Fast Offerings

[RobinFinderson]

What is the church? Is it the First Presidency and corporation or is it a body of members?

I suppose the answer depends on whether the church is trying to protect its tax exempt status.

[Goatnapper'96]

You supposedly are a politician, yet your understanding of these matters is severely immature. Seriously, how can you put out such ignorant nonsense? I realize you are a Democrat and this is how they think but it is also the difference between Satan's plan and God's plan.

Rambam makes me laugh and he is one talented sophist. However, his pounding of Mormon in support of his only true and living political perspective is very Snipeish. I guess it is more sexy to use the scriptures in support of the less popular political perspective held amongst mormons, but I don't see a glaring difference.

[tooblue]

I suppose the answer depends on whether the church is trying to protect its tax exempt status.

Or maybe it's the church of God doing what it is designed to do!

[tooblue]

Rambam makes me laugh and he is one talented sophist. However, his pounding of Mormon in support of his only true and living political perspective is very Snipeish. I guess it is more sexy to use the scriptures in support of the less popular political perspective held amongst mormons, but I don't see a glaring difference.

Maybe he is the penultimate politician ... I can hear him saying; "Here, let me just write you a check for 23 million dollars -- you can cash it any bank can't you?"

[ERCougar]

tooblue, I don't know if you know about RamBam's desire for complete anonymity--which means no attempts to link him to a former poster or anything else. He's made it very clear he'll leave if it's pushed. I like him around here, so just leave the personal stuff out.

[Goatnapper'96]

tooblue, I don't know if you know about RamBam's desire for complete anonymity--which means no attempts to link him to a former poster or anything else. He's made it very clear he'll leave if it's pushed. I like him around here, so just leave the personal stuff out.

Please people for the love of all that is good, keep RamBam anonymous. We already lost Robin Finderson from reforming the kingdom from the inside, I don't think we could endure losing RamBam as well.

[RobinFinderson]

If I am not mistaken, Rambam is simply making the point that the church has an unknown 'hoard of cash,' and that the known outward cost of its charitable efforts pales in comparison to the known outward cost of its investments in real estate.

Shouldn't members be encouraged to ponder the moral implications of where they dedicate their time and money?

[The Rambam]

Interesting points, Rambam. I don't know enough to comment on your other points, but I can't let this one slide:



The 1 billion people figure sounds about right, but the idea that the church could solve this problem alone in a decade is nonsense. Unless you are talking about miracles of some sort.

I believe in miracles.

China has a goal for clean drinking water for all its people by 2020: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english...ent_395442.htm

The WHO had a goal to cut the billion number in half by 2015. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2...6-09-06-01.asp But they might miss the goal.

Maybe it would take the Church two decades, I don't know, but trying to do it in a decade would be wonderful.

[tooblue]

tooblue, I don't know if you know about RamBam's desire for complete anonymity--which means no attempts to link him to a former poster or anything else. He's made it very clear he'll leave if it's pushed. I like him around here, so just leave the personal stuff out.

We should all be prepared to be held accountable for the things we say or do.

[tooblue]

If I am not mistaken, Rambam is simply making the point that the church has an unknown 'hoard of cash,' and that the known outward cost of its charitable efforts pales in comparison to the known outward cost of its investments in real estate.

Shouldn't members be encouraged to ponder the moral implications of where they dedicate their time and money?

But the very idea of a hoard of cash is a lie at worst and a half truth at best. So therefore your ponder the 'moral implications' is a ruse.

[ERCougar]

We should all be prepared to be held accountable for the things we say or do.

Are you kidding?
Accountable to whom?
Exactly what do you KNOW about RamBam and what he's said or done?

[The Rambam]

I don't understand why it matters that the members and even community members who were being served participated in these service projects. Is it so horrible that there was a mile long line of community members digging a ditch? Did Christ himself not ask something of some whom he healed also? And don't the members make up the church? Are they not the body? So who cares that the church responds in kind as the collective church and not brother and sister so and so. How else is the church supposed to administer the aid if not through the local channels? Are you suggesting that the church create an arm that does all of the research, leg work, and funding?

Of course the church could do more with their money. So could all of us right? I feel like even if the church did donate it's billions that there would still be room to gripe that the money was donated to the wrong cause. We're also speculating as to how much money is spent in humanitarian efforts. The bottom line is I trust the "old white shirts" that they have ours and the Lord's bests interests in mind and I will continue to pay my tithes and offerings accordingly.

I agree completely that it is wonderful that people on the ground are contributing. They will take better care of it if they have sweat equity into it. And working is good for them.

But it is not fair to compare a deca-billion dollar tax exempt organization whose mail goal is to do what Christ would do were here (and the NT makes clear what Christ's main work was) to our families whose main goal is to somehow pay the mortgage, save for our kids college fund all the while paying 10% tithe, a generous fast offering, 40% taxes and still give and serve in humanitarian causes.

People get up in the morning and go to work at Church HQ. They are either independently wealthy or are paid a wage. Some of them have control decisions over billions of billions of dollars. They are overwhelmingly choosing to reinvest profits into other profit making enterprises.

I agree that there will always be room for critics to complain about which charity got funded and which didn't. But that isn't my criticism. My criticism is the lack of using the resources available to do charitable work.

[The Rambam]

What is the church? Is it the First Presidency and corporation or is it a body of members?

Your half truths perpetrated here are egregious. You fail to ask one of the most basic questions about the churches involvement and then mischaracterize a willingness to make public comment on SOME of the things the church is doing as taking credit. You're actions are reprehensible and detrimental.

Consider for a moment whether the church is welcome in many of the above situations or countries where they are partnering with other organizations? In other words the church is NOT welcome and may ONLY be involved by partnering with other organizations. Furthermore, would it not be prudent and wise to prop up existing organizations instead of starting new and competing organizations?

Could the individual Stakes, Wards and members act in such instances as stated above without the organizational structure provided by the chruch? You can't have it one way or the other bambam. Individual members could not act without the organizational structure and support provided by the church. And the corporation cannot act without the body of the church doing the work.

Is the church responsible for forcing members to be charitable? Or is it the churches purpose to provide a means by which members can CHOOSE to be charitable?

You supposedly are a politician, yet your understanding of these matters is severely immature. Seriously, how can you put out such ignorant nonsense? I realize you are a Democrat and this is how they think but it is also the difference between Satan's plan and God's plan.

You talk about the aid sent to Peru as if it is a SINGULAR instance of aid. What about the aide that was already there in the form of church welfare for 40, 50, 60 years? So the millions sent there that you diminish as a paltry 1 or 2 dollars is in fact above and beyond the millions or billions that have already been spent and that will be spent after the calamity.

You are making it too complicated. The institutional Church is sitting on many billions of dollars in liquid wealth. What are they doing with it.

Mostly reinvesting it in more profiting making ventures--it seems that the huge sums they are hoarding are not enough and they want to see more zeros.

I am here pointing out that just comparing the cash spent on charitable ventures vs. the cash spend on the commercial development of downtown reveals an obvious value judgment.

Are you saying the charitable donations are actually in a proper proportion to commercial reinvestment? Or are you saying we should not think about the issue?

[Jeff Lebowski]

We should all be prepared to be held accountable for the things we say or do.

What the hell does that mean?

Seriously, you should step back for a minute and take a breather.

[RobinFinderson]

But the very idea of a hoard of cash is a lie at worst and a half truth at best. So therefore your ponder the 'moral implications' is a ruse.

It isn't a lie or half truth. 'Hoard' means to hide something away from the public. It is a technically accurate descriptor of the church's money. Of course there are also some negative connotations to the word, which is where I believe you take exception.

But there ARE moral implications to paying tithing and fast offerings, and I think that members should be encouraged to explore those implications fully.