Sleeper Cell Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) Only if you ignore what has been said of every translated city, "And there were no poor among them."IIRC, there was also something said about being “of one heart and one mind” (which would sorta eliminate our "Mormon Dialogue and Discussion” community).I know you, personally, are not an opponent of the mall. I just couldn’t resist. But seriously, if good church members cannot even be “of one mind” about the morality of building a shopping mall, how are we going to establish a City of Zion? Edited July 22, 2013 by Sleeper Cell
Stone holm Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 IIRC, there was also something said about being “of one heart and one mind” (which would sorta eliminate our "Mormon Dialogue and Discussion” community).I know you, personally, are not an opponent of the mall. I just couldn’t resist. But seriously, if good church members cannot even be “of one mind” about the morality of building a shopping mall, how are we going to establish a City of Zion?I think they are just wondering whether the City of Zion that is being planned is going to include them, or just the top 20% of Americans or less.
ERayR Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 IIRC, tithes are used for the infrastructure of the humanitarian aid and fast offerings so that all the donation and offering can go to the people who need it, not things like transportation and the salaries of those that are paid to drive the trucks, oversee the work, etc.It is my understanding this is correct. While some charities use 50% to 90% on overhead this is not so for church humanitarian programs. 1
Stone holm Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 It is my understanding this is correct. While some charities use 50% to 90% on overhead this is not so for church humanitarian programs.Most other charities depend on hired help as part of the overhead, we use a tremendous amount of volunteer or underpaid help at the lower levels.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 I think they are just wondering whether the City of Zion that is being planned is going to include them, or just the top 20% of Americans or less.Then they lack understanding.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) When you're out of town and there's no convenient place to get a meal, then Sabbath is made for man, not the other way around.While there may be merit to this, bear in mind that Midway is in the heart of Utah, i.e. not very far from home for most General Authorities. Moreover, we shouldn't fall into the trap of endeavoring to rationalize something that may be nothing more than garbled rumor in the first place.Clarification: Tacenda said Heber, but Midway, not Heber, is the location of The Homestead resort, though they are in proximity to each other. Edited July 23, 2013 by Scott Lloyd
Mark Beesley Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Veiled dig noted.I see you on here quite a bit, actually.The infrequent visits I make are so larger than life and leave such an indelible impression on you that it just seems that I've been around more than I actually am.
Thinking Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 I went to Heber, Utah and visited a resort, The Homestead. They have a yummy breakfast buffet on Sundays, and the waitress there said that some of the GA's or maybe some of the 12, not sure, have eaten there for this. So I don't think they worry too much about eating out on Sunday.They also serve that same yummy breakfast buffet on Saturdays. Whoda thunk it?
Stone holm Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Then they lack understanding.No they just react to what they see more than what they hear, and if they are poor and living in Utah -- what they saw was a big shiny mall that caters to the upper class, and they wondered...its a fairly natural reaction that should come as no surprise...
Bikeemikey Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Welcome to the board! You may find this a different site than the other board. The Mall is really a non-issue that was made an issue by malcontents who wish to find fault with the church. Basically, it was a good investment and one that will keep downtown vibrant. I don't think that it had much to do with Gateway Mall but with what would draw all salt lake residents to the downtown area. And people do need to shop.This is the kind of assertion that really creates a combative stance around the Mall.I know many good faithful LDS saints who were upset about the mall being built. Some just dealt with it silently, some made some noise. All are still great active and testimony holding LDS members. None of them were malcontents.It is entirely possible to respond negatively toward the mall building with a strong religious conviction and still fully support the gospel and the church. Those who didn't like it should not be pushed into the category of malcontents simply because they chose to vocally state that they were unhappy with the decision. I am sure some vocally opposed to the mall may deserve that title, though I am sure many did not. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) No they just react to what they see more than what they hear, ...Ergo, they lack understanding.Isn't that generally the case when one jumps to a conclusion?And isn't jumping to a conclusion what you are describing here, reacting to what one sees without waiting to hear or to properly consider an explanation? Edited July 23, 2013 by Scott Lloyd 2
Bikeemikey Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 Ergo, they lack understanding.Isn't that generally the case when one jumps to a conclusion?And isn't jumping to a conclusion what you are describing here, reacting to what one sees without waiting to hear or to properly consider an explanation?Or perhaps jumping to a conclusion is reacting to what you see with due consideration to what you hear?But likely it is neither... and both.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 23, 2013 Posted July 23, 2013 (edited) Or perhaps jumping to a conclusion is reacting to what you see with due consideration to what you hear?Jumping to a conclusion, by definition, is not doing that, as this essay explains.Jumping to a conclusion, by definition, is a fallacy in reasoning. It is reasoning from ignorance.John 7:24 Edited July 23, 2013 by Scott Lloyd
Stone holm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Jumping to a conclusion, by definition, is not doing that, as this essay explains.Jumping to a conclusion, by definition, is a fallacy in reasoning. It is reasoning from ignorance.John 7:24Yeah, their jumping to that conclusion based on what they saw wasn't particularly ignorant, what was ignorant was that anyone would have thought people wouldn't jump to that conclusion and therefore not taking some time to sell it to the so called ignorant masses that didn't understand.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) Actually, the Church sent out a request to Stake Presidencies during the Carter/Reagan recession when gas prices sky rocketed to reduce the number of Stake Center activities because the cost of travel was crushing some members. I remember the incident because I was in charge of the Stake Calendar at the time and both the Stake Relief Society Pres and the Stake Primary Pres were pushing back. It was the Stake Relief Society Pres who was eating lunch with us who asked the question. Elder Faust said it it in his kind grandfatherly way, still I about choked, and that ended further negotiation on the matter.I was around for both...don not remember this. But if they did good for them. Edited July 24, 2013 by Bill “Papa” Lee
Stone holm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 I was around for both...don not remember this. But if they did good for them.Yes, we were monitoring the flow of Fast Offerings carefully at the time. Previously we had always sent out more in Fast Offerings than we distributed in the Stake, that reversed during that recession. It was not long after that the Church also dropped its ad version to government run welfare programs because the Church Welfare system was overwhelmed. I cannot imagine how tough the situation is now with even fewer people with access to gardens, etc
exmormonatheistofutah Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) I dont know about it being successful. Ive been inside three or four times and it seemed like walmart at 3:00 a.m. I didnt buy anything there because nothinginterested me. They probably would have done better business putting a super walmart there. Edited July 24, 2013 by exmormonatheistofutah
Stone holm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 I dont know about it being successful. Ive been inside three or four times and it seemed like walmart at 3:00 a.m. I didnt buy anything there because nothinginterested me. They probably would have done better business putting a super walmart there.Well that would have helped create jobs in China.
rockpond Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 This is the kind of assertion that really creates a combative stance around the Mall.I know many good faithful LDS saints who were upset about the mall being built. Some just dealt with it silently, some made some noise. All are still great active and testimony holding LDS members. None of them were malcontents.It is entirely possible to respond negatively toward the mall building with a strong religious conviction and still fully support the gospel and the church. Those who didn't like it should not be pushed into the category of malcontents simply because they chose to vocally state that they were unhappy with the decision. I am sure some vocally opposed to the mall may deserve that title, though I am sure many did not.Thank you for this.I would consider myself a good faithful member of the church and I also have some serious reservations about the mall.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 They also serve that same yummy breakfast buffet on Saturdays. Whoda thunk it?Hmm. Could it be that the server with whom Tacenda conversed was recalling that the General Authorities who ate there came on Saturday rather than Sunday?
Scott Lloyd Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Yeah, their jumping to that conclusion based on what they saw wasn't particularly ignorant, what was ignorant was that anyone would have thought people wouldn't jump to that conclusion and therefore not taking some time to sell it to the so called ignorant masses that didn't understand.Perhaps the Church leaders in the assumption they made gave the masses too much credit.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Thank you for this.I would consider myself a good faithful member of the church and I also have some serious reservations about the mall.How fortunate for you that your calling or responsibility in the Church does not pertain in any way to the decisions regarding the mall and that you don't have to endure that tension.
rockpond Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 How fortunate for you that your calling or responsibility in the Church does not pertain in any way to the decisions regarding the mall and that you don't have to endure that tension.Fortunate for you that you get to live and work in the newly revitalized SLC.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Fortunate for you that you get to live and work in the newly revitalized SLC.I feel very blessed in many ways.But I have come to understand that, pretty much anywhere one lives and works, there are blessings and challenges associated with it.
Stone holm Posted July 24, 2013 Posted July 24, 2013 Perhaps the Church leaders in the assumption they made gave the masses too much credit.No. It was probably due to tone deafness caused by too much bubble time.
Recommended Posts