Mormons are ashamed of their own beliefs

[_Yoda]

Pahoran, if anything, is an equal opportunity offender. ;-)

Still, Pahoran and Dan have both missed the point that Jason and I have both made. ALL Church funds ultimately point back to some type of contribution from members. That should not be in dispute.

[_Themis]

[Stand next to pygmies == you look tall without trying.

Post on a thread with Themis and Malaise == you write the most take-serious-worthy posts in the thread without trying.

Regards,
Pahoran

Are you calling SB a pygmie? :)

I at least talked about the OP, and yes there are some beliefs that members are uncomfortable talking about. Polygamy and the priesthood ban I would put as the top two. I don't recall you providing much substance here even with all the hateful posting you do. Give up the hate and you will be much happier. I would also ask you to provide sources on how the tithing money is spent.

[_Themis]

Should she lie? The leaders of the church DO keep the finances of the church a secret and they DO spend most of the money on luxuries for themselves and improvements to Salt Lake City.

Let us examine these two statements:

A. The church keeps its finances secret.
B. The church spends most of the money on luxuries for itself.

How can you know B, when A is not revealed?

See that is much better then your other post, and I agree with you.

[_zeezrom]

Still, Pahoran and Dan have both missed the point that Jason and I have both made. ALL Church funds ultimately point back to some type of contribution from members. That should not be in dispute.

I agree, Liz. However, I don't think I always looked at it that way. I recall thinking about the business investments differently and wholly (funny word) independent of the tithing contributions. In other words, returns on business investments have nothing to do with tithes and therefore were not connected to me in any way. This was how I justified the idea of massive expenditures on facilities that did not seem to benefit the tithe payer or the poor.

I can see how either viewpoint is held, depending on your angle.

[_Jason Bourne]

Scratch

I don't find Dan's comments reactionary at all on this thread. Pahoran also makes some valid arguments. He is just mean, nasty and strident.

Harmony, it is prudent for any organization to set aside assets to generate a future revenue stream especially in cases of bad times. Tithing, the main annual income source for the church can fluctuate based on number of members, economy issues, income of the members and activity rate. The church does have other financial demands as part of it's mission. Taking care of the poor, needy and widows not the sole purpose of the church. If the Church depletes all it's surplus every year what does it do when there is a major downturn and income no longer meets it's reasonable oprations needs? It would be fiscally irresponsible for the church to give all it's surplus very year. Now one can argue it should do more for the poor but really what you suggest would be irresponsible.

[_Themis]

They have.

http://www.fairlds.org
maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu

Another reminder why I shouldn't take you seriously. What's next? Jeff Lindsay?

This makes me laugh having already said this to him with another post. Sometimes he can do ok, but to much is like this post.

[_Yoda]

Still, Pahoran and Dan have both missed the point that Jason and I have both made. ALL Church funds ultimately point back to some type of contribution from members. That should not be in dispute.

I agree, Liz. However, I don't think I always looked at it that way. I recall thinking about the business investments differently and wholly (funny word) independent of the tithing contributions. In other words, returns on business investments have nothing to do with tithes and therefore were not connected to me in any way. This was how I justified the idea of massive expenditures on facilities that did not seem to benefit the tithe payer or the poor.

I can see how either viewpoint is held, depending on your angle.

And. as you said...my point is that those business investments would not exist at all if it weren't for member contributions, whether they were tithing or other donations. It's all Church money. When I choose to pay my tithing, I am choosing to assist in funding the Church. I am trusting the Church to put that money to good use. As I said before, I have no problem with a portion of my tithes going toward the GA's expenses, just as I don't have a problem with my tithes going toward temple building and maintenance. But, ultimately, it is all the Church's money. And, in the long run, if the members hadn't contributed in the first place, those other business investments would not exist.

[_Yoda]

[Stand next to pygmies == you look tall without trying.

Post on a thread with Themis and Malaise == you write the most take-serious-worthy posts in the thread without trying.

Regards,
Pahoran

Are you calling SB a pygmie? :)

I at least talked about the OP, and yes there are some beliefs that members are uncomfortable talking about. Polygamy and the priesthood ban I would put as the top two. I don't recall you providing much substance here even with all the hateful posting you do. Give up the hate and you will be much happier. I would also ask you to provide sources on how the tithing money is spent.

I'm normally not big on CFR'ing, Pahoran, but I would like to see a source as well. I would particularly like to see a source that shows how the business investments originated. Show me that the original money for those investments did not come from member donations.

[_harmony]

Scratch
Harmony, it is prudent for any organization to set aside assets to generate a future revenue stream especially in cases of bad times.

Any business. I fail to see how building up a huge portfolio of businesses and investments follows the church's stated mandate and mission. Creating an investment portfoilo, especially a portfolio without any of the checks and balances that a true annual financial report would have... gives the impression that... hmmmm... we aren't in the business of savings mankind or helping the poor... the LDS church is in the business of making money (or losing it, in the case of the mall).

I didn't join a church (that's right, Pahoran. I am a convert, not BIC. I don't take this sort of secrecy lying down, when I wasn't fully informed of the way the church does business at my baptism, but rather found out dozens of years later) that was more interested in secret money than in truthfulness and openness.

Tithing, the main annual income source for the church can fluctuate based on number of members, economy issues, income of the members and activity rate.

Then the church expenditures should fluctuate at the same level. The LDS church is not a business... or if it is, then it may be time for me to look elsewhere.

The church does have other financial demands as part of it's mission. Taking care of the poor, needy and widows not the sole purpose of the church.

No, but increasing or maintaining an investment portfolio is not part of the church's mission. There are legitimate expenditures of tithing; I agreed to those earlier: temples, church buildings, toilet paper... but for the church to fire all the janitors with the excuse that they can no longer afford them, and then to turn around and pay GAs enough to build million dollar esates... well, that's a whole different ballgame.

If the Church depletes all it's surplus every year what does it do when there is a major downturn and income no longer meets it's reasonable oprations needs?

If the church cannot operate within it's income, then those "reasonable" operational needs should be dealt with like everyone else does: cut expenses.

It would be fiscally irresponsible for the church to give all it's surplus very year. Now one can argue it should do more for the poor but really what you suggest would be irresponsible.

Not if the church really believes that God will bless based on righteousness.

Personally, I think if the church sold ALL of its businesses and investments, and cut expenses to only those related to the 4-fold mission of the church, and managed it's money wisely, the church could truly impact the suffering of the world to a huge degree. But they won't. Such a sacrifice would require... well... sacrifice!

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello,

Why are TBMs OK with their church hiding its financial records? It boggles the mind.

V/R
Dr. Cam