can change the law.  The (JA) is an amendment to the IRC Code 501 (c) (3).  To eliminate or change it, it has to be done by both houses of Congress

The only thing Trump did was to say to the IRS employees by Executive Order (EO), don't aggressively enforce the Johnson Amendment (JA) against the churches and religious organizations.

Actually, the law does not pertain to the pastors, only to the local church. 

The pastors still have their free speech rights.  They can say whatever they wish, they just cannot say or write anything under the authority of the church without harming the churches tax-exempt status.

The pastor can endorse anyone for public office, but he can't say the church makes the endorsement without jeopardizing the churches tax-exemption.

The church cannot invite a candidate without inviting a candidate from the opposite party also to make a presentation, etc.  The church can present all kinds of material on candidates and issues as long as it is neutral material.  The church can say what its position is as long as it gives the other side their opportunity to present material on their candidate and position on issues.  It can educate but cannot indoctrinate.  The church cannot violate the anti-discrimination laws, etc.  It has entered into a contract for these benefits and must obey the contract.

The Problem

As we have said above nothing has changed.  It was reported by USA Today on May 5, "The (executive order) does not really resolve anything with respect to the Johnson Amendment," said Lloyd Mayer who teaches nonprofit and election law at Notre Dame Law school. "The Johnson Amendment is still law."  Liberal groups preparing to sue over the order said there was no need.  The American Civil Liberties Union called the order "an elaborate photo-op with no discernible policy outcome." Public Citizen said it was "a sham because what it actually does is instruct the IRS to enforce the law as written."  And even conservative groups couldn't hide their disappointment. "Though we appreciate the spirit of today's gesture, vague instructions to federal agencies simply leave some wiggle room to ignore that gesture, regardless of the spirit that was

intended," said the statement from Michael Farris, President of Alliance Defending Freedom

Violates Scripture    

This is totally contrary to scripture.  It is giving the authority of the church over to the state, and the preacher and the church is abrogating their first amendment guarantees.

The church still remains a state registered agency of the state, receiving benefits from the state in provisions (tax-exemption and tax deductible gifts), protection from the state in limited liability and prestige (legal authority from the state). 

Is this not evidence that we are now deep into the Laodicean age?

Rev 3:14 – 22 -  And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; v - 15  I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 

v 16  So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. 

v 17  Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: 

v 18  I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. 

V 19  As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

The Lord Jesus said, Mat 28:18  And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. V - 18 

 At Mt 6:24 He said,  No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

Why we Need the UBF Meeting in Indianapolis Oct. 16-18, 2017 More than Ever

We need it for the perpetuation of the New Testament churches – Nearly 100% of the churches on earth are now state registered churches.  We must do all we can to encourage the continuation of churches that are uncontrolled by the state.

We need it for fellowship – Men of like faith need to encourage one another

In these days of apostasy and decline.

We need it for instruction – Att. Jerald Finney of the Biblical Law Center will be teaching on Tuesday and Wednesday as to how to organize or reorganize a church to be unregistered and how to exist in this present political climate. (President Trump's (EO) can be rescinded by the next President if Trump is not reelected.)

If Congress was sincere about the matter they could eliminate the Johnson Law but they have not indicated that they are interested in doing so.

President Trump has also made it clear that he is not going to discriminate against the LGTB agenda.  If it is a choice between the churches and the former, does anyone really believe which side he will come down on, especially in that his own family has made it clear that they are on the side of "LGBT" rights.  Also, Attorney General Rex Tillerson just declared the month of June "LGBTI Month" to uphold the "fundamental freedoms of LGBTI persons to live with dignity and freedom." This act also permitted U.S. embassies and consulates around the world to positively promote perversion during June and to fly the rainbow flag along with the American flag at American embassies.

There are other issues that we have not mentioned.  What about collecting and remitting withholding and FICA taxes for a wicked government to finance every vile sin known to man.  Can you imagine Peter, Paul, and  John suggesting to the early churches that they needed to pass the hat for poor Caesar because he was having a problem raising money to fight his foreign wars?  And yet our preachers preach against abortion, sodomy, and sin of all kinds on Sunday morning, including public education and then collect the withholding and FICA tax on their "employees" quarterly as a good "employer" of the IRS and send it off to their headquarters in Washington, D.C. and tell their folks that Jesus Christ is the head of their church when all along they have bowed down to the head of the non-profit Czar of the IRS?  

And even though the President has signed this (EO) for the bureaucracy to go easy on the churches, we need to remember that the "Swamp" hasn't been drained in D.C. yet and just because Trump has ordered it doesn't mean that they are going to jump to his wishes.  These preachers need to remember the admonishment of the Psalmist who said,  "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help."

What will these pastors say at the Judgment Seat, when they have to give an account for this "Covenant of death" that shall not stand? Could this be one of the things that the Prophet Isaiah had in mind? "And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand" (Isa 28:18).

Is it possible that our pastors today are the kind that Jeremiah spoke of, "For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered."

Right now it seems as if Fundamentalism is riding the crest of the wave.  Churches are filled on Sunday morning.  Coffers are filled, new multi-million dollar projects are being launched, church programs are implemented, all with the not for profit gift (government largess for the welfare church) but is it possible that God is saying, "knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:"

But Oh! Can we not hear our dear Savior say, "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. 

V  21  To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. 

V 22  He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Overall, I personally believe that President Trump is doing a good job and my wife and I pray for him daily that God will protect him.  He is not a theologian.  He went to the Evangelical community and asked the pastors what they wanted and they told him that they wanted the Johnson Amendment eliminated.  He has just done what they asked to the best of his ability.  It is too bad that they are not willing to pay the price to organize their churches to take advantage of their First Amendment guarantees, then they wouldn't have to worry about a statutory solution.  Tragically, one day at the Judgment Seat of Christ they will find out too late, "If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness" (Mt 6:23b).  It is far worse to sin against light.

We have no ill will against our preacher brethren.  Where they are, is where we were at one time, and where we would be still if God had not shown us this truth on Lordship over His blood bought church from His word, as we saw the Roloff and Sileven scenes take place before our eyes.  And then we experienced them personally as we went through our ordeal from 1999-2001.  Regardless of individual motives which we will not pass judgment; we are happy to know that in most instances the evangelical churches still continue to preach the gospel of Christ. As Paul said to the church at Philipi.  Some preached with boldness, others even with strife, and contention, and yet others in sincerity and love, but he was still glad for the furtherance of the gospel (Php 1:12-17).

Since 1984 the Biblical Law Center has helped scores of churches to organize or reorganize to take advantage of their First Amendment guarantees.  For anyone interested in information they should contact the Biblical Law Center or Attorney Jerald Finney at:

Jerald.finney@sbcglobal.net or call 317-413-1104

 http://biblicallawcenter.com/

http://unregisteredbaptistfellowship.org/

http://the-trumpet-online.com/