Church seized for not incorporating

[coffeeseven]

This was in my email box thins morning. If anyone can verify the credibility or lack thereof or provide more details pleas post it.

Refusing to Incorporate

By Pastor William Raymond

WilliamRaymond@thechurchatSalem.info



From: the church at Salem [mailto:WilliamRaymond@thechurchatSalem.info]
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 5:50 PM
To: JAIL4Judges
Subject: Church seized for refusing to incorporate!



Dear J.A.I.L.



On 03-24-05 our church was seized by Counter Terrorism Agents, and my wife and I were arrested on criminal charges... for refusing to incorporate the church of Jesus Christ! 



We've lost everything we spent our entire lives working for, have become alienated from most of our family and friends, and are currently sojourning in exile while all efforts to achieve any form of redress from the government who committed this unconstitutional sacrilege have all been ignored. ....



If you think there is a workable solution to this very complexed legal problem, we would certainly appreciate hearing any "outside the box" ideas you might have.     



Peace and blessings,



William Raymond:

pastor & ambassador for the Christ 

(in Mays Landing at 609-476-2109)



<www.thechurchatSalem.info> 





Dear Pastor Raymond:



You are to be honored for your Scriptural stand for the Word of God. There are approximately 300,000 local churches in America, and most all of them are government incorporated churches, i.e., they have prostrated themselves at the feet of another lord. Christ taught us no man can serve two masters, "No servant 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." Luke 16:13.



Little known among the churches is the fact that "government tax exempt status" for churches is a relatively new concept. It was under the Johnson Administration that this idea was conceived that the holy and magnificent government should bless the churches with its scepter of righteousness by granting them tax exemption. Before this, the churches were properly recognized as inherently tax immune. Tax exemption is a privilege offered by government, but tax immune has nothing to do with government, for the government can neither add to nor take away from its inherent status.



The idea of tax exemption was invented by the god of this world to gain control over the churches by granting them a government privilege. So in order for the churches to retain their government privilege they must toe the mark. They cannot preach on "political" subjects such as alternate life styles dealing with marriage, when conception begins, candidates, home-schooling, corporal punishment of their children, taxation or other anti-establishment sentiments, lest they be tried for government invented sins, or for hate crimes in which pastors must offer penance.



Satan's goal is to deter pastors from preaching the whole counsel of God as set forth by the Apostle Paul, "For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God." Acts 20:27. Further, Satan has now established that the churches must report to their new head of the church on all their financial affairs. Ahhh, what does this do to Christ's clear command, "But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:3. When the churches give account on their mammon forms to their other lord, it is not only not secret, but is shared with Interpol, the NWO, and all law enforcement and all the nations of the earth through tax treaties. This hardly meets Christ's command that our alms-giving be done in secret.



The churches have to decide which "lord" they are going to serve, for they can not serve both God and mammon! Show me a church that has a government tax exempt status and I will show you a church that has chosen by practice to serve mammon, i.e., the god of this world. In Jeremiah 10:2 we are told, "Learn not the way of the heathen." Now notice that God does not here say, Do not worship what the heathen worship, but rather learn not the way of the heathen. Now the heathen render not unto the Lord God, but unto mammon. Now if the churches do likewise and answer to another lord what belongs to God after the manner of the heathen, have they not indeed learned the way of the heathen?



What's more, looking at this matter from the civil approach, is not our Constitution the supreme law of this land? It says it is! "This Constitution... shall be the supreme law of the land." Art. V, Sec. 2. Do we accept that? We are told, "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the member of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution." Art. V, Sec 3. Do we also accept that? If so, what saith the Constitution. "Congress shall make not law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof." Amendment I. Is that true. If so, what is the meaning of "NO"? Do "NO" include the IRS Code, Title 26 USC 501(c)(3), by which Congress grants churches the privilege of tax exempt status?



By churches applying to the government for tax exempt status and filling out their forms, they are thereby renouncing the Constitution by practice. Shall we not call these churches un-American churches who by practice renounce the Constitution in addition to betraying their Lord in making an open show of their giving. Again I say, the churches can have but only one lord, not two.



Pastor William Raymond, you are to be honored for abiding true to the One and Only Lord God of Heaven as opposed to the mammon of this world.



In answer to your question as to a way of escape in your dilemma, God has already provided a way of escape for all the churches in America through passage of J.A.I.L. The question is not whether God has provided a remedy, but whether the churches will receive it. He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear.



Ron Branson

VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org

www.jail4judges.org

[John Edward Mercier]

I doubt they were seized for non-incorporation... most likely tax evasion.

Freedom of Religion is an individual right... that can be collective... but tax-exemption/tax-deductibility is still controlled by the 16th Amendment.

From a 'legal' perspective, it will depend on the charges.

[Pat McCotter]

Church website: http://www.thechurchatsalem.info
WMV video Seized for Refusing to Incorporate

It appears that it is a property tax issue because they didn't incorporate as a church.

[KBCraig]

Gene Scott may have been a kook, but he possessed a brilliant mind. (Anyone who can give hours of sermons-slash-lectures on the mathematics of the Egyptian pyramids while surrounded by Playboy bunnies as Merle Haggard sings gospel, has got to have it going on!)

One of the things he insisted on was never claiming tax exemption for his church or its activities, because he knew the control that gave the government over what he could say and do.

[Tunga]

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's!

Ya can't say that in an IRS church.

No way.

No how.

First amendment?

Crucified.

[John Edward Mercier]

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's!

Ya can't say that in an IRS church.

No way.

No how.

Of course you can... 'Render unto Caesar' was about paying one's taxes.

First amendment?

Crucified.

First Amendment does not free someone from taxation... simply makes it unconstitutional to infringe on their beliefs.

[coffeeseven]

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's!

Ya can't say that in an IRS church.

No way.

No how.

Of course you can... 'Render unto Caesar' was about paying one's taxes.

Interesting choice of words "one's taxes"?

[Lloyd Danforth]

Of course you can... 'Render unto Caesar' was about paying one's taxes.

I once heard an interesting 'take' on this from Russell Kanning where , if I remember correctly, it is not about taxes. Perhaps he can elaborate.

[John Edward Mercier]

Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's!

Ya can't say that in an IRS church.

No way.

No how.

Of course you can... 'Render unto Caesar' was about paying one's taxes.

Interesting choice of words "one's taxes"?

Taxes are imposed upon the individual by the collective.

[coffeeseven]

Sounds to me as if you are assigning ownership.

[John Edward Mercier]

More of obligation than ownership.
The context and meaning of the sermon is pretty well known.

[antijingoist]

Of course you can... 'Render unto Caesar' was about paying one's taxes.

I don't think so. I don't think Jesus even answered the question. He knew their hypocrisy and it looks like He pointed out that they were not even giving to God what is Gods, which is more important, and they did not do. Remember, Jesus knew that they were asking him the question to trap Him. They knew that a yes or no answer could be used against Him and He did not answer.
Anyway, thats how I initially took it, especially since the coin would have said that Caesar is God, which Jesus would not have been saying.

Chuck Baldwin did a sermon on this yesterday when he said that Christ was trying to say that Caesar has no authority over your conscience (or something... i lost the notes I took ), and did not even mention taxes.

Also, this atheist does an excellent job of showing through the Bible how Jesus was not talking about taxes. http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/ludlow/ludlow1.html

i have never heard a decent interpretation that showed that taxes _must_ be paid that was not a outright cop-out.
Although, Matt 17 can be used to give a reason for paying taxes: Jesus did not have to, but did it to avoid conflict. This does not mean that not paying is wrong though.

[John Edward Mercier]

He answered the question in the only manner it could be answered.

He set the tone for the separation of State and Church...
That materialism and morality are not one and the same.

[Tunga]

More of obligation than ownership.
The context and meaning of the sermon is pretty well known.

The meaning is simple enough. A slave is owned. What portion of your body is owned by Rome?

Send that portion off to them with Tungas' blessing. Maybe you'll get to heaven that way.

[John Edward Mercier]

They were slaves to the belief in the Roman coins... a likeness, value, and standard set by Caesar.