Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lostindc

The Church is potentially spending 129 million to purchase a London office building.  

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

“If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” -Paul

So maybe happiness?  Statistically speaking, that might not be a good indicator for our faith.  Or maybe coming unto Christ?  Or what does this really mean to you?

Edited by lostindc

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, lostindc said:

So maybe happiness?  Statistically speaking, that might not be a good indicator for our faith.  Or maybe coming unto Christ?  Or what does this really mean to you?

To me it means if the gospel is false we are a bunch of miserable suckers who missed out.

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:


¨These pre-attack plans indicate the assault on the settlement was hatched days ahead of time, too soon for it to have resulted from the Extermination Order issued by Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs...¨

https://www.lds.org/church/news/new-insights-and-interpretations-of-hawns-mill-massacre?lang=eng&_r=1

¨Lilburn W. Boggs, Governor of Missouri, issued the exterminationorder on Oct. 27, 1838 stating that all Mormons must remove from the state or be exterminated. According to Alex Baugh, apparently the militia got word of the extermination order on Oct. 31st - the day after the attack.¨
http://www.heartsoffarwest.com/hawns-mill.html

And evidence for and against on Wikipedia.

 

Note: There´s actually an impressive number of parallels between Hawn´s Mill and Mountain Meadows that were presented in a compassionate-to-all article on a website that I can´t link to here. One of these parallels was the acting of the perpetrators without orders from superiors. Message me if you would like the url (I think that does not break the board rules).

Oh, and:

Boggs’s intentions in issuing the executive order remain uncertain. Many have assumed he authorized genocide and have associated the order with the massacre of 17 Latter-day Saints at Hawn’s Mill three days after it was issued. But anti-Mormon vigilantes, not the state militia, carried out the massacre, and no evidence suggests the vigilantes were aware of the governor’s order.

https://www.lds.org/study/history/topics/extermination-order?lang=eng

Don´t mean to extend this sidetrack, but I thought it noteworthy that LDS Church officiale has reached this conclusion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

To me it means if the gospel is false we are a bunch of miserable suckers who missed out.

What do you mean 'missed out'? Do you mean you would have looked at dating a non LDS? Or other things? Because I feel for those that don't venture out of the LDS world and date non LDS, but instead stay single. Especially if there aren't many LDS in their vicinity. Or tell me to mind my own business Nehor.

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

What do you mean 'missed out'? Do you mean you would have looked at dating a non LDS? Or other things? Because I feel for those that don't venture out of the LDS world and date non LDS, but instead stay single. Especially if there aren't many LDS in their vicinity. Or tell me to mind my own business Nehor.

Well, there was that threesome I turned down in college.......but no, not just a desire for intimacy or companionship.

If the gospel is false I have wasted a lot of my life. Mission, temple, countless meetings, etc. Paul wasted much more. He gave up pretty much his whole life post-vision and spent a lot of time in prison and privation for nothing if it was a fraud.

Fortunately it is not a fraud. :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, alter idem said:

The church's efforts at providing Humanitarian aid are ongoing and bless many daily and you are welcome to share some of your resources to help.  If you don't want to give to the church, find another organization to support.

 

And it's a good thing they have all that wealth, because that buys the church some protection and clout in this world against those who would like to see us gone.  As Pres. Harold B. Lee once said;  "Just remember this isn't 1830 and there aren't just six of us"...🙂

The persecution argument just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.  No one really cares what the church believes, as long as it behaves like a church and not a political organization. The only time the church gets real push back is when they come out politically on the wrong side of civil and human rights.  The church got serious push back in the 60's and 70's because of racists priesthood policies, and then again forty years latter (today) when they were politically active in the suppression of gay rights.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

No one really cares what the church believes, as long as it behaves like a church and not a political organization.

In other words, stay in the back of the bus if your religous beliefs in any way challenge the currently dominant political narrative. Got it.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
23 hours ago, poptart said:

Why?  Please explain.

 

On 4/29/2019 at 4:10 PM, poptart said:

You know, I sat down one day and asked myself something along the same lines.  Here's my opinion, take it for what it's worth.  The Church is keeping it's future in mind.  The LDS church and their flock are the only people in US history who had extermination orders taken out on them, think about that.  During the 50's when many of the members were still into rural farming/lifestyle (Someone please correct me if i'm wrong here, just going of what I know/think I know), the rest of US Christendom, esp. Protestants were exploding as a powerbase.  It was so successful almost everyone, even Catholics started to mirror their powerbuilding and congregational growth strategies.  While they assoiciated religion with the American way and anyone who disagreed was a commie, the church kept quiet and steadily grew.  Now, the LDS church is a legit power of the land, they may well rival the Catholic Church in holdings.  People go on about how the church is greedy in demanding 10% tithe wise, what most people here don't realize is most other countries get similar donations, Germany takes about 10% by law, you don't even have a choice in the matter.

1. I thought about it…
a) The LDS Church and it´s flock ¨were¨ (or may have been) the only people in US history who promised extermination to those who attacked them - not just their attackers but their attacker´s families as well. (And, yes, it was more than just Sidney Rigdon. His July 4th Oration was included in a pamphlet published by the LDS Church before Boggs´ Order was made.)

b) I agree that this extermination order belief, promulgated by the LDS Church amongst its members, could certainly be a cause for the financial actions of the LDS Church as you argue here. The validity of that belief, however, is more than questionable. As Calm pointed out, however, the expulsion of the Missouri LDS was real and I believe could have been both a real thing and a cause of self-preservation motivation leading to the financial strategies of the LDS Church.

2) Baseless speculation:

https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/commercial-real-estate/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-vaticans-us-real-estate-empire-50298

26,000 properties in the US and US territories alone. 177,000,000 acres of land worldwide (possible underestimate). 170 Billion dollars spent in the US alone.

 

On 4/29/2019 at 4:10 PM, poptart said:

https://wwkn.de/en/about-german-taxes/church-tax-kirchensteuer/

This is also why the church in Germany can and often does so much more than they can here, they run a lot of the schools in the country side, rehab facilities and what not.  Bottom line, lots of people here want something for nothing, yet when life happens the come running to a church for help.  So many of them are strapped hence why many churches do end up closing their doors.  The LDS church has seen lots of people leave, they take their money with them.  At least LDS leadership was wise enough to see this coming and acted accordingly.  They never had the edge that mainline protestants here, they were never one of the "Approved" branches of the Christian religion, they were the outliers who knew what it was like to be hunted and hated, all that aside they probably saw the writing on the wall when divorce really started going up.  Look at the proclamation they made years ago, so many people have no idea what an amazing thing this was.  Now more than ever, a good family will more or less help you not end up homeless.  Even if you have a good job, all it takes is one dibilitating illness to wipe you out financially.

https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng&old=true

1) ¨Hunted¨? If you believe the LDS interpretation/spin of the extermination order, perhaps this word fits, but hunted ineffectively in that case. (Hawn´s Mill was certainly a horrifying, although isolated, exception.)
 

2) I could be reading your unclear point incorrectly, but, just in case:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/23/144-years-of-marriage-and-divorce-in-the-united-states-in-one-chart/?utm_term=.d443023c0636

Reminder: ¨The Family: A Proclamation to the World¨ was in 1995.

 

On 4/29/2019 at 4:10 PM, poptart said:

The LDS Churches is one of the few organizations I know of here stateside that will help their members no matter what, who else do you know of who does the same?  Deseret industries ability to mobilize and help people is amazing, they put sams club to shame in how organized they are.  Think it was one of the prophets who said, if the church can't help their members survive than they have little ground to stand on.  Not sure who it was, maybe someone here can clear that up for me. That being said, it's my opinion that it's peoples entitlement that is destroying so many of our institutions that were at one time pillars of the community, the church is one of them.  I can talk to my grandaunt and hear how the church would do so much more for the poor back in the day, there were people in her church who adopted 6 orphans and made sure they had a good childhood and shot at life, I somehow doubt your average protestant/evangelical/anglo catholic church would be as giving.  Only people I've ever known here who adopted someone elses kids, even those of a different race were LDS.  Really makes you think....

1) Anecdotal? Rhetorical? Bias.

2) Anecdotal. You compare ¨people¨ in your grandaunt´s church to ¨the average Protestant/Evangelical/anglo catholic church¨. Whole churches! Maybe you meant ¨family¨. Some unknown number of LDS families in one LDS church to the average family of all of (non-LDS) Christendom???

--------------------
 

Logically and reasonably, your post is guessing, anecdotal, and imaginary (¨think about it...may very well...who else do you know...Really makes you think.). Historically your post is party-line claim with no apparent interest in qualification based on the details.


Your overall point, which I agree is part of the answer - that the difficult history of the LDS Church influences its proactive financial strategy - could have been made without any of the comparisons with non-LDS Christianity. Your post is so thick with faith-promoting bias for your group and against non-LDS Christians that it borders on bigotry. In fact, I would be surprised if a non-LDS Christian made equivalent statements (for non-LDS and against LDS) and you didn´t accuse them of bigotry.

This may sound harsh but throughout your piece you make the LDS innocent martyrs and unmatched doers of good, while making (non-LDS and) non-LDS Christians out to be the enemy (extermination), at best just a bit better (holdings), hunters, haters, withholding of available help, and obviously not as generous as the Saints. All of this without even considering actual facts; all of this on assumptions, i.e.- prejudice.

This deserved the effort involved in ¨dislike¨-ing your post.


Despite all of this, I think your point (that the difficult history of the LDS Church has been a great influence on its approach to finances) has merit, even if the evidence you use is questionable. And, despite all of this, I suspect you don´t consider yourself to be so prejudiced and did not mean to come across that way. Honestly, though, I do wonder if you would not decry equivalent statements made by a Christian against LDS as ¨bigotry¨. And if so, what does that say about your statements?

Please Note: It is certainly possible that my own biases have come into play too much in interpreting your writing.  But I think the specific points I make here indicate my interpretation is understandable, even if mistaken. In any case, I think I have shown that your valid point was encumbered with your extraneous contrasts with non-LDS Christians.

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

The persecution argument just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.  No one really cares what the church believes, as long as it behaves like a church and not a political organization. The only time the church gets real push back is when they come out politically on the wrong side of civil and human rights.  The church got serious push back in the 60's and 70's because of racists priesthood policies, and then again forty years latter (today) when they were politically active in the suppression of gay rights.  

in the States that may be true, the Church here in Canada is not poltically active at all. We are linked with various Religious councils and that sort of thing but we don't do petitions or told how to vote or anything

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

In other words, stay in the back of the bus if your religous beliefs don't sync with the current political fad. Got it.

No.

As I understand Sunstoned’s post, he was saying that nobody really cares about your religious beliefs unless they are racist or you are working politically to deny civil rights.  Those two issues are what seem to have created the most “persecution” for the church in my lifetime. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

The persecution argument just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.  No one really cares what the church believes, as long as it behaves like a church and not a political organization. The only time the church gets real push back is when they come out politically on the wrong side of civil and human rights.  The church got serious push back in the 60's and 70's because of racists priesthood policies, and then again forty years latter (today) when they were politically active in the suppression of gay rights.  

You are thinking provincially ;)

Russia....

Edited by Calm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, rockpond said:

No.

As I understand Sunstoned’s post, he was saying that nobody really cares about your religious beliefs unless they are racist or you are working politically to deny civil rights.

I.e., don't have religious beliefs that challenge current political fads. Got it.

The problem is that, by nature, religious belief is often inherently subversive to those who are politically ascendant. Cf. Jesus and the Pharisees.

And telling people they can believe whatever they want as long as they don't believe certain things is more than a bit like saying people can sit anywhere on the bus as long as they don't sit up front.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
50 minutes ago, Joshua Valentine said:

Historically your post is party-line claim with no apparent interest in qualification based on the details.

Poptart isn't Latter-day Saint as much as some have tried to persuade him to be.  :)

Unfortunately search only goes back a year or I would link you to one of his intro posts.  Has a rather unusual life experience.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Calm said:

Poptart isn't Latter-day Saint as much as some have tried to persuade him to be.  :)

Unfortunately search only goes back a year or I would link you to one of his intro posts.  Has a rather unusual life experience.

Intriguing, indeed...


Thanks for the 411, Calm.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

He has described himself as a secular pagan (particularly fond of the Norse), Lutheran family background, I believe.

Makes his own mead.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/29/2019 at 5:01 PM, sunstoned said:

I believe we are in agreement.

I was kidding. I really do care.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

CFR

Sadly I did not record the conversation. Was one of my non-LDS friends and her roommate. Both were very attractive. I realize it is hard to believe but in their defense I was much better looking back then. ;) 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

You bring up a very, very good point. I do not disagree.

The problem for me comes in the specific application of how I (and the organizations I support - whether the church or the Kiwanis) spend money today.

This word you use “ultimately” has a very fair point in this conversation.  But, I am very, very weak. I will easily slip into using that word to excuse me giving less directly - today and now - to those in need.  I suspect I am not the only weak individual who excuses my lack of generosity today by leveraging the principle of trickle down economics, or some sort of nebulous dispersal of good affecting spirituality.

Again - do not mistake my response. I agree with the premise that humanitarianism should be viewed FAR wider than we traditionally view it. BUT, I fear that if we take that idea to an extreme, we will excuse ourselves from helping the one in need today.

That at is a valid concern. It can definitely happen. If it does, though, it would be in violation of the law of consecration and the associated covenant. It would violate the two great commandments. It would impede one's progress in becoming like Christ.

The good news is, the law of consecration is a higher law, and people are not bound by that law until they take it upon them.  Until they do, they will only be bound by lower laws they have accepted, like the law of tithes and offerings, etc.

However, as previously indicated, the leaders of the Church, and thus the Church as an institution, are bound by the higher law, which they are and have been able to keep.

[Edit: I should add that those  whom the law of consecration is lost on them, and who are critical of how the Church has invested its own money, it is probably for the best that it is lost on them because were they to see and understand, they would then be accountable, and they evidently could not abide the  law and the accountability (Mt 13:15). Being left in the dark, in some respects, is an act of mercy.]

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by Wade Englund

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, rockpond said:

No.

As I understand Sunstoned’s post, he was saying that nobody really cares about your religious beliefs unless they are racist or you are working politically to deny civil rights.  Those two issues are what seem to have created the most “persecution” for the church in my lifetime. 

  I understood Sunstoned's post as saying, as long as you are on the 'right' side of argument, you're fine (no persecution)--the 'right side' being the one that is deemed popular by societal trends, which will in these hard times, put the church likely on the 'wrong side' by the world's view.   

IMO, The 'world' doesn't want us to simply choose not to join in, it demands we embrace and participate as well.  If this trend continues, so will persecution.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, alter idem said:

  I understood Sunstoned's post as saying, as long as you are on the 'right' side of argument, you're fine (no persecution)--the 'right side' being the one that is deemed popular by societal trends, which will in these hard times, put the church likely on the 'wrong side' by the world's view.   

IMO, The 'world' doesn't want us to simply choose not to join in, it demands we embrace and participate as well.  If this trend continues, so will persecution.

Well, Sunstoned can comment on exactly what he meant.

I don't see evidence of the world demanding that we embrace and participate in popular societal trends.  Sunstoned wrote specifically of racism and civil rights.  I see those as for more than "popular societal trends".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I.e., don't have religious beliefs that challenge current political fads. Got it.

The problem is that, by nature, religious belief is often inherently subversive to those who are politically ascendant. Cf. Jesus and the Pharisees.

And telling people they can believe whatever they want as long as they don't believe certain things is more than a bit like saying people can sit anywhere on the bus as long as they don't sit up front.

It's not anything like that. The church can believe and teach anything it wants, period. Equating public criticism of the church (the 1st Amendment applies just as much to church critics as to the church itself) with Jim Crow laws is very tone deaf, Hamba.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, The Nehor said:

To me it means if the gospel is false we are a bunch of miserable suckers who missed out.

And this....is why I am NOT anti-mormon; albeit that mormon are NOt suckers....those who are willfully deceived are not suckers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

And this....is why I am NOT anti-mormon; albeit that mormon are NOt suckers....those who are willfully deceived are not suckers.

I think they still are and I have been deceived and conned and I was a sucker even though there were no obvious signs of it. As the old line goes:

”There’s a sucker born every minute and you were right on time.”

Edited by The Nehor
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, sunstoned said:

The persecution argument just doesn't hold up under scrutiny.  No one really cares what the church believes, as long as it behaves like a church and not a political organization. The only time the church gets real push back is when they come out politically on the wrong side of civil and human rights.  The church got serious push back in the 60's and 70's because of racists priesthood policies, and then again forty years latter (today) when they were politically active in the suppression of gay rights.  

As well:

1.  Governor Ford breached his promise (as he admits in his biography) to provide protection to Joseph Smith at Carthage.  He personally withdrew the state militia to make room for the Carthage Greys.  Joseph Smith's basis for incarceration was "treason," a non-bailable offense.  His treason?  Using Nauvoo's chartered authority to quash subpoenas against him and in the ordering of the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor.  Really?  That justified state-sanctioned murder?

2.  The Republican party sent out Evangelical ministers and supporters to masquerade as judges and public officials to confiscate the Church's property, while Democrats, Jews and Catholics complained.  

3.  The Republicans sponsored and passed legislation to disenfranchise LDS female voters.   

4.  In the early 1900s, the Republican-led Senate used the subpoena power of Congress to question LDS general authorities about their sexual relationships and the intimate details of the temple. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...