LDS Freedom Forum

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

Here is how I see it: The Church is a theocracy, not a democracy. We do not vote on church policy. If we want to have a vote on church policy we will need to change churches, there are some out there that even vote on what their doctrine will be.

Also I am thinking the mall might be a safer place for money right now than the bank is. If there is a major devaluation of the dollar the mall will still hold it's value. So I am okay with it.

:ymapplause:
The truth is; we have no way of knowing what God's Purpose was when he inspired them to build the mall. To say that God didn't inspire them, is to be an accuser.

As obvious as it is to say, our leaders are not infallible. We can only hope this seemingly foolish endeavour was the right call, but it's not looking good so far. [-( All that money spent on a mall? /:)

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

Here is how I see it: The Church is a theocracy, not a democracy. We do not vote on church policy. If we want to have a vote on church policy we will need to change churches, there are some out there that even vote on what their doctrine will be.

Also I am thinking the mall might be a safer place for money right now than the bank is. If there is a major devaluation of the dollar the mall will still hold it's value. So I am okay with it.

Yeah we don't vote on church policy, I guess all that talk in the D&C about common consent wasn't meant to followed anyways......

71 And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the voice and common consent of the order.
But,
If there is a major devaluation of the dollar, I'm sure the mall will still be a good investment, because when a currency crashes, the first thing people usually do is go out and shop at Tiffany's and BrooksBrothers.

Is that really the reasoning I just read??

Come on guys, if we are gonna support the mall decision, we can certainly do better than this!

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

=; Sorry pal. Where do you think we are...Chicago? )

shadow wrote:

A Random Phrase wrote:Yes, there are people who have stopped paying tithing from this -

The sifting has commenced. Fact is this- some are wheat and some are tares but agency allows the choice.

I absolutely and totally concur.

ajax wrote:

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

=; Sorry pal. Where do you think we are...Chicago? )

=)) You know what they say, vote early and often.

Gad wrote:

ajax wrote:

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

=; Sorry pal. Where do you think we are...Chicago? )

=)) You know what they say, vote early and often.

THANKS guys - this is actually FUNNY! =))

SmallFarm wrote:

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

Here is how I see it: The Church is a theocracy, not a democracy. We do not vote on church policy. If we want to have a vote on church policy we will need to change churches, there are some out there that even vote on what their doctrine will be.

Also I am thinking the mall might be a safer place for money right now than the bank is. If there is a major devaluation of the dollar the mall will still hold it's value. So I am okay with it.

:ymapplause:
The truth is; we have no way of knowing what God's Purpose was when he inspired them to build the mall. To say that God didn't inspire them, is to be an accuser.

SmallFarm, were the brethren inspired when they dropped about a million bucks for Mark Hoffman's forged documents back in the 1980's?

Col. Flagg wrote:

SmallFarm wrote:

Fielding wrote:I clicked on the wrong choice. When you created the poll you didn't check the box which allows voters to change their vote.

Here is how I see it: The Church is a theocracy, not a democracy. We do not vote on church policy. If we want to have a vote on church policy we will need to change churches, there are some out there that even vote on what their doctrine will be.

Also I am thinking the mall might be a safer place for money right now than the bank is. If there is a major devaluation of the dollar the mall will still hold it's value. So I am okay with it.

:ymapplause:
The truth is; we have no way of knowing what God's Purpose was when he inspired them to build the mall. To say that God didn't inspire them, is to be an accuser.

SmallFarm, were the brethren inspired when they dropped about a million bucks for Mark Hoffman's forged documents back in the 1980's?

I don't envy the brethren their stewardship.
To answer your question Col. Flagg, I believe the brethren to be inspired, not omnipotent.

Good points, Smallfarm:

I don't envy the brethren their stewardship.
To answer your question Col. Flagg, I believe the brethren to be inspired, not omnipotent.

As I've noted before:
1. The Lord is well aware of problems even in the Restored Church -- see D&C 112, for example.
2. The LORD will do the cleansing, not you and me -- see D&C 112 and parable of the Ten Virgins (also wheat and tares prophecy).
3. The Good Woman = the Lord's Church will arise victorious and build the New Jerusalem when Babylon the great falls in "one hour" (Revelation 17-22).

4. I also believe that patterns in the Book of Mormon before the coming of Jesus Christ to the Lehites will be repeated before the Second Coming, including riches becoming "slippery" and Gadiantons rising in influence in the government (see Helaman "sole management of the government" and 3 Nephi).

5. It behooves us to stay with the Lord and with his Church, help each other ride out the storms. And let the LORD do the cleansing!

Dr Jones, will there ever be a point where we temporarily rid ourselves of the Gadiantons like they did in the Book of Mormon?

@ Fielding

No way a mall is going to hold value with a dollar devaluation. Only commodity like assets will such as gold, silver, oil, wheat etc.

HeirofNumenor wrote:

Having crack dealers and hookers dealing their wares right outside temple grounds isn't what I'd like to see, like I do in downtown Denver, Sacramento, Baltimore, etc.

Why on earth would crack dealers and hookers seek out church headquarters?!

The area surrounding the Temple in Mesa, AZ is now a major blight, and I bet the city govt there would love to have the LDS Church come in and revitalize it - and the only people who would oppose would be those who are either:
a) anti-mormon or otherwise @#!*% at the Church
b) think that all Churches should have any money (all must be spent on the poor ASAP - even above building houses of worship and other religious facilities)
c) think that all religions should be taxed heavily

The city government would love such a project but that is because most government officials are greedy, money spending bastards. I say let's take all the "blight" we can get and love, serve and help them!

"Beautifying" Salt Lake means get rid of the "blight". I think Salt Lake should be a Mecca for sinners, the poor and needy and homeless because so much love and service should be rendered there!

hyloglyph wrote:Sorry for lurking, i just now saw this thread. I have served in the church in the 3rd world. Spending a billion plus dollars in Salt Lake boggles my mind. I am absolutely without words. I have no idea why this was done or how some people can justify it. But it's not on me, although I pay tithing, I'm not in leadership, and I was never given even a chance to vote or withhold my consent.

37 For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

39 Why do ye adorn yourselves with that which hath no life, and yet suffer the hungry, and the needy, and the naked, and the sick and the afflicted to pass by you, and notice them not?

I think these verses sum it up. If we spend more money on the Church's appearance, "beautifying" Salt Lake City, than on helping those in need we are polluted and hypocrites.

Col. Flagg wrote:

Nephi294 wrote:I'm okay with it and I live it Utah. Much bigger and more important matters facing the world and us. Why spend so much time bickering back and forth about a mall. Time for some to build a bridge and get over it!!!

If it were only a minor issue, but it's perhaps one of the biggest issues plaguing the church right now and tell those who have stopped paying tithing because of it to 'get over it'.

If this is true, how sad. I used to live in Salt Lake ( when City Creek was announced)and if I recall correctly they didn't use tithes and offerings, they used money from other investments...they have a few. The reasoning was to secure the area around temple square that was starting to look "run down" and they wanted to preserve the area of the temple (wish they could do that for the LA temple ).

They built at a time when the economy was down and took advantage of millions of dollars in savings and kept hundreds of people employed. The finished value I'm sure has surpassed what the cost to build was, making it a good investment.

If people don't have the faith to allow leaders to make decisions like this; that for the most part don't effect them directly.....how will they have the faith to act when they are asked to do something that does effect them and humble themselves to just obey?

If anyone has the link to conference talk explaining it might be good to post; if not already here.


By the way I support the project...even if tithing was used. It's not up to me how it's spent, just up to me to be accountable to myself to pay.

skmo wrote:

Thinker wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:Do you know what billions could have done for members in impoverished nations? Imagine those without potable water in a nation like Ethiopia getting a culinary water system or well or pumps installed for fresh drinking water... not only would something like that keep people alive and hydrated, it would also reduce disease and death..

Exactly.
SingYourWayHome,
I'm sure you have good intentions, but you're comments reflect a lack of clarity, a lack of charity/Godly love.

No. It reflects the judgement of our inspired leaders of something they saw that should be done that was within their sphere of possibilities to do. Much of the effort to bring prosperity, or even humanity to parts of the world have resulted in even more corruption to an already troubled area. Most of the food sent to the starving nations of Africa got hijacked by warlords and doled out to those they deemed worthy of their support, or worse, were made to sit in ships at port until they rotted and were of no value. I know there is suffering going on, but we can only do what we're aloowed to do by the standards of those who will allow us to do it. You see with your eyes. I see with mine. While we may see some of the same things, we may interpret them differently. however, God's leaders see with His eyes, and until they demonstrate a falling away, I don't presume to tell them how to do their jobs. I follow what's happening, I pray I will be led in what I do and how I follow, but I have no business telling God's leaders how to run his church.

You DO have business standing for truth - for God - if that is indeed your God, based on love, which will never fail!
If your priority is blindly following imperfect people, no matter what - then that is your god/priority... and that god WILL FAIL.

If money is the root of evil - of corruption, as you claim it to be in charity - then why is money such a billion dollar priority with this materialistic shopping mall?
You cannot support this inappropriate use of sacred funds, while generalizing that money will do no good in any parts of the world for anyone...without contradicting yourself. That you don't see it, is almost as concerning as your willingness to follow flesh, even in evil.
The difference between the sides of this money issue - is that some are considering the greatest commandments of all (which will never fail), & some are worshipping imperfect people, no matter what imperfect thing they say or do (which will fail).

If helping the many in fatal need was truly a priority, there would be time, money & resources invested in discovering causes of poverty in particular areas throughout the world (unfair international trade laws, natural disasters, disease, civil unrest, geographical location/climate, etc.). Then, with a proper diagnosis and plan of action, money, time & resources would be better put to use in humanitarian missions, while learning & improving along the way (as with proselyting missionary efforts).
Yet, it is obvious, this is NOT the priority of those who are supposedly leading the church of Jesus Christ, & therefore their mistaken priorities are bound to fail.

Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Then I guess we must abstain from "voting" if we want to follow our conscience.

AGStacker wrote:

HeirofNumenor wrote:

Having crack dealers and hookers dealing their wares right outside temple grounds isn't what I'd like to see, like I do in downtown Denver, Sacramento, Baltimore, etc.

Why on earth would crack dealers and hookers seek out church headquarters?!

The area surrounding the Temple in Mesa, AZ is now a major blight, and I bet the city govt there would love to have the LDS Church come in and revitalize it - and the only people who would oppose would be those who are either:
a) anti-mormon or otherwise @#!*% at the Church
b) think that all Churches should have any money (all must be spent on the poor ASAP - even above building houses of worship and other religious facilities)
c) think that all religions should be taxed heavily

The city government would love such a project but that is because most government officials are greedy, money spending bastards. I say let's take all the "blight" we can get and love, serve and help them!

"Beautifying" Salt Lake means get rid of the "blight". I think Salt Lake should be a Mecca for sinners, the poor and needy and homeless because so much love and service should be rendered there!

Yes

Nephi294 wrote:Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Hmmmm....anyone else waiting for a scriptural reference on this?

Nephi294 wrote:Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Not to be a broken record, but . . .

Does giving full loyalty and support mean going along with something you believe is wrong? Can't you be supporting someone even while you are honestly giving them your critical opinion of their actions? I would think in any other organization, such as a business, no one would expect a loyal participant to go along with everything done no matter how damaging it was to the organization. How about the drunk driving scenario? Would a loyal friend insist on not letting you drive or would they encourage their drunk friend in their decision?

I see absolutely nothing wrong with voicing concern over faulty decisions by our leaders. I feel this is more loving toward them then quietly allowing them to act foolishly. The strongest argument I'm hearing in favor of this mall is that people trust their leaders and believe them to be inspired. It seems many are assuming this decision is correct simply because the leaders made the decision. How much better would it be for our leaders if we all questioned their decisions and gave our honest opinions of what they were doing so they could be checked in the natural maladies that inhibit man.

Called to Serve wrote:

Nephi294 wrote:Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Not to be a broken record, but . . .

Does giving full loyalty and support mean going along with something you believe is wrong? Can't you be supporting someone even while you are honestly giving them your critical opinion of their actions? I would think in any other organization, such as a business, no one would expect a loyal participant to go along with everything done no matter how damaging it was to the organization. How about the drunk driving scenario? Would a loyal friend insist on not letting you drive or would they encourage their drunk friend in their decision?

I see absolutely nothing wrong with voicing concern over faulty decisions by our leaders. I feel this is more loving toward them then quietly allowing them to act foolishly. The strongest argument I'm hearing in favor of this mall is that people trust their leaders and believe them to be inspired. It seems many are assuming this decision is correct simply because the leaders made the decision. How much better would it be for our leaders if we all questioned their decisions and gave our honest opinions of what they were doing so they could be checked in the natural maladies that inhibit man.

You're assuming it was the leaders that made the decisions. I prefer to assume that they are directed by God.

AGStacker wrote:

hyloglyph wrote:Sorry for lurking, i just now saw this thread. I have served in the church in the 3rd world. Spending a billion plus dollars in Salt Lake boggles my mind. I am absolutely without words. I have no idea why this was done or how some people can justify it. But it's not on me, although I pay tithing, I'm not in leadership, and I was never given even a chance to vote or withhold my consent.

37 For behold, ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches, more than ye love the poor and the needy, the sick and the afflicted.

38 O ye pollutions, ye hypocrites, ye teachers, who sell yourselves for that which will canker, why have ye polluted the holy church of God? Why are ye ashamed to take upon you the name of Christ? Why do ye not think that greater is the value of an endless happiness than that misery which never dies—because of the praise of the world?

39 Why do ye adorn yourselves with that which hath no life, and yet suffer the hungry, and the needy, and the naked, and the sick and the afflicted to pass by you, and notice them not?

I think these verses sum it up. If we spend more money on the Church's appearance, "beautifying" Salt Lake City, than on helping those in need we are polluted and hypocrites.

Bingo! :ymapplause:

SmallFarm wrote:

Called to Serve wrote:

Nephi294 wrote:Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Not to be a broken record, but . . .

Does giving full loyalty and support mean going along with something you believe is wrong? Can't you be supporting someone even while you are honestly giving them your critical opinion of their actions? I would think in any other organization, such as a business, no one would expect a loyal participant to go along with everything done no matter how damaging it was to the organization. How about the drunk driving scenario? Would a loyal friend insist on not letting you drive or would they encourage their drunk friend in their decision?

I see absolutely nothing wrong with voicing concern over faulty decisions by our leaders. I feel this is more loving toward them then quietly allowing them to act foolishly. The strongest argument I'm hearing in favor of this mall is that people trust their leaders and believe them to be inspired. It seems many are assuming this decision is correct simply because the leaders made the decision. How much better would it be for our leaders if we all questioned their decisions and gave our honest opinions of what they were doing so they could be checked in the natural maladies that inhibit man.

You're assuming it was the leaders that made the decisions. I prefer to assume that they are directed by God.

I personally would never assume that because they never made that claim. I believe what our leaders say. I don't think they would want us to build up myths around them. In fact I think that is very dangerous. But that is just me.

Let me be clear: I do NOT believe God told them to build a few BILLION dollar shopping center, after having spent a lot less than that in humanitarian aide in the past 25 years combined because they never claimed that He did.

If they told me that He did, I would take them at their word.

hyloglyph wrote:

Nephi294 wrote:Found this to be interesting:

In a solemn assembly at April 1970 general conference, at which President Joseph Fielding Smith was sustained as president of the Church, President Harold B. Lee, his counselor, conducted the voting. On that occasion, President Lee taught: "Every one is perfectly free to vote as he wishes. There is no compulsion whatsoever in this voting. When you vote affirmatively you make a solemn covenant with the Lord that you will sustain, that is, give your full loyalty and support, without equivocation or reservation, to the officer for whom you vote" (Conference Report, p. 103). :ymparty:

Hmmmm....anyone else waiting for a scriptural reference on this?

When I sustain someone, whether in my own ward or anyone called to be a GA, I do so based on the fact that I don't know that they've done anything wrong or are unworthy to hold the office to which they are being called and sustain them with faith that they will act in harmony with the will of the Lord. Sustaining someone DOES NOT mean I swear an oath to never disagree with, question or criticize words, actions or decisions, especially when those actions, words or decisions do not square with what I know about gospel principles, our Savior and the Almighty.