DiscussMormonism.com

Does that mean fishing on Sunday is no longer a sin?

They were genetically engineered not to be sinful.

Then I will have to pay a visit to that pool...on Sunday.

bcspace wrote:
Then I will have to pay a visit to that pool...on Sunday.

First BCspace post that ever made me laugh in the way it was intended.

Joseph wrote:joseph smith CAIN wrpte:

Your continued violation of Rule #2 is getting annoying.

JMS

So the feeling I get is that the Church can not invest in long term projects that help keep it out of the black. You would be much happier if it drove itself into bankruptcy.

Alrighty then.

JMS

I might be happier if the church of Jesus Christ spent a greater % of their income on charity than Apple or Target or any number of for profit corporations.

jskains wrote:So the feeling I get is that the Church can not invest in long term projects that help keep it out of the black. You would be much happier if it drove itself into bankruptcy.

Alrighty then.

JMS

Who stated, implied or said anything like that?

The church is wise to invest its money, but it deceives its members when it attempts to paint an imaginary divide between tithing funds and other general funds.

If the church had financial transparency, its members would see clearly how uncharitable of a so called Christian church that it really is (% donated compared to income).

Tchild wrote:Why are donated lands, stocks and money, or monies earned on donated land, stocks and money, or church businesses which create income created by members donations of lands, stocks and money....any less consecrated than tithing donations?

When someone donates their 500 acre parcel in Springville at their death, they are donating it to the church and its leaders only as representatives or proxies of God. Donations made to the church are exactly the same as tithing receipts.

Since every business started by the church came either by tithing or donations, it is all the same.

I agree with this statement. I find it very disturbing that this trend is even defendable by some of our membership.

jskains wrote:So the feeling I get is that the Church can not invest in long term projects that help keep it out of the black. You would be much happier if it drove itself into bankruptcy.

Alrighty then.

JMS

Hello,

You have to be one of the most [violation of Terrestrial Rule #2 deleted.]

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

Hey Doc CamNC4me, can we use this quote eisewhere? It is well done. If do, do we need to provide a link to your original here? Payment of fees? Sacrifice a goat maybe? Flush a goldfish down the sacred goldfish burial urn in the bathroom in homage?

Good stuff guy.
-------------------

You have to be one of the most brainless, dense, doltish, dopey, dorky, dull, dumb, fatuous, half-witted, mindless, oafish, obtuse, senseless, simple, slow, thickheaded, unintelligent, vacuous, weak-minded, witless, retarded, simpleminded, foolish, idiotic, imbecilic, moronic, ignorant, illiterate, lowbrow, uneducated, uninformed, untaught, absurd, asinine, cockeyed, crazy, daffy, daft, harebrained, insane, looney, nonsensical, nutty, preposterous, illogical, irrational, & unreasonable human beings I have observed. You, quite literally, have no ability, whatsoever, to absorb ideas with any degree of functionality. You doe-eyed unsophisticated nave.

Tchild wrote:If the church had financial transparency, its members would see clearly how uncharitable of a so called Christian church that it really is (% donated compared to income).

It is interesting that you claim the church is not transparent but you ALREADY know it isn't very charitable. If it is so secret, how did you get this special knowledge?

JMS