LDS Freedom Forum

Bircher wrote:Why are we so fixated on which sin is worse? Isn't all sin to be avoided?

Once again, bircher starts a discussion, and kills the discussion. Please, don't ask me to explain.

14freedom wrote:Bircher - I don't think you understand the modern form of debate. When you present an idea like this that points out errors, it is easily trumped by another person pointing out larger errors by another party thus removing focus from the original argument (no offense meant to anyone here).

I must not, because I have no idea how someone changing the subject is the fault of the original discussion starter.

Master, I wont ask you to explain, but I do not understand.

My mind is boggled by the turn of this conversation.

OK, I'm going to attempt an example of 'the dole' we are constantly pressured to enlist in, but which as farmers we have declined.

There are many USDA farm subsidies and "programs" available to farmers. Most of you have heard of those subsidizing a farmer for NOT growing something or of growing something and being paid a price support to do so. There are countless such programs. Brand new trucks in town are as predictable as the annual USDA check. Some of the recipients don't even live on a farm; they simply collect their USDA payments from the fallow farm land they own.

We recently received an expensively printed booklet describing a series of 'programs' available through Soil Conservation of USDA called Natural Resources Conservation Service. The government will 'cost share' putting in wells, pipelines, tanks, fences, windbreaks, pasture seed, cover crops, animal feeding operations, irrigation systems, and soil reclamation practices.

A few years back my husband and I looked into what the water well program provides. It would cover about 70% of the total cost of drilling, equipment, and setting up tanks, pumps, etc., but the 'oversight' on the part of US Gov would extend into the far distant future, apparently into perpetuity!

Had we signed with the government our land would have become a 'partnership' with the Feds. Our well driller said those contracts have an odd little paragraph written which holds the signers to that 'partnership' even when/if the United States no longer exists as such and becomes known as some other designated national entity (NAU?).

Needless to way, we didn't sign up for that program nor will we sign up for any programs. We are 'poor' compared to any other farmer in this county. Our equipment is old and bought used when we buy equipment. Our vehicles are old and 'used'. We earn very little 'income' - not enough to necessitate paying income taxes or social security to the feds. We do pay tithing on our coin 'increase'. Although we are told bishops no longer take tithing 'in kind' in the form of lambs, chickens, eggs, etc., the time may come when they will out of necessity for the sustenance of the extended membership.

Our livestock is healthy and beautiful and as yet, without microchip or electronic tattoos. Our land is yet un-Premise Registered with the Feds, and productive of all that we need to sustain ourselves.

We are 'free' to lose our land all by ourselves through increasing property taxes, insurance costs, and fuel expenditures. I suppose the local government will get it at some point for back property taxes, but for now we owe no one and are still managing to tread water.

We are the only farmers I know who are not required to meet with USDA every spring to 'report' how every acre will be used for that given year. All those statistics are sent to Wall St. so the serious players can more precisely estimate inventories. (I won't bring up the little known factor of market manipulation by means of weather modification.)

.

buffalo_girl wrote:What is the punishment for a member of the Church accepting government welfare?

Increased laziness. Forgotten principles. Loss of confidence in God and increased confidence in the arm of flesh.. I could go on, but I will not.

buffalo_girl wrote:OK, I'm going to attempt an example of 'the dole' we are constantly pressured to enlist in, but which as farmers we have declined.

There are many USDA farm subsidies and "programs" available to farmers. Most of you have heard of those subsidizing a farmer for NOT growing something or of growing something and being paid a price support to do so. There are countless such programs. Brand new trucks in town are as predictable as the annual USDA check. Some of the recipients don't even live on a farm; they simply collect their USDA payments from the fallow farm land they own.

We recently received an expensively printed booklet describing a series of 'programs' available through Soil Conservation of USDA called Natural Resources Conservation Service. The government will 'cost share' putting in wells, pipelines, tanks, fences, windbreaks, pasture seed, cover crops, animal feeding operations, irrigation systems, and soil reclamation practices.

A few years back my husband and I looked into what the water well program provides. It would cover about 70% of the total cost of drilling, equipment, and setting up tanks, pumps, etc., but the 'oversight' on the part of US Gov would extend into the far distant future, apparently into perpetuity!

Had we signed with the government our land would have become a 'partnership' with the Feds. Our well driller said those contracts have an odd little paragraph written which holds the signers to that 'partnership' even when/if the United States no longer exists as such and becomes known as some other designated national entity (NAU?).

Needless to way, we didn't sign up for that program nor will we sign up for any programs. We are 'poor' compared to any other farmer in this county. Our equipment is old and bought used when we buy equipment. Our vehicles are old and 'used'. We earn very little 'income' - not enough to necessitate paying income taxes or social security to the feds. We do pay tithing on our coin 'increase'. Although we are told bishops no longer take tithing 'in kind' in the form of lambs, chickens, eggs, etc., the time may come when they will out of necessity for the sustenance of the extended membership.

Our livestock is healthy and beautiful and as yet, without microchip or electronic tattoos. Our land is yet un-Premise Registered with the Feds, and productive of all that we need to sustain ourselves.

We are 'free' to lose our land all by ourselves through increasing property taxes, insurance costs, and fuel expenditures. I suppose the local government will get it at some point for back property taxes, but for now we owe no one and are still managing to tread water.

We are the only farmers I know who are not required to meet with USDA every spring to 'report' how every acre will be used for that given year. All those statistics are sent to Wall St. so the serious players can more precisely estimate inventories. (I won't bring up the little known factor of market manipulation by means of weather modification.)

I found this the other day:

In Isaiah in the footnotes, that it talks about the farms of the poor being taken by the wealthy.. I wish I wrote down the chapter and verse.. it mentioned joining lands together or something like that and I noticed it in the footnotes as was amazed....

In Isaiah in the footnotes, that it talks about the farms of the poor being taken by the wealthy

Well, no doubt. But I think that passage also speaks to the accumulation of assets by the powerful - you know...kind of like Wall Street's pillage of assets. I call it 'ENRONization'.

We are ALL being ENRONized.

Isaiah 5:8-9
8 ¶ Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth!
9 In mine ears said the Lord of hosts, Of a truth many houses shall be desolate, even great and fair, without inhabitant.

Micah 2:1-3

1 Woe to them that devise iniquity, and work evil upon their beds! when the morning is light, they practice it, because it is in the power of their hand.
2 And they covet fields, and take them by violence; and houses, and take them away: so they oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage.
3 Therefore thus saith the Lord; Behold, against this family do I devise an evil, from which ye shall not remove your necks; neither shall ye go haughtily: for this time is evil.

Sound familiar?

YES!!! Thank you! It is the Foot notes for the Isaiah verse that hit me So hard.

And just a heads up, it is NOT online at all... at least not on the links that you can click on for the footnotes, you have to actually break out the sticks (the hard copy).

The JBS has the video THE LINK, or actually a shorter version of the same material that includes E.T Bensons talk and Video MAN FREEDOM AND GOVERNMENT.

In that speech there is a key point that is overlooked by those of us against the socialist , satanic system. That is that it reaches a point when people are forced into "subserviant positions."

In a truely free society there is near 100% righteousness, freedom and Free agency (Christs Plan), It is under those circumstances that we have the most opportunity.
At the opposite end of the scale there is no free agency, and no opportuntiy, no choice. This idea is expained well in the book MANY ARE CALLED, BUT FEW ARE CHOSEN. We do have some level of freedom and choice here, I agree with E T Benson that many have been forced into subserviant positions. This belief also supports the idea that we should be building the second set of tracks, because we can not salvage the wreck that is in progress now. I believe this is why the church has changed position on this subject. Those of us that have studied understand the consequences that follow, should acknowledge that the unheeded warnings to prevent those consequences have allready passed. Back to the idea of Building track 2. Education is the key I believe. I am greatfull for the "far" Truth and those that promote its spreading, such as the JBS members.

I've not understood what the building of Track 2 is to entail. I think of it as doing what I/we can to educate people about the benefits of government compliance with the US Constitution, and in the case of LDSs, to educate us about our responsibility to "befriend" the US Constitution as commanded in D&C 98:6. And that, incidentally, is the main and probably sole purpose of my running for Congress. It has taken me a while to realize and accept the wisdom of not promoting that effort in any of our church meetings (although I think a few other churches do so). If the Church were to actively promote building Track 2 by promoting allegiance to the US Constitution and its principles, stating little or nothing more that the applicable lines in D&C 134:1; 101:80; & 98:6, the result would likely be worse that what we will experience for remaining silent on the subject. Either way we gotta problem. And I perceive that problem as education and preparation of people certainly younger than I (perhaps that "remnant" we reaad and hear about) to complete the building of that Track 2.

I so wish we could discuss in church the building of Track 2 to the extent that we are discussing and promoting a formal definition of marriage. Our ward has a phone bank assignment in a couple of weeks. Wouldn't I love to ...forget it.

I would like to correct a bit of false doctrine. This last conference, you know, the one we just had a week ago.

We were told, "Welfare principles . . . do not change. They will not change. They are revealed truths.”

http://www.lds.org/conference/talk/disp ... 23,00.html

There has been NO CHANGE of the Church's postition

With this info, the other false doctrine above falls apart on its own.

To which 'false doctrine' are you referring?

Bishop Keith B. McMullin, Sunday Morning Session:

To provide for others in the Lord’s way, we strive to care for ourselves and sacrifice to help those in need. The poor labor for what they receive and seek the betterment of others as well.8 This pattern has been with us from the beginning.9

The Church welfare plan embodies this divine pattern, and faithful Church members follow it. Their offerings provide succor to the widow, care to the orphan, and refuge to the suffering.

If we follow the Lord's example, along with his admonition to the wealthy young man, we will give up ALL we have of earthly possessions, sell them, and give our wealth to the poor.

Luke 18:22-25

22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Elder D. Todd Christofferson, Saturday afternoon Session:

Zion is Zion because of the character, attributes, and faithfulness of her citizens.

Remember, "the Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them" (Moses 7:18).

If we would establish Zion in our homes, branches, wards, and stakes, we must rise to this standard. It will be necessary (1) to become unified in one heart and one mind; (2) to become, individually and collectively, a holy people; and (3) to care for the poor and needy with such effectiveness that we eliminate poverty among us.

We cannot wait until Zion comes for these things to happen—Zion will come only as they happen.

b_g I believe that was a response to misinformation and false assumption on my part. btw, was that talk on sat? I was unavailable and havent listened to sat Sat talks yet. Forgive me Bircher for posting misinformation. It wasnt intended as anything against you or anyone personally.

Bircher wrote:I would like to correct a bit of false doctrine. This last conference, you know, the one we just had a week ago.

We were told, "Welfare principles . . . do not change. They will not change. They are revealed truths.”

http://www.lds.org/conference/talk/disp ... 23,00.html

There has been NO CHANGE of the Church's postition

With this info, the other false doctrine above falls apart on its own.

Yes, I stand corrected, as that must simply false assumption and practice among members and bishops.

However I still agree also with ETB that many are in subserviant positions. This is a fault of violation of welfare principles from many and not just the reciever. There are plenty of wealthy members who use resources for excessive recreation, materialism etc. So most of us are guilty to some degree. Except perhaps Bircher and a few others.

Thanks for the correction, and I am guilty as much as anyone for being at fault in this situation as anyone else. I think it was Joseph F Smith that said he was partially at fault for the great depression. If he shares some blame in that, I cannot be guilt free in our current situation.

My point in this whole thing, is if I am correct in my assumption is; we all need to be better givers, and if we are in need to accept help in the Lords way. From recent experiences in many states, we are abandoning yet another principle that the Prophets said was essential to maintaining the Priesthood.

Bircher wrote:Thanks for the correction, and I am guilty as much as anyone for being at fault in this situation as anyone else. I think it was Joseph F Smith that said he was partially at fault for the great depression. If he shares some blame in that, I cannot be guilt free in our current situation.

My point in this whole thing, is if I am correct in my assumption is; we all need to be better givers, and if we are in need to accept help in the Lords way. From recent experiences in many states, we are abandoning yet another principle that the Prophets said was essential to maintaining the Priesthood.

Bircher, I was impressed to see you come out and say this. No doubt, the Church teaches many things, including correct welfare principles, and we often do not follow through 100% of the time. But it is not any different than any other aspect of the gospel. The Lord doesn't say, "Are you perfect, then you can have the Priesthood," just as Apostles have said previously that the temple is not for perfect people. President Hinckley often said the gospel was to make bad men good and good men better.

Therefore, we all are not without guilt on this, or probably any other aspect of the Gospel. The real question is, are we going to have faith, and take what we've learned and try to do better at following the true doctrine, as you have pointed out, or are we going to say, "well, I am comfortable taking from the government because I can live a more lavish lifestyle; I don't want to give that up"?

I don't know what it says about our Church teachings/teachers/lessons as of late, but being fairly young (28 yrs.), I am only now learning about the TRUE doctrine on welfare, and many other things (constitutional principles, etc.). As with anything else in the Gospel, change takes place slowly, almost imperceptibly sometimes (I think someone gave that quote from ETB in conference last week), but as we learn the truth, are we working toward being better on the matter? Then I think we are doing well, whether we are farther ahead, or behind other individuals.

I'm glad we've finally come to some agreement on this issue, at least from my standpoint.

Thanks!

I did not realize there was that big of a paradigm shift.

You are right, and I did not mean to imply the need for perfection to have the Priesthood.

I see perfection of a principle and outright rejection of a principle as two separate things.

For example; One who does not obey the WoW exactly but just enough not to be denied a temple recommend, but also don't fight against the doctrine. They agree that it is true, and strive to obey it more and more each day.

This person, I do not feel would be in danger of losing their Priesthood.

On the other hand, one who has outright hostility towards doctrine, is what I see as what could put us in danger (spiritual and otherwise)

Maybe I am just not explicit enough.

Bircher wrote:Thanks!

I did not realize there was that big of a paradigm shift.

You are right, and I did not mean to imply the need for perfection to have the Priesthood.

I see perfection of a principle and outright rejection of a principle as two separate things.

For example; One who does not obey the WoW exactly but just enough not to be denied a temple recommend, but also don't fight against the doctrine. They agree that it is true, and strive to obey it more and more each day.

This person, I do not feel would be in danger of losing their Priesthood.

On the other hand, one who has outright hostility towards doctrine, is what I see as what could put us in danger (spiritual and otherwise)

Maybe I am just not explicit enough.

No, I think you do well, I just don't always take what you say in the right spirit. I get worried sometimes that there is too much debating over whether the Church membership in general is following correct principles, and I sometimes take it personally and think it applies to me.

I'm sure a lot of times it DOES, however, I know a lot of the true doctrines, and I also realize I am learning more and more, so I don't feel I am hostile toward any doctrine of the Church. I try to put the principles into practice as I come to learn their truthfulness, but I certainly am not making any incredible leaps all at once.

I think naturally as we learn true doctrine, at first if we didn't understand it, we tend to rationalize, or even justify, maybe even being a little hostile. But as the true doctrine gets more familiar, we gain a stronger testimony of it, to the point where we want to follow it. Then naturally, the testimony grows stronger, and we start to feel like we ought to help others understand the importance of the true doctrine. (I might point out just for the sake of argument, that false doctrine is very, VERY dangerous, because Satan pretty much works in the exact same way - look at Sherem, or Nehor, or Korihor - I think they knew it was false doctrine at first, but little by little, they preached, and eventually thought it was true doctrine. So there is much need to be prudent on this and any other doctrinal matter.)

I don't have as much courage in speaking out as some of you on here do. That's one of my big weaknesses. I know the truth, but I am never sure when it is my place to speak out in the presence of others, especially if the comment may be interpreted as controversial.

As far as your comments go, many things get misinterpreted in text. It is much harder to communicate electronically than in face-to-face communication. So I apologize if I have misunderstood things. I am getting better at finding the common ground, instead of finding areas of conflict, because I think we agree on more than we disagree. I am also getting a little more courageous on here in speaking out, because I know a lot of you better over time. However, it is always easier to speak out on an Internet forum, because there is still a sense of anonymity. Speaking out in Sunday School is a different thing.

masterdmjg wrote: No, I think you do well, I just don't always take what you say in the right spirit. I get worried sometimes that there is too much debating over whether the Church membership in general is following correct principles, and I sometimes take it personally and think it applies to me.

Well rest assured, when I say something, I talk about my understanding of a teaching, I am not directing it towards anyone personally, just in a general principle clinically based intention.

masterdmjg wrote: Speaking out in Sunday School is a different thing.

isn't that the truth!

masterdmjg wrote: I get worried sometimes that there is too much debating over whether the Church membership in general is following correct principles

What are your thoughts on these?


"...if we had done our homework and were faithful, we could step forward at this time and help save this country. The fact that most of us are unprepared to do it is an indictment we will have to bear. The longer we wait, the heavier the chains, the deeper the blood, the more the persecution and the less we can carry out our God-given mandate and world-wide mission." ETB Gen Conf April 1965


"...if we do our duty we can be preserved, and if not then we shall be destroyed. This means that a good deal of the responsibility lies with the priesthood of this Church as to what happens to America and as to how much tragedy can be avoided..." ETB Gen Conf April 1965

I understand them to mean that since much is given of us as a people in general much is required, and so when we, for whatever reason it maybe, do not act the consequences are huge. Additionally, we were generally condemned for our inaction on the above principle. The same thing happened to us regarding our general treating lightly of the Book of Mormon.

General rejection through inaction or other means is quite common.

I agree though with what it appears you are generally getting at, which is when we focus too much on what we feel is "apostasy" of others, we are generally being prideful and looking at the mote in another s eye, when we should be focusing at the beam in our own, or that we are putting ourselves up , usurping authority that is not ours.

If I had done my homework and had been faithful back then, I could have stepped forward at the appropriate time and at least tried a lot sooner to save this country. The fact that, at age 27 I had been in the Church for 5+ years and was unprepared to do it is an indictment I will have to bear. The longer I waited, the heavier the chains, the deeper the blood, the more the persecution and the less I have even now been able to carry out our God-given mandate and world-wide mission. (Lundbæk)

For what it's worth, I am aware of 3 members of our ward currently on FedGov disability welfare. I cannot believe the Church has not altered its stance since the days of the following instructions:

“Occasionally, we receive questions as to the propriety of Church members receiving government assistance instead of Church assistance. Let me restate what is a fundamental principle. Individuals, to the extent possible, should provide for their own needs. Where the individual is unable to care for himself, his family should assist. Where the family is not able to provide, the Church should render assistance, not the government.” (Elder Ezra Taft Benson, General Conference April 1977)

“If a member is unable to sustain himself, then he is to call upon his own family, and then upon the Church, in that order, and not upon the government at all.” (Elder Boyd K Packer, General Conference April 1978)

I just wish that when an instruction given in a General Conference no longer applies, that the Church would announce the fact.

I'm also not at all clear on the position of the GA's on Social Security payments. Of course, there probably isn't a SS Trust Fund left since the looters and pillagers have had at it and it has all become irrelevant.

Wonder what the GA's think about the looting and pillaging of money in Trust - which money was originally forcefully removed from the paychecks of the common laborer.

Aren't SS paycheck withdrawals in part from the employee's earnings to whom that money rightfully belongs?

(Please let's not start another screaming match over this particular point. I'm just interested in the position of the GA's on Social Security.)

I had forgotten about this experience until now.
About 6 months ago our stake had a preparedness fair. My husband and I attended several classes on emergency preparedness--things like cooking methods, 72 hour kits, using grains, budgeting etc.
In the cultural hall there were tables set up addressing various topics. The displays were all wonderful and what you would expect at an event like that. I was excited to be there and learn...until I got to the last table in the room: A sister from our stake who works at the city offices in the town next to ours was sitting there with information on how to apply for different government programs. There were stacks of papers on welfare, WIC, food stamps, medicaid, medicare, and the CHIps (children's healthcare in our state).

I remember that I was so floored by this display that I just stood there speechless. I was so tempted to say something, but this lady was someone who I really respected in our stake. I know she is conservative.
I just left the table, but the whole experience left a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe I should have said something, but I was so shocked to see those things in an LDS stake center that I was practically shaking! It is totally the antithesis of self reliance and preparedness!

What would you have done?

How do the generous retirement packages of career military and elected officials differ from Social Security?

Social Security is not a benefit of Government employment. Unless of course, we are all working for the government.

-a-train