Corporations
THE LAW CONCERNING TREATY/COVENANT/CORPORATION WITH THE GODWORSHIPPING NATIONS
Exodus 34:12 "Take heed to yourself, that you make no covenant, with the inhabitants of the land, where you are going, or they will be a snare in your midst."
Should the House of Yahweh be a chartered corporation? The House of Yahweh is not a building, or a dead corporate body. It is a living body, a body of believers!
The word Corporate means: to make into a body. From Corpus: a dead body.
I Corinthians 3:16, 17 "16- Do you not understand that you are the House of Yahweh and that the Spirit of Yahweh dwells in you? 17- If anyone defiles the House of Yahweh, Yahweh will destroy him. For the House of Yahweh is holy, which you are."
II Corinthians 3:16, 17 "16- However, when one turns to Yahweh, the veil is taken away.
17- Now Yahweh is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of Yahweh is, there is liberty!"
I Timothy 3:15 "But if I am delayed, I write so that you may know the right and proper way to conduct yourself in the House of Yahweh, who are the called out ones of the LIVING FATHER, the pillar and ground of the truth."
Attached at is a copy of one such charter granted by the State to The House of Yahweh, corporate church, a 501c3 organization. If you notice the language, you will see a difference between both organizations, one being a church and the other a synagogue. However, both have received permission or authority to do business by the State, not realizing that Yahweh has already granted authority to exist and do business. They have become servants to whom they obey. If they don't obey the State, they can be penalized by the State. It is a tough decision, but it is one that all Houses of Yahweh must consider. Yahweh's law forbids making treaties/covenants with the godworshiping nations.
Exodus 34:12 "Take heed to yourself, that you make no covenant, with the inhabitants of the land, where you are going, or they will be a snare in your midst."
KJV “Take heed 8104 to thyself, lest thou make 3772 a covenant 1285 with the inhabitants 3427 of the land 776 whither thou goest 935 , lest it be for a snare 4170 in the midst 7130 of thee:”
The following words are defined from Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary and Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon.
The word heed is #2414 and means: to keep guard, watch over, to be on one’s guard, to abstain, refrain.
The word make is #3772 and means: to cut off, to make a covenant, to destroy (such as to be cut off from Yahweh.)
The word covenant is the Hebrew word beriyth, in Strong's Hebrew Concordance it is #1285 which means: a treaty, alliance, between men an agreement; a constitution or ordinance.
The word inhabitants is word #3427 and means: to sit down, to sit down with anyone, to marry, judges and kings sitting on their thrones.
The word land is #776 and means: inhabitants of the earth, people of the land, country or territory.
The word goest is #935 and means: to come in, enter, to enter into, to have intercourse with.
The word snare is #4170 and means: bait, lure, a snare, from #3369--to set a trap, to be ensnared. The word ensnare means: to trap or gain power over someone by dishonest or underhand means.
The word midst is #7130 and means: in the middle, a seat of thought and emotion, as faculty of thought and emotion. From #7126 which means: to come near, approach, to draw near.
So we can see from the Hebrew meanings, Yahweh warns the House of Yahweh; “To guard, refrain from making a covenant, which will cut one off from Yahweh, by treaty, alliance between men who sit in their kingdoms and govern their country, sitting with them through contract or marriage, entering into treaty or intercourse with them, will be a snare, they will gain power over you and your thoughts by controlling you through deceptive practices.” As we will see in this study incorporation is such control as the Hebrew words describe in this Law of Yahweh.
COVENANT OR CORPORATION?
In Webster's Dictionary the word covenant means: a usually formal, solemn, or binding agreement; a written agreement or promise usually under seal between two or more parties, especially for the performance of some action.
The word corporation means: a group of merchants or traders united in a trade guild; A legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners. Corporations enjoy most of the rights and responsibilities that an individual possesses that is, a corporation has the right to enter into contracts, loan and borrow money, sue and be sued, hire employees, own assets and pay taxes. The most important aspect of a corporation is limited liability. That is, shareholders have the right to participate in the profits, through dividends and/or the appreciation of stock, but are not held personally liable for the company's debts.
In most Law Dictionaries the word corporation means: an organization formed with state governmental approval to act; A fictitious legal entity/person which has rights and duties independent of the rights and duties of real persons and which is legally authorized to act in its own name through duly appointed agents. It is owned by shareholders. Usually created under the authority of state law.
We can see by this definition that a corporation is a fictitious entity, and it is created under the authority of state law. The true House of Yahweh is not fiction, nor does it need authority by the state to exist. It’s existence is from Yahweh and it’s creation if from Yahweh. For Yahweh is the creator of all things, both heaven and earth and the things that are in them. Reading further we find the definition of the word treaty.
The word treaty means: 1 : the action of treating and especially of negotiating. 2 a : an agreement or arrangement made by negotiation: (1) : private treaty (2) : a contract in writing between two or more political authorities (as states or sovereigns) formally signed by representatives duly authorized and usually ratified by the lawmaking authority of the state b : a document in which such a contract is set down.
The word contract means: 1 a : a binding agreement between two or more persons or parties; especially : one legally enforceable. b : a business arrangement for the supply of goods or services at a fixed price <make parts on contract> c : the act of marriage or an agreement to marry. 2 : a document describing the terms of a contract.
From these definitions we can see that entering into a corporation binds the organization into a marriage, a binding agreement, or a trade guild. Both parties are subject to the authority that gave them the permission to do business, in the case of a corporation it would be the State or Federal government. Now I am not saying that it is wrong to enter into business agreements, because there is nothing wrong with doing business with anyone as long as you keep the Laws of Yahweh in your agreements. But concerning a corporation, you are entering a contract, whereas the parties are subject to the authorities who regulate the contract. In the case of a corporation, the state is giving the chuch permission to do business in the name of the corporation. The church would be subject to following the states codes. If not then the state can dissolve the corporation and the corporation could be liable against law suits. A corporation is created by statutuary law, whereas the House of Yahweh is created by the creator, who is not bound to the flesh and statutes of man. The House of Yahweh is more of an ecclesiastical pure trust.
The definition of the word Trust in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1856 edition has the meaning of: An equitable right, title or interest in property, real or personal, distinct from its legal ownership; or it is a personal obligation for paying, delivering or performing anything, where the person trusting has no real, right or security, for by, that act he confides altogether to the faithfulness of those entrusted. This is its most general meaning, and includes deposits, bailments, and the like. In its more technical sense, it may be defined to be an obligation upon a person, arising out of a confidence reposed in him, to apply property faithfully, and according to such confidence.
It is Yahweh who we have confidence in. It is He that we are obligated to. He created a pure trust agreement with our Father Abraham thousands of years ago, that was not bound to human laws, or codes. It was an everlasting trust that He created and as the creator only He has the authority to abolish it, govern it, and control it’s business. The House of Yahweh is a living trust made up of living beings, who are part of a body of believers, that do the work or business of Yahweh. This trust does not die upon the managers death, but instead is carried on to other managers. Yahweh's people should consider carefully Yahweh's Law when doing anything concerning business and the use of Yahweh’s name.
Deuteronomy 15:5 "Only if you carefully listen to the voice of Yahweh your mighty one, and are careful to observe and do all these commandments I command you this day."
When one studies the constitution of Yahweh’s laws, which was established from the beginnning, they can see that the Laws of Yahweh are living Laws, for living beings, meant to bring life to those who live by them.
Deuteronomy 30:15 “See I have set before you life and righteousness, death and destruction. For I command you today to love Yahweh your Father, to walk in all His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, so you may live and multiply, and so Yahweh your Father may bless you in the land you go in to possess.”
Yahweh is the Sovereign King over all of His creation. There is no need to get permission or to enter into Treaty with any human created government entity in order to do Yahweh’s business. The people of Yahweh are not bound to such agreements. For in doing so, they become in bondage to those who take a right and turn it into a privilege. Such rights, as doing the work of Yahweh has already been sanctified and granted by Yahweh, therefore it is not necessary to be granted a privilege from the state, or man in order to do the rights granted by Yahweh. It is the body of believers right to form a union in order to do the work of Yahweh. Yahweh gave such permission long ago to our forefather Abraham.
Genesis 17:7 “I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you, for all generations to come, to be your Father and the Father of your descendants after you.”
Here we see a covenant promise made by Yahweh to Abraham. This is an irrevocable trust made by Yahweh to Abraham and his descendants. Irrevocable means: That which cannot be revoked;
REVOCATION. The act by which a person having authority, calls back or annuls a power, gift, or benefit, which had been bestowed upon another. For example, a testator may revoke his testament; a constituent may revoke his letter of attorney; a grantor may revoke a grant made by him, when he has reserved the power in the deed.
Yahweh can revoke his promise, if he so chose to do. But Yahweh then how could we trust Yahweh? The Promise would be null and void!
The definition of living trust in most Law Dictionaries is defined as: A trust created during the maker's lifetime that does not allow the maker to change it.
Yahweh made the covenant promise with Abraham, and most assuredly he will not change it. Our creators lifetime is infinite. Yahweh has no beginning nor end. At least the scriptures don’t give us enough detail only to tell us that the secret things belong to Yahweh.
Malakyah 3:6 “For I am Yahweh, I change not; therefore you sons of Yaaqob are not consumed.”
Deuteronomy 29:29 “The secret things belong to Yahweh our Father, but the things revealed to us, belongs to us and to our children forever, so that we may perform and do all the words of this law.”
EXAMPLES OF TREATIES IN THE SCRIPTURES
In the inspired scriptures we see where Kings had made treaties with other nations and because of their disregard to the Law of Yahweh, it brought curses to them and their Kingdom. King Solomon who is mentioned as one of the wisest Kings in Israyl, disregarded the Law of Yahweh concerning making treaties with the godworshiping nations. In I Kings 3:1 a treaty made with the marriage of Pharaoh’s daughter to the King, and because of this treaty, Solomon fell into Godworship by sacrificing on the high places to the Gods of Egypt.
I Kings 3:1-3 “Solomon made a coalition pact with Pharoah king of Egypt, and married the daughter of Pharoah. he brought her to the City of David until he finished building his own house, the House of Yahweh, and the wall all around Yerusalem. However, the people were sacrificing on the high places, because there was no House built for the Name of Yahweh until those days. Solomon showed his love for Yahweh by walking in the statutes of David his father, with the exception that he sacrificed and burned incense on the high places.”
In the KJV the word that is translated above coalition pact is the word affinity which in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary is word #781 and means: to give one’s daughter in marriage.
In the ancient days it was customary for King’s to take the daughters in marriage in order to secure a treaty and have peace among the nation that they were living next to, or to bring peace between the countries. One of the sadder aspects of dynastic politics has always been the marrying off of princesses to foreign rulers in order to cement a bond between two royal houses. As young girls they were sent abroad with a small entourage to a strange country, where people spoke a language they did not understand, ate funny tasting food, worshipped incomprehensible gods and where they generally disappeared among a host of wives. The chances of their ever seeing their families again were slim; and contact with their loved ones was often restricted to a few letters and presents.
Here is some examples:
Tushratta, was a king of Mitanni at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III and throughout the reign of Akhenaten -- approximately the late 14th century BC. He was the son of Shuttarna II. His sister Gilukhipa and his daughter Tadukhipa was married to the Egyptian pharaoh Amenhotep III; Tadukhipa later married Akhenaten who took over his father's royal harem. always mentioned his sister and later his daughter, both married to the pharaoh, in his letters; but he was probably at least as much concerned about the political alliance the marriage was supposed to strengthen as about the girls' well-being.
Jalaluddin Muhammad Akbar, the ruler who founded the Mughal dynasty in India in 1605. During the early years of his reign, he had an intolerant attitude towards Hindus and the other religions, but he exercised great tolerance after he began marriage alliances with Rajput princesses.
King Felipe II of Spain (1527–1598) was the second king of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty. As king, it was his job not only to rule his vast realm but also to sire an heir to continue the royal dynasty. His four marriages, however, were not only in pursuit of an heir, but also forged and strengthened international alliances that were beneficial to Spain. His marriages to Maria of Portugal and Archduchess Anna of Austria gave him sons and strengthened ties with the Portuguese Aviz and Austrian Habsburg royal families. His marriages with Mary Tudor (Queen Mary I of England) and Elizabeth of Valois forged needed alliances with England and France.
Felipe of Spain married his cousin Maria of Portugal in 1543. She was the daughter of his aunt Catherine and King John III of Portugal. His father, King Carlos I of Spain, had arranged the marriage in order to strengthen the Spanish alliance with Portugal and also in the hopes of one day getting a sole heir to Spain and Portugal, thus unifying the Iberian Peninsula under one monarch.
These treaties, secured through marriage, were designed to strengthen alliances between nations. Is it no wonder why Yahweh would condemn such practices. For He knew that the Hebrew people through these covenant treaties would subject themselves through marriage to the Godworshiping women of this world. As it is written: “How can two walk together unless they agree.” The treaties that were made between Kings involved provisions that the scriptures don’t go into detail about. Solomon’s love for women, foreign women, caused him to break the Laws of Yahweh. We can see the consequences of these treaties.
I Kings 11:1 “However, King Solomon loved many other foreign women, besides the daughter of Pharoah: women from the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Phoenicians, and Hittites--From the very nations Yahweh had commanded the children of Israyl: You must not marry them and they must not marry you, because they will turn away your heart after their gods! To these, Solomon clung in love.”
Through Treaty or Covenant with the nations around them, King Solomon was drawn into godworship through the marriage of these pagan wives. Could he have secured peace and forged an alliance some other way, we will never know because the scriptures don’t show that he did. Today, the House of Yahweh is faced with the same choice. Should we make a treaty with the government to secure rights and privileges that are already endowed to us by the great architect of the universe, Yahweh? And if we do so, what is the consequences of such actions?
Let us examine further into the corporate state church.
- According to man, The State is Sovereign over its Corporations "A corporation is a creature of the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the limitation of its charter. Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and ascertain if it has exceeded its powers" (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43)
- "A corporation derives its existence and all of its powers from the State and, therefore, has only such powers as the State has conferred upon it. Power is used here to mean the legal capacity to execute and fulfill the objects and purposes for which the corporation was created, and the source of this power is the charter and the statute under which the corporation was organized." Len Young Smith and G. Gale Roberson, Smith and Roberson's Business Law, West Publishing Company, 1966, page 796.
- A corporation derives its existence and all of its power from the State. The church on the other hand was created by and is the body of Messiah. We belong to Him and we are subject to Him and His Laws. The source of any church's power is supposed to be the Holy Spirit; it's authority to function solely from Yahweh.
- Every corporation has obtained a charter from the State of Incorporation. This charter is simply permission to exist given to the corporation (by the State!) without which, its operations would be considered illegal. In addition to the charter are the articles of incorporation: "The objects or purposes for which a corporation is formed are expressly stated in its articles of incorporation, which delineate in general language the type of business activities in which the corporation proposes to engage" Smith and Roberson's Business Law, West Publishing Company, 1966, page 798.
Here is some points to consider of why the House of Yahweh should not incorporate:
- Here in the United States of America a church does not have to incorporate at all to be recognized as a local body of believers.
- According to the Internal Revenue Code, "a church, its integrated auxiliaries, and conventions and associations of the church are excluded from taxation." United States Code, Title 26, 508(c)(1)(A).
- Section 508(c) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that churches are not required to apply for recognition of Section 501(c)(3) status in order to be exempt from federal taxation or to receive tax deductible contributions. Churches are automatically exempt from Federal income tax, and contributions to churches are deductible by donors under section 170.
- The government has no constitutional authority over the Church. It is not allowed to violate the First Amendment protection that the constitution provides. In fact the government may not infringe on any of our constitutional rights at all. They have found a way around this of course. To hold out an unbiblical advantage hoping an ignorant clergy person will take the bait and bring the church into voluntary compliance by forming a 501( C )(3) corporation, thus placing the church under the authority of the state.
- Once the church has been transformed into a corporation it then becomes subject to control by federal and state governments. In truth an incorporated church is no longer a church!! but merely a non-profit organization. Once a church incorporates the new non-profit organization is subject to total control by the government. You will be controlled on who you hire, what you can and cannot preach. You cannot conflict with public policy nor assault the hearer's sense of mental well being, self-esteem, sexual orientation etc. You can be sued. The IRS prohibits such organizations from "carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation" (26 USC 501-C-3). This prohibition extends, not only to the endorsement of a political candidate, but also any other attempts to "influence legislation," including taking a public stand against such government-protected abominations, such as abortion or homosexuality. Now, the church is discovering that favors from Washington, DC have strings attached. In this case, the string is a rope that is being used to throttle her once-powerful voice, to squeeze out her very life and, eventually, to hang her by the neck until dead!
- Most people don't know this, but by signing IRS form 501c3 (tax exempt status) the CHURCH in America has agreed (in very plain and clear terms) to NOT criticize the Almighty government, politicians, or anything political, ever, under any circumstances... The First Amendment right to free speech, amazingly, is voluntarily forfeited by the "Amerikan" church the moment they sign on the dotted line.
- Churches applying for 501 status agree they will maintain their internal practices in accordance with government wishes... These churches are not private churches. They are public corporations subject to every whim and fancy of the government, like Microsoft... "Churches are simply applying for something they do not need and should not have, usually out of ignorance... A true church does not subject itself to government, or seek public benefits. It especially does not do so to get more money from it's members.
From the information presented above we learn that:
- A corporation is “a creature of the State.”
- The State is "sovereign" over the corporation.
- The corporation is “incorporated for the benefit of the public.”
- A corporation is a State “franchise.”
- Incorporation is a State “privilege.”
- A corporation is “subject to the laws of the State.”
- “Its powers are limited by law.”
- It must “obey the laws of its creation.”
- A corporation has no constitutionally-protected rights.
Reading further about the history of corporations we find that corporations are not new or novel legal principles that the Supreme Court just discovered in 1906. Rather, these are legal principles that date back many centuries. The corporation is a product of ancient Rome. The corporation, as the legal entity we are familiar with today, dates back to at least 250 B.C.
By 6 A.D. and the codification of Corpus Juris Civilis (the first great codification of Roman civil law) all "spontaneous collectivities of persons" were required to incorporate. The early church was persecuted over their refusal to incorporate. Had they incorporated they could have avoided much of the persecution they otherwise suffered at the hands of the Romans.
Rome persecuted the Christians not for Who they worshipped. Rome had hundreds of deities, and they could care less who or what you worshipped, as long as you were "licit" (licensed). The church was persecuted not because they worshipped Jesus Christ, but because of the manner in which they functioned -- an ecclesia. The church was declared to be "illicit," and held in a state of "civil disobedience," because of their refusal to incorporate. Why did the church refuse incorporation? Largely because they knew that it would destroy their testimony that Yahshua Messiah is our Saviour and Yahweh is our Sovereign King.
Under Roman civil law, "Caesar is sovereign over the corporation," and "the corporation is a creature of the State." The early church willingly suffered for its refusal to accept "State privileges and benefits."
III Yahchanan 1:7 “Because they went forth for his name’s sake, taking nothing of the Gentiles.”
Corporations have been known and widely used for many centuries in virtually every corner of the earth. However, the corporation was not at all widely known in America during the colonial era, and for many decades after our independency. Indeed, the corporation was an entity viewed with great suspicion, if not trepidation. For many years it was extremely difficult and expensive to incorporate and, therefore, it was rather difficult to identify corporations of any kind, especially incorporated churches.
Today, all that is necessary to incorporate is that you fill out the necessary forms and file them with your Secretary Of State's office; but that wasn't always the case. It used to be that if you wanted to incorporate you would have to petition your state legislature for a corporate charter, and they weren't in the habit of handing those out to just anyone who wanted one. In order to be issued a corporate charter, you had to prove to a majority of your state legislators that you simply couldn't operate any other way. As a result, the vast majority of businesses operated as sole proprietorships and general partnerships.
Those who have ever had to petition their state legislature for anything know that it is a time-consuming process, and often leads to frustration, if not failure. For any church to request a corporate charter would surely be met by failure (at least after ratification of the Constitution and the First Amendment), since the states viewed the incorporation of any church as a government "establishment of religion." Some state legislatures, such as Virginia and West Virginia, went so far as to amend their state constitutions to "forever prohibit the incorporation of any church."
In Caesar's Grip, page 66, by Peter Kershaw we find the following information:
In 1811 Congress ratified a bill, to incorporate the Protestant Episcopal Church in Alexandria, Virginia. When the bill was presented for President James Madison’s signature, he promptly vetoed it. He furnished a list of his objections, in a veto message, which in part included:
"Because the bill exceeds the rightful authority to which governments are limited by the essential distinction between civil and religious functions, and violates in particular the article of the Constitution of the United States which declares that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment.’ The bill enacts into and establishes by law sundry rules and proceedings relative purely to the organization and polity of the church incorporated… This particular church, therefore, would so far be a religious establishment by law, a legal force and sanction being given to certain articles in its constitution and administration."
James Madison had no difficulty with grasping the fact that the bill was wholly unconstitutional, although the majority in Congress evidently did not. With the Episcopal Church having already declared its intentions, the Virginia state legislature prevented any church from ever incorporating by amending their Constitution to preclude their doing so. To this very day, it is unlawful to incorporate a church in Virginia.
Of Madison's historic veto, constitutional law professor John Eidsmoe states in his book, Christianity and the Constitution: His
reason was that incorporation was a form of licensing by which
government gave churches permission to operate. Therefore, incorporation
was superfluous; government has no jurisdictional authority to tell
churches they can or cannot operate.
Madison's veto set an historic precedent that was seldom departed from, at least up until the turn of the twentieth-century. In 1898, New Jersey became the first state to "liberalizate" their incorporation laws. The New Jersey state legislature delegated its powers to incorporate to the New Jersey Secretary Of State. Rather than issuing corporate charters, the Secretary Of State issued "articles of incorporation." All the former impediments to obtaining corporate status were done away with. In order to "compete" with New Jersey, other states quickly followed suit and liberalized their incorporation laws, as well. Soon the mainline church denominations, no longer hindered by state legislators, incorporated. Andrew Carnegie, a wealthy industrialist who sat on the board of directors for the largest Presbyterian denomination (PCUSA), was first to encourage his denomination to incorporate. Carnegie did so not because of all the reasons we hear today. Not once did he ever even mention limited liability protection. Rather, Carnegie spoke highly of the corporation, based upon its alleged "efficiencies."
Other industrialist tycoons, such as Cleveland Dodge and John Wanamaker, who sat on the boards of other mainline denominations, also encouraged their denominations to incorporate, based upon their theories of "improved efficiency." This was the industrial age and industrialists had rapidly become "corporate men." In their worldview, the church too must become "modernized," and incorporation was a necessary element of modernization. Eventually, many local churches, encouraged by the example of their denominations, also incorporated. By the mid-twentieth century, incorporation of the church had become the status quo.
Madison's veto of 1811, and his reasons for that veto have, by and large, been abandoned, if not completely forgotten. Of even greater concern is the fact that today's church has, with few exceptions, abandoned the beliefs of the early church fathers who refused to incorporate, and suffered Rome's persecution, as a direct result. Incorporation was mandatory for all "spontaneous collectivities of persons" throughout Rome. Yet they refused Caesar's "privilege."
In America, incorporation is completely voluntary. Furthermore, as we've already mentioned, it used to be almost impossible to incorporate a church, based upon the fact that no church can be free and independent of that government that incorporates it. Yet churches today incorporate routinely, a decision which they make with about as much care and consideration as what brand of tissue paper to use in their lavatories; this in spite of the fact that there are huge legal and theological ramifications to any church seeking incorporation.
INCORPORATION MYTHS
Limited Liability Protection? Limited liability protection is generally first among the legal “benefits” used by attorneys to convince a church to incorporate. However, limited liability protection is, for a number of reasons, largely a phantasm promulgated by (you guessed it) the legal profession, and fails to take into account significant trends in tort law in recent years. The American Bar Association has hosted “Tort & Religion” conferences since at least 1989 in which they instruct attorneys in the finer points of how to target incorporated “religious organizations” and “pierce the corporate veil.”
Incorporation does little if anything in the way of actually protecting the church. The legal reality is that a church cannot be sued and brought into court until it incorporates. A church “is not an entity recognized in law.” If the court cannot legally recognize it, it cannot be sued. A church is not subject to the jurisdiction of any court. However, should a church incorporate it most certainly may be sued. Incorporation becomes the nexus of government jurisdiction to the incorporated church. One of the legal attributes that seldom if ever is discussed by the attorney is: A corporation may sue and be sued. How they can sell that as a “benefit” is hard to comprehend.
The Fox Guarding the Henhouse
One thing attorneys will never discuss is just who offers the “protection” to the corporation. The answer is the State. Is this wise or prudent? Even decades ago when the State was openly cordial to the church it would be hard to argue from Scripture that the church should seek its “protection” from the State. But in post-Christian America when the State has grown openly antagonistic toward biblical believers, is it smart to seek State “protection”? That would be like asking the fox to guard the henhouse (or in biblical vernacular, the wolf protecting the sheep.)
INCORPORATION PROBLEMS
There are numerous problems associated with a church organizing as a corporation. Attorneys will enthusiastically market the alleged “benefits,” but nary a word is mentioned about all the pitfalls of incorporation. Not only are there legal pitfalls, but there are significant theological ones, as well.
A Creature Of the State. Two of the most serious of all problems for the church that incorporates is the legal fact that:
- The corporation is a “creature of the State.”
- The State is “sovereign over the corporation.”
These are legal maxims that originated in ancient pagan Rome, and they survive as governing legal dictum to this very day. The corporation that we know today, with all of its legal attributes, was perfected by the Romans at least 250 years prior to the birth of Christ Jesus. Those who have studied Roman culture will appreciate how every element of society, including its legal system, was imbued by their pagan worldview. There were no personal liberties in the Roman empire, only State-sanctioned privileges and benefits. The State was sovereign (the supreme authority) in all matters and nothing could be done absent the State’s license. Incorporation became mandatory by 6 A.D. for all “spontaneous collectivities of persons.” The church was not persecuted by Rome because of who they worshipped (there were hundreds of deities that Rome permitted to be worshipped). Persecution began because of the manner in which they worshipped. The church was held to be “illicit” because they refused to seek the permission of the State through incorporation.
Why would the early Believers suffer the wrath of Rome rather than incorporate? The answer is both legal and, necessarily, theological. For the church to incorporate would have been a public proclamation that Caesar was sovereign (the supreme authority) over Yahshua Messiah, the Head of the church. Those Believers would have considered such a thing blasphemy!
Secondly, they well knew that the church is the body of Messiah -- corpus Christi -- not the corpus of the State (the word “corporation” comes from the Latin “corpus” or “body”). The early church had far more regard for the consistency of their testimony than many churches do today. We should try to learn something from their example. It is because of that testimony that they at no time sought the privileges and benefits of the Roman State:
III Yahchanan 1:7 “Because that for his name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles.”
The early church existed to testify to the world the authority and leadership of its Head and Founder, the Man, Yahshua Messiah -- an everlasting message. The local church, though persecuted, was free and unconstrained to impact the culture of the Roman Empire, not become subordinate to its pagan rulers. Incorporated churches in America today, however, are constrained by the dictates of the State by virtue of the myriad of laws which apply to non-profit corporations.
This little light of mine, I'm gonna let it shine
Let’s now follow one of the more typical scenarios in how the pastor (and often the elders, and deacons) are convinced to incorporate the local church. Sunday morning the pastor gives a stirring sermon on the passage from John 3:3, “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” He closes with an altar call and proclaims, “Friends, Jesus is not only the Savior merely of men’s souls, He is the Savior, the Lord, the Sovereign of every area of our lives, Jesus wants to not only save your soul from eternal damnation, His will is to govern every area of your life. Jesus is the Provider. Jesus is the great Protector.” And many a soul is saved that day. They are convinced the Pastor really believes what he says.
With Monday morning into the church comes an attorney who informs the Pastor, “Reverend, in combing through the Secretary Of State’s records, I noticed that your church is not incorported. Don’t you know that most churches are incorporated? Pastor, you’re flirting with danger. Didn’t you hear about the church just down the road here that got sued because some grandmother walked in and fell over a rumple in the carpet and broke her hip. She got a judgement not only against the church, but because the church wasn’t incorporated she was able to attach the personal assets of the pastor, elders, deacons, and any of the members of the church with deep pockets.”
What the attorney just presented to the Pastor is a lie (just ask that attorney to give you a citation for the case of granny and her broken hip, and you’ll never see him again), but lies rooted in fear often sell, and the attorney well knows this. He’s not concerned for the truth, just for roping in another paying client. The law profession is far more competitive than most people realize. There are over one-million attorneys in America (that’s more than the entire attorney population of the rest of the world combined). There are too many attorneys chasing too little legitimate legal work, so many of them have to create work for themselves -- to create a perception of a need where no legitimate need exists.
Just what kind of a testimony is it to the world when the church incorporates, and particularly when we do so out of a spirit of fear? Sadly, the issue of our testimony is seldom ever considered when making that monumental decision. But it is one that many others will ponder when they are presented with the gospel message. “Let’s see, the Pastor just said that Jesus not only saves my soul, but He will be my Savior in every area of my life. He’s my Provider. He’s my Protector. If he’s such a great Protector, why then did this church think they needed to go to the State and get its limited liability protection by incorporating? Obviously the church must not think very much of Yahweh’s ability to protect them.”
THE FREE BODY OF BELIEVERS, THE HOUSE OF YAHWEH NOT AN INCORPORATED CHURCH
A great many of the believers problems today are a direct result of the church "taking" and actively pursuing a legal status that makes it inferior to, and a subordinate of, the civil government. The two most significant ways this occurs is by incorporation (state jurisdiction) and the tax-exempt 501c3 status (federal jurisdiction).
Scripture simply does not support the notion that the church is an inferior institution to the State. Nor, for that matter, is the House of Yahweh a superior institution to the State. Yahweh has ordained both the church and the civil government as His "ministers." The church is the minister of the Law of Yahweh, while the State is the minister of justice among civil people. Church and State are two distinct and independent spheres of authority (jurisdictions) ordained by Yahweh. Of course the State we speak of should be a body politic formed with the Laws of Yahweh as it’s constitution. That does not mean however, that we are to rebel against govenment, as long as they do not pass laws that oppose Yahweh.
However, no church can remain separate and distinct from the civil government when it incorporates and/or accepts 501c3 status. For legal purposes an incorporated 501c3 church has subordinated itself, by contract, to the civil government. For theological purposes, that church has made a covenant with the State, a covenant which Scripture in no way supports.
Exodus 34:12 "Take heed to yourself, that you make no covenant, with the inhabitants of the land, where you are going, or they will be a snare in your midst."
What is the solution to the church's current messy state of affairs? It must cease operating as an underling of the State. The solution is for the church to legally operate as it once had in America (and we might add, quite successfully so). Rather than operating as "tax-exempt nonprofit religious corporations," churches once functioned as "free-churches." Just what exactly is a free-church? A free-church operates independent of, and is in no way subordinate to, the civil government. It is the right of any church to operate free of the corrupting and compromising influence and control of the State; and it is a right guaranteed by the Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…
A free-church is not some radical-fringe concept. Rather, the free-church was one of the most influential, and certainly one of the most common, institutions in early American history. The worldview of those men who fought for America's independence embraced an uncompromising belief that the church was not an underling, a vassal, or in any way subordinate to any king, parliament, or any other civil government body. The House of Yahweh is the religious institution ordained and established by Yahweh Himself, and Yahshua Messiah never delegated His authority to the civil jurisdiction to rule in the affairs of the House of Yahweh.
A free-church is the opposite of a State-Church. The Church Of England is a State-Church system. State-Churches are well known throughout Europe, and there have been State-Churches there for many centuries. Europeans not only have a very low regard for their State-Churches and government-licensed clergy, they often hold them in open contempt, and this is reflected statistically by what is the lowest church attendance in the world. Rather than being quick to criticize the Europeans for not attending church, we should ponder whether their contempt for the State-Church system isn't well deserved. If you're ever inclined to have a church experience that is cold, empty, meaningless and downright depressing, just attend the average European church service (it's little wonder there are so many agnostics and atheists there).
A State-Church is a church which is organized by the State, and/or is controlled and regulated by the State, or which exists at the pleasure of the State. Christians in Europe have, for a number of generations, grown up surrounded by nothing but State-Churches. As such, they are generally not offended by the notion that the State controls their church (they just don't bother to show up unless it's Christmas). It's simply a way of life for them which they generally do not question. Americans, on the other hand, are generally offended by the notion of the State creating or controlling their churches, or that their churches would be subordinate to the State. However, this is exactly what has occurred in recent years as a direct result of churches incorporating and seeking a 501c3 status -- they have become State-Churches.
A free-church is a church that is truly separate, independent and autonomous from the State. It is established by a local body of believers, or chartered or "planted" by another church body or denomination, without the permission or sanction of the State. The only "sovereign" of the free-church is Yahweh. A free-church cannot incorporate, it cannot seek a 501c3 status, it cannot become a tax collector for the State (withholding agent), it cannot accept government-issued tax numbers (EIN).
The term "free-church" was widely used by the American colonists. It was not a term that they coined, but one which they inherited from their fathers and forebears such as the Scottish Covenanters, and the "non-conformist" English clergy, both of whom fled the persecutions of the Anglican State-Church and it's "sovereign head" the British monarchy. Even after American independence there continued to be Christians who fled the religious persecution of their State-Church systems for the freedom of religion America offered them. They too often used the term "free-church" to describe the churches they organized. Such an example of this would be the Evangelical Free Church, which was founded by a group of Scandinavians who settled in America in the mid-nineteenth century. Tragically, the Evangelical Free Church In America today has become a "Free Church" in name only. By incorporating and becoming a 501c3 they, some years ago, decided to abandon those principles that their Swedish, Danish and Norwegian forefathers endured great persecution for.
Equally tragic is the demise of the so-called "Free-Church of Scotland." Were they honest it would be renamed the "State-Church of Scotland." So thoroughly has it become a State-Church that Scottish pastors receive their paychecks from the government (and it happened because the Scottish clergy insisted upon it). He who pays the piper calls the tune.
The church must cease operating as an underling, subordinate to the State, or in any way dependent upon the State for "privileges and benefits." The solution rests in the church organizing and operating as a church -- the ecclesia, not as something other than what Yahweh ordained and specified. Yahshua spoke of the House of Yahweh as a “body” with Himself as the “head” of the body, and we as various “members of the body.” The House of Yahweh is, therefore, not an “organization” (a “legal entity”) but a living, breathing “organism.” This should not be a difficult biblical doctrine to grasp, particularly for the Pastor. Sadly, however, ever since local churches started organizing as tax-exempt non-profit corporations in the mid-twentieth century, and since the incorporated 501c3 church is now the status quo, many folks have a hard time conceiving of the church operating as just a church. For some odd reason, just being a church isn’t good enough anymore for too many believers. The thinking today appears to be that we must somehow be smarter than Yahshua and His disciples were. They refused to incorporate and that refusal resulted in their persecution (incorporation of all “spontaneous collectivities of persons” became mandatory throughout the Roman Empire by 6 A.D.). We’re told that we live in a far more complex world than the first-century church, and so the church too must inevitably become more complex and just adapt to the complexities of the modern information age. The simplicities of the organizational infrastructure (polity) of the early church are no longer adequate to address the complex world in which we live.
Those who hold to such beliefs, whether in word or deed, are in reality, making a public proclamation that Yahshua Messiah is no longer competent to govern the House of Yahweh and provide for, and protect it.
The courts well-understand that “a church is not an entity recognized in law,” meaning that they have no jurisdiction over the church. However, organizing a church as a church is an especially difficult concept for attorneys to grasp. Few attorneys can comprehend that there are things and issues completely outside the purview and jurisdiction of the civil government, nor do they much care for the idea. After all, it’s hard to get many billable hours out of those churches that understand that the civil government has no jurisdiction over them. A free-church needs an attorney like a fish needs a bicycle. The legal support for the State’s lack of jurisdiction over the church in America is not only the Word of Yahweh, but the First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…
No church in any nation at any point in history can lay claim to the freedoms and liberties that are guaranteed the church in America. The First Amendment is an act of Yahweh’s Providence to safeguard His church and maintain its independence from the State. The First Amendment is the highest form of real protection the church has ever known in history. The solution rests in the church abandoning the phony third-rate protections and benefits of the State and returning to those real protections and benefits that are ours in Yahweh’s Laws. Although it's not inherently difficult to unlicense a State-Church and/or organize and operate as a free-church or free-ministry, you'll still need some guidance and direction. Thankfully, there's no need to hire an attorney. All you need is some basic do-it-yourself education.
CONCLUSION
Consider the covenant made with Abraham for it was an everlasting covenant. It is passed down from generation to generation. This covenant did not involve any other party, nor was there a need to get a government stamp of approval. In Genesis the 22nd chapter we see the story of Abraham and the revealing of more of this trust covenant between him and Yahweh.
Genesis 22:14 “And Abraham called the name of the place, Yahweh-Yireh, that is Yahweh will provide; as it is said to this day. On the mountain of Yahweh it will be provided.”
The word Mountain in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary is word #2022 and means: the holy mountain of Yahweh.
The word Yahweh-yireh in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary is word #3070/7200 which means: Yahweh; to see the face of Yahweh.
Abraham was face to face with Yahweh in a covenant relationship. He was at the Holy Mountaing or the House of Yahweh, which was established as an everlasting covenant. The House of Yahweh is not a corporation, it does not need protection from the State, nor permission to carry out it’s objective. You are the House of Yahweh, that is, if the Spirit of Yahweh dwells in you. As the body of Messiah, we must not prostitute this body to godworship and godworshippers. Let us not incorporate ourselves to a dead body. Let us trust in Yahweh and believe as Abraham did, and it will be accounted to us as righteousness. We need to keep the Covenant of Peace, the everlasting Laws of Yahweh. It is our job to reveal false doctrines and to expose the workers of darkness. Do the job of a minister, study to show yourselves approved and pray for the day of deliverance.
