Critics Accusations Of Financial Improprieties

[saemo]

I am not trying to convince you to donate to any cause.  If you want to donate then donate.  If you don't then don't.

 

The one thing you seem to forget is that once you give(notice the word give) to whatever cause you choose then it is theirs to use as they see fit without answering to you.  If you are not comfortable with that don't give.

I don't!

But that wasn't my point. If any person or group of persons scrutinizing an organization, decides not to donate, a reputable organization would want to know why.

Saying, "don't give" just makes it look worse.

[Vance]

There is a distinction that you seem to miss.  I don’t solicit donations in order to further a religious point of view.

Nice strawman you are attempting to fabricate there.

You will have to prove that the Church is out "soliciting" donations.

Or perhaps we could just say that you "solicit" a pay check.

But to know for sure, you need to divulge your financials, just so we can know if you are being a good steward of the money you have "solicited".

[USU78]

If that were true the second servant would have been sent to outer darkness, for his poor investment decisions.

It is a parable that teaches us all we have from God and what we have is not ours to hide away for safe keeping. It is about our standing before God at our judgement, and I don't believe God is going to look at my financial portfolio to make sure it had good returns, and then judge me for making a good investment.

It is about people. Not money.

 

Money is not the antithesis of people.

 

Money is a construct, a metaphor constructed by people to represent the stuff and labor people exchange.

 

The 2nd guy in the parable, the one who risks and loses, is not punished because G-d is gracious and the Master's Atonement restores the fruits of our intentions when we fail in our execution  . . . and even more:  His Atonement dries all tears we fail to dry; restores everything lost we failed to find; replaces everything irretrievably broken . . . which we in our fallen state could not save from breaking.

[ERayR]

If that were true the second servant would have been sent to outer darkness, for his poor investment decisions.

It is a parable that teaches us all we have from God and what we have is not ours to hide away for safe keeping. It is about our standing before God at our judgement, and I don't believe God is going to look at my financial portfolio to make sure it had good returns, and then judge me for making a good investment.

It is about people. Not money.

 

It makes you wonder though why Jesus would use sound investment advice to make a point doesn't it?

[Vance]

Those rights don't negate the fact that financial trasparency is virtuous, lovely, of good report, and praiseworthy, while financial opacity is not.

Would it be "virtuous, lovely, of good report, and praiseworthy" for the critics to shut their mouths and mind their own business?

[saemo]

It works pretty well as such.

And it should be viewed in the context of Jesus' teaching as a whole. Getting a rich man into the kingdom of God is like pulling a camel through the eye of a needle.

Material possessions become gods in themselves.

[ERayR]

I don't!

But that wasn't my point. If any person or group of persons scrutinizing an organization, decides not to donate, a reputable organization would want to know why.

Saying, "don't give" just makes it look worse.

 

When enough people cease to give then the practices will change.  It certainly is not the business of those who do not belong or do not give.  They have already made their choice.

[saemo]

It makes you wonder though why Jesus would use sound investment advice to make a point doesn't it?

Because he used the every day to convey spiritual ideas, as analogies and metaphors. An analogy is a symbolic representation of an idea. It isn't the idea.

Edited August 7, 2014 by saemo

[saemo]

When enough people cease to give then the practices will change.  It certainly is not the business of those who do not belong or do not give.  They have already made their choice.

Well, there is the notion of "choice". If I were LDS, I'd be struggling with giving because someone says I need to in order to know the blessings of God, and my own reason.

It is a gray area, with arguments I can go with from both sides. Give in faith, and any criminal activity is not on you. Right? But then as a Christian I have an obligation to not support criminal activity. So there's that.

Good luck.

And I can speak out on whatever I like, and it is none of your business what I choose to speak about, or not.

[ERayR]

And it should be viewed in the context of Jesus' teaching as a whole. Getting a rich man into the kingdom of God is like pulling a camel through the eye of a needle.

Material possessions become gods in themselves.

 

And that is because the rich man wanted a financial statement before he donated.

[wenglund]

You don't speak for me, so stop pretending that you are.

There are many good people, trustworthy, but you are talking about a group of people, and you don't know every person in the group. One crafty criminal is all it takes do dupe all the nice people that you are trusting. I think it naive to believe these types of people don't exist in your church. But to each their own I guess.

Take it from me, I worked for nearly 30 years in the Mormon business world. There are a lot of good people, but I have known Mormons in my career who have been convicted of fraud, and one guy I knew quite well, seemed very upstanding, trustworthy, worked in the banking field...convicted of bank robbery. All held callings in the Mormon church.

Good people can be sorely tempted by money, and can justify in their own minds criminal activity.

 

I am not pretending to speak for you, nor am I really trying to speak for you. I simply took you at your word, and drew distinctions between how you view certain things as differentiated from how I view them, and respectfully granted to each their own.

 

I did so as one who has you beat by several decades working in the so-called "Mormon business world," as well as working in the Mormon non-business world, and who has the capacity, when formulating trust, to differentiate between the two, if not also the capacity to weigh the general wealth of good against the rare exception, as I see it. 

 

You, are free so see otherwise.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 7, 2014 by wenglund

[ERayR]

Because he used the every day to convey spiritual ideas, as analogies mad metaphors. An analogy is a symbolic representation of an idea. It isn't the idea.

 

Yep that he did and he did not condemn those business practices but rather embraced them as formula for increasing spirituality.

[saemo]

And that is because the rich man wanted a financial statement before he donated.

The rich man wasn't asked to donate, he was asked to leave everything he had and follow Jesus.

[saemo]

Yep that he did and he did not condemn those business practices but rather embraced them as formula for increasing spirituality.

Then you should embrace making wine!

[Vance]

The LDS Church would be a better church if it were to follow these standards.

Nah, the only difference it would make is the nitpicking busybodies would have more to nitpick. The nattering nabobs of negativity if you will.

[ERayR]

Well, there is the notion of "choice". If I were LDS, I'd be struggling with giving because someone says I need to in order to know the blessings of God, and my own reason.

It is a gray area, with arguments I can go with from both sides. Give in faith, and any criminal activity is not on you. Right? But then as a Christian I have an obligation to not support criminal activity. So there's that.

Good luck.

And I can speak out on whatever I like, and it is none of your business what I choose to speak about, or not.

 

And that would be a struggle you would have to wrestle with.

 

If you worried about your participation in an activity is supporting criminal activity you should stop paying your taxes.  Yea but see where that gets you.

 

You can certainly speak on what ever you choose to speak on but don't get offended when you are told to butt ou and mind your own business. 

[ERayR]

The rich man wasn't asked to donate, he was asked to leave everything he had and follow Jesus.

 

Sounds like a pretty sizable donation to me.  It doesn't matter who received it he was asked to give it up and that sacrifice was a donation.

[thesometimesaint]

Well, there is the notion of "choice". If I were LDS, I'd be struggling with giving because someone says I need to in order to know the blessings of God, and my own reason.

It is a gray area, with arguments I can go with from both sides. Give in faith, and any criminal activity is not on you. Right? But then as a Christian I have an obligation to not support criminal activity. So there's that.

Good luck.

And I can speak out on whatever I like, and it is none of your business what I choose to speak about, or not.

 

Malachi 3:10

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

[Vance]

In 2013, President Thomas S. Monson invited members to help support the missionaries - especially those of lesser means - in their efforts to serve the Lord in a meaningful way. Donations to the General Missionary Fund really do help “change and save lives.”

Hum,

So an "invitation" is the same as a "solicitation"?

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

[ERayR]

Then you should embrace making wine!

 

I have no problem with you making wine if you want to, I have chosen not to and will not impose my choices on to you.

[wenglund]

I am searching in the NT for the parable about the kingdom of God being like the man who refused to donate for want of transparency. Can someone point me to chapter and verse?

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 7, 2014 by wenglund

[thesometimesaint]

Nah, the only difference it would make is the nitpicking busybodies would have more to nitpick. The nattering nabobs of negativity if you will.

 

Agreed.

[ERayR]

I am searching in the NT for the parable about the kingdom of God being like the man who refused to donate for want of transparency. Can someone point me to chapter and verse?

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

Not in my NT or OT or BOM.  In fact I like you can not find it.

[Vance]

I don’t solicit donations in order to further a religious point of view.

BTW, that is a poor attempt at moving the goal posts.

[Vance]

According to mainstream sensibilities, these standards make sense for churches and charities that solicit donations from the public.

Isn't this an example of the logical fallacy of "ad populum"?