But thanks for joining the conversation. The blog is quiet here, but it lives on at its new location:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

If you look at the science, you will see there are good reasons to believe in God.

They also support their leaders in great luxury and ignore the biblical admonition that “It’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” But they always pick and choose what parts of the bible to use, so what’s one more?

It cannot be the worst of both worlds. If we say they are tax exempt…. then so be it. If we say they are taxable entities, we must allow them the same deductions that we allow all taxable entities. Most churches have no “margin”. Meaning, they are NOT stockpiling huge sums of money into bank accounts. The reason so little makes its way to other charities is that there is often little left.

CHurchs do not put “food pantry” “salvage sales” “fund raisers” on the books, because oftentimes they use those funds to directly benefit the needy or poor.

I do think it’s an excellent idea to create a federal mandate of “lifestyle” where anyone associated with ministry is limited to the first say a value on the home and the organization pays a tax for any value that exceeds that amount.

So of the revenues taken in, 43% is salaries – ALL DEDUCTED. 28 % is Property light heat – ALL DEDUCTED.

Sounds like we’re in agreement that the overhead makes a church or ministry not in the same category as a conventional charity.

How is that a subsidy to the church? It’s a tax break to an individual.

I can’t deduct country club dues; why can I deduct church donations when the net effect to society is similar?

BTW, this site is an archive. C’mon over to the new location: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

But here’s the catch folks . If you want to treat a church LIKE A BUSINESS, you have to allow them to DEDUCT EXPENSES LIKE A BUSINESS!!!

So of the revenues taken in, 43% is salaries – ALL DEDUCTED. 28 % is Property light heat – ALL DEDUCTED.

The only “allowable expense” in that nightmare of analysis is the occurance of donating the monies to other charities.

Why is running a church more costly than the American Red cross? Because the Church is ONLY USED A SMALL FRACTION OF THE TIME .

The “analysis” also includes in the estimate the tax advantage of donations to churches. Why? How is that a subsidy to the church? It’s a tax break to an individual. Does anyone include the Medical expense deduction as part of the cost of healthcare?

It’s easy to run at this issue half cocked and demand something be done, but try to look at it from both sides. Governments tax incomes – which are an exchange of service or product for monies. Exactly what “fee” are you proposing churches obligate their congregation?

BTW, the blog has moved. Check it out at its new home and see the latest:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

I quoted you in my most recent post here. You’re famous!

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/

If our Government was to require religion to pay taxes, then Christians would not be in God’s favor, if not complying to the law.

It’s not government’s job to make sure that Christians are right with God.