Mormon Leaks Interview Discussion

[Col. Flagg]

Just found out about this from my Mother - anyone know more or have any details as to what the story is about?

[cyclOps]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[gardener4life]

Given that the lds.org site and lds newsroom etc don't show anything, I highly DOUBT that this is going to be anything positive, not to mention its coming out right around the time frame when several Mission President's got in trouble.

[Silver Pie]

I thought Mormon Leaks only leaked stuff on their site on the internet.

[Joel]

Just found out about this from my Mother - anyone know more or have any details as to what the story is about?

[kittycat51]

I found out recently that a close family member's relative is involved with Mormon Wikileaks. It revolts and saddens me at the same time.

I personally have made a commitment to never go to their website. It's only purpose is to throw hate towards the Church and stir up controversy.

[Mark]

I found out recently that a close family member's relative is involved with Mormon Wikileaks. It revolts and saddens me at the same time.

I personally have made a commitment to never go to their website. It's only purpose is to throw hate towards the Church and stir up controversy.

Indeed. It brings to mind a quote from Orson F Whitney: “The spirit of the gospel is optimistic; it trusts in God and looks on the bright side of things. The opposite or pessimistic spirit drags men down and away from God, looks on the dark side, murmurs, complains, and is slow to yield obedience.”

[oneClimbs]

Thus far the only thing they've really leaked are some boring meetings and fairly unsurprising information. The church and our American Republic are not governed by mob rule but are a form of aristarchy (no aristocracy) which means "a body of good men in power, or government by excellent men." The idea being that you lend your support to representatives who should be selected among the best of the population to govern and make important decisions. The church was originally designed to be governed by checks and balances via separate and distinct quorums (D&C 107) but that has been altered after Joseph's death.

The current version of the church I think is a step backward in that it walks a dangerous line of having the potential of becoming corrupt without any means of rooting out the corruption. I'm not saying that it IS corrupt but that the possibility is there to a greater degree. Similarly to our own republic where the original intent of the founders was altered fundamentally by things like the 17th Amendment which threw a wrench into the ability to remove a corrupt senator from office by the state legislators. Instead, the only way to get rid of a senator between elections is to have 2/3 of all the senators vote to remove them. This has happened only once since the amendment, I believe. Thus corruption has the freedom to do it's work for a longer period of uninterrupted time.

I think that we as people naturally sense this and so some desire to keep a watchful eye on the actions of leaders who are part of structures that are more prone to corruption to hold them accountable by making their actions more transparent.

If something questionable is being done, then someone should break the silence and speak out. No one should have knowledge of potential corruption and stay silent or they are complicit. This is why we are invited to sustain or oppose openly someone being called to a position. You let your voice be heard so that potential corruption in that individual can be made known, or you can be given information that would help you clarify your own misgivings because you may have wrong information.

Things like Mormonleaks exist because there is a distrust. Much of this distrust I think comes from a lack of clarity on the part of leadership in explaining their actions. I don't mind there being a place where a whistle blower can expose legitimate wrongs that cannot be addressed any other way. As long as the intent is to make known a legitimate wrong. If it is being done to undermine an organization as part of a witch hunt (which many think Mormonleaks is and may be) then the public should be equally on guard to investigate and judge the motives of the organization by how they conduct themselves.

[abijah]

the title of “accuser” belongs to satan (revelation 12:10). mormonleaks is among the spawn of the devil.

[gardener4life]

I found out recently that a close family member's relative is involved with Mormon Wikileaks. It revolts and saddens me at the same time.

I personally have made a commitment to never go to their website. It's only purpose is to throw hate towards the Church and stir up controversy.

Indeed. It brings to mind a quote from Orson F Whitney: “The spirit of the gospel is optimistic; it trusts in God and looks on the bright side of things. The opposite or pessimistic spirit drags men down and away from God, looks on the dark side, murmurs, complains, and is slow to yield obedience.”

I think they are taking stuff out of context a lot of the time too. There's sort of missing background of why an issue came up. And it's often unsaid that there are many victims when discussing a particular issue. But then those that are a guilty part, want to lash out as if they are the victims when they are actually aggressors. Also these people are acting like they own an organization that doesn't belong to them. We are given the church as a 'borrowed instrument' that doesn't belong to us. Yet some people are acting like we are owed something.

Thanks for your thought on trust in God. This is right on.

If we trust God naturally he will freely give us answers instead of having to spy on someone or steal instead.

[Rand]

The current version of the church I think is a step backward in that it walks a dangerous line of having the potential of becoming corrupt without any means of rooting out the corruption.

Please explain this further 5tev3. What do you mean by the "current version" of the church. I like your thoughts and often read your blog, but this seems to come out of left field.

[gardener4life]

So I take it someone is going to post the link to this around 10:00 to 10:30 PM right?

[mcusick]

For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed;
neither hid, that shall not be known.
Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness
shall be heard in the light;
and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets
shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

[kittycat51]

Actually didn't you mean KUTV? I didn't see anything on KSL. (The station I always watch)

[gardener4life]

So no one posted anything for this. Was it a no show?

I had thought I was going to have to come and correct whatever lies someone was trying to peddle in their efforts to destroy testimonies.

[captainfearnot]

Story with links to the full interviews here:

http://kutv.com/news/local/the-men-of-m ... eyre-after

[abijah]

cure for insomnia, that.

[oneClimbs]

The current version of the church I think is a step backward in that it walks a dangerous line of having the potential of becoming corrupt without any means of rooting out the corruption.

Please explain this further 5tev3. What do you mean by the "current version" of the church. I like your thoughts and often read your blog, but this seems to come out of left field.

Sorry, I'm the tech industry and am involved in app and software development and so I think that my language was influenced by a paradigm where something begins and then progresses through a series of iterations. I was thinking along the same lines with my comment as there is a parallel to the history of the LDS church along with how God has organized his people throughout time. While the scriptures contain much individual devotion, we only get glimpses of how the church was organized at various points in history.

Modern LDS history is completely different, the records are detailed and many of them are considered part of our standard works in the D&C. From the time of the first vision on to where we are today, there were many iterative changes as things were being rolled out. Many of those things were steps forward and expansive while others were reductive in nature. What I was referring to as the "current version" of the church was in reference to the organization of the leadership where there is a top-down leadership from the president to the twelve and the seventy.

This was not how the church was organized in Joseph's time. I referenced D&C 107 where it explains that the governance of the church would be by three co-equal quorums. You have a presidency of the church consisting of three high priests, twelve traveling councilors, the seventy, and every decision made by them had to be unanimous. Then you had the individual stake high councils themselves which formed quorums equal in authority to the presidency and the twelve and the high council of Zion which was equal in authority to all the individual stakes of Zion.

The twelve were originally a traveling council that went around building up the church with the seventy to help them. The main governance of the church happened at the local stakes and with the high council of Zion. After Joseph's death, there was a power struggle between various factions including the stake high council, the twelve, and the remaining member of the first presidency Sidney Rigdon. At the time, nothing had been said concerning succession so they had to decide how things would shake out. Ultimately Brigham pushed for the idea that the twelve had the right to lead and the rest is history.

Instead of the quorums today being talked about as co-equal in authority, we are presented with a top-down hierarchical model where the presidency is at the top, the twelve below, and the seventy below that, and further down you have stake presidents and high councils. To make matters worse (in my opinion), we seem to ignore all of this by simply stating, "We are led by A prophet today" thus putting everything on one single man. Much of LDS speech in this regard makes it appear that we are just a group of people with a single prophet at the top. That is not how the church was or even IS organized. That kind of talk is a gross oversimplification at best and at worst it portrays a false paradigm of what should be.

To me, ignoring the co-equal quorums which could check and balance each other in favor for a king-like structure lends itself to corruption because when you put all the power in the hands of one man, that one man can potentially cause much more destruction. Whereas if we know that there are co-equal quorums with equal authority, one bad apple could be removed without tarnishing the trust of the leadership as a collective. D&C 107 notes that any of these quorums has the potential to make decisions "in unrighteousness" (vs.32) and in vs. 82 it mentions what happens if the President of the High Priesthood shall "transgress."

Instead, we walk what I feel is a dangerous line by referring to the president of the church as "beloved" and lifting him high to a state of adoration and praise. You may have noticed this with Elder Nelson. When President Monson was alive, he commanded all of the attention and Elder Nelson was simply another one of the twelve. Now that he is President Nelson that same attention given to Monson is centered on him and suddenly he is the most amazing person alive. I get that the church media department wants to profile the latest president of the church, and that's basically what media does is they try to inform questioning people as to who this person is and what qualifies them to lead.

I should probably state here that I have nothing personally against President Nelson or Monson. I'm sure they are wonderful people and may very well be deserving of all the praise heaped upon them. I look at them and think, "Those seem like respectable men." But I don't think we should be throwing massive birthday celebrations for them either or any other leader in the church. It is the office which is endowed with divine power, not the man, men are replaceable, even Joseph Smith was.

Should we be treating the call of a new president the same as the president of our nation which I would also say stinks grossly of that kingly worship we see in other nations? People love a king, they always have. I think it comes from an innate desire for a perfect heavenly king, but that adoration should never be centered in a mortal one. In my opinion, I think we should be leading the way in showing how co-equal quorums and authority provide for a greater check against corruption in governance. Something I think all nations of the earth could look at and desire to model. Instead, it seems that we are modeling them to a degree.

So when I say "current version" of the church you could point to a lot of things that distinguish it from past versions, many of which are good. The pointless priesthood restriction is gone and the gross crime of men taking on many wives has been eradicated in deed but not quite yet in thought.

Now, this doesn't mean that I live in a perpetual state of sour face about everything. I have witnessed what I feel is a rather unprecedented move by the church to more localized leadership and authority. I first noticed it when Stake misssionaries were changed to ward missionaries. Then the dedication of meetinghouses to the status of temples temporarily for temple dedications. After that, many more little interesting moves, and lately, the consolidation of the high priest group and elders quorum and the implementation of the ministering plan vs the old home and visiting teaching program.

Typically large organizations get more complex over time with more micromanaging. In the last few decades and especially this year we have seen the opposite which is very interesting. Think about it, before, home and visiting teaching had very specific objectives. Success meant getting into a home and teaching a lesson. As long as that happened it was assumed that people were being blessed. The numbers were tracked to see how successful the program was. Now there is no objective other than for the individual companionships to determine what is best of each family without any instruction from the leadership of the church and instead to work directly with the Lord. This is a massive organization putting an immense amount of trust in its own people, that cannot be understated as to how big of a deal that is to even come close to something like that in a large organization (especially a religious one). So kudos to the church under the leadership of President Nelson in this regard.

This latest conference marks another "version" of the church, an upgrade so to speak. There will be more changes in the future. Ultimately, we will be led by a king, Jesus Christ, and the current version of the church will be archived for something more complete and suited to a Zion people.

Until then, what we have now is what the Lord has permitted to be for the current time. So I lend my heart, might, and mind to the work at hand and seek to support everyone in their position so that we may be as successful as we can be with what we have today. I think that is all that we can do. Personally, I think it is foolish to leave this work for something lesser or to try and start something new. We know that the current iteration of the church is incomplete, that's not a surprise to anyone. We don't have all the scripture God intends for us, and there are many things yet to be revealed.

How that is all going to unfold, I don't quite know. It's possible that the Lord may cleanse his current house or ignite something new parallel to it and draw out the pure in heart. I don't quite know and honestly, it is not something I spend a ton of time thinking about other than here and there. The vast majority of my focus is on the doctrines and principles of the gospel, which, if you do read my blog, you'll notice an almost complete absence of controversial issues and references to current news and pop culture.

That's mostly due to the value that I place on certain information. I find it much more enriching and productive to study the doctrines and principles of the gospel and the endless fruit they bear, especially from the Book of Mormon. So while I do voice my opinion on controversial subjects here, my blog is far more reflective of what my usual study consists of. So anyway, long "answer" to a short question. Remember, I'm just some guy on the Internet, my ideas only have value if they are accurate so if you find me to be off-base with anything just ignore it, I'm only speaking for myself, I'm no prophet.

[Durzan]

That was actually a rather enlightening article, I think. However, the information leaked can be used as ammo by anti-mormons and apostates.

Puts Mod Hat On:

Gonna merge this thread with the original, and then move into general discussion as it seems to fit better there. MormonLeaks isn't exactly a Gospel Discussion. Will leave a shadow topic.

Takes Mod Hat Off

The current version of the church I think is a step backward in that it walks a dangerous line of having the potential of becoming corrupt without any means of rooting out the corruption.

Please explain this further 5tev3. What do you mean by the "current version" of the church. I like your thoughts and often read your blog, but this seems to come out of left field.

Sorry, I'm the tech industry and am involved in app and software development and so I think that my language was influenced by a paradigm where something begins and then progresses through a series of iterations. I was thinking along the same lines with my comment as there is a parallel to the history of the LDS church along with how God has organized his people throughout time. While the scriptures contain much individual devotion, we only get glimpses of how the church was organized at various points in history.

Modern LDS history is completely different, the records are detailed and many of them are considered part of our standard works in the D&C. From the time of the first vision on to where we are today, there were many iterative changes as things were being rolled out. Many of those things were steps forward and expansive while others were reductive in nature. What I was referring to as the "current version" of the church was in reference to the organization of the leadership where there is a top-down leadership from the president to the twelve and the seventy.

This was not how the church was organized in Joseph's time. I referenced D&C 107 where it explains that the governance of the church would be by three co-equal quorums. You have a presidency of the church consisting of three high priests, twelve traveling councilors, the seventy, and every decision made by them had to be unanimous. Then you had the individual stake high councils themselves which formed quorums equal in authority to the presidency and the twelve and the high council of Zion which was equal in authority to all the individual stakes of Zion.

The twelve were originally a traveling council that went around building up the church with the seventy to help them. The main governance of the church happened at the local stakes and with the high council of Zion. After Joseph's death, there was a power struggle between various factions including the stake high council, the twelve, and the remaining member of the first presidency Sidney Rigdon. At the time, nothing had been said concerning succession so they had to decide how things would shake out. Ultimately Brigham pushed for the idea that the twelve had the right to lead and the rest is history.

Instead of the quorums today being talked about as co-equal in authority, we are presented with a top-down hierarchical model where the presidency is at the top, the twelve below, and the seventy below that, and further down you have stake presidents and high councils. To make matters worse (in my opinion), we seem to ignore all of this by simply stating, "We are led by A prophet today" thus putting everything on one single man. Much of LDS speech in this regard makes it appear that we are just a group of people with a single prophet at the top. That is not how the church was or even IS organized. That kind of talk is a gross oversimplification at best and at worst it portrays a false paradigm of what should be.

To me, ignoring the co-equal quorums which could check and balance each other in favor for a king-like structure lends itself to corruption because when you put all the power in the hands of one man, that one man can potentially cause much more destruction. Whereas if we know that there are co-equal quorums with equal authority, one bad apple could be removed without tarnishing the trust of the leadership as a collective. D&C 107 notes that any of these quorums has the potential to make decisions "in unrighteousness" (vs.32) and in vs. 82 it mentions what happens if the President of the High Priesthood shall "transgress."

Instead, we walk what I feel is a dangerous line by referring to the president of the church as "beloved" and lifting him high to a state of adoration and praise. You may have noticed this with Elder Nelson. When President Monson was alive, he commanded all of the attention and Elder Nelson was simply another one of the twelve. Now that he is President Nelson that same attention given to Monson is centered on him and suddenly he is the most amazing person alive. I get that the church media department wants to profile the latest president of the church, and that's basically what media does is they try to inform questioning people as to who this person is and what qualifies them to lead.

I should probably state here that I have nothing personally against President Nelson or Monson. I'm sure they are wonderful people and may very well be deserving of all the praise heaped upon them. I look at them and think, "Those seem like respectable men." But I don't think we should be throwing massive birthday celebrations for them either or any other leader in the church. It is the office which is endowed with divine power, not the man, men are replaceable, even Joseph Smith was.

Should we be treating the call of a new president the same as the president of our nation which I would also say stinks grossly of that kingly worship we see in other nations? People love a king, they always have. I think it comes from an innate desire for a perfect heavenly king, but that adoration should never be centered in a mortal one. In my opinion, I think we should be leading the way in showing how co-equal quorums and authority provide for a greater check against corruption in governance. Something I think all nations of the earth could look at and desire to model. Instead, it seems that we are modeling them to a degree.

So when I say "current version" of the church you could point to a lot of things that distinguish it from past versions, many of which are good. The pointless priesthood restriction is gone and the gross crime of men taking on many wives has been eradicated in deed but not quite yet in thought.

Now, this doesn't mean that I live in a perpetual state of sour face about everything. I have witnessed what I feel is a rather unprecedented move by the church to more localized leadership and authority. I first noticed it when Stake misssionaries were changed to ward missionaries. Then the dedication of meetinghouses to the status of temples temporarily for temple dedications. After that, many more little interesting moves, and lately, the consolidation of the high priest group and elders quorum and the implementation of the ministering plan vs the old home and visiting teaching program.

Typically large organizations get more complex over time with more micromanaging. In the last few decades and especially this year we have seen the opposite which is very interesting. Think about it, before, home and visiting teaching had very specific objectives. Success meant getting into a home and teaching a lesson. As long as that happened it was assumed that people were being blessed. The numbers were tracked to see how successful the program was. Now there is no objective other than for the individual companionships to determine what is best of each family without any instruction from the leadership of the church and instead to work directly with the Lord. This is a massive organization putting an immense amount of trust in its own people, that cannot be understated as to how big of a deal that is to even come close to something like that in a large organization (especially a religious one). So kudos to the church under the leadership of President Nelson in this regard.

This latest conference marks another "version" of the church, an upgrade so to speak. There will be more changes in the future. Ultimately, we will be led by a king, Jesus Christ, and the current version of the church will be archived for something more complete and suited to a Zion people.

Until then, what we have now is what the Lord has permitted to be for the current time. So I lend my heart, might, and mind to the work at hand and seek to support everyone in their position so that we may be as successful as we can be with what we have today. I think that is all that we can do. Personally, I think it is foolish to leave this work for something lesser or to try and start something new. We know that the current iteration of the church is incomplete, that's not a surprise to anyone. We don't have all the scripture God intends for us, and there are many things yet to be revealed.

How that is all going to unfold, I don't quite know. It's possible that the Lord may cleanse his current house or ignite something new parallel to it and draw out the pure in heart. I don't quite know and honestly, it is not something I spend a ton of time thinking about other than here and there. The vast majority of my focus is on the doctrines and principles of the gospel, which, if you do read my blog, you'll notice an almost complete absence of controversial issues and references to current news and pop culture.

That's mostly due to the value that I place on certain information. I find it much more enriching and productive to study the doctrines and principles of the gospel and the endless fruit they bear, especially from the Book of Mormon. So while I do voice my opinion on controversial subjects here, my blog is far more reflective of what my usual study consists of. So anyway, long "answer" to a short question. Remember, I'm just some guy on the Internet, my ideas only have value if they are accurate so if you find me to be off-base with anything just ignore it, I'm only speaking for myself, I'm no prophet.

This is a rather interesting view of the church, and somewhat similar to how I view it, though I am a tad bit more zealous in my focus on it. I think little by little the Lord will correct any of flaws we can see within the church (and many more we don't see), and he will do it the easy way, the hard way, or whatever way works the best given the circumstances. I have faith that whatever state the Church is in, God will make sure the Pure in Heart reach the intended destination, one way or the other. Even if the whole Ship gets set on fire, God will provide a way.

Tying this back into the main subject at hand, it is quite possible that MormonLeaks is one piece on the chessboard meant to facilitate the kind of changes God needs in the Church.

5tev3, would you be willing to start another thread with similar thoughts to what you posted here? It really deserves its own thread.

[Thinker]

Story with links to the full interviews here:

http://kutv.com/news/local/the-men-of-m ... eyre-after

Thanks, Captainfearnot.
From the article:
“For Dodge, tithing is one of the main reasons he works on leaks.

“[The church] pushes tithing and donations very hard,” Dodge said. He choked up, adding that “it upsets” him when leaders “make broad statements like pay your tithing before you feed your family.” He served and LDS mission in Guatemala where he said he would tell families that they needed to pay tithing even when they were scrambling to find a can of beans to feed their family.

MormonLeaks has posted documents containing financials from the church including where some tithing dollars go. One such release, internal documents of the church showing the base living allowance of General Authorities, amounted to $120,000 per year in 2014 - estimated to $135,000 today with the general three percent cost of living increase used in past years.

One of the organization's leaks expected to be benign was one of the site's most viral. MormonLeaks obtained documents showing the average price of décor used inside each new temple. “...The average bridal rug: $17,000, which he notes means could translate to way more in some temples.”

One aspect that is self-evident that goes counter to scripture, is how finances are handled.
Oaks admitted that no tithes go to help the poor. Yet, in Deuteronomy 14:28-29, it clearly states that 1/3 of collected TITHES are to be given to the poor. And, if you look under "tithing" in your triple combination bible dictionary or indexes, you don't find such an important scripture about how leaders are supposed to handle sacred funds. Also, scriptures repeatedly state that tithes are to be based on INCREASE, but lds leaders have changed that and said tithes are now based on income. In doing so, they put unnecessary burdens on the poor - demanding they pay what they have not to give.
To explain this... consider 2 men earn same income. 1 man is sole provider of a family of 7, and after paying all bills, has no increase left. The 2nd man lives at his parents' home where all his bills are paid for him, so all of his income is increase. To demand both men to pay the same tithes is not of God, but happens. Also, priestcraft is like charging for temple worthiness.

Some might try to justify tithing collectors NOT sharing tithes with the poor by saying, "that's the law of Moses." Yes, it is the LOWER law. Jesus asked for much more. Jesus repeatedly commanded us to love one another and to help those in need. That is one of the highest commandments, "which hang all the law and the prophets."

In my opinion, there are 2 serious problems that need to have light brought to them:
1. Finances.
2. Cognitive distortions taught - while discouraging psych-ology (study of the soul), thereby contributing to depression, addiction, etc.
“13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.” -Matthew 23

I was wondering, is there a difference between kingdom of God & kingdom of heaven? Considering how Jesus used them interchangeably even within the same context, they are the same - or so closely related as to be no distinction. Considering Jesus was asked WHEN the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, lo here or lo there. For behold, the kingdom of God is within you.” -Luke 17
The realm within us is obviously the means by which we feel the spirit and communicate God. Where else would it be? To suggest that it’s external or that one should not search one’s own soul (psych-ology) is deceptive and keeping people from entering into the kingdom of God/Heaven.

Speaking of psych-ology, and watching out for cognitive distortions - the church is not 100% true nor 100% false. The people (including leaders) are not 100% good nor 100% evil. There's a mix. I appreciate the church for the priceless sense of community and for the high standards that helped build a good foundation from which to build.

[oneClimbs]

This is a rather interesting view of the church, and somewhat similar to how I view it, though I am a tad bit more zealous in my focus on it. I think little by little the Lord will correct any of flaws we can see within the church (and many more we don't see), and he will do it the easy way, the hard way, or whatever way works the best given the circumstances. I have faith that whatever state the Church is in, God will make sure the Pure in Heart reach the intended destination, one way or the other. Even if the whole Ship gets set on fire, God will provide a way.

Tying this back into the main subject at hand, it is quite possible that MormonLeaks is one piece on the chessboard meant to facilitate the kind of changes God needs in the Church.

5tev3, would you be willing to start another thread with similar thoughts to what you posted here? It really deserves its own thread.

I actually agree with you on the state of the Church. Whatever the proximity of the church today in respect to its final destination I have still been able to connect with the divine, see miracles, and be born of God. The gospel of Christ is present with us and one can be baptized of water and fire and lay hold upon salvation.

As for MormonLeaks, I don't see it as evil or even necessary but a manifestation of a lack of trust. Such a thing shouldn't need to exist but it does and I don't know if the intentions of the creators are evil or not, only God does. While it is possible that it could, by its very existence, cause important changes that lead to greater accountability and transparency, I think that there may be other ways that this can be achieved as well without going down what I feel is a very "tabloidy" road.

With Wikileaks, I think we tend to be more accepting of that since most of us do not doubt that there is serious corruption in governments across the world and the ability to hold them accountable with information feels empowering and I think it is. With MormonLeaks, it offends us more because we trust our leadership, we are asked to sustain them (which means to help keep them from failing) and seeking to expose corruption feels like it undermines that trust.

So where we have taken quorums that were meant to be co-equal as a check against one another and the natural disposition of man to exercise unrighteous dominion, there seems to be a loss of accountability in that there doesn't seem to be any. This is why I think that something like MormonLeaks has come into being. I think it has simply filled a vacuum that exists because we have altered the order of things by desiring a top-down model where the men are considered worthy only if they are alive, because if they were bad, God would kill them.

Note that this line of thinking is NOT what we find in scripture. God has indeed had many corrupt people gain power and influence in his church and among the leadership of his people. Re-read D&C 121 again and note that it is the nature and disposition of ALMOST ALL MEN to exercise unrighteous dominion. Are there exceptions? None are given. So what do we make of the current quorums of the church? Is it the nature and disposition of almost all men except for those in the highest quorums of the church? I don't think so.

Is there corruption? I don't know. I don't know any of these men personally and I've never heard of one quorum checking another. Every year the church's own auditing reporter says that everything every year was done properly.

I can't speculate further. I can only look at the organizational structure as it was revealed in D&C 107 and what we have today and notice the differences. I think those differences have invited suspicion due to an attitude on our part where we all look to one single man as the ultimate authority without considering that he is part of a presidency and quorum and that other quorums are equal in authority and that they all must agree unanimously, the president cannot act alone, or at least he shouldn't.

[Mark]

Story with links to the full interviews here:

http://kutv.com/news/local/the-men-of-m ... eyre-after

Thanks, Captainfearnot.
From the article:
“For Dodge, tithing is one of the main reasons he works on leaks.

“[The church] pushes tithing and donations very hard,” Dodge said. He choked up, adding that “it upsets” him when leaders “make broad statements like pay your tithing before you feed your family.” He served and LDS mission in Guatemala where he said he would tell families that they needed to pay tithing even when they were scrambling to find a can of beans to feed their family.

MormonLeaks has posted documents containing financials from the church including where some tithing dollars go. One such release, internal documents of the church showing the base living allowance of General Authorities, amounted to $120,000 per year in 2014 - estimated to $135,000 today with the general three percent cost of living increase used in past years.

One of the organization's leaks expected to be benign was one of the site's most viral. MormonLeaks obtained documents showing the average price of décor used inside each new temple.

“There was one very notable item, that was the rug in the bridal room” says McKnight. The average bridal rug: $17,000, which he notes means could translate to way more in some temples.”

One aspect that is self-evident that goes counter to scripture, is how finances are handled.
Oaks admitted that no tithes go to help the poor. Yet, in Deuteronomy 14:28-29, it clearly states that 1/3 of collected TITHES are to be given to the poor. And, if you look under "tithing" in your triple combination bible dictionary or indexes, you don't find such an important scripture about how leaders are supposed to handle sacred funds. Also, scriptures repeatedly state that tithes are to be based on INCREASE, but lds leaders have changed that and said tithes are now based on income. In doing so, they put unnecessary burdens on the poor - demanding they pay what they have not to give.
To explain this... consider 2 men earn same income. 1 man is sole provider of a family of 7, and after paying all bills, has no increase left. The 2nd man lives at his parents' home where all his bills are paid for him, so all of his income is increase. To demand both men to pay the same tithes is not of God, but happens. Also, priestcraft is like charging for temple worthiness.

Some might try to justify tithing collectors NOT sharing tithes with the poor by saying, "that's the law of Moses." Yes, it is the LOWER law. Jesus asked for much more. Jesus repeatedly commanded us to love one another and to help those in need. That is one of the highest commandments, "which hang all the law and the prophets."

In my opinion, there are 2 serious problems that need to have light brought to them:
1. Finances.
2. Cognitive distortions taught - while discouraging psych-ology (study of the soul), thereby contributing to depression, addiction, etc.
“13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.” -Matthew 23

I was wondering, is there a difference between kingdom of God & kingdom of heaven? Considering how Jesus used them interchangeably even within the same context, they are the same - or so closely related as to be no distinction. Considering Jesus was asked WHEN the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, lo here or lo there. For behold, the kingdom of God is within you.” -Luke 17
The realm within us is obviously the means by which we feel the spirit and communicate God. Where else would it be? To suggest that it’s external or that one should not search one’s own soul (psych-ology) is deceptive and keeping people from entering into the kingdom of God/Heaven.

Speaking of psych-ology, and watching out for cognitive distortions - the church is not 100% true nor 100% false. The people (including leaders) are not 100% good nor 100% evil. There's a mix. I appreciate the church for the priceless sense of community and for the high standards that helped build a good foundation from which to build.

Gee where have I read this before?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xkW_ZkMtmlQ

[gardener4life]

Let the Spirit answer this with the scriptures. After you ponder and think about what's in the scriptures it will be clear what this means.

First, Helaman Chapter 16 is happening right now in spiritual form.

2; there were who did not believe in the words of Samuel were angry with him (Angry at the church and the prophets)...and they shot arrows (harmful anti-videos at him)
3 Now when they saw that they could not hit him, there were many more who did believe on his words, insomuch that they went away unto Nephi to be baptized. (The Lord has said he will not let his work be frustrated if we will be humble and truthful and committed. But we can be chastened.)
4 For behold, Nephi was baptizing, and prophesying, and preaching, crying repentance unto the people, showing signs and wonders, working miracles among the people, that they might know that the Christ must shortly come— (Think how many signs and wonders we're ignoring that show the Church is on track and true. We ignore that we surpassed 100 temples. We ignore the sign and wonder that they could announce a temple in Russia of all places. We ignore that there's the sign and wonder of Fast Offerings, and the Bishop's Storehouse. We ignore the sign and wonder that the Berlin Wall and iron curtain came down, that our country was blessed and more prosperous than the whole earth's countries simply for our willingness to do Temple work. We ignore the wonder that the makers of this smear video don't themselves donate to fast offerings but attack people that do. We ignore the sign and wonder that if you really believe in temple ordinances that you would rather have a temple than a full belly because the purpose of our mortality is to get sealed to our family so we can come home...NOT to eat steak and gravy everyday. We ignore the sign and wonder that nobody is starving in the church, but if they were you could put a stop to it at any time by reporting it to leaders and doing something about it.)

6 But the more part of them did not believe in the words of Samuel; therefore when they saw that they could not hit him with their stones (internet smut) and their arrows (darts of persecution), they cried unto their captains (anti groups), saying: Take this fellow and bind him, for behold he hath a devil; and because of the power of the devil which is in him we cannot hit him with our stones and our arrows; therefore take him and bind him, and away with him. (The Devil wants people to think the church is fallen, when those people in it are trying to do good. If these people think people are poor and starving why are they not giving to fast offerings? I bet some of those guys have never given to the poor themselves.)
10 ....the more part of the people remaining in their pride and wickedness, and the lesser part walking more circumspectly before God. (This is why they are really questioning faith. Their hearts are set upon wealth, riches, prestige, power, pride, immorality, and the fine things of the world. So they attack the things that are doing good so their sins won't be seen. If they can accomplish that then there is no standard to compare them to, which shows where their hearts are at.)
12 ....the people began to be more hardened in iniquity, and do more and more of that which was contrary to the commandments of God
13 ....there were great signs given unto the people, and wonders; and the words of the prophets began to be fulfilled. (comets, blood moons, sun darkened, astrological phenomenon, solar eclipses, hurricanes, storms, fires, and great warnings to repent.) (Look how quickly people forgot these events that just happened within a short time ago)
14....***the people began to harden their hearts, all save it were the most believing part of them, both of the Nephites and also of the Lamanites, and began to depend upon their own strength and upon their own wisdom, saying:*** (depend on their own trust in the flesh to question the prophet and God and his guiding of the plan of Salvation in their vanity, just like we're doing now and people on this forum.) (Are you going to be the most believing part of them, or something else that's forgotten...?)
16 Some things they may have guessed right, among so many; but behold, we know that all these great and marvelous works cannot come to pass...
17 And they began to reason and to contend among themselves
18 That it is not reasonable that such a being as a Christ shall come; if so, and he be the Son of God, the Father of heaven and of earth, as it has been spoken, why will he not show himself unto us as well as unto them who shall be at Jerusalem? (They ultimately question Christ himself. The modern twist is people questioning Christ being in charge of his own church. This is reflected in, 'why will he not show himself a sign unto us as well?'
20 ...we know that this is a wicked tradition, which has been handed down unto us by our fathers, to cause us that we should believe in some great and marvelous thing which should come to pass, but not among us...(They begin to label good as evil and ally with evil to destroy that which is good under the pretenses that their church and leaders are fallen or corrupt.)
21 ....hey will, by the cunning and the mysterious arts of the evil one, work some great mystery which we cannot understand, which will keep us down to be servants to their words, and also servants unto them, for we depend upon them to teach us the word; and thus will they keep us in ignorance (notice the sweet words of poison. If someone doesn't have their own testimony they may think there might be some truth in those words by not seeing what's going on clearly. The devil's arguments are so cunning and easily overcome their defenses because they WANT to do bad instead of good. They don't want to go to church or pay tithing so they choose to believe evil, not realizing they are giving up a wealth of blessings and their own future in doing so.)
22 And many more things did the people imagine up in their hearts, which were foolish and vain; and they were much disturbed, for Satan did stir them up to do iniquity continually; yea, he did go about spreading rumors and contentions (filth and lies) upon all the face of the land, that he might harden the hearts of the people against that which was good and against that which should come.
23 And notwithstanding the signs and the wonders which were wrought among the people of the Lord, and the many miracles which they did, Satan did get great hold upon the hearts of the people upon all the face of the land. (Verse 22 and 23 clearly show what this Mormon Leaks and other antis are trying to do...and also some of the people on this forum.) (Satan's end goal is to try to get you to deny your faith and get hold of your hearts.)


And also 3 Nephi Chapter 1

5 But there were some who began to say that the time was past for the words to be fulfilled, which were spoken by Samuel, the Lamanite. (Samuel is a representation of the prophet of his time.)
6 And they began to rejoice over their brethren, saying: Behold the time is past, and the words of Samuel are not fulfilled; therefore, your joy and your faith concerning this thing hath been vain.

We know how the story ends already. The Book of Mormon is a manual for what's happening now and what's going to happen. It is absolutely true. And why would you trust someone who doesn't pay tithing or fast offerings to try to teach you God's plan? People who pay tithing and fast offerings have a testimony that God takes care of them for doing so.
7 And it came to pass that they did make a 'great uproar' throughout the land; and the people who believed began to be very sorrowful, lest by any means those things which had been spoken might not come to pass.

[mtm411]

I have never agreed with anyone more than this on the internet, 5tev3. Very well done. We are told never to say all is well in Zion. There is so much good, but I hope we can be humble enough to continuously improve. I also find it interesting that even in the Book of Mormon, people naturally want a King. We make our modern prophets into celebrity kings, often against their will.

The current version of the church I think is a step backward in that it walks a dangerous line of having the potential of becoming corrupt without any means of rooting out the corruption.

Please explain this further 5tev3. What do you mean by the "current version" of the church. I like your thoughts and often read your blog, but this seems to come out of left field.

Sorry, I'm the tech industry and am involved in app and software development and so I think that my language was influenced by a paradigm where something begins and then progresses through a series of iterations. I was thinking along the same lines with my comment as there is a parallel to the history of the LDS church along with how God has organized his people throughout time. While the scriptures contain much individual devotion, we only get glimpses of how the church was organized at various points in history.

Modern LDS history is completely different, the records are detailed and many of them are considered part of our standard works in the D&C. From the time of the first vision on to where we are today, there were many iterative changes as things were being rolled out. Many of those things were steps forward and expansive while others were reductive in nature. What I was referring to as the "current version" of the church was in reference to the organization of the leadership where there is a top-down leadership from the president to the twelve and the seventy.

This was not how the church was organized in Joseph's time. I referenced D&C 107 where it explains that the governance of the church would be by three co-equal quorums. You have a presidency of the church consisting of three high priests, twelve traveling councilors, the seventy, and every decision made by them had to be unanimous. Then you had the individual stake high councils themselves which formed quorums equal in authority to the presidency and the twelve and the high council of Zion which was equal in authority to all the individual stakes of Zion.

The twelve were originally a traveling council that went around building up the church with the seventy to help them. The main governance of the church happened at the local stakes and with the high council of Zion. After Joseph's death, there was a power struggle between various factions including the stake high council, the twelve, and the remaining member of the first presidency Sidney Rigdon. At the time, nothing had been said concerning succession so they had to decide how things would shake out. Ultimately Brigham pushed for the idea that the twelve had the right to lead and the rest is history.

Instead of the quorums today being talked about as co-equal in authority, we are presented with a top-down hierarchical model where the presidency is at the top, the twelve below, and the seventy below that, and further down you have stake presidents and high councils. To make matters worse (in my opinion), we seem to ignore all of this by simply stating, "We are led by A prophet today" thus putting everything on one single man. Much of LDS speech in this regard makes it appear that we are just a group of people with a single prophet at the top. That is not how the church was or even IS organized. That kind of talk is a gross oversimplification at best and at worst it portrays a false paradigm of what should be.

To me, ignoring the co-equal quorums which could check and balance each other in favor for a king-like structure lends itself to corruption because when you put all the power in the hands of one man, that one man can potentially cause much more destruction. Whereas if we know that there are co-equal quorums with equal authority, one bad apple could be removed without tarnishing the trust of the leadership as a collective. D&C 107 notes that any of these quorums has the potential to make decisions "in unrighteousness" (vs.32) and in vs. 82 it mentions what happens if the President of the High Priesthood shall "transgress."

Instead, we walk what I feel is a dangerous line by referring to the president of the church as "beloved" and lifting him high to a state of adoration and praise. You may have noticed this with Elder Nelson. When President Monson was alive, he commanded all of the attention and Elder Nelson was simply another one of the twelve. Now that he is President Nelson that same attention given to Monson is centered on him and suddenly he is the most amazing person alive. I get that the church media department wants to profile the latest president of the church, and that's basically what media does is they try to inform questioning people as to who this person is and what qualifies them to lead.

I should probably state here that I have nothing personally against President Nelson or Monson. I'm sure they are wonderful people and may very well be deserving of all the praise heaped upon them. I look at them and think, "Those seem like respectable men." But I don't think we should be throwing massive birthday celebrations for them either or any other leader in the church. It is the office which is endowed with divine power, not the man, men are replaceable, even Joseph Smith was.

Should we be treating the call of a new president the same as the president of our nation which I would also say stinks grossly of that kingly worship we see in other nations? People love a king, they always have. I think it comes from an innate desire for a perfect heavenly king, but that adoration should never be centered in a mortal one. In my opinion, I think we should be leading the way in showing how co-equal quorums and authority provide for a greater check against corruption in governance. Something I think all nations of the earth could look at and desire to model. Instead, it seems that we are modeling them to a degree.

So when I say "current version" of the church you could point to a lot of things that distinguish it from past versions, many of which are good. The pointless priesthood restriction is gone and the gross crime of men taking on many wives has been eradicated in deed but not quite yet in thought.

Now, this doesn't mean that I live in a perpetual state of sour face about everything. I have witnessed what I feel is a rather unprecedented move by the church to more localized leadership and authority. I first noticed it when Stake misssionaries were changed to ward missionaries. Then the dedication of meetinghouses to the status of temples temporarily for temple dedications. After that, many more little interesting moves, and lately, the consolidation of the high priest group and elders quorum and the implementation of the ministering plan vs the old home and visiting teaching program.

Typically large organizations get more complex over time with more micromanaging. In the last few decades and especially this year we have seen the opposite which is very interesting. Think about it, before, home and visiting teaching had very specific objectives. Success meant getting into a home and teaching a lesson. As long as that happened it was assumed that people were being blessed. The numbers were tracked to see how successful the program was. Now there is no objective other than for the individual companionships to determine what is best of each family without any instruction from the leadership of the church and instead to work directly with the Lord. This is a massive organization putting an immense amount of trust in its own people, that cannot be understated as to how big of a deal that is to even come close to something like that in a large organization (especially a religious one). So kudos to the church under the leadership of President Nelson in this regard.

This latest conference marks another "version" of the church, an upgrade so to speak. There will be more changes in the future. Ultimately, we will be led by a king, Jesus Christ, and the current version of the church will be archived for something more complete and suited to a Zion people.

Until then, what we have now is what the Lord has permitted to be for the current time. So I lend my heart, might, and mind to the work at hand and seek to support everyone in their position so that we may be as successful as we can be with what we have today. I think that is all that we can do. Personally, I think it is foolish to leave this work for something lesser or to try and start something new. We know that the current iteration of the church is incomplete, that's not a surprise to anyone. We don't have all the scripture God intends for us, and there are many things yet to be revealed.

How that is all going to unfold, I don't quite know. It's possible that the Lord may cleanse his current house or ignite something new parallel to it and draw out the pure in heart. I don't quite know and honestly, it is not something I spend a ton of time thinking about other than here and there. The vast majority of my focus is on the doctrines and principles of the gospel, which, if you do read my blog, you'll notice an almost complete absence of controversial issues and references to current news and pop culture.

That's mostly due to the value that I place on certain information. I find it much more enriching and productive to study the doctrines and principles of the gospel and the endless fruit they bear, especially from the Book of Mormon. So while I do voice my opinion on controversial subjects here, my blog is far more reflective of what my usual study consists of. So anyway, long "answer" to a short question. Remember, I'm just some guy on the Internet, my ideas only have value if they are accurate so if you find me to be off-base with anything just ignore it, I'm only speaking for myself, I'm no prophet.

[mtm411]

I do think there needs to be a careful balance when evaluating information from Mormon Leaks. You cannot have a successful organization of millions without some bureaucracy. The church is here to inspire, help us make and keep covenants, fulfill our divine potential. In doing so, it needs programs, buildings, employees, health insurance, paint, furniture. Things that seem to have no place in a divine institution. Unfortunately, these things seem ill fitting in a divine institution, but they are necessary.

I honestly think organized religion has great potential for harm, but it can be so very good as well. I love how we have organization and community even if sometimes I feel like a cog in a big machine. Bureaucracy, even a divine one, does have big potential for corruption. I do think we should have more transparency.

I am also of the mind that we pay too much tithing. We have one income supporting 8 people and often hang on by the skin of our teeth. Thankfully, we have never needed to rely on the church or government to make ends meet. We do believe strongly in God's command to multiply and replenish and we do have enough for our needs. When 6 of those people are grown up and gone, we will still pay the exact same amount of tithing even though our stewardship over our children is gone. This seems to be against the spirit of tithing, it disadvantages large families. I agree that it seems to me that the Lord meant it to be on increase, not gross income. We still pay tithing as the church currently interprets it, but I do have my questions.