Tithing

[Letfreedumbring]

This from a previous thread but perhaps with new insights as time has been a great teacher these days:

Hinckley April 2003, Saturday Morning Session, talk entitled Condition of the Church:

"I promise you that we will not put the Church in debt. We will strictly tailor the program to the tithing income and use these sacred funds for the purposes designated by the Lord.

I call attention to that which has received much notice in the local press. This is our decision to purchase the shopping mall property immediately to the south of Temple Square.

We feel we have a compelling responsibility to protect the environment of the Salt Lake Temple. The Church owns most of the ground on which this mall stands. The owners of the buildings have expressed a desire to sell. The property needs very extensive and expensive renovation. We have felt it imperative to do something to revitalize this area. But I wish to give the entire Church the assurance that tithing funds have not and will not be used to acquire this property. Nor will they be used in developing it for commercial purposes.

Funds for this have come and will come from those commercial entities owned by the Church. These resources, together with the earnings of invested reserve funds, will accommodate this program.

[City Creek happens in 2008, Billions spent and Let's Go Shopping Years Later - whistleblower reveals different story]

[Letfreedumbring]

Reserve funds are not tithing funds. I thought President Hinckley explained it well.

While cash is fungible, I agree. I think Pres. Hinckley's point is: 1) We don't want this neighborhood around the temple to become a terrible ghetto, and 2) we are not using new funds coming in, we have funds from past years that are being used as investments anyway; this mall has no place in our budget with regards to funds coming in--it is just part of an investment that we do with surplus funds.

Circular rationalization at its finest.

At the end of the day, we all have to admit for ourselves and no other person really. Where did the funds come from originally?

The church was never a business before becoming a church. I think any person would view any business that did attempt to become a church with disgust or at the very least exam their content more closely.

Therefore there were no carry over funds before the money existed in the church and came entirely as money given to the Lord. The sacred tithes were set apart for the Lord's purposes and paid per christians following what they thought was a direct commandment from the Lord. This the whole key to understanding. Anything after that, the accountability of handling the Lord's money begins and while our personal attitudes towards it may cloud the matter - there is no other way it came about.

After that, you may delve into what lawyers like to use to obfuscate the issue: non-profit vs profit, not ethical vs legal by tax law, preferences over what to purchase, smart vs not smart, etc. These are all attempts to deal with the symptoms but never addressing the initial cause. Even writing later all donations will be used whatever way we choose does not excuse them from this singular obligation.

[Letfreedumbring]

Joseph F Smith current prophet at the time in conference: (1906 Conference Report)

"I want to say another thing to you, and I do so by way of congratulation, and that is, that we have, by the blessing of the Lord and the faithfulness of the Saints in paying their tithing, been able to pay off our bonded indebtedness. Today the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints owes not a dollar that it cannot pay at once. At last we are in a position that we can pay as we go. We do not have to borrow any more, and we wont have to if the Latter-day Saints continue to live their religion and observe this law of tithing, It is the law of revenue to the Church.

Furthermore, I want to say to you, we may not be able to reach it right away, but we expect to see the day when we will not have to ask you for one dollar of donation for any purpose, except that which you volunteer to give of your own accord, because we will have tithes sufficient in the storehouse of the Lord to pay everything that is needful for the advancement of the kingdom of God. I want to live to see that day, if the Lord will spare my life. It does not make any difference, though, so far as that is concerned, whether I live or not. That is the true policy, the true purpose of the Lord in the management of the affairs of His Church.

https://archive.org/details/conferencer ... ew=theater

I would ask have we not already reached this day?

[Moroni104]

At the end of the day, we all have to admit for ourselves and no other person really. Where did the funds come from originally?

I actually agree with you that the funds did originally come from tithing and to the extent that Church officials obscure that fact they are being dishonest.

My point is two-fold: 1) this has always been done, and 2) the Church does have excess reserve funds which it does invest so why is investing in a mall so bad?

1) Prior to the 1900s, as was pointed out above, the prophets urged people and also indebted the Church sometimes to pay for things like anti-banks or railroads. And in this time, you could say "well it wasn't tithing"... but even if you use that argument, you have to admit that the people who gave money for these efforts believed they were consecrating funds for the building of Zion.
The Church has always used consecrated funds to build material, including commercial endeavors; it has never just used those funds to give to people who are poor. In the other post, I brought up the ranch in Florida as an example. It was bought in the 1950s and is still owned by the Church. To answer people's questions, I have been there. I personally think it is cool they own this ranch and don't believe they need to liquidate it and give funds to the poor.

Which gets me to my next point
2) The Church has been putting away funds building up a reserve. Their massive stock holdings are well documented and include a wide array of stocks which have nothing to do with our Church's values. They are just random stocks held to earn money on reserves. Owning facebook stock (although I hate facebook; think they are evil; wish the Church did not invest in them and wish they did not use Facebook for missionary work) does not obligate the Church. it is just part of a portfolio of investments to preserve and grow surplus funds. Given the recent massive increase in real estate values, in Utah, it seems like the Church made a decent investment in the mall next to the temple. I would rather they did stuff like this with their surplus funds than just invest in Facebook. At least they were able to help the area near the temple not become a ghetto. ... now that real estate values are up... perhaps they can sell and be done with it.... but even holding onto it is not a bad idea because the possibility of a future owner of that area purposely buidling anti-mormon stuff seems plausbile to me. ... I wish the Church would buy the land the University of Utah is on, and ship the University of Utah off to the California Bay area.

As to your question about whether we have reached a point as to not need 10% of income to go to the Church corporation, and instead be individually donated to local causes; you may be right. We may have reached that point. I don't feel that strongly about it yet, as the amount of wealth the Church has is still only something like $10k per member, depending on how many active members you think we actually have. I can see at some point that we will have reached a point that donating to the Church corporation instead of locally will seem silly.

[mudflap]

well, I don't think the church is 100% funded by tithing - there has always been gifts - I know folks who signed over their house or farm to the church in their will.

but agree on the other points - I would love to see local donations remain local. Or - even better - maybe the church sorts out wards by "prosperity level" - comparing the ratio of the local cost of living to donations - see which wards are the poorest, and then "invest" to help make them "not so poor". I said "invest" on purpose - maybe some learning programs to help the local poor increase their independence - job training, business planning, investing, saving, etc. They should not just throw money at the poor - that never works anywhere.

[Mindfields]

The church's philosophy is 'business is business' and 'church is church' with business clearly the more important of the two. But none the less, entirely two separate entities.

[MikeMaillet]

1 Nephi chapter 22:

23 For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity; yea, in fine, all those who belong to the kingdom of the devil are they who need fear, and tremble, and quake; they are those who must be brought low in the dust; they are those who must be consumed as stubble; and this is according to the words of the prophet.

How on earth can we argue that we are not a church built for gain when most non-members, when asked about Mormons, will admit they know nothing about our church except for the fact that we are loaded to the gills. Do we not realize that when we use the central bank's money that we empower the money as well as the creators of the money?

If the love of money is the root of all evil, where does that put us?

Isaiah chapter 1:

22 Your silver has become dross,
your wine diluted with water.
23 Your rulers are renegades,
accomplices of robbers:
with one accord they love bribes
and run after rewards;
they do not dispense justice to the fatherless,
nor does the widow’s case come before them.
24 Therefore the Lord, Jehovah of Hosts,
the Valiant One of Israel, declares,
Woe to them! I will relieve me
of my adversaries,
avenge me of my enemies.
25 I will restore my hand over you
and smelt away your dross as in a crucible,a
and remove all your alloy.
26 I will restore your judges as at the first,
and your counsellors as in the beginning.
After this you shall be called
the City of Righteousness, a faithful city.
27 For Zion shall be ransomed by justice,
those of her who repent by righteousness.

Mike

[Ebenezer]

The “church” is a business.

Religion is its flagship product.

[Letfreedumbring]

1 Nephi chapter 22:

23 For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world ...

Do we not realize that when we use the central bank's money that we empower the money as well as the creators of the money?

By now the Church has enough money to run its own economy in its own country, we could effectively buy much of South America or Africa and many island nations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... _(nominal)

yet we continue to support the central banks with our use of their funds, invest in companies like Monsanto (GMO), All the Jab Companies (Pfizer, AstraZ, J&J, Abbott Labs, etc), companies using slave labor, list goes on with companies that have shown their ill intent toward humanity, but if that wasn't enough the church actually donates our donations to furnish the UN Death Star.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/chu ... t?lang=eng

They could earn interest on all those tithing funds in a savings account (they pay well these days) or use it to help people directly like those other lesser charities do, but no we need money at risk to provide a golden parachute for some down on their luck scumbag CEO. At what point is not only unnecessary but supporting the very cause we are defending against?