What recourse do you have?

[_wenglund]

And how do you know what is the point for everyone in terms of paying tithing? Maybe for some it is to learn to sacrifice, maybe for others it is faith, maybe for others it is dedication, maybe for others it is obedience, etc. etc. etc.~dancer~

It's interesting that you would say it that way. In one of Dallin Oaks earliest conference talks as a apostle, he deliniated 8 reasons we members may rightly do what we do in complying with commandments. I don't recall all 8, but essentially they can be broken down into 4 general ascending categories. In terms of tithing:

1. Members may pay out of fear--i.e. fear of burning in the last days, or fear of being punished for disobedience, etc.

2. Members may pay out of a sense of reward--i.e. the windows of heaven being openned up, reaching the celestial kingdom, being able to attend the temple, etc.

3. Members may pay out of a sense of obedience--they pay because they have been commanded to do so, and duty, commitment, responsibility, and honor require them to obey the commandment.

4. Members may pay because that is integral to their loving nature--they pay tithing because for them not to pay would be in violation of who and what they are as a person.

I suspect that for many of us, there are elements of each of these motivating factors behind our charitable giving. And, while I believe that God is content with those who pay tithing purely out of fear or for reward, the intent of his gospel plan is to enable us to progress at a reasonable rate until we arrive fully at level 4--and this from one level of law to the next, from the law of tithing to the laws of sacrifice and concecration. At least that is how I see it. Others are free to see it differently.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Scottie]

Wade, you bring up a good point.

This absolutist mindset is a great training tool for the time when the saints are required to live the law of consecration.

Just think how much worse it will be when you have to give 100% of what you earn back to the church!

[_wenglund]

Wade, you bring up a good point.

This absolutist mindset is a great training tool for the time when the saints are required to live the law of consecration.

Just think how much worse it will be when you have to give 100% of what you earn back to the church!

I hear ya.

However, with my understanding of the temple coventants, some of us are already required to live the law of consecration, though not necessarily by giving all directly to the Church or via the same mechanisms found in the early days of the latter-day Church--though certainly dedicated or concecrated to God's kingdom. I am in the process of gearing my mind to viewing my efforts even within my secular career as consecrated to the divine edict of loving my neighbor. It's a little hard, though, when attempting to negotiate land deals or when promoting housing projects with a broad range of people, but I am working on it. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Jason Bourne]

D&C 119. CHI 154-157. Tithing is tithing and not other things and it must be given to the Church, not some other group.

I understand the church teaches it must be given to the church.

Ok

I'm asking if someone gives 10% of their income to the church but marks a different box, say fast offering, should they be excluded from the temple based on church doctrine, even if they believe they were inspired to do this and believed they were honestly full tithe payers?

Should they or would they are different questions.

If they stated that they were indeed full tithe payers because they believe they were in full compliance with the commandment would they be denied a TR?

Depends on the bishop. If he asks are you a full tithe payer and they say yes he is not going to ask more usually. If he asks it and they say they give 5% to tithe and 3% to FO and 2% to the Red Cross so yes they tithe I think the bishop would not give a TR in most cases.

If a person answers yes in a TRI, are they questioned as to exactly what box they checked?

No not usually.

[_Jason Bourne]

Where is it written that the form must be specifically checked "tithing" to qualify as giving 10% of one's increase to the church? Are you suggesting that one will be denied a TR if they tell the bishop they give ten percent to the church to help the poor?

Official rule?

I'm open to learning here.

I know a few TR holding believers who do this very thing and they feel totally comfortable with it.

If a person received personal inspiration (as I believe was in at least one case), to give their money to the church to help the needy, are you suggesting they should follow the rule rather than their inspiration?

D&C 119. CHI 154-157. Tithing is tithing and not other things and it must be given to the Church, not some other group.

I can respect your narrow and rigid interpretation of that scripture, though I prefer a more liberally reading and application thereof. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wade

Come again? You actually think tithing is 10% to some other use and not 10% to the Church as tithing? If so I am shocked.

[_beastie]

And repent of your pride in thinking that they are less inspired than you are and you would know how to do it better.

Someone needs to send this memo to the apologists at FARMS who believe they understand the Book of Mormon better than the prophets, including Joseph Smith.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Jason...

Yeah, that is my point.

If a person feels they are inspired to pay their 10% to the church by way of FO, and they feel peace answering honestly that they are full tithe payers, and do indeed tithe ten percent of their income to the church...

Seems to me they are not questioned further and the person is good to go.

Who is to say the person is disobedient?

Only God can make this decision, IMHO. (Going with the LDS belief system that is.. LOL)!

Beastie...

I remember so often wondering how apologists can, with a straight face, suggest that Joseph Smith and the Lord's prophets didn't know what they were talking about, that Joseph Smith just had a "superficial understanding" of the Book of Mormon, that leaders in the past, (who thought they were inspired and receiving revelation), just shared their opinions (that turned out to be very wrong), but THEY, the apologists know the real truth. God is inspiring them to bring forth the further light and knowledge, (or something).

Not the prophets, not the leaders, not scripture but apologists.


~dancer~

[_wenglund]

Where is it written that the form must be specifically checked "tithing" to qualify as giving 10% of one's increase to the church? Are you suggesting that one will be denied a TR if they tell the bishop they give ten percent to the church to help the poor?

Official rule?

I'm open to learning here.

I know a few TR holding believers who do this very thing and they feel totally comfortable with it.

If a person received personal inspiration (as I believe was in at least one case), to give their money to the church to help the needy, are you suggesting they should follow the rule rather than their inspiration?

D&C 119. CHI 154-157. Tithing is tithing and not other things and it must be given to the Church, not some other group.

I can respect your narrow and rigid interpretation of that scripture, though I prefer a more liberally reading and application thereof. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wade

Come again? You actually think tithing is 10% to some other use and not 10% to the Church as tithing? If so I am shocked.

I don't view it in that either/or way. I consider it as both. I hope that relieves the shock a bit. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

And repent of your pride in thinking that they are less inspired than you are and you would know how to do it better.

Someone needs to send this memo to the apologists at FARMS who believe they understand the Book of Mormon better than the prophets, including Joseph Smith.

Someone appears to have confused "inspiration" with "scholasticism" in her haste to advise others to do what she seemingly, in principle, is unwilling to do herself (i.e. take the beam out of her own eye before attempting to remove the mote from the eyes of others). But, this is what we love about Beastie. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-