mperry's Blog

Evangelicals

Their Political Involvement & Behavior

Introduction

                When it comes to Evangelists, my opinion is very bold and keen. I am losing all respect for the term Evangelism or Evangelicals. I am profoundly disgusted with the actions and behaviors of some who are in the public eye and consider themselves to be Evangelists or Evangelicals. As stated in “An Evangelical Manifesto, A Declaration of Evangelical Identity and Public Commitment”, Evangelicals are “Christians who define themselves, their faith, and their lives according to the Good News of Jesus of Nazareth”. What about the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the price he paid for the future sins of all the people in the world? Now the Evangelical Manifesto briefly states without going into detail that “Jesus Christ is fully God become fully human”. In my opinion Jesus Christ is God’s spirit become fully human because according to the fourth chapter of the Gospel of John, “God is a spirit”. After all we were all created in God’s image right? Because God is a spirit and the bible also says “No man has seen God at anytime”, the human eye cannot see a spirit, therefore when God came to earth he robed himself in flesh and was called Emanuel, meaning God with us, thus providing a more thorough explanation of the man Jesus Christ who is also fully God.

Evangelicals and Political Involvement      

I completely agree with the Manifesto stating that “Evangelicals must be defined theologically and not politically”. Evangelicals should not be involved with or have a place in the political arena. My major question to Evangelists is this, Are you under the umbrella of the 501(c)(3) tax exempt filing status? If so, why in the world are you flirting with the possible revocation of that exempt status? The following listed below was researched and taken from http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf, Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention. Section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate’s name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate’s platform or biography.
26 CFR 1.501(c)(3)-1: Organizations organized and operated charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.
Rev. Rul. 2007-41, 2007-25 I.R.B. (June 18, 2007)
Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention. Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
• Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office;

• Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval for one or more candidates’ positions and/or actions;
• Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election;
• Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election;
• Whether the issue addressed in the communication has been raised as an issue distinguishing candidates for a given office;
• Whether the communication is part of an ongoing series of communications by the organization on the same issue that are made independent of the timing of any election; and
• Whether the timing of the communication and identification of the candidate are related to a non-electoral event such as a scheduled vote on specific legislation by an officeholder who also happens to be a candidate for public office. A communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election. Nevertheless, the communication must still be considered in context before arriving at any conclusions. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf. Evangelists who choose to walk this road are basically walking a tightrope high above the law and the ban on political activity from a 501(c)(3) organization. In regards to the filing status of a church, it is a complete lie that a church must file under the 501(c)(3) status. The IRS has a 501(c)(1)(a) which specifically states that a church is automatically tax exempt. This is known as the "Mandatory Exception" rule. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-07-41.pdf. Why do the churches ask to be exempt from a tax that they never owed to begin with and why do churches ask to be tax exempt when they already were in the first place? Case and point is this, If the churches do not want the government involved, then quit asking them to be involved! As a church you are automatically tax exempt.

Evangelicals and Their Behavior

The reformation of behavior should be of great and severe importance to Evangelicals. Evangelists are usually the leaders or heads of their church and should behave in such a manner that sees appropriate and fit. This can be accomplished by simply following their own definition of what they say they stand for and who they say they are. As well as following their own definition of Evangelism, Evangelists in general need to completely rethink and renovate what their calling is in life. Have they been called by God to spread the gospel, the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ or did they just simply recognize that call by God, take advantage of it, and use it for personal gain as well as a platform for political candidates to stand upon in an attempt to sway voters in a political race? Seems to be a modern day “Judas Kiss” and a sad affair being committed by a few and ruining the reputations of many. Here are a few individuals displaying this type of behavior in the public eye. Billy Graham, the head of Billy Graham Ministries and his  political activity with the Clinton Campaign, Jeremiah Wright, the pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Illinois and his political activity with the Obama Campaign, Kirbyjon Caldwell, the pastor of Windsor Village United Methodist Church in Houston, Texas and his political activity with President Bush, John Hagee, the pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas and his political activity with John McCain, Dr. Jack Graham, Pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, Texas, and his underlying political involvement allowing Mike Huckabee at the Pulpit of his Church, Rod Parsley, pastor of World Harvest church in Canal Winchester, Ohio, and his political involvement with John McCain, Kenneth Copeland, the leader of Kenneth Copeland Ministries, and his underlying political involvement with Mike Huckabee. To reiterate my point, you can look in the book of Matthew, Chapter 6:24, and the words of Jesus speak as follows, “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. How can these leaders preach about the Gospel of Jesus Christ out one side of their mouth and then turn their head and change their behavior to suit the needs of political candidates? This should be considered a “Goliath” of a problem among Evangelists who are in the public eye, and we as Christians need to recognize this problem and bring it to the attention of everyone.