LDS Freedom Forum

buffalo_girl wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 3:52 pm

That stuff was just for the early saints

Hmmm.....

I was told by one of my BYU Book of Mormon instructors in 1978 that very same thing regarding Mosiah 4:16-23.

Since that was during the same time I was only eating once a day and fasting one full day a week in order to feed my sons while going to school, I had to make sure I had heard him correctly. I made an appointment and visited him in his office. I repeated what I understood him to say and asked if I had heard him correctly. "Yes," he said, "Any person in financial crisis need only repent, and things will be put aright."

Are you also saying that the following 'stuff was just for King Benjamin's time and People'?

Mosiah 4
16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.
17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—
18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.
19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?
20 And behold, even at this time, ye have been calling on his name, and begging for a remission of your sins. And has he suffered that ye have begged in vain? Nay; he has poured out his Spirit upon you, and has caused that your hearts should be filled with joy, and has caused that your mouths should be stopped that ye could not find utterance, so exceedingly great was your joy.
21 And now, if God, who has created you, on whom you are dependent for your lives and for all that ye have and are, doth grant unto you whatsoever ye ask that is right, in faith, believing that ye shall receive, O then, how ye ought to impart of the substance that ye have one to another.
22 And if ye judge the man who putteth up his petition to you for your substance that he perish not, and condemn him, how much more just will be your condemnation for withholding your substance, which doth not belong to you but to God, to whom also your life belongeth; and yet ye put up no petition, nor repent of the thing which thou hast done.
23 I say unto you, wo be unto that man, for his substance shall perish with him; and now, I say these things unto those who are rich as pertaining to the things of this world.

Believing that scripture does not apply to our particular time in mortality certainly makes things a lot less complicated, doesn't it?

It was easy to miss, but if you drop to the bottom of his post, you will see he wrote "JK" for just kidding.

However, your post still stands. I've heard so many LDS deny that scripture pertains to us, especially as it regards wealth and the poor. Many years ago I was discussing this with a ward member whose wife was my close friend. They were very wealthy. I casually mentioned that my husband and were downsizing with one goal being to financially help more people. We were not, and are not, wealthy, but we had some room to cut back on stuff. Man, did he protest. His main point was that the Church does not ask us to anything like that, and that the general authorities all drive nice cars and live in nice houses, etc, etc.
At Ward Conference, my Stake President told us that as an affluent group of people, it was our responsibility..............to introduce our affluent friends to the gospel so that they could also help build the kingdom. I almost lost my lunch.

Rick Grimes wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 12:10 pm

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 11:55 am

markharr wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 10:46 am

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:30 am

This is just an attempt to shame members into not voicing any concerns, but the members supposedly must be perfect before they can raise any concern. Yet in the church, as said by the Lord himself in the DC multiple times, everything should be done by common consent:

DC 28:13 For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.

DC 26:2 2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.

DC 104:71 And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the voice and common consent of the order.
72 And this shall be the voice and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship

How can members even give their consent when things are hidden from them? And what makes current church leaders above the Lord's law, the instruction given directly form him? In fact, are we derelict in our duty by not standing up for following the Lord's pattern?

What proof do you have that anything was hidden from you beyond the word of this one man?

I did not know the church had over $100 billion. Did you?

Why does it matter how much money the church had squirreled away? How much is too much? Would 10 billion be the right number? How about 100 Million instead? Not sure what the big fuss is about. The church has money, so what? I'm not understanding what is so Earth shattering and life changing in finding out how much money the church had tied up in these funds.

If its so not an issue and so normal and so just, "Hey man, whats the big deal?" then why isn't the Church transparent about its money? Why don't we know exactly how much money the Church has? How come this has been kept hidden from members?

Remember, I ask my questions in the context of, "Hey man, whats the big deal?"

...

Sorry about that nightlight! I didn't see the jk dealio.

Nonetheless, there are those who don't know scripture well enough to apply it in their lives - sometimes even Gospel teachers say things not well thought through.

Lizzy, I'm not sure what your Stake President was suggesting? So...wealthy people will help 'give to those in need'?

Here's the Wall St Journal article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mormon ... 1581138011

Who cares what the head of Ensign Peak Advisers said or what he even thinks. I don't.


15 ¶ If ye love me, keep my commandments.
3 And this shall be the beginning of the tithing of my people.

23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.
24 For after today cometh the burning—this is speaking after the manner of the Lord—for verily I say, tomorrow all the proud and they that do wickedly shall be as stubble; and I will burn them up, for I am the Lord of Hosts; and I will not spare any that remain in Babylon.
25 Wherefore, if ye believe me, ye will labor while it is called today.


The Lord told the church what to use tithing funds for.
2 For the building of mine house, and for the laying of the foundation of Zion and for the priesthood, and for the debts of the Presidency of my Church.

Build a foundation on Christ and have faith in Him and these silly stories will pass you by without a concern in the world as you continue to tithe.

buffalo_girl wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 4:49 pm Sorry about that nightlight! I didn't see the jk dealio.

Nonetheless, there are those who don't know scripture well enough to apply it in their lives - sometimes even Gospel teachers say things not well thought through.

Lizzy, I'm not sure what your Stake President was suggesting? So...wealthy people will help 'give to those in need'?

Here's the Wall St Journal article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mormon ... 1581138011

At the start of the talk, when he was talking about our ward being well-to-do, I thought he was going to encourage us to give more in fast offerings. But he didn't. He talked about how the Church needs more people who are "affluent" because so many people who join the church are poor. He was very vague about why affluent people are needed, but I was left with the impression that poor people are a drain on church resources. This was before City Creek was finished, and before I had any idea that the Corp Church is immensely wealthy. It was just a weird talk, and I really got tired of the word "affluent." It was like he avoided using "rich" or "wealthy."

darknesstolight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 4:35 pm

Rick Grimes wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 12:10 pm

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 11:55 am

markharr wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 10:46 am


What proof do you have that anything was hidden from you beyond the word of this one man?

I did not know the church had over $100 billion. Did you?

Why does it matter how much money the church had squirreled away? How much is too much? Would 10 billion be the right number? How about 100 Million instead? Not sure what the big fuss is about. The church has money, so what? I'm not understanding what is so Earth shattering and life changing in finding out how much money the church had tied up in these funds.

If its so not an issue and so normal and so just, "Hey man, whats the big deal?" then why isn't the Church transparent about its money? Why don't we know exactly how much money the Church has? How come this has been kept hidden from members?

Remember, I ask my questions in the context of, "Hey man, whats the big deal?"

...

What business is it of anybody how much money the church has in assets? I mean, how is that germane to yours or my salvation? I'm not sure why people even care about it. Of course the church has money. They are a tax free entity and recieve tithes from faithful members. I'm relieved to hear that the Lord's servants have multiplied these talents and made sound financial decisions with these sacred funds. (Among those expenses is building temples, meeting houses, funding their maintenance, humanitarian aid, etc....) I would be distressed to know that they have been foolish and squandered these funds with nothing to show for them. Instead, we have a surplus of funds and buildings that are in good repair to serve the people who cross their thresholds.

Again, I'm not sure why anybody would be bothered to know the church has funds. I wouldnt have revealed them either, just like I dont advertise how much money I have in my bank account.

What business is it of anybody ! O M - !
The church is really a Fortune 500 company masquerading as a church.
and just like what you said "how is that germane to yours or my salvation? "

darknesstolight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 4:35 pm
If its so not an issue and so normal and so just, "Hey man, whats the big deal?" then why isn't the Church transparent about its money? Why don't we know exactly how much money the Church has? How come this has been kept hidden from members?

Remember, I ask my questions in the context of, "Hey man, whats the big deal?"

...

There are very good reasons not to be fully transparent in everything. Much of what is hidden would try the faith of the members, as is evidenced by the revelation of this bank account. Many will needlessly lose their faith because they were exposed to something they were not ready to deal with. Many will lose their faith because people will represent the presence of this account in an evil light.

The demand for full transparency is a juvenile and selfish vice. It is a worldly and Satanic demand. It is unchecked emotion with no wisdom.

Do we as followers of Christ demand full transparency from Him? Do we demand to know all that He knows NOW? The path of Christ is one of submission without full understanding. It is faith followed by knowledge, not knowledge without faith. Did Christ Himself practice transparency at all times? Did he instruct his disciples to be fully transparent?

No matter how much money is in that account, there will be critics. The revelation of this account simply leads to criticism and contention. I think the Church was wise not to have made this account public. They are doing nothing wrong or ungodly, yet there has been much contention as a result of the actions of this supposed whistleblower who felt he knew better than those with keys.

nightlight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 2:42 pm

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:30 am

Phantom wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:24 am I would suggest you all get your house in order before dictating both what is going on and how the Lord's house should be ordered. You've got no right.

This is just an attempt to shame members into not voicing any concerns, but the members supposedly must be perfect before they can raise any concern. Yet in the church, as said by the Lord himself in the DC multiple times, everything should be done by common consent:

DC 28:13 For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.

DC 26:2 2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.

DC 104:71 And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the voice and common consent of the order.
72 And this shall be the voice and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship

How can members even give their consent when things are hidden from them? And what makes current church leaders above the Lord's law, the instruction given directly form him? In fact, are we derelict in our duty by not standing up for following the Lord's pattern?

That stuff was just for the early saints

And when did that change? When did we stop operating according to common consent?

Serragon wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 7:26 pm

darknesstolight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 4:35 pm
If its so not an issue and so normal and so just, "Hey man, whats the big deal?" then why isn't the Church transparent about its money? Why don't we know exactly how much money the Church has? How come this has been kept hidden from members?

Remember, I ask my questions in the context of, "Hey man, whats the big deal?"

...

There are very good reasons not to be fully transparent in everything. Much of what is hidden would try the faith of the members, as is evidenced by the revelation of this bank account. Many will needlessly lose their faith because they were exposed to something they were not ready to deal with. Many will lose their faith because people will represent the presence of this account in an evil light.

The demand for full transparency is a juvenile and selfish vice. It is a worldly and Satanic demand. It is unchecked emotion with no wisdom.

Do we as followers of Christ demand full transparency from Him? Do we demand to know all that He knows NOW? The path of Christ is one of submission without full understanding. It is faith followed by knowledge, not knowledge without faith. Did Christ Himself practice transparency at all times? Did he instruct his disciples to be fully transparent?

No matter how much money is in that account, there will be critics. The revelation of this account simply leads to criticism and contention. I think the Church was wise not to have made this account public. They are doing nothing wrong or ungodly, yet there has been much contention as a result of the actions of this supposed whistleblower who felt he knew better than those with keys.

This is more of "the members made us do it.". And remember that the Lord put rules in place on how the church is supposed to be run.

Aprhys wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 1:57 pm ...Yet my bishop has the nerve to ask me why I stopped paying tithing last year. Maybe because I had to make the decision of losing my home or buying the church another 250,000 chandelier for the temple. Yeah, I lost my temple recommend but thats a heck of a lot better than losing the roof over my kids head. And to be honest if God rejectals me for this decision then I will reject him and his "church."

I believe Christ would be quite ticked off about how temples are used to make money, and other priestcraft and extortion type behavior, especially when it hurts children and others who are already suffering. “Inasmuch as he have done it to the least of these, he have done it unto me.” Scriptures state tithes are intended for those in need, and that’s backed up by Christ’s greatest commandments which are ABOVE “all the laws and prophets.”

The following video shows examples of LDS leaders
telling the poor to pay them MONEY over feeding their children. They - and those who follow them - will be held accountable.

Lexew1899 made this video:

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 7:33 pm

nightlight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 2:42 pm

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:30 am

Phantom wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:24 am I would suggest you all get your house in order before dictating both what is going on and how the Lord's house should be ordered. You've got no right.

This is just an attempt to shame members into not voicing any concerns, but the members supposedly must be perfect before they can raise any concern. Yet in the church, as said by the Lord himself in the DC multiple times, everything should be done by common consent:

DC 28:13 For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.

DC 26:2 2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.

DC 104:71 And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the voice and common consent of the order.
72 And this shall be the voice and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship

How can members even give their consent when things are hidden from them? And what makes current church leaders above the Lord's law, the instruction given directly form him? In fact, are we derelict in our duty by not standing up for following the Lord's pattern?

That stuff was just for the early saints

And when did that change? When did we stop operating according to common consent?

Not sure. Once JS died...it seems D&C laws were put off until xyz could happen. Then their children just started to pretend like we did follow D&C


We don't follow the main theme of D&C as a church....it's obvious to anyone who can read

I was kidding by the way...everything in D&C is for us.....

Some Mormons have the mindset that we don't live D&C because its something that's not for them, but for some future generation ...lol usally their "amazing grandchildren" lol.
The more delusional Mormons pretend like we do live D&C.. but differ slightly because we're an evolving church...rendering those scriptures null&void. The latter of those two is much more sinister imo

Most Mormons just don't care.
We're not a scripture doing people...we operate through observation, and then claim other men's work as our own through virtue of us being born into the church. We then water down all the gifts/miracles of the Spirit to help countine us in our delusions....like the dude who is dying of thirst and has a dream of drinking water...but wakes up thirsty as hell. Imo we're about to wake up from this delusion dream we call today

He talked about how the Church needs more people who are "affluent" because so many people who join the church are poor.

So...poor people aren't welcome!? Sounds more like an exclusive country club or....the Rameumptom!

Actually though, the Ward I felt happiest in for being treated as someone unique who had much to offer the membership was a very wealthy one situated on Puget Sound north of Seattle. I loved that Ward! Our Home Teacher & his wife became dear friends who did more to bring my nonmember husband closer to accepting the Gospel than any other factor or combination thereof. They visited us in Oregon when we left Puget Sound and even visited us in North Dakota after we moved here!

Despite a lifetime of hard work, we have never achieved obvious wealth. My husband says we are financial dyslexics. We adapt.

Thinker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 8:06 pm

Aprhys wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 1:57 pm ...Yet my bishop has the nerve to ask me why I stopped paying tithing last year. Maybe because I had to make the decision of losing my home or buying the church another 250,000 chandelier for the temple. Yeah, I lost my temple recommend but thats a heck of a lot better than losing the roof over my kids head. And to be honest if God rejectals me for this decision then I will reject him and his "church."

I believe Christ would be quite ticked off


...

We do agree on a lot of things.

But we may not agree that the church does not have the resources to feed the world. You may be unfamiliar with how large that issue is, and how it would deplete the churches resources within a very short period of time.

Take a look at the federal budget and it will give you some idea of the "problem" here, without regard to the far greater size of the world.

We do agree that the leaders? should not talk about tithing like that. And that the lady with no food SHOULD NOT HAVE GIVEN ALL SHE HAD TO THE BISHOP, AND, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN IT.

But that takes us back to some of the local decisions that are made on those things. Of course many of them are not right, such as, perhaps, Buffalo Girl above.

But I believe there were some others that were right and mentioned above. For instance, paying the cable bill was wrong, but in all likelihood, family ties were involved.
dc

If the church started selling Temples, the sale price or value of those Temples would drop sharply.

Trucker wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:30 am

Phantom wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 9:24 am I would suggest you all get your house in order before dictating both what is going on and how the Lord's house should be ordered. You've got no right.

This is just an attempt to shame members into not voicing any concerns, but the members supposedly must be perfect before they can raise any concern. Yet in the church, as said by the Lord himself in the DC multiple times, everything should be done by common consent:

DC 28:13 For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.

DC 26:2 2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.

DC 104:71 And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the voice and common consent of the order.
72 And this shall be the voice and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship

How can members even give their consent when things are hidden from them? And what makes current church leaders above the Lord's law, the instruction given directly form him? In fact, are we derelict in our duty by not standing up for following the Lord's pattern?

"Common consent of the order" is a curious phrase.
What is it and how does it differ from the previously quoted scriptural references to common consent?

just a comment I copied years ago from somewhere.
and this was many many years ago.
Just imagine all the businesses and money making - stock market etc. they are involved with now.
"And I thought this was a church, not a multi-billion-dollar corporate conglomerate" that has gotten bigger and bigger over the years.

quote

I thought you might find interesting this transcript of the US Senate Committee case regarding Mormon Senator Reed Smoot.
Where did Mormon Church President Smith find time for meditation, let alone revelation?

Senate Committee Testimony Transcript:

Mr. Tayler (Senate Attorney):What is your business?
Mr. Smith (Mormon Prophet and President): My principle business is that of president of the church.
Mr. Tayler: In what other business are you engaged?
Mr. Smith: I am engaged in NUMEROUS other businesses.
Mr. Tayler: What?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of Zion's Cooperative Mercantile Institution.
Mr. Tayler: Of what other corporations are you an officer?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of the State Bank of Utah, another institution.
Mr. Tayler: What else?
Mr. Smith: PRESIDENT of Zion's Savings Bank and Trust Company.
Mr. Tayler: What else?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of the Utah Sugar Company.
Mr. Tayler: What else?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of the Consolidated Wagon and Machine Company.
Mr. Tayler: What else?
Mr. Smith: There are several other SMALL INSTITUTIONS with which I am associated.
Mr. Tayler: Are you associated with the Utah Light and Power Company?
Mr. Smith: I am.
Mr. Tayler: In what capacity?
Mr. Smith: I am a director and PRESIDENT of the company.
Mr. Tayler: A director and the president?
Mr. Smith: Yes, sir.
Mr. Tayler: Had you that in mind when you classified the others as 'small concerns'?
Mr. Smith: No sir, I had not that in mind.
Mr. Tayler: That is a 'large concern'?
Mr. Smith: That is a large concern?
Mr. Tayler: Are you an officer of the Salt Lake and Los Angeles Railroad Company?
Mr. Smith: I am.
Mr. Tayler: What?
Mr. Smith: PRESIDENT and director.
Mr. Tayler: Of what else are you President?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of the Salt Air Beach Company.
Mr. Tayler: What else, if you can recall.
Mr. Smith: I DO NOT RECALL JUST NOW!
Mr. Tayler: What relation do you sustain to the Idaho Sugar Company?
Mr. Smith: I am a director of that company and also the PRESIDENT of it.
Mr. Tayler: Of the Inland Crystal Salt Company?
Mr. Smith: Also the SAME POSITION THERE.
Mr. Tayler: The Salt Lake Dramatic Association?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of that and also a DIRECTOR.
Mr. Tayler: Are you president of any other corporation there?
Mr. Smith: I DO NOT KNOW. PERHAPS YOU CAN TELL ME!! I DO NOT REMEMBER ANY MORE JUST NOW!
Mr. Tayler: It would seem that the number has grown so large that it would be an undue tax upon your memory to charge you with naming them all.
Mr. Smith: What relation do you sustain to the Salt Lake Knitting Company? Did I already ask you about it?
Mr. Smith: No sir, you did not.
Mr. Tayler: The Salt Lake Knitting Company?
Mr. Smith: I am PRESIDENT of it, and also a director.
Mr. Tayler: The Union Pacific Railway Company?
Mr. Smith: I am a DIRECTOR.
Mr. Tayler: Are you an official of any mining companies?
Mr. Smith: Yes, sir.
Mr. Tayler: What?
Mr. Smith: I am the vice-president of the Bullion, Beck and Champion Mining Company.
Mr. Tayler: The Deseret News?
Mr. Smith: No, sir.
Mr. Tayler: You have no business relations with that?
Mr. Smith: NO SIR.
Mr. Tayler: Is the Deseret News the 'organ of the Church'?
Mr. Smith: Well, I suppose it is in some sense the 'organ of the church'. It is not opposed to the church, at least.
Mr. Tayler: It has for years published, has it not, at the head of its columns, that it is "the organ of the church", or the "official organ of the church"?
Mr. Smith: Not that I know of.
Mr. Tayler: Do you know who owns it?
Mr. Smith: How is that?
Mr. Tayler: Do you know who owns it?
Mr. Smith: I know who owns the building that it is in.
Mr. Tayler: Who owns the building in which it is published?
Mr. Smith: The church.
Mr. Tayler: The church?
Mr. Smith: Yes, sir.
Mr. Tayler: Tell us what you know about the owners of that newspaper.
Mr. Smith: It has been for a number of years past owned by a company --- AN INCORPORATED COMPANY.
Mr. Tayler: What is the name of the company?
Mr. Smith: The Deseret News Publishing Company.
Mr. Tayler: Do you know who its officers are?
Mr. Smith: No, it is not owned by that company.
Mr. Tayler: Oh, it is not?
Mr. Smith: No; it is not.
Mr. Tayler: What do you know ----
Mr. Smith: But I say for years it was owned by a company of that kind.
Mr. Tayler: What do you know about its present ownership?
Mr. Smith: I presume that the present ownership is IN THE CHURCH.
Mr. Tayler: You suppose the present owner is 'the church'?
Mr. Smith: Yes, sir; the church.
Mr. Tayler: I do not want to have any misconstruction put upon your use of the word 'presume' because you do not know that it is so owned?
Mr. Smith: I really do not know so that I could tell you positively.
Mr. Tayler: Who would know?
Mr. Smith: I PRESUME I could find out.
Mr. Tayler: Could you find out before you leave Washington?
Mr. Smith: Perhaps so.

(SOURCE: Reed Smoot Case transcript, Vol. 1, pp. 81, 82, 83, 86, 87, and 88)

A day later, because the ownership of the Deseret News and its articles were keys to the case, Joseph F. Smith testified:

Mr. Tayler: In what form does your church have title to the Deseret News property?
Mr. Smith: It owns the deed.
Mr. Tayler: I am speaking of the newspaper, not the building.
Mr. Smith: The press; yes. I would like to state that when I was asked that question before, Mr. Tayler, I was not aware of the fact that I have since learned from my counsel here that during the trusteeship of Lorenzo Snow the Deseret News plant was transferred from the Deseret News Company to Lorenzo Snow, trustee, in trust. I was not aware of the fact, Mr. Chairman, when that question was asked me yesterday, I believe it was. I have since learned that that is the fact and that my counsel who is here made out the papers for the transfer. .....
Mr. Tayler: So that it is now in YOU as trustee in trust?
Mr. Smith: NOW I OWN IT AS TRUSTEE IN TRUST. Furthermore, I will say that I have discovered since yesterday that there is published on the second or third page of the Deseret News the statement that it is the "organ of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints"
(Reed Smoot case, Vol. 1, page 158).

As you can see, the Mormon Church has been about business for a very long time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"In 2018, researchers at mormonleaks.io were able to connect the Mormon Church to another 13 asset management companies holding $32.8 billion in US stock at the end of 2017.

Mormons tend to be very proud of their church’s business acumen but transparency and accountability, two basic ingredients of responsible business practice, don’t seem to be a concern to the faithful. They neither request nor receive any accounting of the many billions in donations the church receives every year."

end quote

The following video shows examples of LDS leaders
telling the poor to pay them MONEY over feeding their children. They - and those who follow them - will be held accountable.

The very definition of grinding the faces of the poor.

Mindfields wrote: ↑February 11th, 2020, 8:04 am

The following video shows examples of LDS leaders
telling the poor to pay them MONEY over feeding their children. They - and those who follow them - will be held accountable.

The very definition of grinding the faces of the poor.

Truth. I think it's a shame that this hasn't been corrected.

Mindfields wrote: ↑February 11th, 2020, 8:04 am

The following video shows examples of LDS leaders
telling the poor to pay them MONEY over feeding their children. They - and those who follow them - will be held accountable.

The very definition of grinding the faces of the poor.

It could be if it's not handled properly. In most situations, and I've seen it in action myself, it's handled properly. We are encouraged to tithe first. That's quite simple- we pay on the first fruits. That's biblical stuff. We are commanded by God to love Him first. We are commanded by God to keep his commandments. He's the one who commanded us to pay tithing. So we tithe first. Those who can't afford food go to the Bishop's storehouse and get food there. I've seen this done. I've volunteered there. In almost all situations the Bishop, with the help of the Relief Society president, will make sure the poor in the ward are fed, sheltered and clothed. I've never been in a ward that didn't work that way. I'm sure there are some instances in some wards where the Bishop is a dweeb and refuses to help the poor, but that's NOT how it's supposed to work and it's NOT how it works in most wards. In THOSE cases yes, the Bishop is grinding the faces of the poor, but it's not because he demands tithing, it's because he refuses to help the tithed (there are specific blessings that go to tithe payers). God is the one who commanded tithing (not the Bishop and not the church) and agency is what allows us to pay or not to pay or to even decide what to tithe on.

Art Vandelay wrote: ↑February 11th, 2020, 9:07 am

Mindfields wrote: ↑February 11th, 2020, 8:04 am

The following video shows examples of LDS leaders
telling the poor to pay them MONEY over feeding their children. They - and those who follow them - will be held accountable.

The very definition of grinding the faces of the poor.

It could be if it's not handled properly. In most situations, and I've seen it in action myself, it's handled properly. We are encouraged to tithe first. That's quite simple- we pay on the first fruits. That's biblical stuff. We are commanded by God to love Him first. We are commanded by God to keep his commandments. He's the one who commanded us to pay tithing. So we tithe first. Those who can't afford food go to the Bishop's storehouse and get food there. I've seen this done. I've volunteered there. In almost all situations the Bishop, with the help of the Relief Society president, will make sure the poor in the ward are fed, sheltered and clothed. I've never been in a ward that didn't work that way. I'm sure there are some instances in some wards where the Bishop is a dweeb and refuses to help the poor, but that's NOT how it's supposed to work and it's NOT how it works in most wards. In THOSE cases yes, the Bishop is grinding the faces of the poor, but it's not because he demands tithing, it's because he refuses to help the tithed (there are specific blessings that go to tithe payers). God is the one who commanded tithing (not the Bishop and not the church) and agency is what allows us to pay or not to pay or to even decide what to tithe on.

Please indicate in the relevant passage of scripture where we are to tithe on first fruits.
Please note, the operative word here is tithe... not offering.
Thanks.

Serragon wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 7:26 pm

darknesstolight wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 4:35 pm
If its so not an issue and so normal and so just, "Hey man, whats the big deal?" then why isn't the Church transparent about its money? Why don't we know exactly how much money the Church has? How come this has been kept hidden from members?

Remember, I ask my questions in the context of, "Hey man, whats the big deal?"

...

Do we as followers of Christ demand full transparency from Him? Do we demand to know all that He knows NOW? The path of Christ is one of submission without full understanding. It is faith followed by knowledge, not knowledge without faith. Did Christ Himself practice transparency at all times? Did he instruct his disciples to be fully transparent?

No one is demanding transparency from Christ here. Are you equating the Church to Christ?

He talked about how the Church needs more people who are "affluent" because so many people who join the church are poor.

I have also heard this was said in my current ward before I lived here. I have never heard this myself, though. I often wonder if it's a ploy to damage the reputation of the church or if it was really said.

David13 wrote: ↑February 10th, 2020, 10:55 pm We do agree on a lot of things.

But we may not agree that the church does not have the resources to feed the world. You may be unfamiliar with how large that issue is, and how it would deplete the churches resources within a very short period of time.

...We do agree that the leaders? should not talk about tithing like that. And that the lady with no food SHOULD NOT HAVE GIVEN ALL SHE HAD TO THE BISHOP, AND, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN IT...

Actually I agree the church doesn’t have enough to feed the entire world. And I don’t expect them to fix all problems. But they can and are morally and legally obligated to do MUCH MORE than they have been doing.

To be clear, David, I personally believe in being wise stewards and not just throwing money at poverty, but researching and actually getting involved to figure out exactly what’s needed and how best to help - and reviewing to make improvements. As it is, the church has failed in some specific ways:

1) Shipping costs could be avoided by buying locally, plus it would help local economies. Shipping internationally usually costs much more than items being sent!
2) If you’ve toured the church’s SLC humanitarian center, you may have seen a big warehouse with workers standing in several dumpsters full of used, donated clothing - sorting them, then bundling them to be $hipped to poor countries. It turns out this practice actually put poor local clothing vendors out of business because they couldn’t compete with “free.”
3) Humanitarian work has been hindered by stinginess and lack of funding by the church, and when those in charge of funding are clueless sitting at a desk in SLC, thousands of miles from the need, it’s disrupts or terminated projects.

I know the church does some good, and I know especially members serve above and beyond - really amazing! Yet, tithes are not handled right - major improvements are needed, especially in no longer taking increase from those who really don’t have it to give.

Isaiah 10
1 Woe to those who enact unjust laws,who draft oppressive legislation—
2 denying justice to the needy,depriving the poor of my people of their right,making plunder of widows,mere spoil of the fatherless!

Oppressive laws, symptomatic of a corrupt society, by their very nature lead to more corruption. People’s thinking turns devious as they seek ways of getting around the law. In an unequal community, the poor and needy, the widows and fatherless, are the first to suffer (Isaiah 1:23). Jehovah’s calling those who are unable on their own to lift themselves out of poverty “my people” implies that he acknowledges them, not their oppressors, as his covenant people. The terms “plunder” and “spoil,” which characterize the Assyrian archtyrant (v 6), show that he is the evil archetype that oppressors follow.


Isaiah 1
23 Your rulers are renegades,accomplices of robbers:with one accord they love bribesand run after rewards;
they do not dispense justice to the fatherless,nor does the widow’s case come before them.

On a par with the ecclesiastical leaders of Jehovah’s people (v 10; Isaiah 9:14-16), political leaders similarly come under condemnation. Persons in government, whose task is to protect society from predators, have turned into predators themselves. The would-be administrators of justice perpetrate injustice. The most needy elements of society—the fatherless and widows, whose cause Jehovah advocates (v 17)—are neglected. People in leadership positions have degenerated into “renegades” and “robbers,” officials who violate others’ rights in order to gain their own ends (Isaiah 3:14-15; 5:23; 29:21).

17 Learn to do good: demand justice,stand up for the oppressed;plead the cause of the fatherless,appeal on behalf of the widow.

Doing “good” implies keeping the terms of Jehovah’s covenant. Jehovah’s definition of doing good includes seeking justice for the oppressed—persons unable to aid themselves. While the widows and fatherless represent those most in need, others aren’t excluded. By citing extreme examples of persons and behaviors, Isaiah doesn’t mean to limit things to them. The fact that Jehovah’s people must “learn” to do good suggests that they no longer know. The words “demand,” “stand up for,” “plead,” and “appeal” go beyond passively noticing others’ needs to actively intervening on their behalf.