Would Disaffected Members Actual Return If...

[kgrigio]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

Jamescm post (I know it was said sarcastically) in the desired change thread and all the other rumor threads and the constant criticism from some on this board got me to thinking. If the church capitulates and implements everything that some are hoping and praying for, will this cause the disaffected members that the church is apparently driving away to suddenly "see the light" and return with enthusiasm?

If the church implements more financial and historic transparency like some are demanding, will that cause the loud naysayers to finally sing halleluja and fully embrace the church and brethren?

If rather than spending money on temples and chapels and malls and whatever the critics decry about how the church spends money, would the critics stand up and applaud and start donating a full time and a generous fast?

If the church is more openly pro LGBTQ, will this flood the chapel doors with new congregants?

What new things would have to be changed to make all these new and returning members feel even more at home and feel less judged?

Where are the lines drawn that will stop all criticism, and make us loved and right all wrongs? After all, Jesus was loved and adored wasn't he?

At what point are we just like any other church?

More importantly, will any of the above changes draw more people unto Christ and fulfill the mission of the church, which is to help God bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man?

[Michelle]

Excellent post.

How many are looking for salt without savor? Not many I'd guess.

Saw this article today and thought how literal the scriptures are about churches being built up to get gain.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/churche ... e-faithful

Basic idea: run it like a business.

[Thinker]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

[Rose Garden]

To answer your questions seriously, I would say people probably won't return because of those things. Though those things might have been partially responsible for them leaving the church, ultimately the problem is generally that they stopped believing that the LDS church is truly the Lord's church. They look at the LGBTQ issues, the word of wisdom, the gender roles, etc, and eventually discover the church no longer matches up with their idea of God. Once that idea takes hold, it's no longer one or two issues that fills the gap between the believing member and the disenchanted member. There's no going back after that.

[djinwa]

I don't know many inactives with those issues. Most have problems with church history or experiences with inspiration-gone-bad by leaders that made them question the divinity of it all.

As for the Constitution, I don't hear that much about it from active church members. Few understand it, and many of my relatives have jobs in government agencies that are unconstitutional. Money trumps principles.

Take the NSA spying center in Utah, for example. Likely many workers there are active LDS.

[harakim]

It wouldn't bring anyone back. Some things might keep members from leaving, like if the church decided to distinguish itself from other denominations somehow (other than giving money to it.)

[MMbelieve]

Doubt the church can do anything to bring people back. Its the spirit and truth that good people are attracted to, not policies or practices.

Plus, people are less interested in organized religion anyways.

[RocknRoll]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

You don’t consider all the Bishops Storehouses that are giving out free groceries to those in need, as “giving to the poor”? How about the weekly checks a bishop writes to help someone in his ward make their mortgage that month?

[endlessQuestions]

They would most certainly find something else to complain about. In most cases it's a mindset, not a grievance. The grievance is an excuse to act.

[Thinker]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

You don’t consider all the Bishops Storehouses that are giving out free groceries to those in need, as “giving to the poor”? How about the weekly checks a bishop writes to help someone in his ward make their mortgage that month?

In some cases that’s good but often it’s dysfunctional when you look a little deeper. Ironically and tragically - the church takes from those who don’t have increase to give, then acts like they’re giving THEM charity. I know a big family who’s sole provider-father lost his job, gave a check of thousands of dollars to the church while taking church financial and food assistance. Ridiculous! How insane for a church to demand money in exchange of “worthiness” and on top of that - overcharging - taking from the poor?!!

Financial corruption (which contribute to debt, bankruptcy, poverty and related suffering) is undeniable. Changing scripture from what it states (increase) to mean “income” to get more money, is not of Christ. The reason God commanded tithe be based on increase is shown in the following example:

• 2 men earn the exact same income amount.
  1 man is the sole provider of a family of 7 and after paying bills has no increase left.
  2nd man lives with his parents who pay all his bills, so all of his income is increase.
  Yet, the church demand$ the $ame amount from each man - thereby causing the 1st family to be poor. Christ was about alleviating poverty and suffering - not causing more.

Also, consider almost 1,000,000,000 of our brothers and sisters in extreme poverty who are “chronically hungry” according to a he W.H.O. Tossing pennies to those who are not as poor as many others who don’t even have clean water.


One of the main things I remember in my tour of the lds humanitarian center was a big warehouse of people standing in garbage dumpsters, sorting through unwanted used clothes from DI. I read that in many poor countries which received these used clothing shipments (which cost more than the items being shipped) - it was putting local clothing vendors out of business because they couldn’t compete with free.

It seems that humanitarian efforts are not given the time, research and resources to be effective. It seems more like throwing crumbs to dogs.

“There was an article after an earthquake in China where the Chinese government refused a shipment of supplies from LDS inc. when they opened the containers and found loads of stained used clothing and contaminated medical supplies.

• “The load of 926 boxes, comprising $114,542 worth of supplies, included 47 boxes of expired medical supplies, 60 boxes of medical supplies without expiration dates, 2 boxes of second-hand medical equipment, 2 boxes of expired detergents, 87 boxes of used children's items, and 41 sets of used rehabilitation equipment—adding up to 239 boxes of unusable supplies or equipment...
  
  The two latest examples of problematic donations are not isolated incidents; similar concerns have arisen in the past, though at a smaller scale. If goodwill channels are not properly supervised, a small group may benefit while the needy continue to suffer, contributing to distrust of otherwise well-meaning benefactors. To prevent such incidents from recurring in the future, closer cooperation between donor and benefactor countries is urgently needed to guarantee the true charity of such deeds.”http://www.worldwatch.org/node/3863

If the urgent attention and precision used in making money was applied to helping those in need, humanitarian efforts could be much more effective. Also, tithes should be helping those in need. Deuteronomy 14:28-29 states that at least 1/3 of TITHES are for the poor. Oaks admitted no tithes go to the poor, thereby breaking the greatest commandments. Who’s money are tithes? God’s. And how do we love God? “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these, ye have done it unto me.” - Matthew 25

[Shaffer89]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

You don’t consider all the Bishops Storehouses that are giving out free groceries to those in need, as “giving to the poor”? How about the weekly checks a bishop writes to help someone in his ward make their mortgage that month?

Seems good - until you look it a little deeper. Tossing pennies to those who are not as poor as many others who don’t even have clean water. Ironically and tragically - the church takes from those who don’t have increase to give. I know a big family who’s sole provider-father lost his job, gave a check of thousands of dollars to the church while taking church financial and food assistance. Ridiculous! How insane for a church to demand money in exchange of “worthiness” and on top of that - overcharging - taking from the poor?!!

Financial corruption (which contribute to debt, bankruptcy, poverty and related suffering) is undeniable. Changing scripture from what it states (increase) to mean “income” to get more money, is not of Christ. The reason God commanded tithe be based on increase is shown in the following example:

• 2 men earn the exact same income amount.
  1 man is the sole provider of a family of 7 and after paying bills has no increase left.
  2nd man lives with his parents who pay all his bills, so all of his income is increase.
  Yet, the church demand$ the $ame amount from each man - thereby causing the 1st family to be poor. Christ was about alleviating poverty and suffering - not causing more.

This scenario is difficult to judge. Did the bishop tell the couple that there was an amount they needed to pay in order to be temple worthy? I doubt it but I suppose it is possible. Knowing my own families experience in situations like this I would venture to guess that the couple felt like they need to pay for it to be considered an honest tithe. And when they made the payment the difficulties they faced after sacrificing their money were addressed by the bishop through the storehouse etc....
It all boils down to your idea of what an honest tithe is referring to, though i am pretty sure there are many threads already addressing that issue. To me giving away money and relying on the church for sustenance is closer to the law of consecration and I respect that more than the alternatives.

[Thinker]

Shaffer,
Tithing belongs to God. Inasmuch as we care for those in need, we care for God. God is about truth and honesty in dealings with fellow man - NOT keeping money dark and secret. Christ was about prioritizing the poor, NOT obsessed with building yet another shopping mall, adding to a corporate, greedy empire - using Jesus Christ’s name in vain. Isn’t it priestcraft to use the money to charge for worthiness - besides not sharing with the poor and instead taking from the poor by charging on income rather than scriptural increase? I have a feeling if Christ were here, he’d be braiding a whip again.



Deuteronomy 14:28-29 (conveniently ignored in lds curriculums) states that tithing collectors are to give at least 1/3 of TITHES to those in need. Christ asked those who can, to give much more.

While we are often pressured and shamed into giving “honest tithes,” church leaders keep money dark and secret, though Oaks did admit no tithes go to the poor. Funds intended for the poor go to the corporate empire of mormon leaders and we have no clue or say in how it’s spent. We do know the church had some elaborate malls built, and a list of greedy wordly companies using the name of Jesus Christ in vain. Meanwhile, about 1,000,000,000 of our brothers and sisters are starving.

Grand ribon-cutting opening by for another mall (3 now) built using the name of Jesus Christ...






Even if you designated fast offerings - the church leaders now say it’s their money and they can use it as they want...

[eddie]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

You don’t consider all the Bishops Storehouses that are giving out free groceries to those in need, as “giving to the poor”? How about the weekly checks a bishop writes to help someone in his ward make their mortgage that month?

It wouldn’t matter how often the church was the first one me to give aid to earthquake victims such as Haiti, it doesn’t matter that our missionaries do service to those in need everyday, as a matter of fact,
There will always be those who look for loopholes. I cringe when I hear their criticism. We are a church, we need meeting houses, Manuelsfor teaching , Temples hymn books, etc. The plan never was to give away everything we’ve got.

[shadow]

People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

Well, the poor will flock to the church until the money dwindles, then they'll go back to Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The funny thing about Christ's ministry is that he didn't cure poverty, not even close. The widow offered her mite and went home poor still. And it's not like Christ didn't notice her, He just didn't fill her pockets with Gold, which is something He could've made happen.

And just in case you need a reminder- the church has a huge welfare program. The church programs feed thousands every single day.

The economics of Joseph in Egypt's time is an interesting study. The poor became even poorer as they traded all they had for some corn. Joseph could've just given them the corn for crying out loud. Well, I guess he gave his own family quite a little fortune. Anyway, he could've fed the poor without asking them for everything they own. The money failed so he took everyone's cattle, flocks and herds in exchange for some bread. Then He told them to give him their land for some bread.

[Vision]

If the church actually gave to the poor as Christ asked the rich to and did and taught what Christ did and taught, they would be politically incorrect and hated - and not as successful financially but more successful spiritually. People would be flocking to the church as they did to Christ.

Thinker you and I share the same feelings generally. Let me share with you an eye opening experience I had about the church and the poor.

A friend of mine who is a member of the Cavalry Baptist church in SLC goes to the Bishops storehouse every Friday and gets a truck load of food. He takes the food to a place called "Fill the Pot Ministeries" in downtown SLC. On Sunday volunteers show up and turn that food into meals for the homeless. From what he tells me charities of all kinds get food from the Bishops storehouse every day of the week. Some of the charities run battered women shelters, homeless youth shelters, drug treatment facilities, etc. My heart has been softened about the churches wealth because of my friend sharing with me his service.

[Thinker]

Shadow and Vision,
I know our church leaders do some good for those in need - but compared to what Christ would give and asked those who can, to give - it’s like tossing pennies while hoarding riches and bathing in luxury. Our church is rich with resources - imagine how much good we could do if there was research to figure out needs and most effective solutions... and all missionary work was humanitarian work! Having visited some very poor areas of this world, I feel the need to speak for those who have no voice - those who tithes are intended for. Having studied this out and prayed, I’ve repeatedly felt the Spirit about this.

I know that members locally - offer an awesome sense of community by putting spirituality into action - serving one another. This is huge - and I do believe is what Christ would want.

It’s not all or nothing. Again my motto: Take the best, leave the rest.

[Michelle]

Shadow and Vision,
I know our church leaders do some good for those in need - but compared to what Christ would give and asked those who can, to give - it’s like tossing pennies while hoarding riches and bathing in luxury. Our church is rich with resources - imagine how much good we could do if there was research to figure out needs and most effective solutions... and all missionary work was humanitarian work! Having visited some very poor areas of this world, I feel the need to speak for those who have no voice - those who tithes are intended for. Having studied this out and prayed, I’ve repeatedly felt the Spirit about this.

I know that members locally - offer an awesome sense of community by putting spirituality into action - serving one another. This is huge - and I do believe is what Christ would want.

It’s not all or nothing. Again my motto: Take the best, leave the rest.

"but compared to what Christ would give"

How do you know and where is your evidence that Christ would do differently? When I read the scriptures I see Christ blessing individually. One by one, never in a rush. And quite frankly, He didn't bless everyone, just those in his path. He could have cured all the illness on the planet in an instant, but He didn't. He could have made all the poor rich in an instant, but He didn't. We came to earth to learn. Why don't we all live in a Garden of Eden world right now? By your understanding, isn't that what Christ would do if he were really Christ the way you understand Him?

You used the example of the clothing donations putting local people out of business, but what would happen if a flood of money or goods came to a town? This is basic economics: no need to produce anything if you are getting paid without working. When no one is producing anything there is nothing to buy. A flood of money and goods to a poor town would be like feeding a starving person a feast. They may enjoy the meal in the moment, but you'll kill them pretty quick. Money is just a representation of work. It is a place holder for having produced something or performed a service. Small donations can be blessing, until one is taught to provide for themselves. Long term donations or in excessive amounts would be a curse.

[simpleton]

" There was neither rich nor poor and they had all things common"....

That is the description of Enoch's Zion. And ultimately after 365 years they became so righteous that God literally took the whole city up in some kind translated state, to be brought back here to earth sometime when we are prepared to meet them, or when we are able to see them "eye to eye" . Which I suppose means that we learn to do just like they did. Under the existing "capitalist system" of where some few get rich and the masses get ground down on their faces, I so not see that happening. But yet according to prophecy a "remnant" will. IMO, the church as a whole, under its existing financial, Babylonian system, will never ever reach that utopia. In fact, it has gone backwards in regards to trying to get to that ideal, as a whole. So I figure in the near future there is going to be a complete failure of this capitalistic system that is going to make it completely neccessary to learn to become "one" or not survive. But in the mean time, nothing is stopping each individual from being charitable one towards another....

[JohnnyL]

DESIRED CHANGES:
- Set up the female leadership of the Church to have the same structure, functions, and roles of the male leadership of the Church, because my wife and I always fulfill exactly the same responsibilities, and in exactly the same way, because that is socially popular with people who unconditionally hate the Church and seek to rob our freedoms.
- Tell me I'm allowed to eat, drink, breathe, and inject whatever I want, whenever I want. My thoughts about the deliciousness of green tea flavored things are more important to me than honing my obediance or avoiding dangers that the world either contests or isn't aware of.
- A memorandom stating that the Constitution isn't so important after all, and that it is okay to live off of other people as long as the law says it's okay.
- Tell me I don't have to remind myself of my temple covenants every time I get dressed.
- Make Church services optional, because my relationship with my Savior is entirely personal and can't benefit at all from companionship with others.
- If I drop by Sunday School once in a while, I want everyone to be really sensitive and make sure never to suggest that anything anyoen may possibly do is not ideal, because not offending people is more important than identifying and rejecting sin in our lives. We shouldn't judge anything anyone does to help us determine not to do it ourselves.
- Stop asking me to sacrifice ideas I like, or embrace ideas I don't necessarily agree with.
- Permit me to mostly follow the Church, but to deviate in this or that point when it suites me because it is more immediately satisfying, more convenient, or fits in with popular opinions.
- Aknowledge that <allpastprophetsandteachingsidon'tlike> were wrong after all.
- Basically, allow me to somehow develop big, strong spiritual muscles without having to lift, push, or pull heavy spiritual weight.

Jamescm post (I know it was said sarcastically) in the desired change thread and all the other rumor threads and the constant criticism from some on this board got me to thinking. If the church capitulates and implements everything that some are hoping and praying for, will this cause the disaffected members that the church is apparently driving away to suddenly "see the light" and return with enthusiasm?

If the church implements more financial and historic transparency like some are demanding, will that cause the loud naysayers to finally sing halleluja and fully embrace the church and brethren?

If rather than spending money on temples and chapels and malls and whatever the critics decry about how the church spends money, would the critics stand up and applaud and start donating a full time and a generous fast?

If the church is more openly pro LGBTQ, will this flood the chapel doors with new congregants?

What new things would have to be changed to make all these new and returning members feel even more at home and feel less judged?

Where are the lines drawn that will stop all criticism, and make us loved and right all wrongs? After all, Jesus was loved and adored wasn't he?

At what point are we just like any other church?

More importantly, will any of the above changes draw more people unto Christ and fulfill the mission of the church, which is to help God bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man?

A good example was given of the "rock in the hat" problem--it has been taught for years, in many places, in official church lessons. So now that that has been "remembered", where are the droves of people who left the Church for that reason? Yeah.

[ajax]

How do you know and where is your evidence that Christ would do differently? When I read the scriptures I see Christ blessing individually. One by one, never in a rush. And quite frankly, He didn't bless everyone, just those in his path. He could have cured all the illness on the planet in an instant, but He didn't. He could have made all the poor rich in an instant, but He didn't. We came to earth to learn. Why don't we all live in a Garden of Eden world right now? By your understanding, isn't that what Christ would do if he were really Christ the way you understand Him?

You used the example of the clothing donations putting local people out of business, but what would happen if a flood of money or goods came to a town? This is basic economics: no need to produce anything if you are getting paid without working. When no one is producing anything there is nothing to buy. A flood of money and goods to a poor town would be like feeding a starving person a feast. They may enjoy the meal in the moment, but you'll kill them pretty quick. Money is just a representation of work. It is a place holder for having produced something or performed a service. Small donations can be blessing, until one is taught to provide for themselves. Long term donations or in excessive amounts would be a curse.

Indeed. The Church can't solve world poverty. Christ didn't even solve local poverty, or even pretend to try. If we keep things in perspective, extreme poverty is now only 10% of the worlds population. In 1820, those numbers were reversed, over 90%. And that has been the default position of humanity for thousands of years. In only 200 yrs those numbers have been turned on there heads. Why? Capital Investment. The development of greater and greater tools and increased productivity. It is the greatest anti-poverty program in history. It's success hinges on two things, freedom to voluntarily enter exchanges / relationships one wishes and property rights.

Relieving immediate suffering is important, but it is far inferior in the long run to increased capital (better and more productive tools). And this depends on savings and investment, which in turn depends on sound money. And you can't relieve immediate suffering without prior production and surplus.

[Zathura]

How do you know and where is your evidence that Christ would do differently? When I read the scriptures I see Christ blessing individually. One by one, never in a rush. And quite frankly, He didn't bless everyone, just those in his path. He could have cured all the illness on the planet in an instant, but He didn't. He could have made all the poor rich in an instant, but He didn't. We came to earth to learn. Why don't we all live in a Garden of Eden world right now? By your understanding, isn't that what Christ would do if he were really Christ the way you understand Him?

You used the example of the clothing donations putting local people out of business, but what would happen if a flood of money or goods came to a town? This is basic economics: no need to produce anything if you are getting paid without working. When no one is producing anything there is nothing to buy. A flood of money and goods to a poor town would be like feeding a starving person a feast. They may enjoy the meal in the moment, but you'll kill them pretty quick. Money is just a representation of work. It is a place holder for having produced something or performed a service. Small donations can be blessing, until one is taught to provide for themselves. Long term donations or in excessive amounts would be a curse.

Indeed. The Church can't solve world poverty. Christ didn't even solve local poverty, or even pretend to try. If we keep things in perspective, extreme poverty is now only 10% of the worlds population. In 1820, those numbers were reversed, over 90%. And that has been the default position of humanity for thousands of years. In only 200 yrs those numbers have been turned on there heads. Why? Capital Investment. The development of greater and greater tools and increased productivity. It is the greatest anti-poverty program in history. It's success hinges on two things, freedom to voluntarily enter exchanges and relationships one wishes and property rights.

Relieving immediate suffering is important, but it is far inferior in the long run to increased capital (better and more productive tools). And this depends on savings and investment, which in turn depends on sound money. And you can't relieve immediate suffering without prior production and surplus.

Great point, but surely Christ would have the church give more than the 1.5%(2%)? that the church has reportedly given to charity? Maybe? Nah?

[ajax]

" There was neither rich nor poor and they had all things common"....

That is the description of Enoch's Zion. And ultimately after 365 years they became so righteous that God literally took the whole city up in some kind translated state, to be brought back here to earth sometime when we are prepared to meet them, or when we are able to see them "eye to eye" . Which I suppose means that we learn to do just like they did. Under the existing "capitalist system" of where some few get rich and the masses get ground down on their faces, I so not see that happening. But yet according to prophecy a "remnant" will. IMO, the church as a whole, under its existing financial, Babylonian system, will never ever reach that utopia. In fact, it has gone backwards in regards to trying to get to that ideal, as a whole. So I figure in the near future there is going to be a complete failure of this capitalistic system that is going to make it completely neccessary to learn to become "one" or not survive. But in the mean time, nothing is stopping each individual from being charitable one towards another....

Capitalism is simply this: Exchanges must be voluntarily agreed to by both parties. It is simply free exchange and free association buttressed by property rights. Now examine the present system and see that it isn't really capitalism. So capitalism per se hasn't failed, people have failed to live free.

[ajax]

How do you know and where is your evidence that Christ would do differently? When I read the scriptures I see Christ blessing individually. One by one, never in a rush. And quite frankly, He didn't bless everyone, just those in his path. He could have cured all the illness on the planet in an instant, but He didn't. He could have made all the poor rich in an instant, but He didn't. We came to earth to learn. Why don't we all live in a Garden of Eden world right now? By your understanding, isn't that what Christ would do if he were really Christ the way you understand Him?

You used the example of the clothing donations putting local people out of business, but what would happen if a flood of money or goods came to a town? This is basic economics: no need to produce anything if you are getting paid without working. When no one is producing anything there is nothing to buy. A flood of money and goods to a poor town would be like feeding a starving person a feast. They may enjoy the meal in the moment, but you'll kill them pretty quick. Money is just a representation of work. It is a place holder for having produced something or performed a service. Small donations can be blessing, until one is taught to provide for themselves. Long term donations or in excessive amounts would be a curse.

Indeed. The Church can't solve world poverty. Christ didn't even solve local poverty, or even pretend to try. If we keep things in perspective, extreme poverty is now only 10% of the worlds population. In 1820, those numbers were reversed, over 90%. And that has been the default position of humanity for thousands of years. In only 200 yrs those numbers have been turned on there heads. Why? Capital Investment. The development of greater and greater tools and increased productivity. It is the greatest anti-poverty program in history. It's success hinges on two things, freedom to voluntarily enter exchanges and relationships one wishes and property rights.

Relieving immediate suffering is important, but it is far inferior in the long run to increased capital (better and more productive tools). And this depends on savings and investment, which in turn depends on sound money. And you can't relieve immediate suffering without prior production and surplus.

Great point, but surely Christ would have the church give more than the 1.5%(2%)? that the church has reportedly given to charity? Maybe? Nah?

Of course, my point was a general observation. Church members have a right to petition their leaders in this direction. It is their church too.

[Thinker]

Shadow and Vision,
I know our church leaders do some good for those in need - but compared to what Christ would give and asked those who can, to give - it’s like tossing pennies while hoarding riches and bathing in luxury. Our church is rich with resources - imagine how much good we could do if there was research to figure out needs and most effective solutions... and all missionary work was humanitarian work! Having visited some very poor areas of this world, I feel the need to speak for those who have no voice - those who tithes are intended for. Having studied this out and prayed, I’ve repeatedly felt the Spirit about this.

I know that members locally - offer an awesome sense of community by putting spirituality into action - serving one another. This is huge - and I do believe is what Christ would want.

It’s not all or nothing. Again my motto: Take the best, leave the rest.

How do you know and where is your evidence that Christ would do differently?

I’ve explained this before but will again - it’s good to become familiar with Christ’s teachings...
To the rich, Christ said:

• “Go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and GIVE TO THE POOR, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.” - Mari 10:21

All gifts are given by God to love and benefit one another. Christ noted how hard it is for rich hoarders to give up their false god of wealth:

• “And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” - Matthew 19:24

• “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
  This is the first and great commandment.
  And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
  On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” - Matthew 22:37-40

Tithes belong to God, and how do we love God? By loving those in need...

• “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
  And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
  
  Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
  For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
  Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
  
  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
  For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
  I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” - Matthew 25:31-46

[ajax]

I’ve explained this before but will again - it’s good to become familiar with Christ’s teachings...
To the rich, Christ said:

• “Go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and GIVE TO THE POOR, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.” - Mari 10:21

Was this a specific to that particular man at that particular time or a general commandment to all at all times? If to all at all times, have you done so? I'm guessing you are part of the top 1% of the worlds population. That makes you rich. Correct me if I'm wrong. There is also the parable or increasing talents through wise investment/stewardship.

All gifts are given by God to love and benefit one another. Christ noted how hard it is for rich hoarders to give up their false god of wealth:

• “And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” - Matthew 19:24

What is a hoarder? Is a savings account hoarding?