Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Church buying up more farms


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

What are you imagining about the crumble-down of the entire world? Is it some kind of apocalyptic hellscape where people escape suffering by retreating to non-monetary commodities? 

As I said in a reply to someone else, I think that assets like farms can be good toward the stated mission of the church including helping the poor and needy. But even in a spiritual sense, I think there must be a balance between preparing for disaster and caring for people now. 

So why are you paying what you do for living expenses when you could live so much more cheaply and care for people now? 

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

The Good Samaritan helped. Imagine if he had 48 hours to make his 2-hour journey but said to himself, "I cannot stop for this person. What if I get delayed by a swollen river or a riot in the next town? I better keep my 46-hour cushion just in case. I don't want to be late."

So you are giving away your stuff and emptying your savings so you aren't keeping anything just in case? 

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, juliann said:

I know the answer because anyone who can afford a computer could be giving more to the poor. It is the ultimate privilege to think you can sit comfortably in America and think you aren't hoarding or greedy. You didn't answer how many shoes you have. That is the question I ask because if it is more than one, you are the living example of not doing what you lecture others about. 

I have four pairs of shoes…one each for dress, casual, slippers, and for exercise.  Not by choice, high arch and other issues. I used to have a couple of sandals and a pair of hiking boots, but no more. 
 

Few shoes even with a upper middle class life is very doable.
 

Black shoes go with everything. 

Link to comment
On 6/24/2021 at 1:04 PM, JLHPROF said:

The annoyance is that there still seems to be the idea that the Church is still using today's tithing for all these commercial projects (like City Creek for instance).

I think they haven't probably used a dime of tithing money on these things in decades.  The idea that all the Church's cash flow comes from tithing doesn't make much sense any more.

President Hinckley indicated that it's true the majority of Church income came from tithes and fast offerings and that the Church relies on them for Church operations like chapels, temples, etc.
But also that the Church's commercial investments dating back decades provided a source of income and that is used in the commercial part of the Church (like City Creek mall).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/church-finances-commercial-businesses?lang=eng

The annoyance is from the insinuation that the Church is using tithing to increase its commercial value.
 

But it's also annoying when people pretend that tithing isn't the initial source of the churches wealth, as if they would never consider using tithing for such scandalous things like investment properties. Yet they took the tithing and invested it in other investments and then used those proceeds to make other purchases.

To my understanding the church doesn't use tithing for any purpose other than to invest. They then withdraw some funds to cover expenses but it's not like it was the original tithing fund, as if they could be separated. People need to accept that the church solicits tithing funds and then uses them however it chooses. But just because some don't like the way they are used, or find it embarrassing to admit that tithing was used for investments then they need to grow up a little. The church takes tithing funds and invests them, whether in stock or real estate and then they withdraw what they need for church operations and keep the rest in other investments. This isn't complicated. But don't pretend like the church doesn't invest tithing funds.

Link to comment
29 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have four pairs of shoes…one each for dress, casual, slippers, and for exercise.  Not by choice, high arch and other issues. I used to have a couple of sandals and a pair of hiking boots, but no more. 
 

Few shoes even with a upper middle class life is very doable.
 

Black shoes go with everything. 

That makes you rich.  However, I've never seen you go online and point fingers at others for having more than one pair of shoes and not giving them to the poor. Why do you think that is? 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But it's also annoying when people pretend that tithing isn't the initial source of the churches wealth, as if they would never consider using tithing for such scandalous things like investment properties. Yet they took the tithing and invested it in other investments and then used those proceeds to make other purchases.

To my understanding the church doesn't use tithing for any purpose other than to invest. They then withdraw some funds to cover expenses but it's not like it was the original tithing fund, as if they could be separated. People need to accept that the church solicits tithing funds and then uses them however it chooses. But just because some don't like the way they are used, or find it embarrassing to admit that tithing was used for investments then they need to grow up a little. The church takes tithing funds and invests them, whether in stock or real estate and then they withdraw what they need for church operations and keep the rest in other investments. This isn't complicated. But don't pretend like the church doesn't invest tithing funds.

Just curious, do you do this when you give someone a gift? Do you follow up and instruct them how they should be using it? Especially since it is common to give gift cards or money. Have they used it properly? Do you lecture and scold them if they didn't? Do you then "pretend" that it was a gift? 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, juliann said:

I know the answer because anyone who can afford a computer could be giving more to the poor. It is the ultimate privilege to think you can sit comfortably in America and think you aren't hoarding or greedy. You didn't answer how many shoes you have. That is the question I ask because if it is more than one, you are the living example of not doing what you lecture others about. 

I'm sure out of most people that donate, it's a percentage that their income allows. The whole point of her's, I think, is that the church donate the equivalent, a doable amount according to their income. It's my opinion as well. I'm mainly talking about the business side. I understand that tithing goes to building up the kingdom, or the church. 

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
37 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But it's also annoying when people pretend that tithing isn't the initial source of the churches wealth, as if they would never consider using tithing for such scandalous things like investment properties. Yet they took the tithing and invested it in other investments and then used those proceeds to make other purchases.

To my understanding the church doesn't use tithing for any purpose other than to invest. They then withdraw some funds to cover expenses but it's not like it was the original tithing fund, as if they could be separated. People need to accept that the church solicits tithing funds and then uses them however it chooses. But just because some don't like the way they are used, or find it embarrassing to admit that tithing was used for investments then they need to grow up a little. The church takes tithing funds and invests them, whether in stock or real estate and then they withdraw what they need for church operations and keep the rest in other investments. This isn't complicated. But don't pretend like the church doesn't invest tithing funds.

Speaking for myself, I'm fine if the church invests the $100 that I donate today and ends up with $110 (or whatever) this time next year.  I'm fine if they never use the original donation but just spend $5 of earnings every year and let it continue to grow.

I don't know about anyone else, but I feel it's a privilege to be able to contribute to the Lord's work on earth.  I trust that the Lord is directing our leaders on what to spend and what to save.  I trust that if the Lord sees that course corrections are needed that He will make that  known to His leaders and they will follow His counsel.

To me the whole issue come down to trust.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'm sure out of most people that donate, it's a percentage that their income allows.

That is a very passive concept as if people don’t have choice in what they spend income on. 
 

For anyone not living in survival mode (and there are a lot who are, not dismissing them), anyone who has income significantly left over after necessities (and what is a necessity is likely debatable as some would claim entertainment is a necessity) has choices they can make. They aren’t forced to choose going out to eat rather than cooking at home, going to a movie rather than borrowing a video from the library, using a computer at a library or having one at home, having a car or carpooling or using public transportation, buying Walmart or thrift store clothing or brand names, spending money on a boat or investing in retirement, etc. 

Link to comment

To any who may be interested, I called the church office building. They are letting Tom Owens who was picked by the presidency to answer calls like mine. I'll let you know what he says as far as the business side of the church donating to charity. They had me leave my name and phone number.

I was nervous to call, it's only my second time. The first time was years ago when I was asking about tea and if it would be allowed, since I had read it would be good for Alzheimer's prevention. I was gung ho into prevention at the time and was hoping I could get the okay to drink green tea, haha. Bought it and don't like it, haha. I believe the guy whom I talked to left that up to me, and probably said non caffeine tea was okay.

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment

You say this:

 

On 6/23/2021 at 2:05 PM, Meadowchik said:

I don't know if the church does or doesn't give enough because the church isn't transparent about its finances. 

 

 

 

 

On 6/23/2021 at 2:05 PM, Meadowchik said:

 

 

Perhaps an exact number is impossible, but I would say that given enough information, we might say the saved wealth vastly outpaces what is spent for charity.

And given enough information, we might say the saved wealth underpaces what is spent on charity.  

Posting over and over again how you feel the church is not doing enough undermines your statement that we don't have enough info.

If you want to criticize the church for not giving out info I totally get it.  I know others don't get it, but I do.  But if we don't have enough information to know the church is doing good enough then we also don't have enough info to know the church is doing too badly. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Hope I didn't make it sound like that. I think LDS charities would be wonderful, either way.

If the Church takes 10% of its increase from its commercial investments and transfers it to the Church operational side they are paying tithing.

Is that sufficient?

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

If the Church takes 10% of its increase from its commercial investments and transfers it to the Church operational side they are paying tithing.

Is that sufficient?

Not really, members are asked to donate to fast offerings. Maybe instead of fast offerings the church could donate 10% to charities, theirs and others. 

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Maybe instead of fast offerings the church could donate 10% to charities, theirs and others. 

What do you call what the church uses to cover overhead costs (transportation, salaries, storage, etc) so that all members’ donations can go to those in need?

Quote

While 100 percent of fast offerings and humanitarian donations go directly to those in need, the overhead and administrative costs associated with these programs — in addition to the resources needed to build storage facilities, house and deliver humanitarian aid supplies around the world, train volunteers and so on — are privately fronted by the Church. Today, thanks to a robust infrastructure, the Church continues to relieve the hunger, thirst, suffering and poverty of millions of people around the world and to empower individuals and communities to become more self-sustaining.

https://news-bz.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/humanitarian-aid-welfare-services-breakdown-donations-costs-resources

You should read the full link, shouldn’t take long...

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Not really, members are asked to donate to fast offerings. Maybe instead of fast offerings the church could donate 10% to charities, theirs and others. 

So offerings, not tithing?

If any members contributed proportionally as much in fast offerings as the Church contributes of its annual increase to those in need they'd have to skip more than 2 meals per month.

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So offerings, not tithing?

If any members contributed proportionally as much in fast offerings as the Church contributes of its annual increase to those in need they'd have to skip more than 2 meals per month.

Whatever you want to call it, but if we say that it's tithing then the business side would be putting it back to the church. I was wondering if there would be a way that the church gives more in charitable donations to where the business side could donate, not from member's tithing. 

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Speaking for myself, I'm fine if the church invests the $100 that I donate today and ends up with $110 (or whatever) this time next year.  I'm fine if they never use the original donation but just spend $5 of earnings every year and let it continue to grow.

I don't know about anyone else, but I feel it's a privilege to be able to contribute to the Lord's work on earth.  I trust that the Lord is directing our leaders on what to spend and what to save.  I trust that if the Lord sees that course corrections are needed that He will make that  known to His leaders and they will follow His counsel.

To me the whole issue come down to trust.

I trust the church as well.  One thing I like about the church is that it is actively working in various ways to prepare for the events of the last days.  Most Christians seem to just expect some rapture or to be delivered from the things that will happen. The Church is slowly fortifying its positions in diverse areas.  We can't be standing still as things keep moving forward.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Whatever you want to call it, but if we say that it's tithing then the business side would be putting it back to the church. I was wondering if there would be a way that the church gives more in charitable donations to where the business side could donate, not from member's tithing. 

Bottom line is the Church has money and people think the Church organization should be giving more of it away to the poor than they are.  Not because the Church doesn't help the poor but because they have a large portfolio they should be obligated to give away a bigger percent of it.  That's the idea.

Except it's wrong.  The Church as an organization has no obligation to give away a higher percentage of its annual increase to those outside the Church.  They can donate.  There is no legal or moral obligation to do so.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Bottom line is the Church has money and people think the Church organization should be giving more of it away to the poor than they are.  Not because the Church doesn't help the poor but because they have a large portfolio they should be obligated to give away a bigger percent of it.  That's the idea.

Except it's wrong.  The Church as an organization has no obligation to give away a higher percentage of its annual increase to those outside the Church.  They can donate.  There is no legal or moral obligation to do so.

Well, they are going to reach out hopefully and let me know from the horse's mouth. Trying to put this to rest for myself and those concerned on here. They did reach out on my LDS.org account saying something like my case or something was resolved. I guess when I called the church office building it noted my phone number which is linked to my member account. But still not quite resolved, waiting for a phone called from Tom from public affairs. 

Link to comment

You should write out your questions now and then take notes on his answers, so you can remember details to report and won’t hit yourself thinking “if only I had asked that!”

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Well, they are going to reach out hopefully and let me know from the horse's mouth. Trying to put this to rest for myself and those concerned on here. They did reach out on my LDS.org account saying something like my case or something was resolved. I guess when I called the church office building it noted my phone number which is linked to my member account. But still not quite resolved, waiting for a phone called from Tom from public affairs.

I’m trying to understand why some participants on this board can’t seem to get it into their heads that the Church is going to need a tremendous amount of capital, resources, and real estate if the prophecies pertaining to the establishment of Zion and the New Jerusalem are going to be realized. I’m surmising the main reason why you and the others are so exercised over the Church’s prudent and absolutely essential accumulation of wealth is because the lot of you simply don’t believe the prophecies concerning the establishment of Zion are going to be fulfilled, esteeming them to be fairytales. Meanwhile for those who believe as I do, we are hoping the Church will greatly increase it’s relatively meager present wealth because the building of Zion — which is going to be the creation of a virtual new nation state — will be an incredibly expensive and arduous undertaking, especially while God’s judgements of destruction are being poured out upon the wicked throughout the world..

Perhaps you’ll think I ‘m crazy, but I guarantee you that in the future the Church’s critics are going to be continue to be outraged, only this time they’re going to be complaining that the Church leaders didn’t accumulate enough wealth when they knew ahead of time how costly it was going to be to fulfill the Lord’s purposes.

But to be frank, I’m getting so weary of listening to all the faithless naysayers and apostates on this board constantly harp on things about which they know so little that I’m going to be cutting my participation here to a bear minimum. The whole process is looking more and more like the currently popularized definition of insanity. 

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Bottom line is the Church has money and people think the Church organization should be giving more of it away to the poor than they are.  Not because the Church doesn't help the poor but because they have a large portfolio they should be obligated to give away a bigger percent of it.  That's the idea.

Except it's wrong.  The Church as an organization has no obligation to give away a higher percentage of its annual increase to those outside the Church.  They can donate.  There is no legal or moral obligation to do so.

I would go a step further to say affixing an amount that should be used to help the poor will by definition always have those who disagree. So what are we accomplishing here? Paying out more so as to assuage the grievances of many posters would accomplish just that - the posters in question would no longer complain as though anything were resolved. If I believed the Church could put out more I would have said so many moons ago, listened to the responses for a time, and then dropped it. There simply is no right answer in part because we haven't a clear notion as to what the next 5? 10? 25? years hold. I trust the Brethren and hope they hold as a high priority the importance of helping those in need in addition to the many other things they are responsible for.r Moving on...

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...