Heard in Elder's Quorum today

[Chip]

"The church is building temples to keep the great and spacious building in check. Each temple dedication decreases Satan's power."

There was also some talk of how they are sinking lots of money into temples.

If you consider that Ensign Peak Advisors had a portfolio of $134B, and figure that a fancy temple might cost $13.4M, there was enough money there to build 10,000 temples. Maybe they are building 100 new temples at an expenditure of 1% of their stock portfolio.

The church's TOTAL assets are probably close to $1T, or $1,000,000,000,000. Them giving away $1M is like a millionaire giving away $1. If you had $10,000 and you gave someone a penny, it would be the same proportional expense.

[Chip]

If you think about that 48-page report that detailed their $1.03B in charity expenditures last year, that was probably about 0.1% of their total wealth, or 1/1000th.

Imagine if you had a net worth of $250k and you gave away $250 over a year.

[Lemarque]

One older guy in the class said he heard that 35 temples will be announced this conference. And coming from his perspective where there were fewer than 10 temples when he was born, it's amazing to him how much the church is growing, as evidenced by temple announcements. He can't imagine that the church that he's followed for over 70 years would jump the shark with temple building.

Today's generation isn't going to care at all about temples with how common they are. And the fact they don't have to sacrifice anything for them.

So the church will probably need to redo the video every couple years, since that has been the only thing that has been bringing temple attendance back up post-covid.

[Hosh]

"The church is building temples to keep the great and spacious building in check. Each temple dedication decreases Satan's power."

"We even hear the current leaders talk about their shortcomings, which I think are much exaggerated."

"Naysayers are saying the church is losing people in droves, but that isn't true. We are building more temples now than ever. Statistically the church is growing, it's not falling back."

A lot of comments from people about people they know leaving the church, and it's "because they read something on the Internet." It's becoming a consistent theme recently. The cracks are showing.

Also, I want to add my testimony that it sucks for the teacher and the class to do a 50 minute class on an 8-10 minute talk from conference.

With the rise of the king of Assyria/Babylon prophesied by Isaiah (the end-time dictator), there will be incredible persecution of anyone who is a true Christian. These temples (and chapels) will be either destroyed by the dictator or will be turned into something like a brothel. As for the regurgitating of conference talks, I like this advice given in 1855. Note that the "published discourses" are the general conference talks.

"Thus we might go on reviewing the important subjects discussed in these published discourses, but we say to the Saints, if you would drink at the fountain of intelligence, if you would keep the fire of revelation burning brightly within you, if you would keep pace with the rapid progress of the kingdom, read and study for yourselves. The work of the Lord waits for no one" (Millennial Star, Vol 17, No 42, Oct 20, 1855, p 665).

Except for the Salt Lake temple right?

“We are sparing no effort to give this venerable temple, which had become increasingly vulnerable, a foundation that will withstand the forces of nature into the Millennium,” - Russell M

I guess he only said It won't be destroyed, he didn't say it wont be used as a brothel... he should have been more specific with his prophecy dang it

[HVDC]

One older guy in the class said he heard that 35 temples will be announced this conference. And coming from his perspective where there were fewer than 10 temples when he was born, it's amazing to him how much the church is growing, as evidenced by temple announcements. He can't imagine that the church that he's followed for over 70 years would jump the shark with temple building.

Today's generation isn't going to care at all about temples with how common they are. And the fact they don't have to sacrifice anything for them.

So the church will probably need to redo the video every couple years, since that has been the only thing that has been bringing temple attendance back up post-covid.

Of course they will.

If only to reflect the further light and knowledge.

Received from ChatLDS on how the 57 genders were incorporated into the foundations of the world.

From the beginning.

Just bow your head.

And say "yes" we can.

Too soon?

Ok, I'll wait.

Sir H

[JK4Woods]

I’m really bugged by the tearing apart of the Salt Lake Temple.

It was designed and built with some inspiration and loads of experience.

Now they are worried it’ll fall down in an earthquake.
I thought the dedicatory prayer blessed the temple to stand thru the millennium.

Cathedrals in Europe have been standing for many centuries.

I guess previous PSRs were wrong to say it will stand.

Couple hundred million on all that foundation work…

[spiritMan]

"The church is building temples to keep the great and spacious building in check. Each temple dedication decreases Satan's power."

There was also some talk of how they are sinking lots of money into temples.

If you consider that Ensign Peak Advisors had a portfolio of $134B, and figure that a fancy temple might cost $13.4M, there was enough money there to build 10,000 temples. Maybe they are building 100 new temples at an expenditure of 1% of their stock portfolio.

The church's TOTAL assets are probably close to $1T, or $1,000,000,000,000. Them giving away $1M is like a millionaire giving away $1. If you had $10,000 and you gave someone a penny, it would be the same proportional expense.

The problem with so many Temples is that it has now become the sole focus of the Church. It was always an important part, but now it's next level. I'm not whether we should rename the Church to The Church of the Living Prophet or The Church of the Temples.

[Serragon]

"The church is building temples to keep the great and spacious building in check. Each temple dedication decreases Satan's power."

There was also some talk of how they are sinking lots of money into temples.

If you consider that Ensign Peak Advisors had a portfolio of $134B, and figure that a fancy temple might cost $13.4M, there was enough money there to build 10,000 temples. Maybe they are building 100 new temples at an expenditure of 1% of their stock portfolio.

The church's TOTAL assets are probably close to $1T, or $1,000,000,000,000. Them giving away $1M is like a millionaire giving away $1. If you had $10,000 and you gave someone a penny, it would be the same proportional expense.

The problem with so many Temples is that it has now become the sole focus of the Church. It was always an important part, but now it's next level. I'm not whether we should rename the Church to The Church of the Living Prophet or The Church of the Temples.

A few other issues I have noticed is that the buildings no longer have any soul or individuality and the local membership no longer has any sacrificial stake in the buildings.

I sat in the temple a few weeks ago in the endowment room waiting for the session to begin. The building and the rooms were all beautiful, but there was no ornamentation that made it unique or individual. Same with the celestial room. This is much different than when I visit some of the older temples. The thought and ornamentation is very unique and is often meant to be harmonious with the lessons being taught in those rooms.

And this leads to the other problem of the members having to make no sacrifice of their time or talents to create these buildings. They have no say in what the temple will look like or what it will contain. They do not have a building fund or labor quotas to fulfill. As is true with our meetinghouses, there is no sense of the church or temple being ours or our community center. It is just a nice building "the church" created for us to use for certain prescribed activities.

When I converted in the 90s, the church felt like it was us. It now feels like it is them.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

[Niemand]

I’m really bugged by the tearing apart of the Salt Lake Temple.

It was designed and built with some inspiration and loads of experience.

Now they are worried it’ll fall down in an earthquake.
I thought the dedicatory prayer blessed the temple to stand thru the millennium.

Cathedrals in Europe have been standing for many centuries.

I guess previous PSRs were wrong to say it will stand.

Couple hundred million on all that foundation work…

Some of them. Many European churches have been destroyed by bombs, earthquakes, fires and structural collapse.

[Serragon]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

Seems to me that Judas felt much the same, and my response to you is the same as Jesus response to him.

I understand that this topic is very dear to your heart and that you feel the church and its leaders have misused the poor members of the church by their misinterpretation of tithing. And I don't disagree with you at all on that. But when you step beyond that and into these ideas about not spending money on anything until there are no poor, you step outside of doctrine and scripture.

D&C 119 is the Lord telling us how tithes are to be spent in our dispensation, and it does not conform to your belief. You have previously said that you reject this as being authoritative, but that doesn't change that fact that it is authoritative to believers in the restoration through Joseph Smith, and is a bit disingenuous on your part as you use this same scripture to support your idea that the church is tithing the poor incorrectly.

As to the command that there should be no poor among us.. As with most commands of this sort, it is a collective goal that can only be reached by everyone choosing to act individually. We cannot as a church eliminate the poor without eliminating agency. Individuals are commanded to be charitable and also commanded to not be slothful. You seem to focus exclusively on the first but not the second. This goal cannot be achieved without both. We could throw every penny we have at eliminating poverty, but the poor would still be with us if the slothful did not also decide to become productive. And so, as Christ says... the poor with always be with us.

I appreciate your compassion and your empathy for those who are struggling. But I would suggest that it is possible that this has become a part of your natural man that has brought you out of line with the revealed Word of God. Help others to change their hearts and become charitable on an individual level, and help those who are slothful to change their hearts and become industrious on an individual level. But I think criticizing the honoring of our Lord with beautiful things to be as incorrect now as when Judas said the same thing.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

Seems to me that Judas felt much the same, and my response to you is the same as Jesus response to him.

I understand that this topic is very dear to your heart and that you feel the church and its leaders have misused the poor members of the church by their misinterpretation of tithing. And I don't disagree with you at all on that. But when you step beyond that and into these ideas about not spending money on anything until there are no poor, you step outside of doctrine and scripture.

D&C 119 is the Lord telling us how tithes are to be spent in our dispensation, and it does not conform to your belief. You have previously said that you reject this as being authoritative, but that doesn't change that fact that it is authoritative to believers in the restoration through Joseph Smith, and is a bit disingenuous on your part as you use this same scripture to support your idea that the church is tithing the poor incorrectly.

As to the command that there should be no poor among us.. As with most commands of this sort, it is a collective goal that can only be reached by everyone choosing to act individually. We cannot as a church eliminate the poor without eliminating agency. Individuals are commanded to be charitable and also commanded to not be slothful. You seem to focus exclusively on the first but not the second. This goal cannot be achieved without both. We could throw every penny we have at eliminating poverty, but the poor would still be with us if the slothful did not also decide to become productive. And so, as Christ says... the poor with always be with us.

I appreciate your compassion and your empathy for those who are struggling. But I would suggest that it is possible that this has become a part of your natural man that has brought you out of line with the revealed Word of God. Help others to change their hearts and become charitable on an individual level, and help those who are slothful to change their hearts and become industrious on an individual level. But I think criticizing the honoring of our Lord with beautiful things to be as incorrect now as when Judas said the same thing.

Why did Nephi condemn the latter day churches for their “fine sanctuaries”? The LDS temples are the very epitome of this definition. For starters, the LDS church does not conform to what is taught in 119. They literally grind the face of the poor, which is what Nephi notes in 2 Nephi 28 and how they “changed the doctrine” among other things. You can stuff that in your Judas pipe and smoke it.

BTW, as I’ve noted previously, I don’t ascribe to the LDS definition of “consecration.” Lazy people are not welcome in a consecrated society. And you also don’t give your surplus to the church to have it handed back to you.

And, have you studied what Joseph taught about the original practice of tithing? It looks very little like what the church teaches today.

[TwochurchesOnly]

"The church is building temples to keep the great and spacious building in check. Each temple dedication decreases Satan's power."

There was also some talk of how they are sinking lots of money into temples.

If you consider that Ensign Peak Advisors had a portfolio of $134B, and figure that a fancy temple might cost $13.4M, there was enough money there to build 10,000 temples. Maybe they are building 100 new temples at an expenditure of 1% of their stock portfolio.

The church's TOTAL assets are probably close to $1T, or $1,000,000,000,000. Them giving away $1M is like a millionaire giving away $1. If you had $10,000 and you gave someone a penny, it would be the same proportional expense.

fine sanctuaries
Those #s really put it in perspective -
wow 10,000 temples @ 13 M each...
Heart wrenching to know that millions of people could have been spared great suffering -
If only

[TheDuke]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

Get rid of all the poor............. seems some guy who said he was the son of god said there would always be poor among us and had some mighty spendy oil poured on him. Balance. But feel free to just say what you think and believe it fits the scriptures. BTW, I am all for the church more helping the poor and on record for not building so many temples. But statements like "all the poor" is , well, not scriptural or possible.

I was thinking of my good friend (formerly anyway, now a way left liberal). and telling him that giving all these homeless people here money and food and clothes and homes (to destroy in months) and cash and needles for drugs, and not prosecuting them since their affliction is caused by us.............. Isn't helping and isn't what god would do. and isn't what Enoch did either............

So, sure, church should just give all the money to the poor, and start with about $5M each for every self named Lamanite for reparations, not as a gift but because the gentiles took from them and held them down.

Oh the liberals and their giving away money. BTW I would rather the church spend the money on a mall than give as a donation to the "so called" poor as then at the least I'm not funding someone to hurt those that cannot live without daily handouts that are young, healthy, capable, but just want free............. 13 people (families) now live in RVs and vans about 200 yards from the church building, right next to a day care center and across from the HS. Good access to making their living doing perverted things, but getting stuff for free.........

[Reluctant Watchman]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

Get rid of all the poor............. seems some guy who said he was the son of god said there would always be poor among us and had some mighty spendy oil poured on him. Balance. But feel free to just say what you think and believe it fits the scriptures. BTW, I am all for the church more helping the poor and on record for not building so many temples. But statements like "all the poor" is , well, not scriptural or possible.

I was thinking of my good friend (formerly anyway, now a way left liberal). and telling him that giving all these homeless people here money and food and clothes and homes (to destroy in months) and cash and needles for drugs, and not prosecuting them since their affliction is caused by us.............. Isn't helping and isn't what god would do. and isn't what Enoch did either............

So, sure, church should just give all the money to the poor, and start with about $5M each for every self named Lamanite for reparations, not as a gift but because the gentiles took from them and held them down.

Oh the liberals and their giving away money. BTW I would rather the church spend the money on a mall than give as a donation to the "so called" poor as then at the least I'm not funding someone to hurt those that cannot live without daily handouts that are young, healthy, capable, but just want free............. 13 people (families) now live in RVs and vans about 200 yards from the church building, right next to a day care center and across from the HS. Good access to making their living doing perverted things, but getting stuff for free.........

I feel like I’m talking in circles with some of you guys. Or… we’re really not on the same page. My understanding of a Zion-like society doesn’t seem to match the perception that some of you have. You can both care for the poor AND live the law of consecration… and not have slothfulness or a welfare state.

Read Moses again, study up on the City of Enoch. “they were of one heart and one mind, and there were no poor among them.”

BTW, you seem to take your own set of liberties w/ scripture too, so there’s that.

[TheDuke]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate, and I’m not talking about the LDS temple version of consecration.

Get rid of all the poor............. seems some guy who said he was the son of god said there would always be poor among us and had some mighty spendy oil poured on him. Balance. But feel free to just say what you think and believe it fits the scriptures. BTW, I am all for the church more helping the poor and on record for not building so many temples. But statements like "all the poor" is , well, not scriptural or possible.

I was thinking of my good friend (formerly anyway, now a way left liberal). and telling him that giving all these homeless people here money and food and clothes and homes (to destroy in months) and cash and needles for drugs, and not prosecuting them since their affliction is caused by us.............. Isn't helping and isn't what god would do. and isn't what Enoch did either............

So, sure, church should just give all the money to the poor, and start with about $5M each for every self named Lamanite for reparations, not as a gift but because the gentiles took from them and held them down.

Oh the liberals and their giving away money. BTW I would rather the church spend the money on a mall than give as a donation to the "so called" poor as then at the least I'm not funding someone to hurt those that cannot live without daily handouts that are young, healthy, capable, but just want free............. 13 people (families) now live in RVs and vans about 200 yards from the church building, right next to a day care center and across from the HS. Good access to making their living doing perverted things, but getting stuff for free.........

I feel like I’m talking in circles with some of you guys. Or… we’re really not on the same page. My understanding of a Zion-like society doesn’t seem to match the perception that some of you have. You can both care for the poor AND live the law of consecration… and not have slothfulness or a welfare state.

Read Moses again, study up on the City of Enoch. “they were of one heart and one mind, and there were no poor among them.”

BTW, you seem to take your own set of liberties w/ scripture too, so there’s that.

agreed. But that isn't what you were saying or implying. The poor around me are not LDS, most not Christian. Majority not from Wa, and half not from USA. You suggesting the church donate my hard earned funds and give it to them? Please clarify what you meant with that comment, I must have missed it?????

I agree on Enoch. As I said, Enoch killed anyone who wouldn't work 60 hours a week. If however you were just unable to work, he set them out the door for Nimrod to deal with! Then, like with Capt Moroni, everyone left was of one mind and one heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know sounds silly but not as silly as those spouting some united order BS, IMO. For Enoch, you had a choice. Live in Zion and work and be fruitful. Or live with Nimrod and the rest of their pre-Babylon folks. People were there by choice.

Not true in USA. Most of us are here because we were born here. Some came but fewer. Cannot really just leave, Even Ophrah didn't make it out. so, claiming in just USA alone (where vast majority of the LDS funds originated) it isn't a religious function to eliminate the poor. It just isn't. We can help. We can work with those that want to fellowship. but, in Seattle people go hungry because they will not commit to 12 hours of sobriety to get the food and spend a night in shelter.... those high and drunk are often offensive and injure people. So rule makes sense. Still churches feed them. Just need 1 hour of sobriety to eat.... but just still too hard for the majority (vast) of the poor here.............. Sorry, just the facts.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Get rid of all the poor............. seems some guy who said he was the son of god said there would always be poor among us and had some mighty spendy oil poured on him. Balance. But feel free to just say what you think and believe it fits the scriptures. BTW, I am all for the church more helping the poor and on record for not building so many temples. But statements like "all the poor" is , well, not scriptural or possible.

I was thinking of my good friend (formerly anyway, now a way left liberal). and telling him that giving all these homeless people here money and food and clothes and homes (to destroy in months) and cash and needles for drugs, and not prosecuting them since their affliction is caused by us.............. Isn't helping and isn't what god would do. and isn't what Enoch did either............

So, sure, church should just give all the money to the poor, and start with about $5M each for every self named Lamanite for reparations, not as a gift but because the gentiles took from them and held them down.

Oh the liberals and their giving away money. BTW I would rather the church spend the money on a mall than give as a donation to the "so called" poor as then at the least I'm not funding someone to hurt those that cannot live without daily handouts that are young, healthy, capable, but just want free............. 13 people (families) now live in RVs and vans about 200 yards from the church building, right next to a day care center and across from the HS. Good access to making their living doing perverted things, but getting stuff for free.........

I feel like I’m talking in circles with some of you guys. Or… we’re really not on the same page. My understanding of a Zion-like society doesn’t seem to match the perception that some of you have. You can both care for the poor AND live the law of consecration… and not have slothfulness or a welfare state.

Read Moses again, study up on the City of Enoch. “they were of one heart and one mind, and there were no poor among them.”

BTW, you seem to take your own set of liberties w/ scripture too, so there’s that.

agreed. But that isn't what you were saying or implying. The poor around me are not LDS, most not Christian. Majority not from Wa, and half not from USA. You suggesting the church donate my hard earned funds and give it to them? Please clarify what you meant with that comment, I must have missed it?????

I agree on Enoch. As I said, Enoch killed anyone who wouldn't work 60 hours a week. If however you were just unable to work, he set them out the door for Nimrod to deal with! Then, like with Capt Moroni, everyone left was of one mind and one heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know sounds silly but not as silly as those spouting some united order BS, IMO. For Enoch, you had a choice. Live in Zion and work and be fruitful. Or live with Nimrod and the rest of their pre-Babylon folks. People were there by choice.

Not true in USA. Most of us are here because we were born here. Some came but fewer. Cannot really just leave, Even Ophrah didn't make it out. so, claiming in just USA alone (where vast majority of the LDS funds originated) it isn't a religious function to eliminate the poor. It just isn't. We can help. We can work with those that want to fellowship. but, in Seattle people go hungry because they will not commit to 12 hours of sobriety to get the food and spend a night in shelter.... those high and drunk are often offensive and injure people. So rule makes sense. Still churches feed them. Just need 1 hour of sobriety to eat.... but just still too hard for the majority (vast) of the poor here.............. Sorry, just the facts.

What the LDS church is doing is wrong. They change the doctrine.

[TheDuke]

I feel like I’m talking in circles with some of you guys. Or… we’re really not on the same page. My understanding of a Zion-like society doesn’t seem to match the perception that some of you have. You can both care for the poor AND live the law of consecration… and not have slothfulness or a welfare state.

Read Moses again, study up on the City of Enoch. “they were of one heart and one mind, and there were no poor among them.”

BTW, you seem to take your own set of liberties w/ scripture too, so there’s that.

agreed. But that isn't what you were saying or implying. The poor around me are not LDS, most not Christian. Majority not from Wa, and half not from USA. You suggesting the church donate my hard earned funds and give it to them? Please clarify what you meant with that comment, I must have missed it?????

I agree on Enoch. As I said, Enoch killed anyone who wouldn't work 60 hours a week. If however you were just unable to work, he set them out the door for Nimrod to deal with! Then, like with Capt Moroni, everyone left was of one mind and one heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know sounds silly but not as silly as those spouting some united order BS, IMO. For Enoch, you had a choice. Live in Zion and work and be fruitful. Or live with Nimrod and the rest of their pre-Babylon folks. People were there by choice.

Not true in USA. Most of us are here because we were born here. Some came but fewer. Cannot really just leave, Even Ophrah didn't make it out. so, claiming in just USA alone (where vast majority of the LDS funds originated) it isn't a religious function to eliminate the poor. It just isn't. We can help. We can work with those that want to fellowship. but, in Seattle people go hungry because they will not commit to 12 hours of sobriety to get the food and spend a night in shelter.... those high and drunk are often offensive and injure people. So rule makes sense. Still churches feed them. Just need 1 hour of sobriety to eat.... but just still too hard for the majority (vast) of the poor here.............. Sorry, just the facts.

What the LDS church is doing is wrong. They change the doctrine.

Please don't do that again, change the subject of the discussion. the statement you made was the church should spend all its money until there are no more poor................................ Answer my question if you wish to respond using ". Don't change the subject to way, off the discussion point. Please............ (too hard?)

[Reluctant Watchman]

agreed. But that isn't what you were saying or implying. The poor around me are not LDS, most not Christian. Majority not from Wa, and half not from USA. You suggesting the church donate my hard earned funds and give it to them? Please clarify what you meant with that comment, I must have missed it?????

I agree on Enoch. As I said, Enoch killed anyone who wouldn't work 60 hours a week. If however you were just unable to work, he set them out the door for Nimrod to deal with! Then, like with Capt Moroni, everyone left was of one mind and one heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know sounds silly but not as silly as those spouting some united order BS, IMO. For Enoch, you had a choice. Live in Zion and work and be fruitful. Or live with Nimrod and the rest of their pre-Babylon folks. People were there by choice.

Not true in USA. Most of us are here because we were born here. Some came but fewer. Cannot really just leave, Even Ophrah didn't make it out. so, claiming in just USA alone (where vast majority of the LDS funds originated) it isn't a religious function to eliminate the poor. It just isn't. We can help. We can work with those that want to fellowship. but, in Seattle people go hungry because they will not commit to 12 hours of sobriety to get the food and spend a night in shelter.... those high and drunk are often offensive and injure people. So rule makes sense. Still churches feed them. Just need 1 hour of sobriety to eat.... but just still too hard for the majority (vast) of the poor here.............. Sorry, just the facts.

What the LDS church is doing is wrong. They change the doctrine.

Please don't do that again, change the subject of the discussion. the statement you made was the church should spend all its money until there are no more poor................................ Answer my question if you wish to respond using ". Don't change the subject to way, off the discussion point. Please............ (too hard?)

Duke, I never said that. You should read my comments more closely next time before making assumptions.

BTW, I won't be responding to this further. The church is in the wrong. End of story IMO. I've shared my opinion, you disagree. That's fine w me.

[TheDuke]

I think the only time a temple should have any extravagance is when there are no poor among the people who have covenants to consecrate,....

Duke, I never said that. You should read my comments more closely next time before making assumptions.

BTW, I won't be responding to this further. The church is in the wrong. End of story IMO. I've shared my opinion, you disagree. That's fine w me.
[/quote]

this is what you said, my friend. Sure, change the story, when called on it. Deny it. then run for cover. With an absurd response about the "church is wrong"................. feeble. Please DO NOT ENGAGE in future conversations if you cannot keep on topic and wish to throw stones without even aiming. Is that hard to ask for?

[Reluctant Watchman]

this is what you said, my friend. Sure, change the story, when called on it. Deny it. then run for cover. With an absurd response about the "church is wrong"................. feeble. Please DO NOT ENGAGE in future conversations if you cannot keep on topic and wish to throw stones without even aiming. Is that hard to ask for?

How about you stop misquoting and making assumptions?

I'd recommend you take your own suggestion to heart. This may sound harsh, but I don't care about the opinions of a person who repeatedly uses demeaning and condescending language. You do this all the time. So yeah, just count on me not engaging w you much on the forum.

[Chip]

this is what you said, my friend. Sure, change the story, when called on it. Deny it. then run for cover. With an absurd response about the "church is wrong"................. feeble. Please DO NOT ENGAGE in future conversations if you cannot keep on topic and wish to throw stones without even aiming. Is that hard to ask for?

How about you stop misquoting and making assumptions?

I'd recommend you take your own suggestion to heart. This may sound harsh, but I don't care about the opinions of a person who repeatedly uses demeaning and condescending language. You do this all the time. So yeah, just count on me not engaging w you much on the forum.

Are you girls gonna get this sorted out?

img_8866-1.jpg (116.97 KiB) Viewed 162 times

[randyps]

A lot of comments from people about people they know leaving the church, and it's "because they read something on the Internet." It's becoming a consistent theme recently. The cracks are showing.

I suggested once to the Church that they give pro-Church apologetic website links to professors, mission presidents, seminary and institute teachers, and missionaries.

I guess they didn't.

They should request that all church leaders spend an hour or two a week reading LDSFF so they can understand why people are leaving.

I thought this same thought but over the years I realized that our leaders are actually hearing it straight from the horses mouth in member interviews, not to mention that they all have family, friends, relatives that are leaving too so they are well aware of all the issues.

I do not suggest they come to LDSFF because its a cesspool of complainers and crybabies with negative dark energies. No real constructive criticism for them to learn and grow from.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I do not suggest they come to LDSFF because its a cesspool of complainers and crybabies with negative dark energies. No real constructive criticism for them to learn and grow from.

We see what we want to see.

[Dave62]

That is why I ditch the speeches and just use the scriptures to cover the theme of what ever speech they assign me.

I've a talk to give soon on some topic, quoting someone else. I unintentionally ally lost the last topic (something by Gary E. Stevenson, I think), but this is always an issue for me... how much of their talk must I quote vs how much can I say?

I’ve committed to only speak the words of Christ, faith in him and personal repentance and the doctrine of Christ, no matter what topic I am “assigned”.

THIS.IS.WHAT.YOU.NEED.TO.DO.