LDS Freedom Forum

Separatist wrote:

Mark wrote:

ajax wrote:

rewcox wrote:
Where do the Remanaughties hang out?

I don't know. Ask one of them.

He just did Separatist Sybil. B-)

Like I said, I actually have no idea. More than likely in their own homes.

rewcox wrote:

Separatist wrote:

Mark wrote:

ajax wrote:
I don't know. Ask one of them.

He just did Separatist Sybil. B-)

Like I said, I actually have no idea. More than likely in their own homes.

I think you are right. I usually am. I don't know how they determine who speaks and when. It can't be that hard to figure out. They probably have the sacrament with wine and bread. Probably. I haven't heard if you need a special bread or not. Doubt it.

Anyone going to the May conference in St. George, Utah? Hell nah.

shadow wrote:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Col. Flagg wrote:

shadow wrote:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Is the Elder’s quorum presidency in your ward compensated for their service? How about the High Priest Group Leadership? Bishop? SP? How about the Relief Society Presidency? Primary Presidency? YM-YW Presidency? Ours either. And what is service? Laboring in someone’s else’s behalf and not expecting anything in return. :ymsmug:

shadow wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:

shadow wrote:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Is the Elder’s quorum presidency in your ward compensated for their service? How about the High Priest Group Leadership? Bishop? SP? How about the Relief Society Presidency? Primary Presidency? YM-YW Presidency? Ours either. And what is service? Laboring in someone’s else’s behalf and not expecting anything in return. :ymsmug:

As per a new policy that's not even in the handbook yet the Elders quorum presidency gets a commission, and it's quite high.
It's based off a point system where the more home teaching you do, the more points you get. Since I'm in the presidency I have a line of Elders under me and when they home teach I get points off them as well. It gets a little complicated after that but basically if I can get my line to do 100% home teaching and if their families come to church, even just sacrament meeting, then I can make tens of thousands per month. This MLM, I mean celestial compensation program, is only for the Elders and NOT HP's. Sorry.

Col. Flagg wrote: HP's outperform the Elders every month

shadow wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote: HP's outperform the Elders every month

8-|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-8s4MZ5uQA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Lizzy60 wrote:Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ajax wrote:

FTC wrote:This issue isn't that they get paid. The issue is that they make the claim they don't get paid (even though they are getting paid), and use that as substantiation that the LDS church is better, most righteous/spiritual, more approved of God, more true, than other churches because of it.

There's lots of people in this thread trying to push the stance that its Ok for upper LDS leadership to financially benefit from the work/service/success that they've accomplished. It can be equally applied to other churches in the same way that acknowledge that their ministry is paid from their business success, i.e. their churches. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Thanks FTC for bringing this back around to the topic. Perhaps those whose distress is so great, can vent on the lds friends and fun forum, created specifically for that purpose and in bad mouthing Brian M for perhaps exhibiting too excessive a virtue in tolerating varying opinions.

Matchmaker wrote:

ירד wrote:

Matchmaker wrote:I'm not sure why the GA's don't consider themselves paid clergy, but I'll have faith that they have their good reasons. Perhaps it's because most of the counseling of members is done at the Ward and Stake levels these days and a lot of the Apostles time is now spent on administration tasks, oversight of programs and organizations within the Church, attending functions and meetings, and public relations, and corporate work, just to name a few.

Matthew 25:15
The question it seems is whether or not apostles should be in charge of talents from their master or more occupied with salvation of souls.

I bet the Apostles wish they could devote more time to teaching and testifying than to oversight and administration, but they are stuck in a telestial world too and subject to limitations placed on them by others who may not share their concerns.

Amonhi wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Mark wrote:

AI2.0 wrote:

jbalm wrote:

Mark wrote:
This from the guy who no longer attends the LDS church and most likely doesn't pay a red cent of tithing or fast offerings to help the church anymore with anything. Go lecture your remnant folks with all your pious attitudes Tex. Your bias against all things LDS is deafening.. 8-|

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

AI2.0 wrote:

jbalm wrote:

Mark wrote:

ajax wrote:The whole idea of a leader getting a revelation that he's to be supported by the membership is sketchy anyway. I would have questioned it then. Perhaps he received according to the idol in his heart. (Eze 14) and a little prodding from Rigdon.

The BoM lays out the correct principle imo and I have no problem defending it.

This from the guy who no longer attends the LDS church and most likely doesn't pay a red cent of tithing or fast offerings to help the church anymore with anything. Go lecture your remnant folks with all your pious attitudes Tex. Your bias against all things LDS is deafening.. 8-|

When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amonhi wrote:

rewcox wrote:If you complain/murmur about the church and leaders, you are not biased...

If you believe and have a testimony that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only true and living church upon the earth, that Christ leads his Church, and that Christ selects His leaders and has given them the Priesthood and keys to operate the Church, then you are biased...

This is a murmuring/complaining thread, by the Reds who only want to complain. No one has responded to the questions I asked.

Finrock has an obsession about leaders being evil.

Amonhi has several different people who post for him. One Amonhi decided to send George to the telestial kingdom because George did not agree with Amonhi. It looks like the nicer Amonhi is in this thread, but still having issues on the truth.

When I said biased, I ment completely to the point that if you are for the church you can see no bad or if you are against the church you can see no good.

An honest person will see both good and bad in the church because both exist. A dishonest person will only see one or the other.

It is true that several people post for me.

Peace,
Amonhi

Obrien wrote:

Mark wrote:

AI2.0 wrote:

jbalm wrote:
When you can't refute the message, then, by all means, attack the messenger.

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

eddie wrote:

Obrien wrote:

Mark wrote:

AI2.0 wrote:

Actually, I don't understand why Remnant people continue to attack the LDS church for the way it is run. They have their own church now, they ought to worry about how it is run and stop spending their time criticizing and attacking another faith. And you critics need to not delude yourselves into thinking you can belong to two churches, because the fact is, you have to choose. If you are one of those criticizing the Prophet, Apostles and 70 in the LDS church for receiving a stipend, then you aren't a faithful believer, because in THIS church, we believe that the LORD heads the church and guides it through these men.

You got a problem with that? If so, then you'll need to deal with it in some other way than taking it out on those of us who do.

In the LDS church most callings are done without any compensation. Yes, we no longer send our missionaries out and expect them to live off the charity of the community at large. We also have such a large worldwide membership that we have some callings that are expected to be in the fulltime service of the church and they are given a stipend. If we didn't do that then only men of independent wealth or living off their relatives, could serve in these fulltime, lifetime callings. That's the way we do it now in the LDS church and if anyone doesn't like it, they don't have to pay tithing, fast offerings etc. and they can go join a church that better suits their needs. I don't think that's so hard to understand. They'd be best off to let the church go--Stop with the constant criticism and anger directed at MY CHURCH, for their own mental well-being.

Many of you on this forum are Remnant members and you hide it--so that you can pretend to be active believing LDS, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. Many of you long ago left the church and yet you present yourselves as faithful, active members, WHEN YOU ARE NOT. You think that in the guise of being LDS members you have the right to criticize, but you aren't being honest with us or yourselves. Personally I'm tired of the dishonesty. I know this is true because I actually do attend church and active(meaning those who can TRUTHFULLY answer the temple recommend questions or are working to be worthy of a recommend) members don't have a problem with these things.

Amen. If someone doesn't like the way the church operates they are under no obligation to support it either financially or in their labors. That is their choice. Nobody is twisting their arm. Just be classy enough to not insult or degrade or run down the LDS church or its leaders because you don't happen to agree with them. I would NEVER go on another faiths discussion group comprised mostly of members of that faith and run down their church leveling insults and corrections to those who are faithful followers of that particular church. That would just be classless. Yet on this site it happens constantly. Shots and insults are taken at all things LDS on about every thread discussing the LDS church. Some people need a lesson in manners and civility. [-(

Sure.. you never level insults or correction at those you disagree with... ;) I am not going to another faith's discussion group because I am not of another faith. I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours. I have just as much right to promote my ideas here as you do you, as long as we do so within the forum rules and Brian's interpretation thereof. You just have a hard time understanding that someone could disagree with you.



I hate it when someone says," You don't belong in this church," and you reply," Its just as much my church as it is yours!" But they insist, " "You need to be saved or you will burn!" Stupid firemen

Col. Flagg wrote:

Amonhi wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

Obrien wrote: I'm LDS, and it's just as much my church as yours.

Mark wrote:"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

Mark wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:

Amonhi wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

jbalm wrote:

Mark wrote:"Yet LDS folks come all unglued when someone asks honest questions about their church."

Let me know when "honest" questions are being asked and I think you will find a different attitude from LDS folks who are active participants in the church. The questions I see on this form regarding the LDS faith are most often agenda driven diatribes dripping with cynicism and insults and innuendo and confirmation bias trying to paint the LDS church in the worst possible light. Everybody knows that questions formed in that way do not meet the standard of being "honest" questions. I have been around enough anti's who love to cast aspersions to know the difference.

Another dodge. I can't remember the last time you said anything of substance. All you ever do is attack the character of people you disagree with.

Did you find the question in the OP dishonest?


If so, why?

Mark wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:

Amonhi wrote:

Lizzy60 wrote:Amonhi ----- Announced in the Ensign 1996

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/04/news ... s?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Col. Flagg wrote:

Mark wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:

Amonhi wrote: Wow, I am so far behind the times.

Yikes... talk about a checkmate.

You are a hard one to understand son. First you say you are committed to the church and love serving in it with your callings etc but then you seem to turn around and gleefully cast aspersions on the men we sustain as Prophets/Seers/Revelators by pushing the agenda driven scenario that these men are not trustworthy or honest enough and dont have the integrity to reject this intimation of priestcraft being practiced in the LDS church by its top level leadership. Which team are you really on? Do you want everyone to doubt that their leaders are following a path sustained by the Savior? Would you like people to think the worst of these apostles? That seems to be your goal. Seems awfully doublesided to me.

Mark, you've known me for 8 years now... what has been the one area where I've been consistent? Challenging and/or calling into question what I perceive to be wrong! I love this gospel with every fabric of my being and I love our Savior and the Lord just as much and view everything as 'is it right or is it wrong', especially when it comes to gospel principles/doctrines? If I see it as wrong, I'm gonna say something, end of story. Joseph Smith himself said he had organized a church where men and women were free to question and express concerns when they saw or heard actions/decisions coming from church leadership that were contrary to scripture and/or Christ's teachings. Are you aware that there is a set of instructions in the D&C (section 102) for the members for the removal of church leaders from office should they stray? I find that rather interesting, don't you? These scriptures pretty much invalidate the notion (and what other church leaders have said) that the brethren are incapable of wrongdoing and/or leading the church astray. So please stop with these attacks of lacking faith and 'how dare you' question church leaders - it's old and unfounded and my testimony as is strong in the gospel as its ever been!