Putting the Church’s “Rainy Day Fund” In Perspective

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Mark Beesley said:

To clarify, I did not say your beliefs are an act. I wrote that your feigned offense, the way you are acting, is an act. I stand by that. And you should expect your sincerity to be challenged when you write the things you do.

To suggest that no one knows what the Lord’s plans are is to deny the reality of revelation. See Alma 12:9-11. 

We invite you also to escape the chains of hell and come back to the light.

We invite you to cast off your lack of evidence faith and join the world of enlightenment and knowledge rather than superstition in the unseen imaginary world of faith that you need because you have no evidence.

[Teancum]

9 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

Alma 12:9-11

1 Nephi 16:1-3

Doctrine & Covenants  88:81

Have a nice day.

 

 

 

Words that claim to be from God but are just man made.

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, Mark Beesley said:

We invite you to cast off the chains of hell, and humbly seek knowledge. 

 

So now you are a preacher on the wall?

[Mark Beesley]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

So now you are a preacher on the wall?

Nope. I am on my living room couch! 🤣🤣🤣

[Teancum]

20 hours ago, Mark Beesley said:

Nope. I am on my living room couch! 🤣🤣🤣

Deleted

Edited January 17 by Teancum

[Mark Beesley]

15 minutes ago, Teancum said:

We invite you to cast off your lack of evidence faith and join the world of enlightenment and knowledge rather than superstition in the unseen imaginary world of faith that you need because you have no evidence.

Your definition of evidence may differ from the traditional definition. Perhaps you have confused evidence with something like irrefutable proof, no?

For example, the Testimony of the Three Witnesses is evidence, but it is not irrefutable proof.  So, there is lots of evidence for the unseen world. Your dismissal or disbelief of the evidence does not cause it to lose the quality of being evidence.

Edited January 16 by Mark Beesley

[ttribe]

41 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

Mind reading unnecessary. Words expose one’s thoughts.

Did the rules change around here during my most recent absence? I thought this was a no preaching/no calling to repentance zone.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

I have been on this site since February 2009.  That is just about 14 years.  I have NEVER feigned anything.  What I write is how I feel.  If anything, I sometimes am too blunt. YOU are so out of line here and are breaking the board rules.  Nor are you entitled to sit in judgement over me and tell ME what I believe.  

 

Oh so there has been a revelation given on how God is going to finance the Second Coming.  I am very interested in just what has been revealed. Please provide the link the this revelation.  Yeah CFR!

 

Oh so now I am bound in chains in hell.  You are reminding me about everything I dislike about the Church.  YOU are not responsible for my salvation, nor are you qualified to pronounce any judgement on me.  If what you have learned in all YOUR years in the Church is that you have some kind of responsibility to go around judging others, it is you that have not been paying attention.   I can assure you, and tell you with complete honesty, I am NOT feigning offense here.  I am more than offended, I am pissed.

Beesley needs to read board rules. I've never reported anyone, but this guy needs it.

[Mark Beesley]

20 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Beesley needs to read board rules. I've never reported anyone, but this guy needs it.

And the woke generation strikes again. 😂😂😂 

I am comfortable with everything I have written. So, report me.

[Calm]

27 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

And the woke generation strikes again. 😂😂😂 

I am comfortable with everything I have written. So, report me.

It has nothing to do with being woke or whatever.  And not using the word correctly btw…

It is the purpose of the board to have civil interfaith discussions. Allowing what amounts to pulpit banging or proselytizing will immediately derail that purpose. 

Edited January 16 by Calm

[rodheadlee]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

It has nothing to do with being woke or whatever.  And not using the word correctly btw…

It is the purpose of the board to have civil interfaith discussions. Allowing what amounts to pulpit banging or proselytizing will immediately derail that purpose. 

Let's be honest here Calm this thread is nothing but an excuse to pick on the Church. The church isn't going to change their financial situation because two really smart guys start a thread on the Mormon dialogue board. The only way that'll change is if Jesus Christ tells them to change. If they start selling their stock it would be wise to pay attention. I don't have any so I'm not worried.

[Teancum]

20 hours ago, Mark Beesley said:

Your definition of evidence may differ from the traditional definition. Perhaps you have confused evidence with something like irrefutable proof, no?

For example, the Testimony of the Three Witnesses is evidence, but it is not irrefutable proof.  So, there is lots of evidence for the unseen world. Your dismissal or disbelief of the evidence does not cause it to lose the quality of being evidence.

Deleted

Edited January 17 by Teancum

[Eschaton]

On 1/14/2023 at 4:08 PM, CV75 said:

What radical inclusion and inversion of social order, in relation to the Gospel, benefits your life and would benefit others reading your historical analysis?

I don't think it's about benefiting my life - but it would certainly benefit the poor and outcast (I'm neither). 

[Teancum]

16 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Let's be honest here Calm this thread is nothing but an excuse to pick on the Church.

Not really.  It is a valid topic for discussions purposes.

16 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

 

The church isn't going to change their financial situation because two really smart guys start a thread on the Mormon dialogue board. The only way that'll change is if Jesus Christ tells them to change. If they start selling their stock it would be wise to pay attention. I don't have any so I'm not worried.

Well the church isn't going to change much any critic brings up here on board are they?  Marriage policy?  Law of chastity?  Tithing? Excessive temple building?  Retiring apostles at 80 or so?  So maybe we should  not discuss anything?

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 hours ago, Teancum said:

Excessive temple building?

It's interesting that something I and the Saints I know best all crave is 'excessive' to you. I suspect that has some tangential connection to the main topic of this thread.

I went to the temple last weekend. I walked out of my office at 1:30pm and arrived at the temple at 5:45pm, just in time for the 6:00 endowment session. Afterwards, we grabbed some dinner, spent the night, and then attended the 10am endowment session the next morning. We got home at 5:45pm. I say, Bring on the 'excessive temple building'!

[Teancum]

13 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

It's interesting that something I and the Saints I know best all crave is 'excessive' to you. I suspect that has some tangential connection to the main topic of this thread.

I went to the temple last weekend. I walked out of my office at 1:30pm and arrived at the temple at 5:45pm, just in time for the 6:00 endowment session. Afterwards, we grabbed some dinner, spent the night, and then attended the 10am endowment session the next morning. We got home at 5:45pm. I say, Bring on the 'excessive temple building'!

I do not know where you live. Is your temple busy, staffed well and so on?  The temple near me, one of the very small temples, is not very busy at all.  Limited hours, limited attendance with at times hardly anyone in a session.  Sure I agree that for you, your perspective is different than mine.  It just surprises me that many places they put a new temple the membership is very small and even in decline. But I would guess even if the expensive building is not very busy it is nice for those who want to attend the temple who have to travel less to do so.

[california boy]

On 1/16/2023 at 10:50 AM, Mark Beesley said:

Alma 12:9-11

1 Nephi 16:1-3

Doctrine & Covenants  88:81

Have a nice day.

My dad used to send me scriptures to read and tell me I was going to hell.  What was funny is that most of the scriptures he would tell me to read, I knew by heart and could quote them back to him.  I am still gay.  I still feel very connected to God.  I feel His love for me.  And I know I am on the path that He intends me to follow.  Just like my father, I know you think there is only one way back to God and it is through a Church that claims some kind of special connection to God, just like many other churches claim.  I am glad that path works for you, but obviously it also seems to be turning you into a judgmental jerk spewing things you really have no idea what you are talking about.  The fact that you are a product of that Church and it's teachings bothers me much more than how much wealth the Church amasses.

I stand by what I say.  I don't have a problem with the Church amassing huge fortunes if that is what it wants to do.  I just believe it should be honest and upfront about this goal so that people can make informed decisions about how they feel about the Church and whether they want their money and time going to an organization that has that as it's goal.  Seems reasonable to me.  Let the sunshine in.

Edited January 18 by california boy

[JAHS]

39 minutes ago, california boy said:

My dad used to send me scriptures to read and tell me I was going to hell.  What was funny is that most of the scriptures he would tell me to read, I knew by heart and could quote them back to him.  I am still gay.  I still feel very connected to God.  I feel His love for me.  And I know I am on the path that He intends me to follow.  Just like my father, I know you think there is only one way back to God and it is through a Church that claims some kind of special connection to God, just like many other churches claim.  I am glad that path works for you, but obviously it also seems to be turning you into a judgmental jerk spewing things you really have no idea what you are talking about.  The fact that you are a product of that Church and it's teachings bothers me much more than how much wealth the Church amasses.

I stand by what I say.  I don't have a problem with the Church amassing huge fortunes if that is what it wants to do.  I just believe it should be honest and upfront about this goal so that people can make informed decisions about how they feel about the Church and whether they want their money and time going to an organization that has that as it's goal.  Seems reasonable to me.  Let the sunshine in.

Sounds reasonable, but a lot of it depends on a member's attitude about tithing. For me the tithing I donate is not mine, it is money that already belongs to God before I give it back to Him, so I don't need any informed decision about it. 
Any other charity I donate to I would like to be able to make an informed decision.

[Kenngo1969]

On 1/16/2023 at 12:00 PM, Teancum said:

Words that claim to be from God but are just man made.

Ahem!  What evidence do you have for that?  

  

Sorry.    Couldn't resist!     Carry on!  

[california boy]

3 hours ago, JAHS said:

Sounds reasonable, but a lot of it depends on a member's attitude about tithing. For me the tithing I donate is not mine, it is money that already belongs to God before I give it back to Him, so I don't need any informed decision about it. 
Any other charity I donate to I would like to be able to make an informed decision.

Of course.  I get that concept.  I guess when I was active in the Church, I freely gave both in tithing and other money demands the Church made.  I had the attitude of what better place to make a donation than to an organization that has so little overhead in terms of running the organization since the vast amount is done by volunteers.  If I had known so much of the money was just going to a stock portfolio, I probably would have lonely paid tithing because I felt covenanted to do so.  Hence, being more transparent about what all donations going to the Church seems like a necessary part of their obligation to those who donate.  I realize that a lot of members don't care at all, but it should be an informed decision.

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 hours ago, Teancum said:

Is your temple busy, staffed well and so on?

It hasn't been well staffed since Covid, but the current workers are doing their best. We don't have an abundance of retired people to draw on. Most members are working and raising families, so our temple's busy times tend to be when such people can attend: the last session on Friday evening is nearly always packed, and the earlier sessions on Saturday morning tend to be so as well. Most of our public holidays are on Mondays, but the temple is always open on Good Friday, and they have to put on extra sessions to accommodate everyone who wants to be there.

I don't know where this idea came from that a temple has to be chock-a-block from morning till evening five days a week or it's somehow pointless. My understanding is that, after it was dedicated, the Salt Lake Temple had one endowment session per day. What is priceless to me is that I have access to a temple. I go every month, and whilst it takes more than 24 hours, I'm deeply grateful that I have access to these blessings.

Last Friday evening, I sat down in the endowment room, and immediately I felt an abundance of personal peace. Then the revelation started to flow unbidden. Saturday morning was a repeat. I came home filled with love and gratitude and a deep desire to bless others. Literally priceless.

Edited January 19 by Hamba Tuhan

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Ahem!  What evidence do you have for that?  

  

Sorry.    Couldn't resist!     Carry on!  

Burden of proof is on those who make the claim not on those who don't believe.  You can't prove a negative anyway.

[Kenngo1969]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Burden of proof is on those who make the claim not on those who don't believe.  You can't prove a negative anyway.

Right.  You made the claim.  I don't think you are senile, or unintelligent, or even particularly forgetful, but, for your convenience, here is the claim you made.  (I don't have to support any claims I haven't made, nor am I asking you to do so.)

Quote

Words that claim to be from God but are just man made.

 

[JAHS]

4 hours ago, california boy said:

Of course.  I get that concept.  I guess when I was active in the Church, I freely gave both in tithing and other money demands the Church made.  I had the attitude of what better place to make a donation than to an organization that has so little overhead in terms of running the organization since the vast amount is done by volunteers.  If I had known so much of the money was just going to a stock portfolio, I probably would have lonely paid tithing because I felt covenanted to do so.  Hence, being more transparent about what all donations going to the Church seems like a necessary part of their obligation to those who donate.  I realize that a lot of members don't care at all, but it should be an informed decision.

Why would people who are not active in the church be worried about needing to make an informed decision? Just don't pay the tithing. Problem solved. If they could make an informed decision does that mean they would pay tithing even though they are not active? Just not sure what the problem is. 

People use the word transparency, but what does that really mean and just how transparent does the church need to be to satisfy everyone's definition of transparency? Critics who question it will always question it no matter what the church does.

[Bernard Gui]

On 1/12/2023 at 7:48 PM, Teancum said:

So you would be happy if the church had $200 trillion so it has no material limits on what it can accomplish?  What is it you envision being accomplished?  What is it accomplishing now with the EPA wealth?

For starters, begin construction of the Starship Nauvoo and put up some serious athletic scholarship cash to pump up Cougar football and basketball. Perpetual national championships would be sweet.