Newordermormon.org

[cougjunkie]

I'd share it, but you know, pearls before swine.

How far has he fallen not even his "friends" off the board can have sacred experiences anymore. I bet he is a blast to hang out with.

[UtahDan]

The cost of a building is about 2.5 million.

100 families per ward pay tithing, 3 wards per building, average income in the US is 40,000. $4000x300= 1,200,000 and that is being pretty liberal with income and tithe payers as well as not factoring facility upkeep, welfare to ward members funding activities, etc. Seems the members are getting a bargain.

So over 20 years the building generates 24M which even including cost of building, maintenance, etc you would never approach a third of. And buildings last a lot longer than 20 years. I'm not disagreeing that people can view it as money well spent (that is, that the value to you may well be 10%), I'm just saying that if you wanted monetize the cost of your use of the building it may be less than 10%.

You wouldn't pay $4000 a year for a family gym membership for example (where you are getting use of a building and equipment for a couple hours a week).

[Portland Ute]

Unless you're trying to argue that the cost of a building is 2.5 million per year, I think the church is getting a bargain.

The rectangle that we meet in is about 16 years old.

Not much has been changed, upgraded or replaced in that time period.

The maintenance is mostly carried out, free of charge, by willing ward members.


Then again, our building only houses 2 wards. cj is probably right. The members are getting a financial bargain.

[UtahDan]

I'd share it, but you know, pearls before swine.

That's hardly fair. I have never ridiculed any of your stories in front of you.

[Jarid in Cedar]

That's hardly fair. I have never ridiculed any of your stories in front of you.

Just behind him?

[cougjunkie]

So over 20 years the building generates 24M which even including cost of building, maintenance, etc you would never approach a third of. And buildings last a lot longer than 20 years. I'm not disagreeing that people can view it as money well spent (that is, that the value to you may well be 10%), I'm just saying that if you wanted monetize the cost of your use of the building it may be less than 10%.

You wouldn't pay $4000 a year for a family gym membership for example (where you are getting use of a building and equipment for a couple hours a week).

Of course you don't see the value in it, that is why you left. But for others they see the value and then some. My inlaws pay tithing diligently, pay a generous fast offering, and just left their entire estate to the church as well. For them paying tithing was not enough they felt like they got so much more out of church that they needed to do more than just pay 10%. They have served numerous callings everything from Bishopric, Stake presidency, RS pres, etc. They work at the Provo temple twice a week, they are both close to 85 years old and still Visit and Home teach every month. I think they have more than done their part. However even after leaving every last dollar when they pass away to the church as well as quite a bit of land, my mother in law says that she wishes she could do more as she could never repay everything the LDS church has done for her.

I think the majority feel that way.

[creekster]

So over 20 years the building generates 24M which even including cost of building, maintenance, etc you would never approach a third of. And buildings last a lot longer than 20 years. I'm not disagreeing that people can view it as money well spent (that is, that the value to you may well be 10%), I'm just saying that if you wanted monetize the cost of your use of the building it may be less than 10%.

You wouldn't pay $4000 a year for a family gym membership for example (where you are getting use of a building and equipment for a couple hours a week).

This is a silly comparison and you know it. By making it you appear only to be interested in stirring it up. Suit yourself.

[Sullyute]

I heard similar things in Europe. I didn't think and still don't think that it was about money, rather leadership.

Those "types" tend to be more educated and, generally, better equipped to be leaders.

The church has a huge need for capable leaders. Those that have pursued higher education, in general, have acquired some critical thinking skills, in general. It would make sense that the church would look to professionals to find potential leaders. In general.

You can turn only so many 3rd grade dropouts into prophets...

My cousin went to Zimbabwe and Zambia and they only proselyted business owners, company managers and government officials. The idea was that you needed people who already know how to be leaders/bureaucrats/administrators in order for the church organization to succeed.

I don't know how I feel about this issue. Does the gospel not teach us how to be better people and leaders? Are we not suppose to go to our knees and seek the guidance of the Spirit in our callings and lives? Isn't the whole point of the church to help us become like God? So if the gospel/church cannot make a good leader out of a humble yet poor (non-professional) individual then what good is the church or gospel? Maybe the church needs "professional" leaders first to teach others and then the humble and meek can learn to follow the Spirit and become future leaders. Maybe it is kind of a chicken or the egg question. I don't know.

If running a basic ward takes more than following the spirit, then maybe the church is too complicated and convoluted. I don't have a problem seeking after anyone and everyone who will accpet the gospel, but shouldn't anyone who is listening to the spirit and following the will of God be a good leader?

[Pheidippides]

Of course you don't see the value in it, that is why you left. But for others they see the value and then some. My inlaws pay tithing diligently, pay a generous fast offering, and just left their entire estate to the church as well. For them paying tithing was not enough they felt like they got so much more out of church that they needed to do more than just pay 10%. They have served numerous callings everything from Bishopric, Stake presidency, RS pres, etc. They work at the Provo temple twice a week, they are both close to 85 years old and still Visit and Home teach every month. I think they have more than done their part. However even after leaving every last dollar when they pass away to the church as well as quite a bit of land, my mother in law says that she wishes she could do more as she could never repay everything the LDS church has done for her.

I think the majority feel that way.

I don't know if it's a majority or not but I do know it's a significant number of people. I know of several situations where older people reached interesting and even creative arrangements with the church involving their estate.

[UtahDan]

This is a silly comparison and you know it. By making it you appear only to be interested in stirring it up. Suit yourself.

You are just as bad as cougjunkie. All I said was that a person should pay their own way but that doing so might amount to less than 10%. He wanted to drill down into that comment and I just said that I still think it is accurate, though of course someone could easily feel they had received value and that I was just talking about cost (in the context of the conversation of pulling ones weight). Re-read what I said. You either didn’t understand it or your being obtuse.

[UtahDan]

Of course you don't see the value in it, that is why you left. But for others they see the value and then some. My inlaws pay tithing diligently, pay a generous fast offering, and just left their entire estate to the church as well. For them paying tithing was not enough they felt like they got so much more out of church that they needed to do more than just pay 10%. They have served numerous callings everything from Bishopric, Stake presidency, RS pres, etc. They work at the Provo temple twice a week, they are both close to 85 years old and still Visit and Home teach every month. I think they have more than done their part. However even after leaving every last dollar when they pass away to the church as well as quite a bit of land, my mother in law says that she wishes she could do more as she could never repay everything the LDS church has done for her.

I think the majority feel that way.

I don't disagree with any of that.

[Indy Coug]

I'm glad my money goes towards things like this

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/ny.../02mormon.html

[Pheidippides]

This is a silly comparison and you know it. By making it you appear only to be interested in stirring it up. Suit yourself.

Despite UtahDan's protests, the gibbon is exactly right. The argument is obscured by the method.

[Moliere]

I'm glad my money goes towards things like this

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/02/ny.../02mormon.html

I've said this before on this site but I'll say it again. Tithing is probably closer to the law of consecration than we realize. There is absolutely no way the members in the poorer countries could have the facilities they have without the contributions from the wealthier members in the US. I'm also very happy to provide the means for the poor and downtrodden to be spiritually uplifted.

[lambdacoug]

I've said this before on this site but I'll say it again. Tithing is probably closer to the law of consecration than we realize. There is absolutely no way the members in the poorer countries could have the facilities they have without the contributions from the wealthier members in the US. I'm also very happy to provide the means for the poor and downtrodden to be spiritually uplifted.

I'd rather give my 10% to give the poor and downtrodden more than a good feeling. The church is woefully lacking in humanitarian aid, and its shameful.