Danged If We Do, Danged If We Don't (Revisited)

[ERayR]

With oblique references to Fry Sauce.

 

 

See post # 196

[JAHS]

Correction, audits of certain Church entities may be performed by outside audit firms.  I believe the majority of the audit work inside the Church itself is performed by the Church Audit Department, which reports to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.  Many of those Church employees are CPAs, Certified Internal Auditors (CIA), Certified Fraud Examiners (CFE), etc.  Each of those professional designations imposes professional standards on their holders which provides some amount of assurance as to the adherence to policies, procedures, and controls (including anti-fraud measures).  It does not, however, rise to the level available from a truly independent audit performed by an outside firm.  Nevertheless, it is far better than nothing.

 

It's good enough for me.  

[Gray]

I do not know what means God uses to intervene. He might come in person, I would not know.

 

Then what makes you think He's directly intervening at all?

[Gray]

Son of condiment perdition!  Burger Heretic! 

 

Truly, a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country

[ERayR]

Then what makes you think He's directly intervening at all?

 

The concept of continuing revelation.

[KevinG]

I apologize if I am not asking this in the right place, but is this not

....board nannying. Contribute to the discussion rather than criticizing the poster.

I ask because I am new and trying to understand, I got the above (blue) message on a post of mine recently and I am trying to understand the rules.  I apologize if this is not the correct venue to ask this, if someone would be kind enough to point me to a better location to ask my question I will be happy to do so.

 

 

If you think someone has violated the board rules let the mods sort it out using the report function.

[The Nehor]

Then what makes you think He's directly intervening at all?

He told me several times he intervened. He just we did not tell me how. Obviously this will not convince most people.

[cynth]

If you think someone has violated the board rules let the mods sort it out using the report function.

Thank you, I will do that.

[Gray]

The concept of continuing revelation.

 

Not sure I get what you mean. But, maybe I'm derailing too much. The subject is of course fry sauce.

[Gray]

He told me several times he intervened. He just we did not tell me how. Obviously this will not convince most people.

 

I see, thanks for clarifying

[Brian 2.0]

But the chances of that happening within an entire group of men, called of god, are so low it's not worth worrying about. They have incredibly strict audits that are performed by outside auditing firms. And if they were more transparent and you don't like they way they are spending the money, are you going to stop living the law of tithing?

 

Fraud isn't really my worry.  I'm pretty confident that individuals trying to take advantage would get rooted out by the audit system in place.  My interest is more where the money is going, which is the decisions and judgement of the leadership, and that type of stuff wouldn't get flagged in any audit.  It would be comforting to know that no money put in the Humanitarian fund for example ever get routed anywhere else... even if it's towards temple building.  I don't THINK anything like that is happening... but if it's not... no reason not to show it's not.

[HappyJackWagon]

The concept of continuing revelation.

I think you're confusing continuing revelation with the concept of divine micromanagement.

[JAHS]

Fraud isn't really my worry.  I'm pretty confident that individuals trying to take advantage would get rooted out by the audit system in place.  My interest is more where the money is going, which is the decisions and judgement of the leadership, and that type of stuff wouldn't get flagged in any audit.  It would be comforting to know that no money put in the Humanitarian fund for example ever get routed anywhere else... even if it's towards temple building.  I don't THINK anything like that is happening... but if it's not... no reason not to show it's not.

My question still stands to anyone wanting to know the details of how the money is spent.  If you were given the details and don't like they way they are spending the tithing funds would you stop living the law of tithing and no longer donate to the church?  

[HappyJackWagon]

My question still stands to anyone wanting to know the details of how the money is spent.  If you were given the details and don't like they way they are spending the tithing funds would you stop living the law of tithing and no longer donate to the church?  

I've already answered you pages ago.

[ERayR]

I think you're confusing continuing revelation with the concept of divine micromanagement.

 

Nope.

[JAHS]

I've already answered you pages ago.

Yes I went back and found your response (after wading through all the mayonaise posts)  I would guess that a great percentage of those who worry about how the church is spending the money and complain about lack of transparency are probably those who do not pay tithing anyway (perhaps not the case with you).  

[Brian 2.0]

My question still stands to anyone wanting to know the details of how the money is spent.  If you were given the details and don't like they way they are spending the tithing funds would you stop living the law of tithing and no longer donate to the church?  

 

I'm not the right person to ask.  I stopped paying tithing.  But I do like giving to charity and I don't like corrupt charities that keep most of the money.  So contributing to the Humanitarian Fund of the church interests me... so yes... transparency on this issue would help me... or discourage me.

[HappyJackWagon]

Yes I went back and found your response (after wading through all the mayonaise posts)  I would guess that a great percentage of those who worry about how the church is spending the money and complain about lack of transparency are probably those who do not pay tithing anyway (perhaps not the case with you).  

Not the case with me. Does your guess have any evidence supporting it or is it a gut reaction?

 

It would be interesting to see how many critics of church financial non-disclosure are former tithe payers who stopped because of non-disclosure. (I'm sure it's really not as simple as that, but still it would be interesting)

[Scott Lloyd]

I apologize if I am not asking this in the right place, but is this not

....board nannying. Contribute to the discussion rather than criticizing the poster.

I ask because I am new and trying to understand, I got the above (blue) message on a post of mine recently and I am trying to understand the rules.  I apologize if this is not the correct venue to ask this, if someone would be kind enough to point me to a better location to ask my question I will be happy to do so.

 

Question: Have you recently been on this board under a different screen name?

[JAHS]

Not the case with me. Does your guess have any evidence supporting it or is it a gut reaction?

 

It would be interesting to see how many critics of church financial non-disclosure are former tithe payers who stopped because of non-disclosure. (I'm sure it's really not as simple as that, but still it would be interesting)

I just didn't want to assume you were one who was not paying donations.

I hope non-disclosure would not be the reason for a person to stop. That would mean they were paying it for the wrong reason.

[SmileyMcGee]

Critics are like soldiers who hide in the woods, then run out after the battle is over to shoot the wounded.

? Wouldn't critics be the one's wounding them in the first place...

[SmileyMcGee]

I think I started a thread on this years ago. Critics will never be satisfied. For instance:

"The church should apologize for _____."

If the church were to apologize, the response would be, "Ah ha!!! The church admitted to wrongdoing! The church isn't true!"

"The church should do more charitable work."

But when the church does charitable work? "That's just a PR move!" I read criticisms years ago that it was wrong of the church to have members wear Mormon Helping Hands shirts because that's all about being seen of men. Personally, if I went through a disaster and I needed help, I would appreciate having a way to identify who my helpers are, especially with a group of strangers. There are people out there who use such times to take advantage of others, so anyone could blend in, walk into someone's house, and steal their belongings. Of course I would have no objections to being helped by a neighbor I'm familiar with.

"The church should have more diversity in its videos."

I'm sure the reaction would be that the church only did so with less than pure intentions.

Other examples?

This may be a topic for another thread, but at what point do you think a person becomes a "critic?" "Critic" has a negative connotation, though it seems every participant on this board critiques the gospel and church in some way. Is being a critic necessarily a bad thing? Edited August 28, 2015 by SmileyMcGee

[ERayR]

? Wouldn't critics be the one's wounding them in the first place...

 

Not necessarily.

[ERayR]

This may be a topic for another thread, but at what point do you think a person becomes a "critic?" "Critic" has a negative connotation, though it seems every participant on this board critiques the gospel and church in some way. Is being a critic necessarily a bad thing?

 

Not necessarily it depends on what the mindset and attitude of the critic is.

[SmileyMcGee]

Not necessarily it depends on what the mindset and attitude of the critic is.

so it's not necessarily the content of the critique but what you presume their attitude to be?