Simon Magus and Needing a Temple Recommend to Perform Ordinances

[creekster]

Fine, I will try one last time.

Any mentally capable adult church member, who receives an increase/income, has to (among other requirements) pay money to the church to receive the ordinances necessary for exaltation. If such an adult is capable but does not pay money (with help from the church or other sources), he cannot receive the ordinances for exaltation.

There, I think I've covered pretty much everyone on this board. You can go ahead and find other exceptions.

Maybe I should ask why you think this is important. Am I missing something?

[Northwestcoug]

Maybe I should ask why you think this is important. Am I missing something?

I'm having a hard time understanding why my point is not being understood. So I continue to post, hoping that I can make my point clearer.

Other than that, I have issues with tithing in general. But I admit my opinion is jaded because of personal experience.

[creekster]

I'm having a hard time understanding why my point is not being understood. So I continue to post, hoping that I can make my point clearer.

Other than that, I have issues with tithing in general. But I admit my opinion is jaded because of personal experience.

What I mean to ask is, even if one characterizes with the words you choose, why does it matter. Is there some reason you think that requiring a sacrifice of money is a problem?

[wuapinmon]

Is there some reason you think that requiring a sacrifice of money is a problem?

Well, there is the whole rebuking people for thinking they can buy the priesthood thing, but you can't get the priesthood in the modern LDS church unless you buy it.

[creekster]

Well, there is the whole rebuking people for thinking they can buy the priesthood thing, but you can't get the priesthood in the modern LDS church unless you buy it.

Is that his point, then? I guess I don't see it that way. It is an artifact of modern life that most of us pay tithing in money. It might have been in-kind otherwise. And there is no price; the price is dependent not on the value exchanged as the world sees it, but on the willingness to sacrifice a proportion as God (via your conscience and interpretation) defines it. Saying "if you pay me X you can be ordained" is not the same as saying "you must give me time, stop use of alcohol, 10% of your increase, etc." If you see those as identical, then I guess its a problem. It doesnt bother me that way.

[Moliere]

Fine, I will try one last time.

Any mentally capable adult church member, who receives an increase/income, has to (among other requirements) pay money to the church to receive the ordinances necessary for exaltation. If such an adult is capable but does not pay money (with help from the church or other sources), he cannot receive the ordinances for exaltation.

There, I think I've covered pretty much everyone on this board. You can go ahead and find other exceptions.

I agree that almost everyone needs to pay to the church to receive saving ordinances. I guess that doesn't bother me since the price is not fixed and it's open to everyone regardless of income (although I would say tithing as currently interpreted is regressive in nature since it relatively costs more for the poor).

The temple doesn't have a menu where people pick their exalted status and then pay for it with higher exalted status costing more. Everyone receives the same whether they paid $1,000 or $1million in tithing.

I also don't see a difference between requiring the payments of tithes or requiring the fulfillment of a calling.

[wuapinmon]

Is that his point, then? I guess I don't see it that way. It is an artifact of modern life that most of us pay tithing in money. It might have been in-kind otherwise. And there is no price; the price is dependent not on the value exchanged as the world sees it, but on the willingness to sacrifice a proportion as God (via your conscience and interpretation) defines it. Saying "if you pay me X you can be ordained" is not the same as saying "you must give me time, stop use of alcohol, 10% of your increase, etc." If you see those as identical, then I guess its a problem. It doesnt bother me that way.

I'm not sure that hiding the price in a list of other requirements qualifies it like you want it to. If I give you a list of things that you have to do to go to my college, the price is what'll matter most a fin de cuentas.

[creekster]

I'm not sure that hiding the price in a list of other requirements qualifies it like you want it to. If I give you a list of things that you have to do to go to my college, the price is what'll matter most a fin de cuentas.

It isnt a price. Tell me what the price is? It varies by person. it varies by nature. It isnt even necessarily money. And even the proportion is defined not strictly but to some degree by the person paying. The nature is a sacrifice of means, not a price. I think that is a distinction with a difference.

[All-American]

I'm not sure that hiding the price in a list of other requirements qualifies it like you want it to. If I give you a list of things that you have to do to go to my college, the price is what'll matter most a fin de cuentas.

Can we stipulate in advance that your college is not heaven?

[wuapinmon]

Can we stipulate in advance that your college is not heaven?

It ain't Iowa either.

It isnt a price. Tell me what the price is? It varies by person. it varies by nature. It isnt even necessarily money. And even the proportion is defined not strictly but to some degree by the person paying. The nature is a sacrifice of means, not a price. I think that is a distinction with a difference.

No two people pay the same price to go to the same college. The price to go to a college is what your FAFSA tells the college you can afford, along with the discounts for the "talents" you've been given. The idea that God needs anyone's 10% seems like a human construct lain upon him. I guess I just really hate my ward.

[creekster]

It ain't Iowa either.




No two people pay the same price to go to the same college. The price to go to a college is what your FAFSA tells the college you can afford, along with the discounts for the "talents" you've been given. The idea that God needs anyone's 10% seems like a human construct lain upon him. I guess I just really hate my ward.

Ok, but it is a far cry from buying the priesthood example.

[Northwestcoug]

What I mean to ask is, even if one characterizes with the words you choose, why does it matter. Is there some reason you think that requiring a sacrifice of money is a problem?

In a nutshell, yes. It shouldn't be a hard and fast rule, as currently interpreted by the leadership. Given the early history of the church and the BOM teachings, there shouldn't be any perception that God requires money for people to be saved. Sacrifice I get. But people should be free to choose what sacrifice they want to give to the church. Back when our recommends were taken, our sacrifice in time was worth much more to us than a potential 10% of our income. The time we spent serving meant a lot to us, and I would assume it meant a lot to our local ward. I doubt the bishop would have cared if we sent 10% to SLC, were he not put in a position to judge our worthiness based on a percentage of income. A simple 'do you give of your time and means freely' would be a much more meaningful TR question, and it would stop making the issue of money a stumbling block to enter the temple.

But hey, not too many here have as big a problem with tithing as I do. I do hope I am making my position more clear though.

[wuapinmon]

Ok, but it is a far cry from buying the priesthood example.

Well, I think Northwestcoug and I see this differently than most. The mental gymnastics of religious faith can justify almost anything (e.g. Nephi killing Laban) and have people say it's God's will. The clergy in my stake do that kind of thing all the time, thinking that forcing obedience will work to motivate people. I'm about ready to just call it a day. Two weeks ago the bishop, no shit, "ordered" us to "be friends with the families you home teach." No hometeaching, no temple recommend. No tithing, no temple recommend. This freelancing bullshit needs to stop. But, there's no recourse in our church. You can't complain because you're wrong, No.Matter.What. I mean, evil speaking of the Lord's anointed is a sin. You complain up the chain, it gets sent back down. Don't sustain someone? Court of love.

I am unhappy.

[Northwestcoug]

I agree that almost everyone needs to pay to the church to receive saving ordinances. I guess that doesn't bother me since the price is not fixed and it's open to everyone regardless of income (although I would say tithing as currently interpreted is regressive in nature since it relatively costs more for the poor).

The temple doesn't have a menu where people pick their exalted status and then pay for it with higher exalted status costing more. Everyone receives the same whether they paid $1,000 or $1million in tithing.
I also don't see a difference between requiring the payments of tithes or requiring the fulfillment of a calling.

The only argument I'll make about this is that 10% of a poor member's income is worth a lot more to him than 10% of Mitt Romney's. Asking poor members to donate 10% of their income has real-life consequences. In my experience, I heard way too many 'I paid tithing when I was dirt poor, and I was blessed for the sacrifice', and not empathy when paying 10% meant either choosing to not pay bills or adding to my already burgeoning debt load. And I suppose I could have paid the tithing and asked my bishop to pay whatever bill we would have neglected. I didn't, though in fairness he didn't give me that option either. But I do think that the church advising members to pay a full tithe no matter what, even to the point of letting the church cover other necessities, is a symptom of just how iron-clad the 10% rule has become. I wonder if the leadership has ever considered the possibility that this teaching is ill-advised.

Realistically, could the church survive if the 10% rule was omitted from saving ordinances? No doubt less tithing would be paid, and I'm sure there would be some belt tightening. But certainly other churches survive on less member generosity.

[Moliere]

It isnt a price. Tell me what the price is? It varies by person. it varies by nature. It isnt even necessarily money. And even the proportion is defined not strictly but to some degree by the person paying. The nature is a sacrifice of means, not a price. I think that is a distinction with a difference.

Christ required a sacrifice greater than 10%. Peter left all (which was quite a bit) to follow him. For people that believe the LDS church is Christ's true and living church on the earth, tithing makes sense as a sacrifice. For people that see the church as a earthly organization organized by men, tithing is simply a price to pay for supposed exhalation.

I dare say that when someone basically says that the church requires people to pay money for exhalation, I tune that out as a tired and simplistic Dehlinite type of argument.