Was My Mormon Ancestor'S Tithing Used To Build City Creek Mall?

[Jaybear]

CFR (hint: a single post will not a tendency prove)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Even Scott didn't bother to issue a CFR on that on.

Today, and on just this thread.

Post 367; 348; 352; 364

[Cobalt-70]

I"m not persuaded expenditure of tithing funds is, by and large, an issue for people who are investigating the Church. Those who are members, and those who become members, as Deborah has pointed out, believe the Church is governed by divine inspiration (what Bushman called the "routinization of charisma"; see my prior post). Again, this is only an issue for chronic haters, doubters and critics.

I doubt you can demonstrate that people are deterred from joining the Church merely because it doesn't open its financials to public gaze.

It's just one more issue that can derail an investigator or new convert who happens to have internet access. For every criticism, we need a reasonable response. "It's none of your business what we do with you hard-earned tithing money" is not a reasonable response.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[wenglund]

Today, and on just this thread.Post 367; 348; 352; 364

CFR that each of those posts represents a misreading of other posters, including you. (Hint: his expressed extrapolations or general impression don't count, whether you agree with them or not. The CFR is specific to his your claim that he is misreading.).

Depending upon whether this CFR is substantiated or not, will determine if the initial CFR regarding the "trend" is satisfied or not. Good luck.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

It's just one more issue that can derail an investigator or new convert who happens to have internet access. For every criticism, we need a reasonable response. "It's none of your business what we do with you hard-earned tithing money" is not a reasonable response.

I, personally, don't view you as one who has a good grasp on what is a reasonable response or not.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Cobalt-70]

When someone is trying to find a faith, the last thing they are worried about is how the church will use their money. Obviously you have a problem with trust. That is your problem not everyone else's.

I'm already on record saying that I believe the church uses its funds properly. I pay tithing too, and I don't have a problem with how the church spends its funds. But I can empathize with somebody investigating this church, being asked to donate 10% of their income, when that money is just going into a black hole. I think if the church went transparent, people would probably be amazed at how stringent the processes are to ensure the money is spent properly, compared to other churches. All I'm saying is that we have a light, but perhaps we are hiding it under a bushel.

[Deborah]

money is just going into a black hole.

Black hole? The evidence is in the buildings, the temples, the manuals, the missionaries etc. If someone is curious about how carefully the money is used that can be explained without having to show the records.

[Cobalt-70]

They are as transparent as prudently possible to those with whom it is their business. They aren't transparent to the busy-bodies because: 1) it isn't their business, and 2) transparency to busy-bodies only creates more problems than it solves.

If some people aren't joining the church because of the lack of imprudent transparency, then that tells me they don't understand what the gospel is really about, and it is probably best that they don't join until they do understand. That way, they won't be committing themselves to something they lack basic understanding about, and the church won't be adding more busy-bodies than they already have to rolls, which means that in the end there will be less vocal disgruntled former members since that group is comprised mostly, if not exclusively of busy-bodies.

In short, the Church isn't imprudently transparent to busy-bodies because that wouldn't be in anyone's interest--not that the busy-bodies would understand.

You don't think it's reasonable in general for members of a church to know how their money is being spent? If not, then let me introduce myself to you. My real name is Jim Bakker, and I have this great church organization called the PTL Club. You wanna join? I'll tell you where to send the check. You want to see a financial disclosure? It's none of your business. The fact that you ask makes you unworthy to become part of my organization.

You have lost if you have to appeal to criminal acts to support your argument.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Minos
thread ban

[Jaybear]

CFR that each of those posts represents a misreading of other posters, including you. (Hint: his expressed extrapolations or general impression don't count, whether you agree with them or not. The CFR is specific to his your claim that he is misreading.).

Depending upon whether this CFR is substantiated or not, will determine if the initial CFR regarding the "trend" is satisfied or not. Good luck.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

CFR ... call for reference. You wanted a reference, I gave you 4. Which is 4 more than Scott provided in response to my CFR.

[wenglund]

But I can empathize with somebody investigating this church, being asked to donate 10% of their income, when that money is just going into a black hole. I think if the church went transparent, people would probably be amazed at how stringent the processes are to ensure the money is spent properly, compared to other churches.

Again, if an investigator is reticent about paying tithing without the Church being "transparent" (as you suppose), then that investigator, like you, doesn't correctly understand the intended reason for paying tithing, and until they do, it is may be unwise for them to join.

All I'm saying is that we have a light, but perhaps we are hiding it under a bushel.

The Church shines the light it is supposed to shine and in the way it is supposed to shine it. If you correctly understood the light, then you would already know this. Unfortunately, even though the light shineth in darkness, the darkness comprehendeth it not.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Scott Lloyd]

You don't think it's reasonable in general for members of a church to know how their money is being spent? If not, then let me introduce myself to you. My real name is Jim Bakker, and I have this great church organization called the PTL Club. You wanna join? I'll tell you where to send the check. You want to see a financial disclosure? It's none of your business. The fact that you ask makes you unworthy to become part of my organization.

There is a universe of difference between the Church of Jesus Christ, governed by Jesus Christ through revelation to prophets, and the scam called the PTL Club. If you can't see the distinction, ponder again my prior post about Bushman's comments regarding the "routinization of charisma." Faithful Church members understand that distinction, and new members who have been blessed with testimonies understand it well enough. That's why it's not an issue for us.

[Jaybear]

There is a universe of difference between the Church of Jesus Christ, governed by Jesus Christ through revelation to prophets, and the scam called the PTL Club. If you can't see the distinction, ponder again my prior post about Bushman's comments regarding the "routinization of charisma." Faithful Church members understand that distinction, and new members who have been blessed with testimonies understand it well enough. That's why it's not an issue for us.

[Scott Lloyd]

It's just one more issue that can derail an investigator or new convert who happens to have internet access. For every criticism, we need a reasonable response. "It's none of your business what we do with you hard-earned tithing money" is not a reasonable response.

Nobody is told that.

And again, if you can show evidence that this is a real deterrent to investigators, you are welcome to present it here.

[Scott Lloyd]

CFR ... call for reference. You wanted a reference, I gave you 4. Which is 4 more than Scott provided in response to my CFR.

I told you, you don't need a reference that the sun rises in the east.

If it bothers you, take it up with the mods.

[wenglund]

CFR ... call for reference. You wanted a reference, I gave you 4.

I wanted references that support your claim. You simply listed four of Scott's post without demonstrating that those posts support your claim.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

You don't think it's reasonable in general for members of a church to know how their money is being spent?

I have no problem with the members knowing how their own money is spent.

What I spoke to was the Lord's money. Surely you aren't so bereft of understanding as to not realize that what a member gives to the Lord is no longer the member's?

It is not reasonable for the members to know how the Lord's servants are spending his money. That is the Lord's business, not theirs.

If not, then let me introduce myself to you. My real name is Jim Bakker, and I have this great church organization called the PTL Club. You wanna join? I'll tell you where to send the check. You want to see a financial disclosure? It's none of your business. The fact that you ask makes you unworthy to become part of my organization.

Even were the restored gospel analogous to a "club" (it isn't to me, but I will play along anyway), why would I have a problem with those conditions, particularly since it would have no bearing upon the pragmatic reasons behind me join or not?

You really have little or no clue what the gospel is all about, do you?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 28, 2012 by wenglund

[Teancum]

Oh goodness dare I tread into this rather volatile thread? I think there are some good points on both sides. But I want to share how I feel personally about this issue. I don't post here often any more but this issue is important to me.

First I am a member (though as some who know or remember me here I would likely be classed by them and more NOMIsh or cafeteria in my beliefs) , hold a recommend and tithe. I also give to the Church humanitarian fund and give a generous fast offering. I do so because I think the fast offering program and the Church humanitarian program are very good uses of my money it all goes to those who need it.

First to the critics. I am not sure it is fair to constantly criticize the Church for not giving enough to the poor. I know we can't see the financials and I would like it if the Church would publish them, but this criticism does leave out a few things. First the Church has a large expensive infrastructure to maintain. Buildings are expensive to build and maintain. It has a large cost to meet the teachings of its members, to support its colleges, missions and such. My guess it most of the annual tithing goes to meet this expense. So it is said that the humanitarian efforts over a certain period of time is too small compared to the revenue of the Church. That may be true or may not be if its expenses are taken into account. But it is still not a small sum and it ignore man hours that members give in times of need and crisis. It always amazes me how fast the Church responds to disasters.

Next the criticism that the Church does not do enough for the poor ignores fast offering assistance. I do not know what this is but it has to be substantial on an annual basis. Some will say that this goes primarily to members but so what? Is a hungry Latter-day Saint or one whe needs help with rent or a medical bill less deserving? My ward give out about $40k-$50k a year if fast offering help. It is probably a bit higher than the average ward. But take $25k per year as average and multiply it by the wards in the world and the sum is substantial.

Now about the mall. Personally it does not matter whether the Church uses tithing or some other source to fund this property. Money is fungible and it goes into the pot and goes out. Who cares what the source is or is not. Now I am not one that thinks the Church should not invest. It has too in our modern world. But I think this investment was way too much and very exorbitant. A small % of the Church lives in SLC. To dump $5 billion into this, if that estimate is accurate, just seems personally wrong to me. I understand that the Church wants to preserve the area around the temple. But could it have not been done is a different way? I suspect, though I do not know, that this project was a big stretch for the Church. The new disclaimer on the tithing slip about the Church using the funds for whatever purpose it deems necessary regardless of how the donor designates makes me suspicious. I wonder why does Jesus’ Church need a mall like this? Yes it may be a revenue generator and maybe pay off big time and give more resources to help the Church feed the poor in the future. But Jesus did tell one potential disciple to sell all he had and give it to the poor. I have trouble picturing Jesus and the original 12 apostles at a big ribbon cutting ceremony all smiling like the picture I saw of the FP and other GAs at the ribbon cutting ceremony for the mall.

Now I don't plan on not paying tithing or anything like that. And I understand that once I give it, it is not my money any more. But when I see all the needs and sufferingin the world I wonder if there was $5 Billion to spare to put into this property what great good even some of that could have done to alleviate suffering in the world.

So this all is just my opinion and how I feel about it. I could be wrong. But I can tell you this, I do feel like some of the extra I give to the Church beyond tithing may be now given to other worthy causes that I know relieve suffering. I have a friend that has a NFP that does a lot of good for poor people in Africa. 90% of donations go directly to assisting people with food, schools, housing and water projects. I may increase what I give to them. Not sure yet.

[Jaybear]

I wanted references that support your claim. You simply listed four of Scott's post without demonstrating that those posts support your claim.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You issued a CFR. I provided you 4 references for you to review. If you don't think they support the claim I made, you are welcomed to make your case.

[Deborah]

To dump $5 billion into this, if that estimate is accurate, just seems personally wrong to me.

As already shown the total for the mall was 1.5 billion. 5 billion includes other projects planned in the area by other groups.

[Scott Lloyd]

So this all is just my opinion and how I feel about it. I could be wrong. But I can tell you this, I do feel like some of the extra I give to the Church beyond tithing may be now given to other worthy causes that I know relieve suffering. I have a friend that has a NFP that does a lot of good for poor people in Africa. 90% of donations go directly to assisting people with food, schools, housing and water projects. I may increase what I give to them. Not sure yet.

You are welcome to give to whatever charitable causes you deem fit.

For my part, I will continue to give whatever excess funds I can, apart from tithing, for the fast offering, for the Church Humanitarian fund, for the Perpetual Education Fund, where I know 100 percent, not 90 percent, of the money I give will be used to relieve suffering and/or improve the health and well being of the needy. In doing this I am blessed not to be under the burden of a grudge that makes me too mad at the Church to continue donating to these worthy causes.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Teancum]

You are welcome to give to whatever charitable causes you deem fit.

Obviously.

For my part, I will continue to give whatever excess funds I can, apart from tithing, for the fast offering, for the Church Humanitarian fund, for the Perpetual Education Fund, where I know 100 percent, not 90 percent, of the money I give will be used to relieve suffering and/or improve the health and well being of the needy.

Based on the new donation slip disclaimer you cannot be 100% certian your donation for those line items will be used for the purpose you designate.

In doing this I am blessed not to be under the burden of a grudge that makes me too mad at the Church to continue donating to these worthy causes.

I see your snarkiness is is excellent as ever.

One of the many reasones not to frequent this place to often. I thought my post was polite and measured.

But I noted that I had not decided this for certain, just something I was thinking about.

[Scott Lloyd]

Obviously.

Based on the new donation slip disclaimer you cannot be 100% certian your donation for those line items will be used for the purpose you designate.

If it's what I'm thinking of, the wording is there to comply with tax laws.

I remain confident that the money I donate will go to the funds I designate. In this, I am blessed not to be under the burden of cynicism.

Edited March 28, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Teancum]

If it's what I'm thinking of, the wording is there to comply with tax laws.

You would be wrong.There is no such requirement. And if there was the Church was long out of compliance.

I remain confident that the money I donate will go to the funds I designate. In this, I am blessed not to be under the burden of cynicism.

Yes you are so very blessed and so much wiser and above the rest of us questioning scum. Must be nice. But if you can be so sure why did the Church put that there? If you think tax law requires it how about a CFR that you so love to ask for.

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes you are so very blessed and so much wiser and above the rest of us questioning scum. Must be nice. But if you can be so sure why did the Church put that there? If you think tax law requires it how about a CFR that you so love to ask for.

I didn't say I was sure. I said I was under the impression. Why don't you check into it, if you're so worried about it. Obviousy, I'm not.

[Teancum]

I am not worrried about it the tax issue you raised. I am mildley concerned about the new disclaimer.

Man with defenders like you and others here the Church does not need enemies. Adious amigo. I am out of here. This place has declined even more since the last time I was here. I tried to post what I thought was a reasonable balanced comment about this issue. I did not attack. I did not say I was done with tithing. I said I was considering some of my resources over that going elsewhere but that I was not sure. I defended the Church and its humanatarian assistance and noted that critics often conveniently forget that a very large sum of Church donated funds goes out to feed an help the poor in fast offering funds. But apparently my other comments, since they were not absolutly down the line did not set well with you. I remember a day when you were less snarky and angry in your posting. Perhaps you need a break from this board. The other nasties here are rubbing off on you.

[wenglund]

You issued a CFR. I provided you 4 references for you to review. If you don't think they support the claim I made, you are welcomed to make your case.

You made the claim, so the burden is on you to support it--which includes showing how your so-called references support you claim when questioned. If you think otherwise, then going forward, consider this post as an answer to any and all CFRs on any subject you may issue to me (or anyone else if they wish). The choice is yours.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-