Bishop Waddell on the great and spacious building

[Nevo]

I wonder what Joseph Smith Sr. would have thought to know that people all over the world would still be discussing his dream 205 years later.

[salgare]

1 hour ago, Steve Noel said:

As I mentioned earlier, I am actually quite aware of all of this already. I have read books in the past by Evangelical critics of Mormonism (e.g. Walter Martin, James White, Marvin Cowon, Richard Abanes, Ed Decker, Ron Rhodes, Janis Hutchinson, etc.) In recent years I have been exposed to Evangelical critics of these critics (e.g. Greg Johnson, Richard Mouw, Craig Blomberg, Paul Owen, Carl Mosser, Roger Olson, etc.). The latter of these usually scold the former for their sinful disposition, accuse them of misrepresenting the Latter-day Saints, and criticize the shallow nature of their objections. The former accuse the latter of being gullible pawns of a LDS PR campaign intended to bring Mormonism out of cult status into the mainstream of Christianity. So I am determined to look into the LDS Church for myself. 

Well, I'm back to lds.net is not where you want to do your discovery.

[Steve Noel]

25 minutes ago, salgare said:

Well, I'm back to lds.net is not where you want to do your discovery.

Lol. I am not leaving this forum completely. I will still be checking in.

[Hamba Tuhan]

4 minutes ago, Steve Noel said:

Lol. I am not leaving this forum completely. I will still be checking in.

Please do more than that if you can. I've really enjoyed your posts and your approach!

[Johnnie Cake]

On April 3, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

One of my favorite quotes from the general conference so far, from Bishop W. Chrisopher Waddell of the Presiding Bishopric:

 

I love how general authorities are finally giving Joseph Smith Sr 's dream it's due

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

I wonder what Joseph Smith Sr. would have thought to know that people all over the world would still be discussing his dream 205 years later.

 

27 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I love how general authorities are finally giving Joseph Smith Sr 's dream it's due

Jinx.

[Storm Rider]

23 hours ago, Steve Noel said:

I have only been here a few days, but it is becoming evident to me that this is not the best place to learn about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In a previous post Storm Rider brought up the wide range of both LDS & non-LDS heterodoxy here. I have also been cautioned about this from another member through private messaging.  I joined under the assumption that I would be mostly interacting with "mainstream" Mormons. Boanerges mentioned in that same thread that LDS.net would be a better place for getting an orthodox LDS viewpoint (he wrote "heterodox," but I think he meant orthodox). So I will primarily be interacting over there. From what I've seen thus far there are some solid LDS folks here who know their stuff. I don't know if that is the case over there. I may chirp in from time to time here, but probably not a whole lot. Thanks.

Hello Steve,

I think you are wise in your choice.  This board can even be....painful for a faithful LDS member.  For someone who is trying to learn about the Church of Jesus Christ this would be a challenging resource.  I am sure if you have any questions you have identified a number of folks who would be glad to talk with you.

It would have been interesting to discuss how being a member of the AofG and the challenges of studying in a Baptist seminary.  Maybe in the future.  Best of luck to you and I hope you and your family have returned to health. 

[Johnnie Cake]

1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I love how general authorities are finally giving Joseph Smith Sr 's dream it's due

 

1 hour ago, Nevo said:

I wonder what Joseph Smith Sr. would have thought to know that people all over the world would still be discussing his dream 205 years later.

Great minds think alike...some just alittle slower

[Hamba Tuhan]

31 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Great minds think alike...some just alittle slower

Obviously you just plagiarised...

Edited April 5, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[rodheadlee]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Easy to say for one who doesn't have to live with the consequences.

 

That's not true. In or out of the LDS Church we all have to live with the consequences of our words and actions.

[rodheadlee]

5 hours ago, cinepro said:

I'm not sure what you think would happen if someone not familiar without knowledge (let alone a testimony) of Church doctrine and history read about the issues presented in the essays, or how the polygamy, Priesthood/Temple ban and Book of Abraham issues could in any way give someone positive feelings towards Church history.

This is simply not true.

As an investigator in 1982 I wanted to find out as much about the church as I could. I wasn't concerned about having positive feelings towards church history. Polygamy, the priesthood band and the Book of Abraham were issues at the time. There were no computers in our household at the time to- investigate with. The missionaries were out front with the issues at hand. Pretty much everything was covered through church publications and nothing has come up that has surprised me or had even a small effect on my testimony. My journey outside the church was due to my own shortcomings..

[cdowis]

On 4/4/2016 at 11:06 PM, Steve Noel said:

I have only been here a few days, but it is becoming evident to me that this is not the best place to learn about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This forum is generally about apologetics.  Besides lds.net I also suggest you check out the Social Hall forum here.

[salgare]

On 4/4/2016 at 11:56 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

In a day when people are more apt than ever to call evil good and good evil, I couldn't in good conscience recommend an "equal-time" approach to learning about the Church of Jesus Christ.

To Steve, I would say that if it's important to his peace of mind to explore what the antagonists have to say, to go ahead, but to be warned that he is more apt to be misled thereby than to be brought to a true understanding, that he should take what they have to say with the proverbial grain of salt and to check it against what more reliable sources say.

Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

There really should be no competition right Scott, the truth, the light, the life should glow above all else.

What do you fear?

 

 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, salgare said:

Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

There really should be no competition right Scott, the truth, the light, the life should glow above all else.

What do you fear?

 

 

Distortion, misrepresentation, out-of-context quotation and citation, slanting, half-truths in the guise of the full truth, outright lies -- need I go on?

Edited to add:

I don't fear for the Church when it is vilified; I fear for the innocently ill-informed who are misled thereby.

 

Edited April 6, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[cdowis]

17 minutes ago, salgare said:

There really should be no competition right Scott, the truth, the light, the life should glow above all else.

John 1  [4] In him was life; and the life was the light of men.  [5] And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

[9] That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
[10] He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
[11] He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

[salgare]

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Distortion, misrepresentation, out-of-context quotation and citation, slanting, half-truths in the guise of the full truth, outright lies -- need I go on?

Edited to add:

I don't fear for the Church when it is vilified; I fear for the innocently ill-informed who are misled thereby.

 

why does your truth not outshine all the supposed lies etc.?  Point Steve at some given FAIR article and then a similar link on Mormon Think.  Should not the FAIR article shine well above any "lies" Mormon Think might present?

Steve might want to ask: What of the distortion, misrepresentation, out-of-context quotation and citation, slanting, half-truths in guise of the full truth, outright lies might FAIR be presenting?  You and I are both subjective, I don't fear an objective observer being misled by the study of all subjective sides.  And the likes of Mormon Think, or say the regular critics on this site are far from ill-informed.  Funny where the fear lies eh? 

Edited April 6, 2016 by salgare

[salgare]

7 hours ago, cdowis said:

John 1  [4] In him was life; and the life was the light of men.  [5] And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

[9] That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
[10] He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
[11] He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Yep, and it does not get much more worldly than LDS.inc, malls, condos, huge city ...

Matthew 7:21-23King James Version (KJV)

²¹ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

²² Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

²³ And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

[cdowis]

Salgare,

We appreciate that you share your personal opinions with us.  It gives a contrasting colour to our forum here, rather than the same old grey shading.  But, just curious, are you actually acquainted with the reasoning behind the participation in the building of the mall, or is this just another vapid attempt to sound morally outraged.  

"The church is building malls instead of giving all that money to the poor" sort of thing.
LDS Inc.

Edited April 7, 2016 by cdowis

[carbon dioxide]

On 4/4/2016 at 4:49 PM, 6EQUJ5 said:

The Church is mocked and defamed more now than it ever has been.  The Church stands up for its principles despite what the world has to say.  It is self-evident.

The Church is always going to be mocked for standing for Christ.  The only persecution that I care about is violence or threats.  I don't care if people name call the church or me being a member of the Church.  99% of the people alive I really don't give much value to their opinion.  They are not going to hurt my feelings if they call me a bigot, ect.  But if they come after my family or property, then things will get serious and I will have to defend myself and my family.  I am glad I did not live back in the 1840s when the saints were driven out of Missouri.  That kind of stuff would have driven me mad.  Perhaps stay behind and just quietly took those people out who drove my friends out.

[Bobbieaware]

6 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

The Church is always going to be mocked for standing for Christ.  The only persecution that I care about is violence or threats.  I don't care if people name call the church or me being a member of the Church.  99% of the people alive I really don't give much value to their opinion.  They are not going to hurt my feelings if they call me a bigot, ect.  But if they come after my family or property, then things will get serious and I will have to defend myself and my family.  I am glad I did not live back in the 1840s when the saints were driven out of Missouri.  That kind of stuff would have driven me mad.  Perhaps stay behind and just quietly took those people out who drove my friends out.

How about if members started loosing their jobs and livelihoods because they are Latter-day Saints? There would be legal ways that this could be accomplished, including refusing to patronize businesses owned by LDS Church members.

[salgare]

2 hours ago, cdowis said:

But, just curious, are you actually acquainted with the reasoning behind the participation in the building of the mall, or is this just another vapid attempt to sound morally outraged. 

If they were financially transparent, the reasoning might become clear to both of us.  I would suggest that you have no better idea than me as to their reasoning.  It's the selling of the cattle ranch for the building of a .5mil city that blows me away!

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."

and

" Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me."
 

come to mind

 

[salgare]

2 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

The Church is always going to be mocked for standing for Christ.  The only persecution that I care about is violence or threats.  I don't care if people name call the church or me being a member of the Church.  99% of the people alive I really don't give much value to their opinion.  They are not going to hurt my feelings if they call me a bigot, ect.  But if they come after my family or property, then things will get serious and I will have to defend myself and my family.  I am glad I did not live back in the 1840s when the saints were driven out of Missouri.  That kind of stuff would have driven me mad.  Perhaps stay behind and just quietly took those people out who drove my friends out.

Russell seems to think he is persecuted.

[cdowis]

24 minutes ago, salgare said:

If they were financially transparent, the reasoning might become clear to both of us.  I would suggest that you have no better idea than me as to their reasoning.  It's the selling of the cattle ranch for the building of a .5mil city that blows me away!

Deseret Cattle and Citrus is one of the Church’s investment farms, which operate as taxable commercial ventures. Unlike the Church’s welfare farms, which provide food and commodities for bishops’ storehouses to help the poor and needy, investment farms and ranches support the Church’s mission and principles by serving as a rainy-day fund. In administering Church financial resources, Church leaders practice the same sound economic principles they teach, such as avoiding debt, living within one’s means and setting aside savings for a rainy day.

Former Church President Gordon B. Hinckley (1910–2008) explained why the Church invests a portion of its rainy-day savings in farms and ranches:

Prudent management requires that [the reserves of the Church] be put to use. In that process, we have purchased and hold some good, productive farms. They are well operated under capable management, and they yield a conservative rate of return. We have felt that good farms, over a long period, represent a safe investment where the assets of the Church may be preserved and enhanced, while at the same time they are available as an agricultural resource to feed people should there come a time of need.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-ranch-balances-agriculture-conservation-central-florida

This explains the use of the investment activities of the LDS church.  While speaking specifically of the ranches and farms, the principle is the same for all investments.  And these are taxable entities of the church, which are reported on legal and tax forms.  The income provides a safety net for the church, provides reduced tuition at its universities and colleges for both LDS and nonLDS students, provides the building and maintenance of chapels and other buildings at NO COST to its members (previously the members were responsible for about 40% of the cost of the building of the chapels and made contributions to a budget fund).  These funds support the extensive welfare program,  missionary program, temples, the seminary program for high school age youth, social activities for the ward and stake, Scouting, etc etc.  The necessary infrastructure of running and maintaining the church activities == financial, membership records, legal, etc

I suspect that you bitterly reject these reasons for the financial, taxable activities of the church.  I suspect that you are completely unaware that, in the early Christian church, 
Acts 4 [32] And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.  The members gave everything to the church.

[flameburns623]

The costs of operating a worldwide religious organization are greater than people often expect. (Yes, even with an unpaid, all-volunteer clergy and administration). 

And tithes and offerings tend to ebb and flow, while expenses remain stable or rise at a steady rate.

Investing in a diverse portfolio of assets may sound a bit worldly and avaricious, but it is in fact pragmatic and wise. It allows a consistent level of outreach even during hard times. And where the work of the Church might be able to sieze opportunities with a bit of ready cash, prudent stewardship can ensure that money is availble.

Yes, it would be nice if religious orgs were highly transparent financially.

Remember, however, that there are forces operating in the world hostile to faith and/or anxious to avail themselves of the assets of religion. Faith groups are competitive one with another, and secular governments throughout history have siezed Church wealth and property for their own purposes.

Some measure of confidentiality is probably as necessary to faith-based enterprises as to corporate ones.

 

[Calm]

http://blog.fairmormon.org/2015/08/13/church-development-in-florida/

"After a development plan is eventually approved by all the necessary government regulators, the Ranch will be free to sell off portions of the land to those who want to build houses or businesses on it. The Ranch would not retain any ownership stake after the land is sold. The Ranch would not own a city or any of the resulting houses, businesses, or other new developments. Even the land set aside for environmental conservation would likely transfer to the ownership of the county or the new city.

Why is the Ranch preparing to sell off some of its land? Why now? The Ranch has never before developed its Florida land. But if it doesn’t make a plan for intentional development, it will lose control over its own land bit by bit. Neighboring cities have been suing successfully for water rights, and a neighboring county is attempting to condemn a portion of the land for use as a landfill. Rather than losing a significant portion of the land’s value to such actions, the Ranch has chosen to be proactive and make a coherent plan for the land’s future.

Myth: The Church is building a city in Florida.
Fact: The Ranch is working with local officials to draft a development plan that will allow the Ranch to sell parcels of land for commercial and residential development in the future, which will probably create a new city.

Myth: The Church will have ownership of the future city.
Fact: The Ranch will sell the land to buyers and developers, and will not retain ownership interest in any parcel sold.

Myth: The Ranch’s plan has something to do with creating a gathering place for refuge from future calamities.
Fact: Future development of the land will produce a normal, diverse city without any special LDS character. The only way to live in the city will be to buy or rent a home there from a developer who bought the land from the Ranch."