Paying tithing online....SLC having a change of heart

[_Drifting]

I'd like to thank the thread originator for this thread. The more we explore this question, the more clear it becomes that Tithing, including Tithing Settlement, is much more of a spiritual matter than a financial one. If the Church was only interested in making money (and even our most virulent enemies agree that it knows how to do that) then a lot of what goes on around tithing actually makes the process less efficient.

So, as long as your spiritual intention was to pay your tithing, it doesn't actually matter if you hand over the cash?
(See Dr Shades current signature line)

[_Drifting]

Okay, I take back what I said. We do have something as unreliable as anti-Mormon accusations.

Regards,
Pahoran

Self deprecation...I like it...

[_Bob Loblaw]

That's a straw man, an obvious and clearly deliberate misrepresentation of what I said.

Of course tithing is a way of raising money. Nobody disputes that, and as a tithe payer I'm delighted that my money is going to the best of all possible causes.

But (and I see why you don't respond point-by-point as I do) I remind you of what I wrote:

If the Church was only interested in making money (and even our most virulent enemies agree that it knows how to do that) then a lot of what goes on around tithing actually makes the process less efficient.

Now, would you care to respond to what I actually said, instead of what you ASSume I said?

That's the problem. No one is saying that the church is only interested in making money. You started out with a straw man and then proceeded to heap abuse on people for something they didn't say. When you trade in straw men, hyperbole, and personal attacks, no one takes you seriously. Do you not get that? Thus, I responded to your straw man by pointing out that most reasonable people acknowledge that raising money is one of the primary goals of tithing. You couldn't even grant that, instead preferring to insist that we horrible, evil Mormons think that's the only reason for tithing. It is the main reason, which again, everyone understands, even you.

And this:

In particular, the two things that people have complained about most bitterly in this thread -- Tithing Settlement and the non-publication of online tithe payment facilities -- cannot possibly be explained in terms of either revenue generation or "control."

That tithing involves revenue generation and control is a self-evident statement, nothing controversial about it. And that is the statement I responded to. If you don't want me to respond to ridiculous statements, don't make them.

Note that, early in the thread, snarler #1 whinged long and loud that the Church made it harder for members to pay tithing online because "revenues must be down." I was commenting upon a claim that is absurd on its face -- making the donation process more time-consuming and less convenient is clearly not calculated to increase revenues. I pointed out that I have paid tithing exlusively online for two years, and my donation statements always show the online donations. The notion that bishops personally monitor individual tithe payments is a lunatic fringe fantasy, but even if it were true, online payments wouldn't hold them back.

That is not what I was responding to. I was responding to the statement you quote above. If you want to revise your statement and say that you agree with me, go ahead. But do not attack me for responding to something you actually said, as if I'm supposed to know that you meant something else by your statement.

There are a couple of spelling mistakes in that, and an omission. Permit me to correct them for you.

Most completely uninformed people would assume, and all completely hostile ones would assert, that there is a strong element of control in that practice.

There; fixed.

As I said, you have a way of turning completely obvious and self-evident statements into "completely uninformed and hostile" ones. That you deny there is an element of control in tithing is your prerogative, but simply asserting that I'm uniformed and hostile is not an adequate response. It's not a response at all, other than, "You say that only because you hate the church." Does that count as a response in your country? It doesn't in mine.

Only if they claim to know what they are talking about.

There you go again. Reasonable people inside and outside the church acknowledge there is an element of control in tithing settlements. Is that inherently bad or evil? No, but to simply deny by assertion that there is any control whatsoever is ludicrous. That's the kind of answer I'd expect from someone in complete denial. But the real issue is that, for whatever reason, you cannot even concede an obvious but minor point in your 'defence' of Mormonism. Anyone who says anything critical is, by nature, a hateful liar. It's a mystery why people don't like interacting with you, isn't it?

Or that there are no anti-Mormons here in the sty?

Regards,
Pahoran

Why argue something when you can throw out a label? I don't care who you think is "anti-Mormon." You never deal with substance. You never back up your statements. You just relentlessly attack and hate, and then insist we're the haters. Do you honestly think you are helping the church's cause by these sideshow antics?

[_Drifting]

From the Newsroom:

For Latter-day Saints (Mormons), tithing is a natural and integrated aspect of their religious belief and practice. By the biblical definition, tithing is one-tenth, and Church members interpret this as a tenth of their “increase,” or income, annually. It is paid on the honor system. No one asks to see income statements or pay slips.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/tithing

So, a couple of queries.

1. Newsroom states that Church members interpret that tithing means 10% of income. Ehm, no they don't. Church leaders have interpreted it to mean that and then instructed members that is what it means.

2. It is paid on the hono{u}r system. Ehm, no it isn't. Members are specifically asked in an interview if they have paid it and if they haven't; certain membership privileges are revoked and pressure is put on them to catch it up.
Married men are also put under the additional pressure of being asked this question in front of their wife and children,

[_Bob Loblaw]

1. Newsroom states that Church members interpret that tithing means 10% of income. Ehm, no they don't. Church leaders have interpreted it to mean that and then instructed members that is what it means.

Correct. The meaning of tithing has changed over the years, at least in terms of what is paid and how it is collected. And those changes have come from the leadership.

2. It is paid on the hono{u}r system. Ehm, no it isn't. Members are specifically asked in an interview if they have paid it and if they haven't; certain membership privileges are revoked and pressure is put on them to catch it up.
Married men are also put under the additional pressure of being asked this question in front of their wife and children,

Many years ago when I was newly married with very young children I lived in a lower middle-class neighborhood in Utah. I was working at my first real job--a low-paying, bottom rung of the ladder job which meant that my income was about equal with most of the people in our ward. After a couple of years I got a much better job with better pay and benefits. The first thing we did was to buy a new minivan--which we desperately needed. That Christmas we went into tithing settlement with the bishop and I had paid a full tithe on my gross income. He asked if we were full tithe-payers and I answered that we were. "Is this on your gross or net income?" he asked. I told him it was on the gross and he said "Are you sure?" He asked me several times if I could honestly declare myself a full tithe payer. Finally in frustration I asked "Why don't you believe me?" He said "You have a good job and a new car and everyone knows you make more money than this."